Skip to content

 
 

CAR Reviews

Click Thumbnails to Enlarge

Statistics

How much? £27,995
On sale in the UK: Now
Engine: 2400cc 20v 5-cylinder turbodiesel, 173bhp @ 4000rpm, 309lb ft @ 1500-2750rpm
Transmission: Six-speed manual, front-wheel drive
Performance: 9.6sec 0-62mph, 130mph, 47.1mpg, 159mpg
How heavy / made of? 1784kg/steel
How big (length/width/height in mm)? 4838/1861/1604mm
Need to know

CAR's rating

Rated 3 out of 53

Handling

Rated 3 out of 53

Performance

Rated 3 out of 53

Usability

Rated 4 out of 54

Feelgood factor

Rated 3 out of 53

Readers' rating

Rated 3 out of 53

Volvo XC70 DRIVe (2009) CAR review

By Ben Barry

First Drives

27 August 2009 11:07

On looks alone, this Volvo XC70 may seem like old news, yet it puts a whole new twist on the urban off-roader theme. Why? Because, despite the jacked-up stance, it’s actually front-wheel drive.

What’s happened to the 4x4 version?

Don’t panic, it’s still on sale. The front-wheel drive XC70 has been introduced along with a front-drive XC60, both cars being cheaper and less polluting than the 4x4 variants that sired them.

So, the cheapest XC70 now weighs in at £27,995 (front-drive 2.4D Drive SE), where the cheapest four-wheel drive version starts at £31,535. The front-drive cars come only with the 173bhp version of Volvo’s 2.4-litre five-cylinder turbodiesel, where the nearest equivalent all-paws get 202bhp, so comparing the mpg and C02 benefits is difficult. However, we can see that, like-for-like, the front-driver is 79kg lighter.

Let me guess: mpg and C02 are down, but so is performance…

Only partly true. With the manual gearbox we tried, the 0-62mph dash is down by 1.2sec to 9.6sec compared with the four-by-four, plus mpg rises by a worthwhile 7mpg to 47.1mpg and C02 drops from 186g/km to a highly respectable 159g/km.

The auto figures are less appealing: there’s only 2mpg and 11g/km between the two, despite the four-driver’s extra weight and power. In fact, Volvo’s own figures reveal the XC70 torque converter auto to be spectacularly inefficient in front-wheel drive configuration – it covers 7.3 fewer miles than the manual car for every gallon of diesel. Yet when you compare the same figures for automatic and manual four-wheel drive XC70s, the gap suddenly shrinks to 2.7mpg between the two.

How does it drive?

Not well, sadly. The ride quality is still excellent (far better than the XC60), and it’s still refined in here, but that only makes the rampant torque steer seem more out of place. Strangely, neither the similarly powerful front-drive XC60 nor the S80 were similarly afflicted, but the XC70 torque steers in first, second, third and sometimes even fourth gear. Even if you’re a pootler, you will notice the wheel tugging, especially the unholy mess that unravels when you need to getaway from a junction fairly quickly. First there’s wheelspin, then the traction control cuts power, then power comes back in again and, finally, you torque steer down the road. And we drove it in the dry!

Verdict

Clearly, this isn’t a positive review, but it’s important to remember this is a variant-specific – not model – failing. The four-wheel drive XC70 is a smooth-riding, luxurious-feeling, highly practical estate car that holds much appeal. Removing the front driveshafts has spoiled it and, somehow, ruined the mpg and emissions when combined with the automatic gearbox too – surely the most fitting transmission.

No, the only way to go with an XC70 is four-wheel drive combined with, ideally, an auto ’box. It’s worth spending the extra for what is a far superior car.

1

Rate this article...

Average rating: Rated 3 out of 53 (25 votes)

Discuss this

Add your comment

Volvo XC70 DRIVe (2009) CAR review

Subject

Your comment

By submitting your comment, you agree to adhere to the CAR Magazine website Terms and Conditions

Cancel

 

pint6x

pint6x says

RE: Volvo XC70 DRIVe (2009) CAR review

This car would actually make a lot of sense for me. I have a FWD V70 2.4 D5. Due to the remote nature of where I live, I do find myself negotiating fairly bumpy tracks with ruts, pot holes and big stones strewn about the place. In several places the car can ground out if I'm not very careful. While I have no need for a 4x4, a FWD car with better ground clearance would be just what I need. I prefer manual gearboxes, so wouldn't take the hit of the inefficient slushbox offered with this car.

28 August 2009 12:16

 

markh

reward badge

markh says

RE: Volvo XC70 DRIVe (2009) CAR review

Hi Rob, I agree (and by the way so do I live in a country with high snowfall etc--I'm a Brit living in Moscow). But back in good old blighty you will be one of the 5% using it as intended. 

My real home is Surrey and when I go back every 3 months and take my daughter to school the narrow roads are crowded with huge 4 by 4's that are not needed. I'm not against people having them , I just wanted to stand up for the car option of 2 wheel drive.

I happen to like the Kauga (the only ford do) and I'd quite happily (for the UK and heck prob in Russia) buy the 2 wheel option. Does this make me a poser ??? Probably--but I'd happily take this label with the 2k saving and much less fuel costs

28 August 2009 10:49

 

KiwiRob

reward badge

KiwiRob says

RE: Volvo XC70 DRIVe (2009) CAR review

Hi Mark,

Wheither an AWD is pointless or not is highly dependant on where you live, I happen to live in a country with high snowfall and lots of ice in the winter, an AWD car with winter tyres is what is needed.

28 August 2009 07:31

 

markh

reward badge

markh says

RE: Volvo XC70 DRIVe (2009) CAR review

OK--I'm gonna go against the grain here---

It's not a ......ty pointless car. No, hear me out.

Most (read 95% +) of four wheel drive cars and even those that psuedo 4 wheel drive (think RAV4 or Kouga that are pretty useless off road) are pretty useless off road.

So why are they being bought??????

Cos they look cool and fashionably hip...........

Soooo doesnt it make sense to have the same looks, at less cost , and less polluting?????

Who's the idiot...... the guys driving round in 4 by 4's never using them (as designed) or the guy paying less and polluting less ??????

Just for the record ........I in niether camp........ I'll take the 320d effecient dynamics and ENJOY the driving :-)

28 August 2009 05:59

 

gusto

reward badge

gusto says

RE: Volvo XC70 DRIVe (2009) CAR review

 Reading this for cock-ups is more interesting than the car. "159 MPG" wow. No wheel drive . . . .

27 August 2009 23:00

Become a CAR contributor

Upload stories, photos or videos direct to the site, or email newsdesk@carmagazine.co.uk.

Alternatively, call 01733 468 485 (+ 44 1733 468 485)

CAR magazine June issue 611
Untitled Document

Become a CAR contributor

Seen a secret new car, fabulous exotic or have news we should publish? Then get in touch now.