Well everyone needs a load lugger! I actually enjoy the leather armchair driving experience as a contrast to the Scoob, but I would also expect a contrast in fuel economy!

I have the 2.4 SE & it returns less than 25mpg for everyday mixture of M'way, A / B road steady driving & struggles to make 30mpg on very long steady motorway driving. Even the Scoob managed 32mpg on a long motorway haul.

I have spoken to one other owner & a dealer who both felt the mpg was a bit low (reckoned on 28mpg for mix of roads & 38mpg for steady motorway).

Any other V70 owners (who dare to admit it, anyway ) on SN who could give some real world comparisons?

 

no way will it be that high for motorway

 

The Scoob or the Volvo?

Impreza definitely did 32.01mpg; 328.1 miles from 46.60 litres- my record! (Now you can believe I am a Volvo driver at heart! At least on that particular day I was)

 

Volvo's are not very good on fuel. You seem to be getting good econamy

 

I've run a company V70 D5 on several long distance business trips and got about 40mpg out of it according to the trip computer. Cant see a petrol one getting anywhere near that TBH.

 

A mate has a 2.5T (the light-pressure turbo) and gets about 31mpg on a m-way run at a steady 80-85.

My best-ever economy in my old V40 T4 was 34mpg on a long m-way run at a steady & carefuly 75-80. Oddly, it used to give 31-32mpg on the m-way if I caned it at a 90+ cruise. So I quickly gave up on economy driving

 

Thanks for the replies.

It still sounds like it is down 3 or 4 mpg then.

 

32.01 MPG?

Thats what you get from driving like a scared schoolgirl!

 

Not quite a V70 but I have a S60 T5 and can even get 30mpg.

My run to work is a mixture of dual carriage way and main A-Roads and I get an average of 30mpg over a week.

On the motorway, I'll get a steady 34mpg. Not bad for 250bhp.

 

We drove a D5 V70 on Saturday and the trip computer was in the high 20's.

 

The Volvo. I have a 2.4 S80 and driving reasonably you will get around 26-30 per tank not much more. It is heavy.

 

Recently sold my 850 T5 (auto) to a friend. Used to average 33 on motorways over it's 210,000 miles. Mate was getting 25/26 for the first few weeks but he's now upto about 29, maybe it takes a while to get used to driving a bus. Switched to a 3.0 Outback for about two months which never gave over 28 and never really performed so now have a WRX PPP which gives 30 until I get bored and start using it to apply a grin.

 

Run a XC70 D5 & get around 37mpg generally with a heavy foot & 40+ with a "legal" foot...

I've seen 375 miles out of PTMW! which equates to about 33.5mpg


The main reason that a scoob might be better on fuel than a volvo is that the volvo weighs a load more - generally due to the quality of build & materials used!!

 

I had the Volvo in the local dealers today to investigate- though they were doubtful there would be a problem as like they say, the driver gets messages from the car if there is even a little defect eg lamp bulbs. Apparantly they ran a diagnostic & then quoted me the Govt mpg figures!

A possible explanation is that the V70 has an adaptive gearbox (auto) that learns the style of driving. So perhaps if it is setting itself up for a mixture of road types as per its usual journey, this may well be why it doesn't show better than 29mpg on a long steady run.

However, they did give it a well needed wash- even dressed the tyres- and sorted out a recall on the fan that has just been issued (& mine is a 51!). And no charge.

Big, heavy, thirsty, excellent car.

 

my s60 t5 gets 25 - 29mpg, depended on how you drive, average figs

 

I ran a V70 D5 SE estate as a company bus for a few months and rarely saw 30mpg - mainly A and B road driving and forgetting that I wasn't in the Scoob.
I even did a road rally and an autotest in it!!!

 

My T5 manual averaged 20 around town and best was 27 on a 300 miledrive at a steady 70.

 

I've got a V70 2.5 LPT - it does 31-32 mpg on a long run and about 25 for town stuff. The older 2.4 T we just traded in was alot heavier on the fuel though - more like 27 and 22.

I would have thought you should get better than your figures for a non turbo model,

 

I used to get an average of 24 mpg in my T5 estate (850)

 

I've heard (I'd like to say "from a reliable source," but I can't vouch for that) that a turbocharged engine running off boost will be more economical than the identical engine in it's NA guise. Apparently this is because a turbo'd engine has a lower compression ratio. To be honest I haven't verified this but it certainly made sense in my MR2's. the 2 litre 16v Turbo, ran more economically off boost than the 2 litre 16v non turbo doing an identical 450 mile round trip.