V70 2.0d, feeble?

[Deerfoot]

Following on from my previous thread http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0... I've pretty much discounted the V50 as being a little too small for my needs.

So, I've started to look at V70s and have found a nicely specced 2.0d R Design.

Have any of you had any experience of this engine in the V70?

I'm not expecting it to be rapid but is the engine man enough for the job or will I regret not looking for an older (and leggier) D5 V70?

Any experience of mpg from a V70 2.0d would be appreciated also.

Thanks in advance.

[Skellen]

In a word, yes. I had one as a loner. Fine once you get it going but takes a while to get there.

[Deerfoot]

Cheers, I suspected as much!

[Petrolhead_Rich]

Deerfoot said:

So, I've started to look at V70s and have found a nicely specced 2.0d R Design.

will I regret not looking for an older (and leggier) D5 V70?

Thanks in advance.

what about the diesel engine options between the bottom and top of the range?

[Deerfoot]

Petrolhead_Rich said:

what about the diesel engine options between the bottom and top of the range?

Like the 2.4d?

Strikes me as having the thirst of the D5 without the pace.

[Skellen]

Deerfoot said:

Petrolhead_Rich said:

what about the diesel engine options between the bottom and top of the range?

Like the 2.4d?

Strikes me as having the thirst of the D5 without the pace.

My Dad had the 2.4d for a while - there was very little difference performance wise to the D5 and it returned a steady 39 mpg in mixed driving.

[F i F]

Deerfoot said:

Petrolhead_Rich said:

what about the diesel engine options between the bottom and top of the range?

Like the 2.4d?

Strikes me as having the thirst of the D5 without the pace.

You do realise the 2.4d is just what the D5 used to be before they "chipped it" for want of a better word and called that the D5, renaming the old version the 2.4d?

[Deerfoot]

F i F said:

You do realise the 2.4d is just what the D5 used to be before they "chipped it" for want of a better word and called that the D5, renaming the old version the 2.4d?

Yes.

[FloppyRaccoon]

The 2.4D is a good engine. My parents have it in a relatively new V70. I wouldn't discount it, maybe have a test drive of one?

[F i F]

Deerfoot said:

F i F said:

You do realise the 2.4d is just what the D5 used to be before they "chipped it" for want of a better word and called that the D5, renaming the old version the 2.4d?

Yes.

OK so there is no problem then, just chip it.

[Deerfoot]

F i F said:

OK so there is no problem then, just chip it.

It's a solution of sorts I suppose.

[ad551]

I wouldn't say the 2.0D would feel feeble. It will have a lot of pull at the bottom and I guess you'd lose out at the top end but that's not really what the car is about. Remember it is the same engine/size combo as a Mondeo and they are very common in 2.0d form.

It isn't even the smallest engine Volvo do in the V70 - they put the 1.6D engine in the DRIVe version.

The 5 cylinder diesels are very nice though...

[Beefmeister]

Has anyone chipped the 2.0d? Most companies take it from 136 to 178 bhp which is a nice jump. Seems a good bet to me. I've also been looking at the 2.0d RDesign, great value right now.

You get almost the same power as the D5 but with economy barely changed. I've read elsewhere that this remap can even improve your economy as the V70 is a big lump and the standard 2.0d does struggle a little.

I also know many people who have chipped this engine to c.170 bhp in Ford products and have found improved economy.

Just wondering if there are PHers with any experience...

Thanks

[T5R+]

Depends on what you need and like.

Some are happy with the 2.0D - I think it underpowered and heavy on consumption when "booted".

The 2.4D and D5 were the same basic set up with few differences (namely ECU) between approx 2005 and 2009 but then the 2.4D and D5 went single/dual turbo routes and a simple "chip change" does not give parity. (Ignore the latest 215bhp for now).

The 2.4D and D5 are similar for MPG (in my experience) but the performance element of the D5 is better than the 2.4D (seems the ~20bhp makes a difference).

None of the current R-Design are anything other than marketing ploys - as very few within the range are true to the R roots (the T6 comes close but a geartronic only box!).

My choice would be V70 D5 Geartronic 205bhp R-Design (resale value / manual boxes had some woes / tuneable)

[greathorwood]

Had a V70 2.0d SE Lux for two years, engine was fine for the family hold-all job - not the nippiest but certainly decent(for a diesel)in terms of grunt and throttle response.

[Lootz]

Good morning everyone, just signed up . I have a Volvo v70 2.0 d r design ,2009 bought it 3 yrs ago with 32,000 MLS for 10k,one owner . Superb car ! No major problems, she's in for servicing every 10k , fitted a chip from chip express, she tramps on , had her 120mph many times and wants to go more ,do a long drive up north every month 250 miles . Keen fisherman and camper and all the equipment fits in fine ,very spacious once the back seats fold down and it becomes a completely flat surface, so pleased with this car won't ever sell it.had a v70R 1998 before ,superb again fast as fk chipped to 300bhp ,wanted to keep going at 140. Volvo make safe n reliable cars .

[99Chimaera]

We had a 2010 Volvo V70 r design 2.0 D3 (after looking for a D5 mode)l,which we bought at a few months old. An ex volvo uk car, it had a good spec. It was very responsive. I loved it, we had no trouble with it. We traded it in back in 2013 for a Volvo XC60.