Volvo S60R new daily
Discussion
Thanks for the comments everyone 
that's interesting about the registration too, will have a look through the history again tomorrow see what it says!
I will keep the posts updated of course and will get some interior pics up too hopefully nothing major comes up and looking through the old reciepts has had a lot of work on the AWD system including the angle gear and collar - hopefully upgrade ones have been fitted! Looking forward to running this one and hopefully bringing to a few PH meets 
that's interesting about the registration too, will have a look through the history again tomorrow see what it says! I will keep the posts updated of course and will get some interior pics up too
hopefully nothing major comes up and looking through the old reciepts has had a lot of work on the AWD system including the angle gear and collar - hopefully upgrade ones have been fitted! Looking forward to running this one and hopefully bringing to a few PH meets £6000 for a good S60R is a good deal, I'd say! Knowing the suspension maladies can add up to bills in excess of £1000 a corner, you're better off buying a good one with a warranty to go with it. Get a good one and you're set! They look about ten times better than the dross Mercedes, BMW and Audi had to challenge it at the time, and sound better too. What a fantastic car you have, enjoy it!
And in that green, they're just stunning. It's a tough colour to photograph but in person, on a sunny day, wow!
And in that green, they're just stunning. It's a tough colour to photograph but in person, on a sunny day, wow!
Always liked the look, sound, pace and value of these, but having owned an s60 d5 and got rid due to not really getting on with the steering and handling of it (despite enjoying the comfort), I'm not sure id go for a version which take some commitment in running costs when its predictable (and hence more boring a choice) rivals offer a more entertaining steer. That been said, looking at the pictures still makes me want one! Enjoy
JeffreyLebowski said:
Always liked the look, sound, pace and value of these, but having owned an s60 d5 and got rid due to not really getting on with the steering and handling of it (despite enjoying the comfort), I'm not sure id go for a version which take some commitment in running costs when its predictable (and hence more boring a choice) rivals offer a more entertaining steer. That been said, looking at the pictures still makes me want one! Enjoy
Hi there! Yeah I know what you mean about the current and potential running costs but it comes with the territory of the car I guess! I'm young and prepared for it As with regards to the handling too I've never driven a standard S60 so can't really comment, I have however had a few decent handling cars before such as Golf mk2 GTI, MG ZS 180, Focus ST and I was prepared originally for the S60R to be a bit of a floppy heavy saloon which was only good in a straight line... I was so so wrong... It handles like its on rails, seriously the grip is phenomenal especially when using sport and advanced settings on the active chassis! Comfort setting does however put the car into 'Bison mode' and really softens things up, especially noticeable when pushing on a bit but on poor road surfaces it's very impressive!
in not going to say it's as good as an M3 or S4 but it's right up there with them I reckon! ajb85 said:
Lovely! A bit oddball so right up my street. Probably the last proper 'Q car' that springs to mind. I remember watching the Top Gear review and thinking how plain mad it was. Loved the blue dials and orange seats on there demo car.
Yeah I remember that episode! Think it put in a pretty respectable 1:35 around the TG test track so not overly bad! I'm not sure Clarkson was a huge fan of it on test but it still appealed to me enough to buy it all these years later Baryonyx said:
And in that green, they're just stunning. It's a tough colour to photograph but in person, on a sunny day, wow!
Absolutely love Flash Green! Was so close to buying one in that colour but the mileage was a lot higher than this one and wasn't as fully documented history wise! Agree it's a cracking colour in the flesh! charltjr said:
Balls.
Of.
Steel.
That is all
To be fair, they're nowhere near as expensive to keep on the road as they used to be now that the 4C shocks are available direct from Monroe. Just make sure your 4WD system actually works as soon as you possibly can.
I know. I'm mad. And yes the AWD has been tested the unconventional way trying to get all 300bhp on the road from a wet standing start... Of.
Steel.
That is all
To be fair, they're nowhere near as expensive to keep on the road as they used to be now that the 4C shocks are available direct from Monroe. Just make sure your 4WD system actually works as soon as you possibly can.
seriously impressive the way the power is put down! Rikki55 said:
Yeah I remember that episode! Think it put in a pretty respectable 1:35 around the TG test track so not overly bad! I'm not sure Clarkson was a huge fan of it on test but it still appealed to me enough to buy it all these years later
Think it put in a pretty respectable 1:35 around the TG test track so not overly bad! I'm not sure Clarkson was a huge fan of it on test but it still appealed to me enough to buy it all these years later 
This photo from the test is on Google. I seem to recall they watched the footage back and saw the tyres almost peeling off the rim due to cornering forces. Admittedly, it gave a good showing despite the fact it was never really meant for that sort of tight track work.
xuy said:
philmots said:
Nice.
I had a 2.4 T5 (same engine but with thicker liners and smaller injectors) I went for the T5 as the R's appeared a bit fragile..
It sounded mint, was super comfy, went like hell (mapped ~310hp) but really wooly in the corners.. Ultimately couldn't get on with the way it looked so got rid.
Nice box to tick though.
totally different engineI had a 2.4 T5 (same engine but with thicker liners and smaller injectors) I went for the T5 as the R's appeared a bit fragile..
It sounded mint, was super comfy, went like hell (mapped ~310hp) but really wooly in the corners.. Ultimately couldn't get on with the way it looked so got rid.
Nice box to tick though.
Well, it is fairly different although there are quite a lot of common bits.
The S60R engine is based on the 2.5T and hence can be a bit fragile because the cylinder walls are rather thin for the load.
The 2.4 T5 is based on the 2.3 T5 engine but with slightly different pistons which give the extra capacity. It gains the turbo, inlet and outlet VVT systems and various other go-faster goodies from the R engine but internally it's different to the engine in the R and is much stronger.
OP if you've had the 4WD gubbins replaced already that's great, they will most likely be the upgraded parts which have proven to be solid.
If you're thinking about a remap definitely do some research into having the cylinder liners shimmed - it's a big up-front investment but if you do it then you can tune the engine to some pretty impressive numbers, if you don't then you can still tune it but you're on borrowed time.
The S60R engine is based on the 2.5T and hence can be a bit fragile because the cylinder walls are rather thin for the load.
The 2.4 T5 is based on the 2.3 T5 engine but with slightly different pistons which give the extra capacity. It gains the turbo, inlet and outlet VVT systems and various other go-faster goodies from the R engine but internally it's different to the engine in the R and is much stronger.
OP if you've had the 4WD gubbins replaced already that's great, they will most likely be the upgraded parts which have proven to be solid.
If you're thinking about a remap definitely do some research into having the cylinder liners shimmed - it's a big up-front investment but if you do it then you can tune the engine to some pretty impressive numbers, if you don't then you can still tune it but you're on borrowed time.
philmots said:
xuy said:
philmots said:
Nice.
I had a 2.4 T5 (same engine but with thicker liners and smaller injectors) I went for the T5 as the R's appeared a bit fragile..
It sounded mint, was super comfy, went like hell (mapped ~310hp) but really wooly in the corners.. Ultimately couldn't get on with the way it looked so got rid.
Nice box to tick though.
totally different engineI had a 2.4 T5 (same engine but with thicker liners and smaller injectors) I went for the T5 as the R's appeared a bit fragile..
It sounded mint, was super comfy, went like hell (mapped ~310hp) but really wooly in the corners.. Ultimately couldn't get on with the way it looked so got rid.
Nice box to tick though.
I know of quite a few R owners now who replaced their 2.5 R engines with the 2.4 T5 when the liners eventually went.
I was eyeing up an 850R or V70R as a daily before the Clio. I simply could not find one good enough at the time and needed a set of wheels fast. Yours does look lovely it has to be said.
.
Otispunkmeyer said:
I don't get ST pricing. Face lift ones in orange seem to be on for silly money. Just looked and they seem to be 10k minimum, often 12-13! this is a 5 year old car which isn't that fast especially for the fuel it consumes. Great though the 5 cylinder engine is it's not particularly vocal in that car either. These things cannot have been much more expensive to buy new! I should have bought one back in 2012 when I could have had a good example st3 for just under 10k! I could probably resell it today and have not lost much at all!
Really? My dad has a MkIV Mondeo 2.5T and he will get around 30MPG average on the way to work. On a run at 80MPH with 4 aboard I have seen 35MPG via the tank to tank filling method. Of course if I put my foot down the MPG is rubbish but then my Clio 172 would not be much better either! OTOH I do understand that the STs can become more frugal with tuning.charltjr said:
Well, it is fairly different although there are quite a lot of common bits.
The S60R engine is based on the 2.5T and hence can be a bit fragile because the cylinder walls are rather thin for the load.
The 2.4 T5 is based on the 2.3 T5 engine but with slightly different pistons which give the extra capacity. It gains the turbo, inlet and outlet VVT systems and various other go-faster goodies from the R engine but internally it's different to the engine in the R and is much stronger.
OP if you've had the 4WD gubbins replaced already that's great, they will most likely be the upgraded parts which have proven to be solid.
If you're thinking about a remap definitely do some research into having the cylinder liners shimmed - it's a big up-front investment but if you do it then you can tune the engine to some pretty impressive numbers, if you don't then you can still tune it but you're on borrowed time.
I see the Volvos also crack liners like the Fords with similar fixes available regarding putting in strengtheners/spacers into the block The S60R engine is based on the 2.5T and hence can be a bit fragile because the cylinder walls are rather thin for the load.
The 2.4 T5 is based on the 2.3 T5 engine but with slightly different pistons which give the extra capacity. It gains the turbo, inlet and outlet VVT systems and various other go-faster goodies from the R engine but internally it's different to the engine in the R and is much stronger.
OP if you've had the 4WD gubbins replaced already that's great, they will most likely be the upgraded parts which have proven to be solid.
If you're thinking about a remap definitely do some research into having the cylinder liners shimmed - it's a big up-front investment but if you do it then you can tune the engine to some pretty impressive numbers, if you don't then you can still tune it but you're on borrowed time.
.Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff