2012 Volvo S60 T5: Just Get This Engine

I couldn't agree more.....I love my S60 (T5) and have never felt like it was lagging in the power department.
Also, since the "oh so elusive" competitor for this car seems to be the A4, can we all agree that a 2.0L, 4 cylinder, with 200hp just isn't enough?

I'm sick of VW throwing that engine in anything and everything. I had a 2010 GTI, perfect match for it. CC? A4? A5?
Come on now.

Actually, the 2.0T found in the Audi A4 has 211 hp, but also 258 lb-ft of torque. Furthermore, it goes from zero to 60 mph in 6.4 seconds. That's tied for first amongst base engine entry-level luxury sedans (basically the same as the Cadillac CTS 3.6 too). All of those cars it's tied with have V6s.

However, the A4 does not have an engine that compete with the engine upgrades in the class.

Uh, 7.3 seconds versus 5.9 is a huge difference.

I'd buy the T6 just because I hate lumpy 5-cylinder engines, and there is something awesome about a transverse I-6.

Holy COW! the shock towers are inside the front COWL!

Sacrilege! James I don't believe my eyes! No need for more power?
If a car is a really good match for the buyer, more power can be good. More power, used responsibly (that's for bodyblue) means a safer driving car because you can actively avoid incidents. At some point more power does become pointless--when it causes you to lose control. The downside is fuel economy---so for me more power up to a point. The extra weight of a bigger engine can also be a negative. e.g., I recall the Genesis sedan being a more rounded drive with the V6 instead of the V8.

just picked up a rental S60 T5, and you have another agreement James. Especially when this car is in manual-shift mode, it is almost too responsive - nearly as peaky as VW's turbo 4. Also, it does have a bit of torque steer, which would seal the deal for me.

Ironically enough, it feels incredibly balanced on ramps and around curves. Too bad I'll only have it for a day!

Does that 7.3 vs. 5.9 second time comparison include the 1 foot rollout you used to get the 7.3 (or maybe .2) number quoted?

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/08/il-track-tested-2012-volvo-s60-t5-vs-2010-bmw-328i.html

7.3 vs 5.9 is like night and day!

I do agree though that 7.3 to 60 is plenty in the real world. I've never driven a car with a 5-cylinder engine so I cant comment on the smoothness (or lack thereof). Now I have driven cars with an I6 and they're ridiculously smooth. I used to own a crappy Suzuki Verona (aka Daewoo) that came with an I6. Although the car wasn't that great, the engine was like buttah! For that reason alone I would get the I6!

Either engine wouldn't matter to me because there is no manual trans option at all in North America. Done deal.

"But, I5s are inherently inbalanced, and feel real rough"
"because I hate lumpy 5-cylinder engines"

Obviously either of you have never driven a T5. We've owned our C30 over 3 years and it is the smoothest running mill I've ever owned. "Inbalanced(his spelling speaks volumes),rough and lumpy"...next time you're in the Phoenix area look me up. I'll take you for a ride through the mountain passes and show you both how wrong you are. Sheesh

+1 engineear. Anyone who parrots this hoary line has never driven a Volvo (or even '90's Acura) inline 5.

@engineear: I guess that you've never owned an inline 6 equipped car then. Inline 5s are inherently balanced, and that's just simple physics- even pairs of cylinders are equally balanced (well, not completely, there are secondary vibrations coming from the reciprocation of the crank/connecting rod combination), and an inline 6 produces the least vibrations of all. You have a random cylinder combination running off an Inline 5, so how smooth do you think such an engine can be? They require engine balancers or they simply don't work at all!

Haters saying that the Volvo inline 5 is lumpy and rough, please, drive the car before you make a comment. Volvo has been refining this engine for over 20 years now and it is one of the smoothest engines in a car I have ever driven. It's smoother than the inline 5 in my S70, and smoother than the V6 in my dad's G37S (not revving to crazy 4000RPM+, just normal city driving mind you). Only engine we have driven that is smoother is BMW's inline 6 in our E39 528i, but we all know how great BMW was back in the day. Only time we find the engine rough is when it's idling, as you can feel a bit of vibration, and when you're coasting or slowly accelerating below 1500RPM.

As for the acceleration numbers, yes 7.3s may seem slow, but don't forget that you don't feel it in the real world. There is absolutely no need to go for the S60 T6 unless you want AWD. Btw, the S60 T5 AWD is being released in a couple months so if you want AWD and don't want to splurge for a T6 AWD, wait a couple months.

FINALLY, don't forget that the inline 5 engine is extremely popular since the 850 days. As I said before, this engine has been around for over 20 years, so there should be a lot of aftermarket tuning from IPD, RICA, etc. I believe there are no aftermarket tuning options right now because of the overboost feature, which pushes torque to 295lb ft.

P.S. There is more to a car than just straight line. The T5 is lighter than the T6 AWD and thus and so the body itself is more balanced in terms of weight distribution. Sure it may not put out higher numbers on the skidpad and slalom, but what matters at the end of the day is that you have fun right? If you want even more grip, again, wait for the T5 AWD being released in a couple months.

I just hope they ship the T5 AWD to North America...

The Volvo inline 5cyl is an ultra-reliable workhorse of an engine. It may sound rougher than a 6 cyl, but it is built to last. I am sure aftermarked tunes are coming out, believe RICA has one, and others to follow. I drive the 2012 T5 and can say it has plenty of "giddy up".

If you want more here are 2 words for you:

"Sport Mode"

Slap the shift knob to the right and this car JUMPS.

I owned a 328, and drove and A4 several times.

the 328 has an amazing chassis and very communicative that you enjoy maybe a couple of times throughout the lifetime of the car. Engine sounds nice but is a bit nosy and with run flats the ride quality is not good at all, harsh and uncomfortable.

The A4 is more refined and balanced and the interior is good engine is OK a big plus is the transmission

The S60 is overall more balanced very good low end torque and the ride quality is as smooth as it can be.

I owned a 328, and drove and A4 several times.

the 328 has an amazing chassis and very communicative that you enjoy maybe a couple of times throughout the lifetime of the car. Engine sounds nice but is a bit nosy and with run flats the ride quality is not good at all, harsh and uncomfortable.

The A4 is more refined and balanced and the interior is good engine is OK a big plus is the transmission

The S60 is overall more balanced very good low end torque and the ride quality is as smooth as it can be.

duck87, you're clearly just repeating something you read on the internet. An inline-5 is much closer to an I6 than an I4 in terms of vibrations (an I5 ideally requires only one balance shaft while an I4 requires two, and since a power stroke lasts for a maximum 180% of engine rotation, an I5 that fires every 144% of crankshaft rotation is going to provide much more even power than an I4 that fires every 180% of rotation — close to an I6, in fact, at 120° of rotation). The only vibration in an I5 relative to an I6 is essentially up-and-down end-to-end, but Volvo knows this, which is why the engine is mounted transversely, suspended by a huge cushioned engine mount at at the top of one end of the engine.

Again, unless you've driven a Volvo or Acura I5, your input is irrelevant at best.

*maximum 180°

This car feels faster than a 7 second 0-60 time. Volvo cites a time of 6.8, which is about a 1/2 second quicker than Inside Line got. I wonder if Volvo recorded that time with the standard 17" wheels vs. the 18" Inside Line's has?

Anyway, I love the inline 5, and it's sad it's future is grim (Volvo will be moving to an all 4 cylinder lineup in the future). It has great low-end power and sounds nice through the rev range. Anyone that says this is rough never actually drove one.

@esoterica: The power stroke can actually be slightly less than 180, depending on how significant valve overlap becomes. But beyond that point, I’m not sure why you feel that 144 degrees of crank rotation actually benefits an Inline 5 in any way. The Inline 5 will always have an uneven firing order, are unbalanced both in primary and secondary order vibrations, and the crank itself causes a third level of vibrations. With an inline 4, you at least have both pairs of pistons opposing each other’s movements achieving primary balance (not completely as pistons accelerate slightly differently when going in opposite directions), and you only need balance shafts to account for secondary harmonics. Sure, an inline 4 pulses its torque output, but the inline 5 is simply lumpy! It’s physically impossible to smooth out an inline 5.

When our company was testing different engine configurations, it became increasingly clear (cracked engine mounts, significantly more material required in the engine block, reinforced cranks with slightly offset journal bearings, reinforced end bearings, exceptionally large crank pulley, rev limits) that an Inline 4 or 6 would be a much better idea. Seeing as Acura no longer has an inline 5 and Volvo is killing theirs, they seem to agree.

FYI, my daily job requires benchmarking of different vehicles. So yes, I have driven Volvos before. Not this particular one, but I did drive a T5 V50.

The T5 in the US is a 5 cylinder? That's bizzare and I had to check their website to be sure. North America is the only place where this is the case, in every other country the T5 is the same Ford I4 used in the Explorer.

"But beyond that point, I’m not sure why you feel that 144 degrees of crank rotation actually benefits an Inline 5 in any way."

Because it means that it's under consistent power a greater percentage of the time? I don't know how there can be more obvious answer.

"With an inline 4, you at least have both pairs of pistons opposing each other’s movements achieving primary balance"

Again, this only affects end-to-end pivoting.

"It’s physically impossible to smooth out an inline 5."

Then Volvo and Acura have done the impossible?

"I did drive a T5 V50."

And it's hands-down a smoother engine than the I4 in the same modular engine family.

"Seeing as Acura no longer has an inline 5 and Volvo is killing theirs, they seem to agree."

Volvo is killing their I6 as well, so by that reasoning it must be a bad engine configuration too. And Audi must not know what they're doing with the new TT RS with an I5 — except that it's as quick as the last-generation Porsche 911 Turbo. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-audi-tt-rs-road-test-review

@esoterica: 144 degrees isn't anything approaching "consistent", and you only need to look at the flywheel and crank pulley size of any inline 5 engine to see how engineers are trying to battle the strange firing order and inherent inbalance (and for the most part, failing).

Rather than adding anything more factual or refuting what I said, you are only adding your own opinions- and does a TT being as "Fast as a 911 turbo" mean anything in terms of engine NVH? Sounds to me like you're just repeating something you read on the internet.