KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 5 — After a couple of years of relative quietness, Volvo Car Malaysia is back in action with some new models introduced throughout 2017. The return of the Volvo S90 puts Volvo back on track for the D/E segment, with engine and drive variants, and on top of that, Volvo remains the only maker here in Malaysia to offer a station-wagon.
Since then, Volvo has also introduced the hybrid version of the S90, which is priced lower by RM20,000 — I understand there are some units of the S90 still left to be sold, and although Volvo has not said anything, I would think that it would be logical to reduce the prices to match that of the hybrid version.
Whatever the case, there might still be some who would prefer a conventional drive train to that of a hybrid. Truthfully, I am one of these.
How does the Volvo S90 stack up against its competitors? Looking at the specifications and prices, I would say that the main contenders would be the Mercedes E250 and the BMW 530i, both of which have specifications that are very similar to the S90.
A short introduction to our test car — it is the Volvo S90 T5, the lower of two variants. It has a more than decent 254 horsepower on tap from a turbo-charged 2.0 litre transversely mounted 4-cylinder engine driving the front wheels.
There is another more powerful, 320 horsepower version also from a 2.0 litre engine, called the T6, with All-Wheel Drive (AWD), but that is another story.
In terms of power, the Volvo S90’s 254 horsepower beats the 211 horsepower of the Mercedes-Benz E Class, and is marginally more powerful than the BMW 530i’s 252 horsepower.
Transmission for the S90 and BMW 530i are 8-speed automatics while the E Class has a9-speed automatic. In this department, Volvo is also quite on par — I really do not see any difference between an 8-speed and a 9-speed box.
In the drive train department the Volvo is Front-Wheel Drive (FWD), while the E Class and BMW are Rear-Wheel Drive. The difference in configuration seems to have a lower impact, perhaps due to changes in consumer behaviour, and perhaps due to advancements in drive train technologies, but there are still some, like me, for instance who are suckers for rear-wheel drive cars.
Zero to 100kph acceleration is done in 6.8 seconds, a tad faster than the E Class at 6.9 seconds, while the BMW 530i is fastest at 6.0 seconds — not that anyone buying one of these cars will be doing a drag, but when push comes to shove, we know that all are in the same ballpark. Anything under 8.0 seconds would be fast enough for 95 per cent of the people likely to buy these cars.
In terms of size, the S90, with an overall length of 4,963mm, is the longest when compared to the E Class Mercedes, which stands 40 mm shorter (about 1.6 inches, for those who still think in feet and inches), while the BMW 5301 is 27mm shorter (a little more than an inch) at 4,936mm.
Overall width for the S90, (1,879 mm) is also a tad more than the E Class (1,852 mm) and the BMW (1,868 mm). Longest wheelbase though, belongs to the BMW with 2,975mm, with the Volvo S90 at 2,941mm and the E Class at 2,939mm.
Note though, that the differences in the overall dimensions are not that significant other than being useful to compare which of the cars is bigger or smaller.
Everyone is in the same region in terms of measurements, and actually, the top selling E Class is the smallest of all among the three so it seems that while the buyers require a “ballpark” kind of size, the last few centimeters don’t really matter. However, we know from these comparisons that the Volvo S90 is as big a car as any of the contenders in its class.
Now let us look at how the Volvo S90 drives. With 254 horses under the hood, I would have expected an AWD configuration for better driving dynamics, but then, with all the extra weight due to the size, I am consoled by the fact that it will not be as spritely as the smaller A4 or the Golf R , as some of the horses would be there just to lug all that mass around.
My concern is more about wheel-spin upon take-off — as we all know, the front of a car tends to lift whenever one accelerates, and 254 horses all on the front wheels from standstill will exert quite a force.
However, my fears were unfounded — perhaps the traction control system and other electronic aids were working to ration out power because the S90 was quite good on take-off, except for one instance — when I tried a fast take-off on a wet road, going uphill – got a bit of axle tramping and had to lift off to let it get a grip. Otherwise the S90 drives fine — power delivery is smooth, and there is enough torque to make it feel spritely. I guess the power package works in this respect — you get a large car, but when you drive it, you still feel that it is ‘light’ because there is ample power to give it that “get-up- and-go.”
Visually, the Volvo S90 does look long and narrow — I think it is due to its proportions and perhaps the character lines along the sides — when you refer to the dimensions, it is less than two inches longer than the E Class or the BMW 5 Series, and it is in fact the widest of the three, yet the other two look wider and much shorter.
On the road, however, it does not feel as long as it looks — in short, you do not get the feeling that you are driving a long truck or something like that. There is minimal body roll, and the overall stability is pretty good.
With a drag coefficient of 0.26 to 0.29, it slips through the air quite decently, and good sealing at the doors keeps wind noise down to a minimum — in other words, it feels like a premium car.
The combination of the 8-speed gearbox, with well-spaced ratios (1st gear ratio starts at 5.250:1, progressively moves down to 1:1 in 6 th gear, while 7th and 8th are overdrive gears) and the turbo-charged engine work very well to provide smooth delivery of power throughout.
You will never run out of the power band at any time, considering that the effective torque curve starts from as low as 1,500 rpm through to 4,800 rpm. Normal drivers need never drive beyond the torque curve.
Translating the last two preceding mouthfuls to layman language, what it means is that everybody who is of normal mind and body (not a racing driver) will find this car easy to drive at all times. The racing types are hereby referred to the T6, which probably would suit their temperaments better.
Fuel consumption is mooted at 6.7 litres per 100 km (combined driving), but do not put too much faith on this in everyday driving. Remember that Mercedes (5.9 l/100 km) and BMW 530i ( 5.5 l/100km) also have very similar claimed figures, and that they are test figures based on a set number of test parameters.
Real life numbers usually are 1.5 times as much, or more, depending on how you drive, and of course we must take into account the Malaysian road users who like to set the air-conditioning at near freezing temperatures, not to mention idling by the road with everything on while waiting for someone to go “tapau” something.
For the record, we managed an average of 9.9 litres per 100 kilometres for our test drive session which covered a mixed terrain and also included some fast driving and puttering around Petaling Jaya.
Inside, the S90 feels good, and the white interior looks classy, although I do have some concern about its upkeep — I certainly would have to be careful who gets to sit in my car if I do have one with white upholstery (and I do have one, though it is not a Volvo). All the bells and whistles, plus a Drive Mode toggle, navigation system, and information screen are there.
In the area of safety, Volvo is the pioneer, and in the S90, all the elements of active and passive safety are present.
All things said and done, the Volvo is as good as its competitors, if not better in some aspects. Should you decide to buy one, you would not be making a bad decision. As for me, I would be looking at the T6, but like I said before, that is another story.
