Hi, I was wondering whether anyone has had problems with the 2016 model? We bought it 2 years ago and have so far had to replace the ECM and had the rear door fixed as it couldn't be opened inside or out. Previous owner had gaskets replaced and the same issue on another door, amongst a whole host of other things.
Now, it needs a new engine and replacement turbos at 5 years old and low mileage!
Currently locked in a battle with Volvo UK. Is this normal for this car? Can anyone share their experience with this model?

 

Following as another new (to me)owner of a 16 XC90 in UK.

Warranty stuff aside, no car should need a new engine that quickly (in my experience) - 5 years is nothing. This is where warranties for big stuff are just a terrible concept. Id expect that engines would be built well enough to last 10 years, and would so rarely fail that they could offer longer warranties on things like this.

I hope something gets resolved for you. Have you been able to find out if this is a common thing?

I find this modern car ‘things break quickly’ thing (or insist just XC90’s really depressing.

In three decades of buying/selling sometimes used, sometimes new, I’ve only ever seen one non-wear and tear thing (and that was just some sealant needed on a brand new car). Albeit a lot of Subarus in there.

 

Hi,
While I haven't come across anyone else who's had to replace an engine and turbos, I have discovered that the 2016 model is known for being extremely problematic and multiple people have advised that I get rid of it. I'll make sure I update you when this reaches a conclusion - and I'll share anything that may be useful to you in the future.

 

And likewise.

I’ve got a couple of fixes to make to mine straight off (incl the (I understand common) flipping temp sensor in the wing mirror).

thanks.

 

2016 xc 90 Production date Mid Dec 2015
Just going thru the hide the wiper/piston ring failure dealer VCNA process. Now confronting a possible urbo, supercharger and catalytic converter failure. All caused by excess oil consumption which dealers teste and said was "normal". Now saying same rate is off Volvo spec.
I believe if turbo has failed it's due to the carbon build up and detonation above the piston top causing excess pressure. High pressure >200 psi was recorded during one compression test. If that's normal then I had a super engine
What is interesting is my vehicle went thru the exact same other failures beforehand ECM replaced after 30000 miles and 1500$ of diagnosis, change out of thermostatic water pump, back up battery and testing wires between ECM and engine. Then ECM replaced under " emissions warranty.
Just to complete the picture, my wing Thermostat was also wonky, replaced it, still was bad but worked fine after ECM change.
I wonder if there is another design defect or common fault in these cars the ECM in addition to the wiper ring design defect.
Volvo for life, or until engine fails around 60,000 miles

 

Volvo for Life, or engine failure at 60,000 miles
XC90 2016 Production Date Mid Dec 2015

Just going thru the hide the wiper ring failure dealer process. Consuming Oil and after second consumption test told same value "out of Volvo spec". Potential Turbo Failure, Supercharger Failure, Catalytic Converter, Failure along with pistons, rings replacement. All due to high oil consumption causing carbon build up and high engine pressure. First compression test showed compression at >200 psi.
What is interesting is that also had ECM defective at 30,000 miles. Replaced under emissions warranty after diagnostic cost plus replacing the Electronic Thermostat,Backup battery, and testing continuity of wiring. 1500 $
No coincidence also had the wild wing temperature readings, calibrated, tested and replaced sensor, but still bad, Worked fine after the ECM was replaced

Is there another large class of failures - ECM that has not been discovered publicly.