tow car awards

[xtrailman]

Thanks for the reply Clive.
This link is the source quoting the fuel returns, the XC 60 is near 2T, so maybe yours is a lighter car?
http://www.whatcar.com/car-reviews/volvo/xc60-crossover/readers-reviews/25808-3

 

[Martin24]

Next thing will be the fitting of Airbags should be standard on any new model!!

But, with very few exceptions, airbags are standard on most cars. It's just a question of how many. It all started about 15 years ago with just a driver's airbag, but nowadays most new cars have at least 2 and all but the cheapest 4 or more.

Well mine isn't cheap at £33k but no airbags, and thus in three years time and onwards no failure light for them to fail the MOT!!

 

[otherclive]

Ray,
mine weighs in at 1890kg according to the V5 document. Guess it's all dwon to how they are driven. I dont spend much time in city/town traffic and neither is it used for short hops as the dreaded DPF will bite me!!! Saying that she's done 27k miles without any DPF issue whatsoever but Volvos have been subject to several recalls to sort out the regeneration issues that some drivers have experienced. Looking at your What Car link the XC70 reviews by owners show (only 2 pages) mpg figures close to what I achieve.

Cheers
Clive

 

[allengn]

Interesting post, more or less what i thought.
Having recently test drove the XC60 D5 auto 215hp, i was very impressed, but I'm a bit put of by the MPG figures that owners report.
30 to 33mpg on a run isn't great.
What figures do you get both solo and towing, and does it compare with a Jag?

Ray. Mine is also the D5 auto 215 bhp however I've only had the car a few weeks and so am still getting to grips with it. It's done 12k and the onboard computer is showing that over the last 500 odd miles I've averaged 35.5 mpg which is very slightly down on the Jag. However I am hopeful that this will improve further as the engine 'runs in'. For various reasons have not yet towed with it, but hopefully will be able to get away for a few days in the next week or so.

 

[xtrailman]

Thanks for the replies.
Considering the weight and power 35mpg is acceptable.
I did read a PC report were the D5 returned 24mpg towing , which again isn't bad.
I'll be test driving a BMW X3 after my next tour, so will compare the two.
We did look at a Q5 immediately after the Volvo and found it wanting compared to the Volvo, so that's off the list, only a 80kg nose weight limit with the Q5 anyway.

 

[MichaelE]

An XC60 manual only has a 75kgs nose weight limit, the auto is 90kgs

 

[Lutz]

The only reason why the automatic has a higher noseweight limit is because it has a 2000kg towload limit compared with 1800kg for the manual and this higher limit requires more than 75kg noseweight in order to be legal. There is, however, no difference in the towbars between the manual and the automatic which would account for the difference in noseweight limit.

 

[xtrailman]

An XC60 manual only has a 75kgs nose weight limit, the auto is 90kgs

incorrect, the stats with the brochure received this month show only the D4 FWD manual and auto versions both at 75kg.
All the AWD versions auto or manual, D4,D5, including the T6 auto are 90kg.
Stats for latest models.
The stats for the manual D5 shows around 9mpg more than the auto, and reduced emissions, man 149/F, auto 179/I.
So if i go for the XC it will be the manual.

 

[MichaelE]

I had heard amounst owners that the manual was a miss print?
I found this on the Volvo forumAfter about a month of trying to get an answer & involving about 4 dealers & a totally useless Volvo technical support I have finally got to the bottom of a problem.

The MY10 XC60 price list, on the internet & hardcopy, shows the 4 wheeldrive 205hp to have a towball weight loading of 75kg.

The XC60 owners manual, whether downloaded or supplied with the car, shows the towball download limit is 90kg for the 4wd 205hp model.

Thus the same car noseweight limit is 75kg from one source & 90 kg from the other .

The Volvo product manager has now confirmed that the owners handbook is wrong and that the towball load for all manual XC60's is 75kg whilst for all automatics it is 90kg. This figure is legally enforcable if you are stopped or have an accident.

I am amazed at this as 75kg is very low for a 4x4 vehicle & precludes towing many caravans that would otherwise easily be towable.

I don't know what Volvo are going to do to inform owners but I can see that some owners who have relied on the handbook are towing illegally & are going to be very upset when they find out!
It would be worth actually contacting Volvo?

 

[xtrailman]

I had heard amounst owners that the manual was a miss print?
I found this on the Volvo forumAfter about a month of trying to get an answer & involving about 4 dealers & a totally useless Volvo technical support I have finally got to the bottom of a problem.

The MY10 XC60 price list, on the internet & hardcopy, shows the 4 wheeldrive 205hp to have a towball weight loading of 75kg.

The XC60 owners manual, whether downloaded or supplied with the car, shows the towball download limit is 90kg for the 4wd 205hp model.

Thus the same car noseweight limit is 75kg from one source & 90 kg from the other .

The Volvo product manager has now confirmed that the owners handbook is wrong and that the towball load for all manual XC60's is 75kg whilst for all automatics it is 90kg. This figure is legally enforcable if you are stopped or have an accident.

I am amazed at this as 75kg is very low for a 4x4 vehicle & precludes towing many caravans that would otherwise easily be towable.

I don't know what Volvo are going to do to inform owners but I can see that some owners who have relied on the handbook are towing illegally & are going to be very upset when they find out!
It would be worth actually contacting Volvo?

I would suggest you request the latest literature from Volvo.
I got a brochure which is dated as in no longer current.

The spec i refer to is a separate set of print outs supplied by the dealer.
The dealer told me the spec changes every year for the XC60, the D3 is now no more for example, its now D4.
The sheets i have are the Vehicle price list, the towing data is on page 8.
The reference on page 1 is MY13, edition 2.
May 2,2012.

I believe MY13 is model year 2013.
Remember my last post referred to the latest spec, not model year 10.
The ford mondeo, Passat etc all take 90kg nose weights now, while older models take 80kg, and 75kg previously.

 

[Lutz]

The figure that is legally enforceable is the figure quoted on the towbar itself. Neither the owner's manual nor a price list can be described as an authoritative document, but the plate on the towbar is. I do know that at least one towbar manufacturer is selling towbars for the XC60 rated at 90kg, regardless which configuration.

 

[MichaelE]

Ray i dont need to get the latest brochure i was saying that i remembered problems with Volvo manuals quoting one figure which was incorrect which is why i suggested you check with Volvo,but saying that i remember you saying that 90 kgs is still low for 4X4 in some of your previous posts?
I had and X3 as a loan car when my car was in for a service it is pretty impressive much better than the previous model, after you have driven it i think i know which one you will go for?

 

[xtrailman]

Ray i dont need to get the latest brochure i was saying that i remembered problems with Volvo manuals quoting one figure which was incorrect which is why i suggested you check with Volvo,but saying that i remember you saying that 90 kgs is still low for 4X4 in some of your previous posts?
I had and X3 as a loan car when my car was in for a service it is pretty impressive much better than the previous model, after you have driven it i think i know which one you will go for?

No i was saying 80kg wasn't enough, i could manage with 90kg, but my last two cars have been 100kg.
I'll report back my findings on the BMW X3.

 

[otherclive]

Are we not at risk of becoming slightly paranoid with noseweight limits. An Xc 60 at 90kg is perfectly adequate as most vans are limited to 100kg anyway. I really doubt that many will be able to get better than 10% accuracy. A xc60 is not a real 4x4 in the accepted sense it's a suv/crossover with 4wd whereas a traditional 4x4 will tow up to 3500kgs and have a trailer that can accept higher noseweight than a caravan drawbar.

 

[xtrailman]

Normally i would agree, but my Unicorn Valencia is very nose heavy, so very little can be stored up front.
I've found 90/95kg suits my xtrail and the caravan, plus the CC recommend 5/7% of the MTPLM which is 1565kg.
The Xtrail is a SUV really not a proper 4x4.
For practical reasons, ease of loading, (less under the bed), a 100kg limit suits my needs.
Along with the generally accepted theory that a higher nose weight aids stability, (bath study for example)

 

[MichaelE]

I havent seen the towcar test, did they test the BMW X3 as this is a new model?

 

[otherclive]

Ray I understand where you are coming from but the XC60 has a lower CoG than the x trail and a wider track too. It's road holding and handling a more car- like than would be the case with an X trail. So inherently the xc60 will probably provide a more stable platform than the X trail which itself is no slouch. So a few kilogram less noseweight would most likely be compensated for by the XC 60s Ibetter dynamics.

 

[xtrailman]

I haven't seen the towcar test, did they test the BMW X3 as this is a new model?

PC tested it in the February issue.
The Bmw X3 20d M sport auto against the Xc60 D5 manual AWD 212bhp.
The Xc60 won the test, Just.
Its the max torque of around 309 for the manual version that is interesting, 1400 rpm to 2850rpm, 100rpm lower than the previous version.
Against the still decent Bmw X3 280 @1750/2750rpm.
Either car is an improvement on my xtrail 171 bhp, and 265 at 2000rpm, it lacks good low down torque, its great solo, but needs more power for towing my 1565kg caravan.
The X3 returned 23.7mpg towing and the Xc returned 23.8mpg. Both towed i believe 1445kg.

 

[xtrailman]

Ray I understand where you are coming from but the XC60 has a lower CoG than the x trail and a wider track too. It's road holding and handling a more car- like than would be the case with an X trail. So inherently the xc60 will probably provide a more stable platform than the X trail which itself is no slouch. So a few kilogram less noseweight would most likely be compensated for by the XC 60s Ibetter dynamics.

Yes Clive the Xc is wide, that's could be my reason for not buying one.
I always garage my cars, the garage is integral and gives access to the house, its never cold in there either so the cars don't get a cold start in winter, as such.
with the Xc60 extra width it doesn't leave a lot of space to get through my 2100mm garage door.

 

[otherclive]

Ray I understand where you are coming from but the XC60 has a lower CoG than the x trail and a wider track too. It's road holding and handling a more car- like than would be the case with an X trail. So inherently the xc60 will probably provide a more stable platform than the X trail which itself is no slouch. So a few kilogram less noseweight would most likely be compensated for by the XC 60s Ibetter dynamics.

Yes Clive the Xc is wide, that's could be my reason for not buying one.
I always garage my cars, the garage is integral and gives access to the house, its never cold in there either so the cars don't get a cold start in winter, as such.
with the Xc60 extra width it doesn't leave a lot of space to get through my 2100mm garage door.

Same problem with the Xc70. My wife doesn't like it as the mirrors are on the same level as most other cars!! She' driven Sorento and Disco 2s before but is right when she says that car mirrors mostly pass underneath a full size SUV.

 

[seth1]

The power and torque figures for the X Trail dont seem that bad to me.Dont think they would leave me wanting for more.But i do think once you get up to around the 2.5 litre size in diesel there is a huge difference over the 2 litre size in the favour of the larger engine.I dont think i would go back to a 2 litre diesel.A better way to look at it would be to see what torque is being made in each gear at a certain engine speed.310lbs ft is nice but at 60mph and maybe with an engine speed of 1200rpm and max torque at 1600rpm in top gear how much is actually being made.Where as 260lbs ft at 60 mph with an engine speed of 2000rpm is going to be max torque.Ive got 385lbs ft of torque,60mph is 1250 rpm in top and it wont pull your hat off.

 

[xtrailman]

Ray i dont need to get the latest brochure i was saying that i remembered problems with Volvo manuals quoting one figure which was incorrect which is why i suggested you check with Volvo,but saying that i remember you saying that 90 kgs is still low for 4X4 in some of your previous posts?
I had and X3 as a loan car when my car was in for a service it is pretty impressive much better than the previous model, after you have driven it i think i know which one you will go for?

I had a test drive in the BMW X3 M sport 2L this week.
My jaw dropped when i saw the cars interior, so disappointed with the low rent dash board, and the poor quality leather!
None of the road tests I've read prepared me for such a disappointing interior, externally its OK, but we both were aghast at the cars interior.
Driving the car i found the performance excellent, the handling and ride again very good, it was the auto version.
But no way am i paying premium car prices for a car with such a poor interior.
I could also see what Nigel meant with the noisy engine, but that was only evident at full acceleration.
We would have gone for the 3 litre version anyway, but not with that interior.
To me it looked just like the first X3, very unimpressed, the X3 is off the list, the Volvo leaves it for dead on the interior quality.

Straight from that test drive we drove a Mazda CX5 again, even the Mazda interior quality is better that the X3, so the CX5 is back as the favorite to replace our Xtrail.
Will also look at the new CRV, Kuga, and maybe also wait for the new Xtrail.
Looking at the latest reliability stats the japs are still a good bet, the Kuga is a wild card.