I received an e-mail from my local dealer announcing a software update, they;ve named it the Polestar Optimization and it is available for most all vehicles.

They say it takes and hour and --- hold your hats -- it will cost ---

"Average Cost for the Polestar Optimization Software is only $1,350* (based on a new 2019 model)."

What the %#%#%#%! They disconnect the battery, attach a charger to the system and hook up other wires for the update. And then they sit there.

They expect me to pay $1,350 for the above? I don't think so and one more way to pick our pockets in the digital age.

"The Polestar optimization software is offered on every current Volvo model, in addition to many older Volvo models. Call the Service or Sales department to learn which model years and models qualify to receive this exciting upgrade! "

 

It's because it is a performance upgrade that adds power. Kinda like companies that offer an "ECM tune" for better performance- except this is fully backed by Volvo with regard to warranty and reliability.

 

Well what the heck are people wanting? I've found that my 2016 V60 turbo has power to spare. I've never had any issues with passing cars, going up steep grades, etc. For me to spend that kind of money on an ECM tune, it would have to be a life changer. I wonder if adding more power also adds more stress to the engine which equals a shorter life span.

I know over on Subaru forums they often talk about tuning. You also see subies that have chopped suspensions, street racers, etc. Don't see many Volvo's chopped and street racers.

I'm just so glad to be back in a Volvo I don't need any ECM tune.

 

My new 2019 V60 has the Polestar upgrade. It was an $1195 option.

The P* tune bumps peak power from 316 hp to 330, widens the torque curve across the powerband and raises it from 295 to 325 ft-lbs. Both of those things make the car more responsive all through the meat of the powerband. It also tightens up the shifts and throttle response. The big thing, though, is that the P* tune shifts the AWD power delivery bias farther aft for more balanced handling.

All that, with no effect on warranty, mileage, or emissions. At $1200 that's a real bargain, to me at least.

 

So what Volvo is saying, in effect is: " The modern car is heavily dependent on computer software for most of its functions. We are continually developing software to achieve performance goals and the cost of that development is baked into the cost of the car. We are currently offering cars with what we know to be sub-optimum programming. If you would like to take advantage of the current state-of-the art software, that will be an additional $$$, please"

I find myself conflicted. I like my 2015 V60. I dislike (understatement) Volvo as a company.

 

No, what Volvo is actually saying is this:

"The modern car is heavily dependent on computer software, which allows us to change a lot of parameters. We can program the engine to make a little less power, but also to minimize warranty claims from your typical entitled mouthbreather who expects to be able to hammer the crap out of it under all conditions with no mechanical sympathy. But, since we can, we will offer alternate programming that increases the performance by narrowing the operational margins a little. In order to offset the development of an alternate tune, and to protect ourselves from the potential for extra warranty work arising from those narrower margins, we will bake those costs into the price of the upgrade for those who care to take advantage of it."

If you put a commercial roof on a building, a 20-year roof is physically identical to a 30-year roof, but 30-year roofs are more expensive. What you're paying for is 10 more years of performance with warranty protection. It's the same idea.

 

As a preface, let me note that my tuning experience was gained in the era when to tools available were compression ratio, cam profiles, distributor advance curves (vacuum & centrifugal) and carb settings including SU needle tapers. Techniques have changed but the basic physical and thermodynamic parameters of engine function have not.

That said, it is difficult for me to assign tuning level warranty concerns to a company that

1. Eliminates a dipstick that, in addition to lubricant level can also provide valuable information on lubricant condition in favor of a fallible electronic read out

2. Implements a "stop/start' function (with no default opt-out option) that must inevitably lead to increased wear on starter motor, bendix drive, solenoid and start related cylinder wall wear.

My mouth is closed and I'm not holding my breath.

 

My tuning experience began in 1982 when I converted my '67 Le Mans to electronic ignition and rebuilt its Rochester 2-barrel. Now my fun car is a supercharged '96 Miata that I can tune with a laptop.

1) While I agree deleting the dipstick is stupid, it is entirely driven by increasingly strict emissions standards. Manufacturers are required to get evaporative emissions down to such a low level that they are literally removing every possible source of vapor leaks. Most if not all manufacturers are doing it and it is a result of outside influence, not corporate stupidity.

2A) The stop/start function is also driven by ever-stricter emissions and fuel economy standards, not the manufacturer.

2B) While my wife's 2017 S60 cannot be set to default with the stop/start function disabled, disabling it is the matter of a single button push if it bothers you that much. You don't even have to take your hand off the shifter. The default-on feature is the result of Volvo getting the model's fuel economy numbers certified with the function in operation. Since the official EPA numbers were set with the function on, the car must default to having it on. My 2019 V60, on the other hand, was tested with the function off. I can set the default either way I want. I leave it on. It works pretty transparently and if it saves a little gas and CO2, it's worth it.

2C) If the starter parts are engineered for the extra duty cycle, so what? And in the 3 minutes you are sitting at a stoplight not idling, I doubt that much oil film drains off the cylinder walls, so I don't really give much weight to extra cylinder wall wear from starting and stopping. Idling at a 3-minute red light, each piston is reciprocating about 2000 times. I can't see any 3-minute loss of oil film generating any more wear. And in a DI engine, you don't even have fuel-laden air hanging out in the intake manifold to wash the walls of any cylinder that happens to stop with the intake valve open.

 

Good points - particularly on the regs compliance but, of course, these regs are set by politicians, not engineers.

Your family fleet leads me to this question: My current car is a 2015.5 V60 "Platinum" I've been looking at the new V60 (and V90) - the FWD turbo only models. (I don't need 4WD) Any comments on your 2019 V60 vs spouse's 2017 S60?

The V60 is my 5th Volvo (1960 122s B16, 1976 265, 2003 V70T, 2009 V70 3.2 forerunners) and is, in balance, the best road car I have owned.

 

My wife's 2017 S60 Inscription Platinum T5 AWD is our first-ever Volvo. To replace her 2004 Acura TSX, we were cross shopping the Acura TLX, Audi A3, BMW 330i, and Ford Fusion Sport Ti, all in AWD format. The Acura, Audi, and Ford didn't really grab us. The BMW we liked a lot, but A) it was more expensive than the Volvo, and B) I don't really trust newer BMWs out of warranty, and we typically keep our cars 10+ years.

The 2017 S60 really grabbed us, even though it was clearly nearing the end of its generational model run. We wanted the longer wheelbase Inscription, and we found that once we added all the options we wanted, it was actually cheaper to get the Platinum. At 250-ish hp and similar torque it has plenty of power for a daily driver, and it rides comfortably, without sacrificing decent handling. I agree, it's an excellent road car.

One thing I will note is that her 2017 is a T5 2.0 turbo with the newer 8-speed transmission, whereas your 2015 - I think - has a 6-speed and I'm not sure what engine. Don't quote me on that. The 8-speed shifts nicely, doesn't notably hunt around, and is pretty good about being in the right gear. Her T5 makes plenty of torque down low and drives like a larger-displacement engine.

We love her S60, enough that I really didn't cross-shop anything when I was looking earlier this year. I had actually been looking at a couple of 2018 leftover V60s (previous generation) earlier this year. I would have been perfectly happy with one but I was not quite ready to buy... and when I was ready, they were gone. So I switched to the new-generation 2019 V60.

The 2019 T5 FWDs use the same 2.0T / 8-speed that her car does. I honestly don't know how the weights compare between her car and mine. I was shopping AWD cars, so I never drove the 2019 T5 - all 2019 AWDs are T6 for both the S60 and V60. My car weighs in at a solid 4,000 lbs, which the T6 handles fine even without the Polestar upgrade. The 2019 T5 FWD is a little lighter and probably has enough oomph to feel lively. Again, I don't know how much weight has changed between the two generations.

My V60 is an R-Design and has the sport chassis, which is a little lower and a little firmer than the normal setup. It handles well without being too harsh, but I can't directly compare the two chassis. Based on various test drives in a V60 Inscription, I'd say the 2019's standard ride dynamics are very similar to what you are used to. I love the brakes on both the 2017 and 2019.

The 2017 has limited screen size and user interface, with no touch screen. Programming the nav is not easy. It has all the fiddly little buttons you are used to. By contrast, the 2019 has a larger screen (at least in R and Inscription trims) and almost everything is handled via touch screen. Programming the nav is easier, but many things require a series of touches or swipes. The 2019 comes with Apple / Android interface which is not important to me, but makes my wife envious.

In general I would say that the 2019's interface overcompensates a bit for the 2017's outdated control panel. The best design would have been somewhere in between the two, with more hard buttons for common functions. I am getting more used to it, and as I dial in my driver profile in the car, I am having to make fewer settings changes. The interface and menus are not overly complicated, but some simple things like switching between my preset radio stations will always be a tad more difficult than they should be (unless I discover a feature I have missed - I only have a thousand miles on the car).

The 2019 cockpit is a little deeper, with higher beltline and a higher console. You seem to sit a little farther down in the car than the 2017. Visibility is still pretty good (at least by modern standards - I really miss the huge greenhouse of older cars). The quarter windows on the 2019 V60 are a little bigger than the older version, so blind spot visibility is surprisingly not bad.

I love the 2017 for road trips, but based on a sampling of 1 experience, I suspect I will grow to love the 2019 more. Both have adaptive cruise. We took the train from Philadelphia to Connecticut to buy the V60, and drove it home from there. A 3-hour stint behind the wheel, including both stop-and-go traffic and sustained 80-85 mph cruising on the NJTP, felt like nothing. I was still comfortable and not fatigued when we got home.

Go drive one - the 2019 V60 inventory is thinning out, and the 2020 V60s are supposed to be special-order only. I love mine and if you don't hate the touch screen interface, I think you'll enjoy the way the newer car drives. Plus you can turn the stop/start feature off and have it stay off.

 

The V90 is gorgeous. If you need a bigger car, I'd look at it too. We have a 2012 Town & Country for when we need real space, so I didn't even really consider the V90. The V60 is plenty large enough for me as a daily driver. As optioned out - Advanced package, Polestar, Sport chassis, heated rear seats - my V60 was also at the limit of what I was willing to spend. The V90 runs a few grand more per given trim level.

The V90 has exactly the same drivetrain as the V60, even though it's larger. It's about 150-200 lbs heavier, which isn't bad, considering.

 

Thanks. My V60 is a "2015.5" and has, I believe the 8 speed gearbox. I bought the '09 V70 when the engine on my '03 V70T blew and the repair cost vs value equation made no sense. The '09 V70 3.2 was a very nice car - bought quickly given the situation and had a lot of miles but, despite the 3.2L engine, lacked the "edge" of my '03 so when a series of small repairs and some transmission grumblings arose, I decided to trade it for the V60 - a Volvo CPO with ~ 40K miles. My main criterion for road behavior - when I "tell" a car to do something. I want it done right now. The V60 does that.

I am more than a little bit of a nut on the subject of focus when I am driving - the V60 has a Harmon Kardon sound system, - I guess it works - never tried it so the issue will be the touch screen vs **** and switch question. (Another one of my grumbles about current auto design - I do not believe that any ergonomic argument can be made for touch screens. It's a question of production costs, parts inventory, assembly time etc. being sold as a "feature" plus of course the added benefit to mfr. and dealer that, in the event of failure, it affords the opportunity to replace a $$$$ module instead of a $10 switch)

I agree that they are good long haul cars. I recently did a Baltimore to Branford CT run. With the mess approaching the GW bridge it took almost 8 hours. I arrived grumpy but still mobile.

 

I was just thinking about that stop/start engine function. BTW we passed on one Volvo because of it and yes it can be turned off.

Assume you are in a big traffic jam on an interstate with multi lanes and the traffic is constant stop and go. Stop....travel 10 feet....stop.....travel 10 feet stop....travel, you get the picture. If you don't turn off that function that engine, starter, etc. are stopping and starting a heck of a lot. To me that is a lot of excess wear or am I not thinking clearly?

 

That really depends on how long you're sitting, and how frequently you move forward. If it is pretty constant and the stops are less than a minute each, I would disable it until traffic opened up. Yes, the parts are theoretically designed for it, but too much is too much.

Personally, with the engine-off function, I try to treat that kind of traffic the same way I do in a manual transmission car. Rather than start / stop / start / stop, I do my best to creep along in first gear, and just let the gap between me and the car ahead open and close so that I rarely come to a full stop. Rather than saving wear on the clutch (and my left knee), you're saving wear on the starter.

 

It increases mid-range HP & torque. It only increases peak HP by 1%, whereas mid-range is increased by 15.

 

Kinda like companies that offer an "ECM tune" for better performance- except this is fully backed by Volvo with regard to warranty and reliability.