Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Volvo Cars / August 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Does Volvo sell a Diesel Car in North America?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Tmuldoon - 10 Aug 2007 21:02 GMT
Is there such a beast?

I would be interested in a diesel AWD vehicle that is not an SUV.

Suggestions?  Links?

Thanks,

Tmuld
Joe - 10 Aug 2007 22:14 GMT
> Is there such a beast?
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Tmuld

Nope, no diesel at this time, but the XV70 is a AWD wagon.

http://www.volvocars.us/models/xc70/
Blise03 - 11 Aug 2007 17:18 GMT
Joe ha scritto:
>> Is there such a beast?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> http://www.volvocars.us/models/xc70/ 

No, wait a moment.
The new XC70 is sold in Europe since end of July even though its
official presentation will be in September.
Anyway all Volvo websites in Europe had been showing the new model since
May.
The US Volvo website is only showing the old beast, no sign of the new one.
Probably they have a huge old stock to sell before MY08 comes in?
Tmuldoon - 13 Aug 2007 15:53 GMT
Too bad there no diesel Volvos.

A diesel XC70 would get great mileage and would totally make sense in
NA.

What would be a drawback to having a diesel Volvo?

Thanks!

Tmuld
Joerg Lorenz - 13 Aug 2007 21:01 GMT
Tmuldoon schrieb:
> Too bad there no diesel Volvos.
>
> A diesel XC70 would get great mileage and would totally make sense in
> NA.
>
> What would be a drawback to having a diesel Volvo?

I drive one over here in Europe. These Diesel-Volvos would make perfect
sense in an US-environment. On a US-highway at 60mph I would easily get
45 miles/US-gallon on my V70 D5. The other positive side ist the
enormous torque of the Diesel-engine: 400 NM is better than the best V8
would deliver.

> Thanks!

Your welcome!

> Tmuld

Joerg

Signature

Ubuntu: "Humanity towards others". The "Ubuntu" distribution of the
Linux computer operating system is inspired by the concept(of Ubuntu),
arguing that it "brings the spirit of Ubuntu to the software world."
http://www.ubuntu.com

Tmuldoon - 13 Aug 2007 22:07 GMT
Volvo Canada said there are numerous challenges in meeting
environmental standards of North America.

They said Canadian and American standards (California) are difficult
for diesel engines to meet.  I am guess they would have to re design
their engine - which probably is not cost effective.

I thought Europeans standards were better than NA.

In NA - we do have Mercedes and Volkswagen diesels - they must meet
the emission standards.

Quoting Volvo:
"Future minimum emissions standards will make it progressively more
difficult for diesel-powered vehicles to be certified for sale in this
country. Companies like Volvo need to plan for the long term."

The diesel version says 33 600 pound on the UK site - that is about
$70 000 USD.   A small fortune.

Importing one from Europe would probably not meet standards of NA and
rejected.

I would think with the rise in gas prices here - diesels would sell
better.  Plus their new D5 engine provides more power.

Too bad...would be real nice.

Thanks for all the input!

Tmuld
John Horner - 14 Aug 2007 01:25 GMT
> Volvo Canada said there are numerous challenges in meeting
> environmental standards of North America.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> I thought Europeans standards were better than NA.

Many people think that the Europeans are "more green" regulation wise
than the US, but it isn't true.  Auto emissions standards were in place
in the US long before in Europe.  Lead was removed from automotive fuels
in the US more than a decade ahead of Europe.  Current European
emissions standards are in fact easier to meet than current California
standards.

> In NA - we do have Mercedes and Volkswagen diesels - they must meet
> the emission standards.

The are not available in California nor in the other states which follow
California emissions requirements.
James Sweet - 14 Aug 2007 02:12 GMT
>> Volvo Canada said there are numerous challenges in meeting
>> environmental standards of North America.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> The are not available in California nor in the other states which follow
> California emissions requirements.

I didn't know that, that's too bad really, my friend has a Golf turbodiesel
and it gets great mileage and has decent performance as well. It's an
entirely different beast than the diesel cars of the 1970s that gave them
all such a bad rap around here.

Diesels do emit more particulate, but given they burn so much less fuel per
mile traveled in general I would think this would even out.
Michael Pardee - 14 Aug 2007 13:59 GMT
> [...] my friend has a Golf turbodiesel and it gets great mileage and has
> decent performance as well. It's an entirely different beast than the
> diesel cars of the 1970s that gave them all such a bad rap around here.

That's probably a large reason diesels are so out of favor in the US,
emissions aside. I understand the new common rail diesels have overcome many
of the drivability problems of diesels and at least have the potential for
reducing the clatter, but the diesels we have on the road now are still
miserable beasts.

My work truck is a Ford diesel (TDi) and I love/hate it. The fuel economy is
twice what the previous gasser offered, which translates to twice the
range - a crucial consideration when far from civilization. The power on the
open road and for towing is also very nice; amazing what 25 PSI boost will
do. Off-road, especially in soft spots, the steady torque delivery is a big
improvement over the fluky delivery of gas engines (as long as I don't let
the turbo get going!) Coupled with the manual tranny, though acceleration
from a stop is the stuff of nightmares. Even a slight upgrade means several
seconds to reach walking speed, and bicyclists usually beat me across
intersections. I pretend I'm pulling a heavy trailer when planning a turn
across traffic or for merging from a side street. The engine is horribly
noisy and has been very troublesome; Ford is having trouble with the
injectors in their Cummins diesels and now demands from us 1500 mile service
intervals to keep the warranty in force. Don't even remind me of the
problems from that tank of low-cetane fuel I got. <8^O

Mike
John Horner - 15 Aug 2007 03:39 GMT
>  Ford is having trouble with the
> injectors in their Cummins diesels and now demands from us 1500 mile service
> intervals to keep the warranty in force. Don't even remind me of the
> problems from that tank of low-cetane fuel I got. <8^O

Ford's US truck diesels come from Navistar and are based on an old
International Harvester V-8 gas engine design.  Cummins makes diesel
engines for Dodge and GM get's theirs from Isuzu.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Power_Stroke_engine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cummins_B_Series_engine
Michael Pardee - 15 Aug 2007 05:38 GMT
>>  Ford is having trouble with the injectors in their Cummins diesels and
>> now demands from us 1500 mile service intervals to keep the warranty in
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cummins_B_Series_engine

Pretty sure the owner's manual specifies Cummins, but sometimes my age gets
in the way of remembering things like that :-}

Mike
Stephen Henning - 14 Aug 2007 04:53 GMT
> In NA - we do have Mercedes and Volkswagen diesels - they must meet
> the emission standards.

In fact Mercedes is making a diesel engines for light aircraft for the
US market.
Signature

Cheers, Steve Henning in Reading, PA, USA
   Owned '67,'68,'71,'74,'79,'81,'87,'93,'95 & '01 Volvos.
   The '67,'74,'79,'87,'95 and '01 through European Delivery.
 http://rhodyman.net/homevo.html

Stephen Henning - 13 Aug 2007 21:12 GMT
> What would be a drawback to having a diesel Volvo?

People in the US don't buy them.  Volvo makes diesels and sells them all
over the world.  When they tried to sell them in the US, sales were very
sluggish, just like a diesel Volvo.
Signature

Cheers, Steve Henning in Reading, PA, USA
   Owned '67,'68,'71,'74,'79,'81,'87,'93,'95 & '01 Volvos.
   The '67,'74,'79,'87,'95 and '01 through European Delivery.
 http://rhodyman.net/homevo.html

John Horner - 14 Aug 2007 01:23 GMT
>> What would be a drawback to having a diesel Volvo?
>
> People in the US don't buy them.  Volvo makes diesels and sells them all
> over the world.  When they tried to sell them in the US, sales were very
> sluggish, just like a diesel Volvo.

The current problem is a matter of emissions regulations, particularly
NOX and particulates.  There are a new generation of clean diesels on
the way which clear these hurdles, but the reason there are almost no
diesel cars on the US market right now is regulatory, not customer
preference.

Honda says they will be bringing diesel to the US, probably around 2010.
Joerg Lorenz - 14 Aug 2007 05:49 GMT
Stephen Henning schrieb:

>> What would be a drawback to having a diesel Volvo?
>
> People in the US don't buy them.  Volvo makes diesels and sells them all
> over the world.  When they tried to sell them in the US, sales were very
> sluggish, just like a diesel Volvo.

You have absolutely no clue, desr. The modern Volvo-Diesels have a much
better driveability than the gasoline-engines.

Sluggish? That shows you never drove one of the direct injection
turbo-diesels.

Joerg

Signature

Reclaim your inbox! Thunderbird makes emailing safer, faster, and easier
than ever before with the industry's best implementations of features
such as intelligent spam filters, built-in RSS reader, quick search, and
much more. http://www.mozilla-europe.org/de/products/thunderbird/

James Sweet - 14 Aug 2007 06:07 GMT
> Stephen Henning schrieb:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Sluggish? That shows you never drove one of the direct injection
> turbo-diesels.

I assume he's talking about the 240 and 760 Diesels we got back in the 80s,
88hp in a 3200LB car, they were slow as molasses, smokey, and very hard to
find anyone willing to work on them. We never got any of the modern diesels
over here.
Joerg Lorenz - 14 Aug 2007 10:31 GMT
> > Stephen Henning schrieb:
>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> find anyone willing to work on them. We never got any of the modern diesels
> over here.

My D5 has a 185 hp / 400 NM engine with a modern 6-gear-automatic
attached to it. Top speed 225 km/h (140 mph) and an acceleration to 60
mph in under 9s. This cannot called be sluggish. Before, I had the
same V70 as a T5 with 250 hp but "only" 340 NM torque. The diesel is
much more driveable in everyday conditions and the T5 was only quicker
at very high speeds above 120 mph and with high revs.
With the diesel I hardly ever use more than 3500 RPMs. In the 6th gear
that is equivalent to 122 mph.

What the environmental aspect is conecerned, the 185 hp version is
equipped with a particles filter and a catalytic converter and
therefore meets the highest international standards.

Joerg
James Sweet - 15 Aug 2007 08:41 GMT
>> > Stephen Henning schrieb:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
>
> Joerg

Well that's all fine and dandy, but the fact remains that the D5 was never
sold anywhere in North America. You simply can't get one, so anything else
is irrelevant.
Joerg Lorenz - 15 Aug 2007 14:28 GMT
> >> "Joerg Lorenz" <hugyb...@gmx.ch> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
>
> - Zitierten Text anzeigen -

That says a lot about the American consumer and diesel cars in general
and almost nothing about Volvo diesel cars. Last year I travelled a
couple of thousand miles in Montana, Wyoming and Colorado. I never saw
a diesel passenger car. Ford light-trucks but no pax cars of any make.

During these long trips I wished I had my D5 with me. Huge fuel tank -
not these ridiculously small fuel tanks in American cars and a decent
consumption. Lately I drove from Switzerland to the Atlantic (600
miles with fuel for another 50 miles) at speeds on highways of about
90 to 95 miles whenever possible. The ride took less than 8 hours.

American consumers don't like that kind of economics? Can't be true!
Why is the American car industry sitting so deep in the s..t? and
losing market share globaly and nationaly?

I want to make one thing clear: I do not say Volvo is the only car
maker with such good engines: Look to the French manufacturers, the
Germans and even the Japanese recognised the need to produce diesel
engines for the global market. Only America is standing aside.

At least at the moment. But my contacts at European manufacturers of
engine components tell me that the large American producers are
sucking up all capacities of machine tools to manufacture diesel
injection systems and new equipment aluminium casting systems. It is a
fair guess that in about one to three years there will be a huge
avalanche of new modern diesel cars reaching the North American
markets.

And again: I'm strongly convinced that the conventional gasoline
engine has no future with its low efficiency and its high CO2 output
except for special purposes.

Joerg
James Sweet - 16 Aug 2007 05:59 GMT
>> Well that's all fine and dandy, but the fact remains that the D5 was
>> never
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> couple of thousand miles in Montana, Wyoming and Colorado. I never saw
> a diesel passenger car. Ford light-trucks but no pax cars of any make.

I fail to see what, they're not for sale, they can't be bought, what does
that say about the consumer?

Diesels got a bad reputation in cars because the domestic makers built so
many horrible ones, the new ones are much better, but VW is the only
manufacture I'm aware of in the US to offer a modern TDI and they sell
pretty well in some areas. If Volvo would offer the D5 here, people would
buy it but not everyone wants to drive a Volkswagen, and it will take a lot
to get the bulk of the population interested enough to give them a try. The
economy is simply not the same here, diesel fuel is more expensive than
gasoline, the cars that use it are more expensive, maintenance is more
expensive and harder to find, those things are not gonna change overnight.
clay - 14 Aug 2007 16:46 GMT
> Stephen Henning schrieb:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Joerg

Anyone catch the American Le Mans series road race at Road America last
weekend?
Them Audi diesels are no slugs...
Joerg Lorenz - 14 Aug 2007 21:23 GMT
clay schrieb:
>> Stephen Henning schrieb:
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> weekend?
> Them Audi diesels are no slugs...

Neither are other European makes. The market share is going up quickly
because of the better economics and also the superior characteristics.
Even in countries where Diesel is not subsidised by lower taxes like
here in Switzerland.

And this year the Diesel-Audis won the 24h-Le-Mans-Race for the second
time in a row.

Signature

Reclaim your inbox! Thunderbird makes emailing safer, faster, and easier
than ever before with the industry's best implementations of features
such as intelligent spam filters, built-in RSS reader, quick search, and
much more. http://www.mozilla-europe.org/de/products/thunderbird/

Stephen Henning - 14 Aug 2007 22:12 GMT
> > People in the US don't buy them.  Volvo makes diesels and sells them all
> > over the world.  When they tried to sell them in the US, sales were very
> > sluggish, just like a diesel Volvo.
>
> You have absolutely no clue, desr. The modern Volvo-Diesels have a much
> better driveability than the gasoline-engines.

I only see Volvo Diesels when I pass them in Europe with my gas powered
Volvos which I buy over there.  Volvo diesels will go fast, but they
don't have the quickest acceleration.  There aren't any new Volvo
diesels in the USA.

For a real comparison:

2007 Volvo C70 SE Lux D5 (2.4 litre turbo) Geartronic takes 9.5 seconds
to reach 60 mph (38.7 mpg)
2007 Volvo C70 SE Lux T5 (2.5 litre turbo) Geartronic takes 7.6 seconds
to reach 60 mph (31.0 mpg)
2007 Volvo C70 SE Lux 2.4 (2.4 litre turbo) Geartronic takes 9.1 seconds
to reach 60 mph (31.4 mpg)

The make the statement: "At £29,420 for the cheapest 'port' version, the
D5 is £3,195 pricier than the 2.4-litre petrol. So petrol choosers
effectively get more than 21,000 miles of free motoring, while from the
D5 has to notch 64,000 miles before that premium begins to return a
benefit."

from
<http://cars.tiscali.co.uk/nuovo/Auto/visualizza.php?arrayid=12123&op=int
ro>,
<http://cars.tiscali.co.uk/nuovo/Auto/visualizza.php?arrayid=12121&op=int
ro> and  
<http://cars.tiscali.co.uk/nuovo/Auto/visualizza.php?arrayid=12123&op=int
ro>
Signature

Cheers, Steve Henning in Reading, PA, USA
   Owned '67,'68,'71,'74,'79,'81,'87,'93,'95 & '01 Volvos.
   The '67,'74,'79,'87,'95 and '01 through European Delivery.
 http://rhodyman.net/homevo.html

Michael Pardee - 15 Aug 2007 02:43 GMT
> Stephen Henning schrieb:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Joerg

My work truck has a 6.0L Cummins TDi and has great power on the open road,
but calling it sluggish at low speeds is being way too kind. Sluggish cars
leave it behind - I've actually had people honk at me when I was
accelerating full throttle and gradually building enough speed for the boost
to kick in.

The truly awful diesel engines that appeared here in the 1970s have very
effectively given diesels in passenger cars a bad name. The relatively
primitive diesel engines used in light trucks here only reinforce the image
of them being noisy, smelly, hard starting and sluggish. I understand the
modulated injection common rail engines overcome many of those defects but
the first of those to appear here will have to overcome the image problem
that already exists.

Hybrids are gaining ground rapidly and may starve out the market for diesel
passenger cars in NA. Even the relatively weakly hybridized cars available
today offer better fuel economy around town than comparable diesels (I get
upper 40s MPG in town average, 55 or more in good weather) and are
infinitely quieter and more responsive at low speeds.

Mike
Roadie - 14 Aug 2007 01:13 GMT
> Too bad there no diesel Volvos.
>
> A diesel XC70 would get great mileage and would totally make sense in
> NA.
>
> What would be a drawback to having a diesel Volvo?

Drawbacks for any diesel car in USA:
1.  Depending on your location there may be only a few stations that
sell diesel fuel.
2.  Diesel sells for approximately the same as premium gasoline and
sometimes more.  More than anything else this reduces the financial
benefits of a diesel motor.  Biodiesel could be a cheaper alternative
although there are some conversion costs.
3.  A comparably equipped car with a gas motor will probably cost less
than one with a diesel motor.
4.  Contrary to popular myth the non-fuel cost of operating a diesel
over the long haul is about the same as a gasoline equipped engine.
They do require maintenance and when something breaks it is usually
expensive.
5.  Be sure to drive any diesel powered vehicle before buying.  Large
torque numbers at low rpm's notwithstanding they tend to feel
sluggish.
Joerg Lorenz - 14 Aug 2007 21:28 GMT
Roadie schrieb:
> 5.  Be sure to drive any diesel powered vehicle before buying.  Large
> torque numbers at low rpm's notwithstanding they tend to feel
> sluggish.

Right you are for older models. Diesels in general have a steeper torque
curve than gasoline engines. These days the manufacturers compensate for
this with very short 1st gears and more gears in total. In the case of
my D5  there are 6 gears and the spread between 1st and 6th is roughly 6
to 1 which is very high compared to older transmissions with usually 4
gears and spreads of 4:1 or even less.

Joerg

Signature

Reclaim your inbox! Thunderbird makes emailing safer, faster, and easier
than ever before with the industry's best implementations of features
such as intelligent spam filters, built-in RSS reader, quick search, and
much more. http://www.mozilla-europe.org/de/products/thunderbird/

byrocat - 15 Aug 2007 15:52 GMT
I have to agree that the current crop of European diesel cars are not
sluggish.

I rented a brand new SAAB 95 diesel two years ago and drove all over
Devon and Corwall (driveway of rental cottage went right unto a B road
on a near-blind curve.)

I noticed no problems with acceleration (had to tone down some starts
because I started leaving rubber on the road.) and the mileage was
terrific compared to my V40 back home (1000KM city/highway on a full
48-liter tank, versus the 500-or-so on pure highway.)

If Volvo markets a diesel, I'll be seriously considering it. (local
Ikea store just put in parking spots for Hybrids.....)

Still looking for a guide to retro-fitting a Vokswagon diesel into my
V40.....
Mike - 16 Aug 2007 22:05 GMT
My experience with diesel sedan is very positive.

About 10 yrs ago in Massachusetts I bought used Toyota Camry Turbo
Diesel from Toyota dealer and enjoyed it for over 5 years. It was a
great car, with over 40 miles/gallon and not a single problem. The only
minor drawback was not all stations carried diesel fuel. That car was
good performer, not noisier than gasoline cars, fare from being
sluggish. I'm sure today's diesel cars are better than my Camry diesel
designed in the last century.

Pollution is significantly lower at sedan diesel compared to bus and
truck diesel  engines.

If available, I would seriously  consider Volvo sedan diesel.

Mike
'98 S70
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.