Anyone own a Volvo XC90?

[Bo]

We're Volvo fans (had a 1995 850 Turbo now drive a 2004 C70 convertible) and have been looking into used 2004-2007 XC90s. We've been test driving them and like 'em more than the other contenders (Acura MDX, Toyota Highlander, Honda Pilot).

Consumer reports says to avoid...
Volvo tech says just avoid the 6 cylinder versions...

What's your experience?

[RgrF]

Matt over at AppleSwitcher hosts a Volvo site with over 10,000 registered users. That would be a good place to start. Matt's site

[RgrF]

I forgot to mention my daughter and son-in-law have leased one for the past two years and are quite happy with it. They say they may even buy it when the lease runs out but I doubt that - by then new car fever will have set in.

[ajakeski]

Nice car, but not enough leg room for me.

[davester]

My neighbor owns one. I don't know how you can remotely compare it to the MDX, Pilot and Highlander. It's a station wagon, not an SUV. The Volvo has zero carrying capacity compared to those and I certainly wouldn't take it off road. It has no ground clearance to speak of.

Although they seem like OK cars, I don't understand the Volvo lust at all. Perhaps you could explain it. My perspective is obtained from riding in and driving the many Volvos my friends own (in Berkeley they are extremely popular and linked to environmentalism for some odd reason that I can't fathom) For the most part they don't have much performance and the ones my friends have are all falling apart (especially the interiors), whereas our much older Mercedes which we beat the heck out of is in much better shape than all of those.

[mrbigstuff]

The inline 6 used in these cars is a variant of the I-6 that Volvo has been using since the early 1990s, and that is a good thing. Get the 2.9L or 3.2L versions, not the V-8. I'm familiar with the 2.9L versions, as it also powered many different models through the years (960, S90, V90, S80). They are great engines developed in conjunction with Porsche (and they have great, smooth power although the XC90 is a bit heavier than the other models).

I have heard of the transmission having issues in these models. Check out Brickboard.com for more information.

[dad@home]

One of the curious offspring of Ford's purchase of Volvo is the Taurus X (formerly the Freestyle). It shares the same basic design as the XC90 although it has been stretched enough to give it a decent 3rd seat and storage. It is much less expensive than the Volvo and much more reliable.
It's main draw back is that it is not nearly as attractive as the XC90.
I have a Freestyle and it has been a very good car and completely reliable.

Dad

[jdc]

we had a 2005 XC90 for several years, just got rid of it last year and traded it in for an XC 70 (davestar might be thinking of this, not a XC90)

we had the smaller 5 cyl engine (2005 was the last year with this engine option) -- and although it was no pushover -- it worked just fine -- just dont expect any neck snapping acceleration

we loved it while we had it, quiet, not too big and mileage was near 18 with mixed use -- my wife was pretty dissappointed when we did get rid of it...

we chose it over a highlander not problem, it was just nicer -- but the MDX was too much $$ and my wife just didnt like the pilot

not sure what i would buy today between those -- still not a highlander -- but if i could get a similar year/mileage/condition MDX -- i would probably lean that way...

[davester]

You're right, I was thinking of the XC70.

[OWC Jamie]

thanks for the well researched information