Fuel Economy
I just recently obtained my '01 S-60 T5 (103k miles), and was curious.
I saw someone post that at 55-60mph he was getting 35mpg with his S-60 on trips, and that got my attention.
My S-60 has been in the family since new, and the BEST it ever got was 23mpg in suburban driving, and that's with a light foot (I get 28 local-32 highway mpg with my '96 much larger Pontiac Bonneville w/ the non-supercharged 3.8 V-6 driven the same way, except I drive 65-70 on Interstates) and never exceeding 60mph w/ the S-60. The previous owner, my nephew, got 16-18 in more urban driving.
The car runs well, has been dealer-maintained (some independent repairs) since new, and has no MIL lights or anything indicating problems. The brakes are NOT dragging in the least (shift into "N" at a light and the car will roll forward or back with the slightest grade). It just had a very expensive ($2700) dealer service at the 100,000 mile point, including the timing belt, of course, and they noted nothing amiss.
The dealer told my nephew (the original owner) to expect 15-22mpg since it's a high-performance car despite the small engine (that has to work hard to move the heavy car), and that is exactly what the car has already gotten so he, then I didn't think anything of it until reading the mentioned post.
The Volvos I have owned (a couple 240s, a 740, and my much-missed 965, all w/ auto transmissions) never did better than 23mph, so I just assumed mediocre economy was part of the marque.
I wonder if the 35mph was a typo, or should I be looking for something specific? Not looking for a survey or anything. Just whether I am in the ball park with 23mpg when driven like I have the proverbial egg under my foot.
Bob
I saw someone post that at 55-60mph he was getting 35mpg with his S-60 on trips, and that got my attention.
My S-60 has been in the family since new, and the BEST it ever got was 23mpg in suburban driving, and that's with a light foot (I get 28 local-32 highway mpg with my '96 much larger Pontiac Bonneville w/ the non-supercharged 3.8 V-6 driven the same way, except I drive 65-70 on Interstates) and never exceeding 60mph w/ the S-60. The previous owner, my nephew, got 16-18 in more urban driving.
The car runs well, has been dealer-maintained (some independent repairs) since new, and has no MIL lights or anything indicating problems. The brakes are NOT dragging in the least (shift into "N" at a light and the car will roll forward or back with the slightest grade). It just had a very expensive ($2700) dealer service at the 100,000 mile point, including the timing belt, of course, and they noted nothing amiss.
The dealer told my nephew (the original owner) to expect 15-22mpg since it's a high-performance car despite the small engine (that has to work hard to move the heavy car), and that is exactly what the car has already gotten so he, then I didn't think anything of it until reading the mentioned post.
The Volvos I have owned (a couple 240s, a 740, and my much-missed 965, all w/ auto transmissions) never did better than 23mph, so I just assumed mediocre economy was part of the marque.
I wonder if the 35mph was a typo, or should I be looking for something specific? Not looking for a survey or anything. Just whether I am in the ball park with 23mpg when driven like I have the proverbial egg under my foot.
Bob
Last edited by bobinyelm; Aug 19, 2010 at 11:52 PM.
That solves the mystery.
A T5 will get poor mileage even driven conservatively. It is incapable of decent mileage due to compromises (and maybe gearing?) to make it a semi-boy racer, though it's hardly a real performance car.
It is comfortable, though.
A T5 will get poor mileage even driven conservatively. It is incapable of decent mileage due to compromises (and maybe gearing?) to make it a semi-boy racer, though it's hardly a real performance car.
It is comfortable, though.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SwedishGermanCars
General Volvo Chat
8
Apr 30, 2005 11:09 PM



