Dear R enthusiasts,

Based on tests performed at RICA Engineering with my own R, tests performed by other R owners also at RICA Engineering, tests performed at Innovam in cooperation with Volvo Cars Nederland BV, acceleration tests performed by Paul Maaskant Prodrive training at the RDW test facility in the Netherlands and the results of many well known car magazine reviews it became obvious...

The new Volvo S60R and V70R do not produce the torque numbers specified by Volvo Car Corporation.

Volvo specifies 400 Nm of torque starting at 1950 RPM up to 5250 RPM and 300 horsepower at 5400 RPM.
The real numbers are a maximum 380 Nm of torque starting at 2500 RPMup to 5400 RPM
and 300 horsepower at 5900 RPM or higher.
On average the R models are performing 4% below specification, some 7%.

(Click here for some dyno results) Updated 05-07-2004

0-100 km/h specifications can not be met. 100-200 km/h specifications are nearly identical to the 50 horsepower lesser Volvo T5 models. The R feels sluggish at higher speeds. So sluggish it makes one think a parachute is attached to the car. For the real speed freaks the 200-250 km/h performance is pathetic.

A meeting with Volvo customer relations in the Netherlands revealed that test results gathered by Volvo in the Netherlands were in line with the test results of most R vehicles tested by customers. As it seems there are only two all wheel drive dynamo systems available in the Netherlands, Innovam performing the tests for Volvo Cars Nederland BV and RICA engineering performing some of the tests for customers.

Roughly 15% of current R owners in the Netherlands have filed a complaint at Volvo Cars Nederland BV within the first weeks of ownership or after the Dutch car magazine Autovisie confirmed what owners already were suspecting. Most of the disappointed R owners arranged testing of their vehicles on their own behalf mainly because of the fact that the car felt sluggish and was performing below expectation and promise.
AutoVisie tested 0-100 km/h performance for the V70R in 7.7 seconds instead of the specified 5.9 seconds.
Autoweek in the Netherlands tested 0-100 km/h performance for the S60R in 6.6 seconds instead of the specified 5.7 seconds.

At first Volvo customer relations responded to customer complaints with a list of requirements which had to be met to reach the acceleration numbers claimed by Volvo. During acceleration tests performed by Volvo in the Netherlands in cooperation with professional drivers and with the use of calibrated measuring equipment it became obvious that specifications could not be met.
The test vehicle, an S60R, reached 0-100 km/h in 6.1 seconds instead of the claimed 5.7 seconds.
I did not receive any information in writing about these tests.

Volvo Car Corporation in Sweden refuses to look in to this matter so I was told. Solving the problem would require new emission certifications. The tolerances for power output should be +/-5% as explained in the European union council directive 80/1269/EEC and the commission directive amendment 89/491/EEC (But hey, I'm not a lawyer..). Almost every Volvo car model tested on the same dynamo system measures within 2% of the specifications and most of them within 1% with the R being the only consistent exception with 4% below spec on average.

Volvo's emission statement indirectly confirms that Volvo is well aware of the lower than advertised specifications in media and sales material yet keeps spreading false information and expectations to it's customers.

The denial and customer unfriendly attitude of Volvo Car Corporation in Sweden towards this problem made some customers turn to engine management tuning by third parties to regain some of the power never received yet these customers risk warranty on the vehicle drive line while doing so.

Volvo Car Corporation created an expectation by marketing the R as a sports sedan and estate and spreading press material showing the R as a track car making all kinds of high speed maneuvers.
Press introduction took place at Paul Ricard circuit in France to underline the new image of the R models.
For the European market Volvo chose to place the R in the same segment as the Audi S4, BMW M3 and Mercedes C32 AMG .

The R can't live up to that promise.

Awaiting a solution I will leave this page in place to inform future R customers what to expect.

Johann



For US owners of R vehicles,

The performed tests were based on the usage of RON 98 (MON 88) gasoline which is required to meet the specifications of the R. RON 98 equals 93 premium gasoline according the (RON+MON)/2 standard.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update 05-07-2004:

Finally after nearly a year I was given the opportunity to have a conversation with a few Volvo engineers.
The conversation took place at the Volvo HQ in the Netherlands. A phone conference was arranged so we could talk to the engineers in Sweden. The engineers explained the EWG normation procedures and how the engine's where actually performing when placed in the engine test environment.
I attended the meeting together with an engine engineer who assisted me with the more technical side of the issue.
Although hard numbers still have to be exchanged in the coming weeks there were a few points of concern about the way the engine was tested on an engine test bench but almost no tests are performed by Volvo when the engine's are actualy in the car.
Some technical data which were given by the Volvo engineers raised questions. Mentioned numbers didn't come close to the data gathered by the multiple tests performed on the chassis dyno and on the street and every day situations.
In this area the cause of the lower than advertised power delivery of the R could reside.
The Volvo engineers were very proud of their R product. I really hope they can deliver this message to the more performance oriented R owners soon.

Update 03-06-2004:

Today Dutch car magazine AutoVisie published a multy dyno test review. Multiple cars of various brands were dyno tested to check if car buyers receive what they pay for. Present in this test were a Volvo S60R and an S40T5.

The image shows the S60R failing to meet the ECC norm to verify conformity of production as explained in Commission Directive 89/491/EEC.
Torque specification is outside the +5% margin for engine speed, the power outside the +5% margin for engine speed and outside the +/- 5% margin for power output within the specified engine speed range.
Most striking is the comment of Volvo PR representative Huib de Vries quoting,

" It is a known fact that the R engine's are sensitive to ambient conditions and only perform optimal under specific conditions. The reason for this behavior is because of the relative small engine in combination with a rather large turbo. Most of the tested R vehicles reach the specifications set by Volvo and only a few perform lower than spec but within the 5% margin."

Well Mr. Huib de Vries I think this is the point that I can honestly say that you are lying and misleading your customers.
Volvo in the Netherlands has never been able to hand over information nor test results showing that the R meets it's specifications. This after repeated requests.

Again it shows that the R doesn't do what it is supposed to do.

Update 30-05-2004:

The last weeks I have received a dyno report of a V70R from Switzerland and a report from the USA showing the results of an S60R Geartronic. (Also see here..)
Let the results speak for themselves.

Update 03-03-2004:

Received the first dyno report of an S60R from Switzerland showing over 400 Nm of torque.

Update 30-1-2004:

Received a new dyno report of a V70R tested earlier today. Results were terrible. Car has driven 28000 km and clearly does not comply with the tolerances Volvo is using to proof their right. This car should be returned to Volvo

Dutch car magazine AutoVisie published a (re)test as some sort of rectification claiming that a V70R which only reached 7.7 seconds from 0-100 km/h in a comparison test this summer was using wrong 95 octane gasoline and was not fully broken in.
The article quotes Mister Hans Nilsson saying that a new engine will produce 28,5 Nm(!) lower torque and that brake in will take at least 10000 km. Well Mr. Nilsson, the above mentioned dyno showes that some R's still reach 20+ Nm below specification after 28000 km. Again my point has been proven and relies the false claims Volvo is spreading via car magazines.
Spring time is near, R's will lose a lot of power when temperatures rise above 10ºC. It is about time to do something about this issue for those owners who didn't tune their R yet.(To receive what they have purchased in the first place.) Lucky for Volvo there are only a few non tuned R's left..........

Update 17-1-2004:

According US aftermarket Volvo tuner iPD some of the newer R's come with newer ECU software revisions.
Also Volvo discovered a production glitch with wrong 130 mph top speed limiter settings for some R models.
Most of the models were US spec R's delivered in Germany.

Update 17-12-2003:

The last dyno test performed by Volvo showed maximum torque of 393 Nm at 3000 RPM, average near 385 Nm, and 307 DIN corrected HP at 5700 RPM.
DIN correction suggested a cold ambient test environment. Volvo informed the customer that the car was within spec.
Car was tested in 3rd gear. At 2000 RPM nothing close to 400 Nm to be found.

Update:

According some R Geartronic owners in the US the GT is not capable of producing 300 HP at all.
Besides the reduced maximum torque of 350 Nm compared to the specified 400 Nm for the manual the geartronic seems to be severely limited in maximum allowed revelations per gear and also limited even more in maximum torque in the first gears.
Volvo specifies 300 HP for the R GT at 6000 RPM, recalculating the torque curve suggests 300 HP at 6100 RPM, yet the gearbox does not allow to reach those RPM's except for first and second gear .
All other gears reach a maximum below 6000 RPM according tests performed by the R GT owners.

One owner supplied the following numbers,

1-2: 6240 rpm
2-3: 6570 rpm
3-4: 5870 rpm
4-5: 5870 rpm
All of these values are +/- 50 rpm

A phone conversation between Mr. Hans Nilsson, Product Strategist for the R models at VCC, and a few R GT owners in the USA confirmed the mentioned maximum shift points and the even further reduction in torque in first and second gear.

Reactions can be posted on the Swede demon forum.

Home | Forum | Guestbook

BACK