Guys,

I am in a market for a 7 seater SUV and I have read on many forums people bashing the Xc90 especially the T6 model and the V8.

So which year is the most reliable and has no Transmission or engine issues, shall I stick with 2005-2006 2.5T XC90 or go to 2007-2010 3.2 Litter Xc90?

Please help me here.

 

Any ones wants to answer this question and help everyone interested in buying the XC90????

 

Its been answered repeatedly. Sounds like you've already done your research.

 

Thanks...so 2.5 2005-2006 is the way to go....wha bout bearings issues, realibility in general like fuel pump, water pump, engine issues....


I own a Camry now, and I want a bigger car with peace of mind in it, would you recommend 2.5 2005-2006 with less than 80,000 miles mileage?

 

Yes, the 2.5T is the most proven. The I6 is hit or miss with oil consumption issues.

Of course, there are no guarantees. But the 2.5T has been around a while in various Volvo models and is reliable.

 

Thank you. In case I could not find a low mileage 2005-2006, what about 2007-2010 CX90, is 3.2 a good choice to go or shall I go with bigger engine ?

Again my main concern is reliability and fuel consumption....

 

I just joined this forum after purchasing a 2006 2.5T with 85K on the clock. In the last few days I have gone through all 96 pages of threads/posts. I did not come across any that mentioned major engine or transmission issues for the 2006 2.5T especially the FWD model. One or two posts about leaking bevel gear seals IIRC. I bought the seven seater for no good reason but I paid a fair price for a vehicle that was well maintained by a reputable Volvo dealership.
Gas mileage is not spectacular but I'm coming from a 2001 Jeep Cherokee,which is a rock solid vehicle but 17 MPG in warm weather with the AC off is about the best you'll ever do with a Cherokee 4.o I6.

I have owned four Volvos before 3RWDs and an 850 Turbo. I think Volvo got it right with the 2.5t. Sure I wish it has Bluetooth or at least an Aux. input, but I'm very happy with it.

 

what about 2007-2010 3.2 XC90? any issues with the 3.2L between those years? shall I go higher than 2006 or stick with 2.5L 2005-2006?

 

Yes the 2006 2.5T engine is by far the most reliable. Have this model, FWD version, and it's been solid, just had the suspension refreshed and she is running like a new car. Get the transmission flushed and the gear shifting is sooo smooth, actually have hard time telling when she shifts. The owners manual states this isn't necessary unless towing, but I plan on keeping this car for good as a 2nd car later on. Best of luck and enjoy

 

How much fuel does it consume the 2.5T 2006? I am thinking to go with XC90 2010, just to save on gas.

What do you recommend get the XC90 2.5T 2006 or the XC90 3.2L 2010?

 

My 06 2.5T mpg averages: 17/18 city, 21/22 hwy, 19+ combined. Great car and year model. I would probably go with the 2010 if the tranny was fixed for that larger engine and if they weren't asking too much more or difference. I believe they finally fixed that engine/tranny combo by then but not sure. I really like the 2006 model with2.5T but I've taken excellent care if it too for it to be enjoyable, clean, and very reliable after 10 years old, looks like a new car. But with this said, I'm not sure how most 2006's will be, condition wise, now that they are 10 year old cars. If it was taken care of and very clean, then maybe the 2006. Hard to say without seeing the cars, that's your call.

 

Do you guys still thing that the 2010 XC90 3.2L still have transmission problems like the 2006 T6????

If it is, I will go back to the 2006, as I do not want to spend all that money and end up with headaches!!!

 

Hello - I am going to go ahead and anger a lot of people by jumping ahead and posting without reading through all of these answers too thoroughly, as I am running out of time.
My spouse is a member of this forum because we own*ED* a wonderful V70 up until about two weeks ago. I have been driving a rental vehicle while searching for a vehicle to purchase -
I can't get away from the Swedish machines, perhaps because my family is from Gothenburg?! That is the excuse I use, but I just love these automobiles. It is like a sickness. Anyway, I have come across a couple of C90's and I have always been somewhat intrigued by them. In my three day hurried research, I have come to learn that one big ouch is with their transmission troubles. The one I am currently looking at is a 2004 and the owner has all the service records, claims there are no mechanical issues, etc., is aware of all the talk of this particular make of Volvo having a reputation for tranny problems but he has had none and doesn't notice anything *Of course he could be lying his tail pipe off, I realize that*, but I like the fact that he has the service records and if I wait any longer, I am going to have had this rental car long enough to be able to BUY a new transmission for a C90 anyway. Having owned and driven a Volvo already for over 10 years, I know the ball joints or tie rods will have to be replaced constantly, especially the way I drive, so I don't consider that to be anything unusual. THANK YOU, great Volvo minds.

 

...So whats your question?

The T6 transmissions had major issues. If he hasn't had them, eventually, I would bet you will.

 

I guess that is my question. Was this something they ALL had - and is it something that I will have to look forward to? I read most of the consumer reviews and I can see that there are a respectful number of people who have had no issues with them, and I had some issues with my transmission in my V70 - I don't expect to get another 10 years out of an 04 vehicle, this is really a surprise because I was planning on buying a newer SUV after the 1st of the year. The V70 overheated and died earlier that I thought it was going to.
The price is decent enough that if we had to do some transmission work, it wouldn't be the end of the world. When you say TRANSMISSION ISSUES, do you mean they needed entire new transmissions? That would suck - that I would not be happy with.

 

The T6 had the issues. The 2.5L did not.

And when I say issues, I mean we replaced the transmission, radiator, transmission cooler and transmission cooler lines, per Volvo.

There is new TCM software available that may take care of it if the trans warning comes on and no symptoms are felt. But usually if they are slipping really bad and/or making noise- its too late.

 

Ok - I got it. Now for the other question. Can you explain to me what the difference is between the 6 and the 2.5?
sorry... I have to say though - if I had listened over the past 24 years, I would probably be able to rebuild one of these!

 

Difference as in problems each have? Or just general differences?

 

Well, I guess both - I am trying to understand what the differences mean, because I read them as this -
the one with the transmission issue is: a T6, which is a 6 cylinder, (?) and it has a 2.9L L6 SOHC 24V TURBO- the one that did not has the problem is the 2.5L - 2.5L L5 DOHC 20V TURBO- so in other words, (why don't they call that a T5?)

Are there any drawbacks to the 2.5, like lack of power of anything? After all the crap I have heard now about the transmission going on the T6, I am thinking that may be the wrong way to go (the stubborn Swede has made progress!) so why would anyone go with the T6 over the 2.5 in the first place?

 

The T6 is a 2.9L inline 6 with twin turbos. The 2.5T is a 2.5L inline 5 cylinder with a single turbo. Volvo makes several 5 cylinder engines and the T5 designation is already used by a different variation of it.

I would never recommend anyone buy a T6 XC90, unless the transmission, radiator, transmission cooler and lines have been replaced and the TCM software is up to date. And even then, I would suggest a 2.5T. It is much more reliable.