Long-overdue update - 6,000 miles

I haven't posted in a while because, frankly, the V60 has been steadily doing its thing with hardly an issue. It's been an enjoyable, relaxing car. I can't really think of any new quirks or issues that have come up, but I figured it's time to share my thoughts now that the "honeymoon" phase of new car ownership is over.

Comfort remains exceptional. Road noise is reasonable, although I wish it was a little quieter overall (it's certainly nothing objectionable). The seats are likely some of the best in the business. A family member recently bought a 2018 BMW 530e and the standard thrones in that car are far less comfortable than the lowly Volvo's chairs. I haven't taken it for incredibly long drives, but it's a perfect companion for 4+ hour stints behind the wheel.

Fuel economy has been surprisingly strong, to the point where I don't think the 2.0L is worthwhile given its penchant for premium gasoline which is nearly 20% more expensive in these parts. It's warm now, so I had expected an uptick in mileage. Overall I'm averaging around 25 mpg with my best tank at 26.6 mpg. Volvo's estimate of 29 mpg on the highway is probably only achievable at 60-65 mph - I've never come close.

I installed the Curt model 12066 1.25" trailer hitch for mounting a bike carrier. Overall installation was quite easy but more involved than simply bolting the thing on. The rear bumper cover and bumper bar has to be removed, and the process takes two people and about 2-3 hours of time. My only extremely minor complaint is that the hitch mounts behind the bumper bar, and this causes the bar to be just slightly more protuberant. The bar pushes out against the bumper cover because the clearances are quite tight. This means that I needed to manhandle, stretch, and cajole the cover to snap back into place. There is a very minor change in how the cover fits, leading to a slightly uneven panel gap. It's no big deal for me, but YMMV. Volvo needs to come out with a first party solution for this, but they would probably charge an insane amount of money for it. My local dealer quoted ~$300 for a V60CC part, and 2-3 hours of labor at $100/hr. Ouch!

Since the weather is so nice, I've been taking the Miata on more road trips, including one long, lovely journey up to Quebec City with a stay at the famous Chateau Frontenac. I missed the comfort of the Volvo but the weather was too good not to drive top-down. Among other creature comforts, the Miata doesn't have cruise control, which is something you completely take for granted until you have to drive without it.

I did take the Volvo to Montreal a few weeks ago for the Grand Prix and enjoyed the drive immensely. It's just a fantastic car to soak up a few hundred miles and arrive at the other end feeling fresh. The V60 is a good city car as well, with a reasonable turning radius, well weighted electro-hydraulic steering, and excellent visibility. Parallel parking is super easy with the rear view camera and the ability to flip down the passenger side mirror by holding the "R" mirror button. My favorite driver Valtteri Bottas did a fine job, coming in second place behind the legend Lewis Hamilton.

So those are my thoughts at 6,000 miles. The V60 is an old car, to be sure. Its platform dates back to the early 2010s but it remains a fantastic choice for a daily driver and road trip car. The 2.5 L engine sounds good and delivers solid gas mileage on (this is important!) 87 octane gasoline. The seats are wonderful and the entire car delivers a sense of old-school solidity that makes it very, very satisfying to drive.

Fuel economy - premium versus regular

If you look on the interwebs you'll find all kinds of hyperbole and controversy surrounding the simple topic of using premium gasoline versus regular. Inevitably someone will bring up the notion that "if you can't afford an extra $5 per tank, you shouldn't be driving the car!" as if throwing money away is somehow irrelevant. I've always been a little skeptical about claims of premium fuel superiority. My 2006 NC Miata with a naturally aspirated, and honestly pretty craptacular, engine actually recommends premium and I've never quite understood this.

Over the last 11 tanks of gasoline I've done a modest experiment. I ran my first 5 tanks of gas on 87 octane, then performed a "washout" tank of premium, and then ran my next 5 tanks on 91 or 93 octane (whichever was available).

Regular octane average over 5 tanks = 24.1 mpg
Premium octane average over 5 tanks = 23.2 mpg
Two-sided t-test P value = 0.37 (not statistically significant)

Weather during this test was extremely similar, with most days around or below 32 F and some random warm days thrown in. This was all on winter fuel which is normally 10% ethanol. I kept track of the city/highway balance for each tank and this was similar across both groups as well.

So there isn't really a difference in fuel economy. What about driving feel? There does seem to be a very subtle difference in smoothness and "eagerness" of the engine when using premium. However, this isn't blinded or controlled in any manner so I can't be confident that this is a real difference.

Although the extra couple of bucks per tank isn't a huge deal, I'm sticking with 87 octane for now. The small difference in driving feel just doesn't seem worth the extra money with no improvement in fuel economy.

Thoughts at 3500 miles

I've owned the V60 for two months and driven 3500 miles now. I was hoping to provide some initial thoughts at this point, for anyone who might be interested in buying one.

The reason I chose the V60 was due to its combination of comfort, practicality, relative reliability (compared to its German peers), and value. On those counts it has done very well.

Comfort
The front seats remain incredible. On the highway at 75 mph, road noise can be highly variable. With a decent road surface, the car is quiet and comfortable. However, on rougher pavement, a significant amount of road noise does still get transmitted into the cabin. This past month I've had the privilege of driving a 2017 BMW 530i and a 2017 Porsche Macan, and there remains a significant difference in NVH between the Volvo and those fancier cars. The road noise doesn't become excessive and I never need to turn up the radio more than 1 or 2 clicks to compensate, but it's not library-quiet like a Mercedes C300. I still feel that the BMW 3-series is unacceptably loud with significant wind noise (not to mention subpar materials) and the V60 easily bests it in this regard.

Practicality
Although the V60 is on the smaller side for a wagon, it hits a sweet spot for hauling capacity. The Golf Sportwagen is significantly larger, however (44 ft³ versus 66 ft³). Although there is a big difference between the two, in practice the V60 handles my needs without issue. In particular, I can fit my bulky Surly Crosscheck touring bike with full fenders and racks easily, and the low load floor is extremely helpful when manhandling this heavy bike into the back.

Reliability
Nothing to mention here. Even the oft-maligned infotainment system has been totally reliable. The funny skipping issue with the iPhone interface actually hasn't resurfaced.

Value
This is a interesting one. When I purchased my car ($30,900), the VW Golf Sportwagen 4Motion was just coming out onto the market, and prices hovered in the $25,500 range in my area for the VW. The VW is more modern and has a great interior in its own right, although the seats can't compare to the Volvo. The VW also comes in a manual transmission which is a great benefit. The Volvo is rated at 20/29 while the VW achieves 22/30 so the rated difference is small, although I suspect the VW will have better real-world mileage with its 170 hp 1.8 liter turbocharged engine (edit - the VW seems to have been revised upward to 22/32). In my area dealerships are not discounting the VW yet, but I suspect it will be only a matter of time before a manual Sportwagen 4Motion can be had for $22-23,000, and that makes the Volvo seem like a significantly poorer value. The more premium German competition such as the BMW 328i xDrive Sports Wagon and the Audi A4 Allroad remain much pricier, and Mercedes is still M.I.A. in this market segment.

Nitpicks
I've really had very few nitpicks with this car. Gas mileage has been decent, but not mind-blowing. I certainly haven't approached the 29 mpg highway rating. My average still hovers around 23 mpg and premium fuel seems to have made zero difference in economy. I have a few more tanks to go, and I'll update this blog with my 87 vs 93 octane testing.

BLIS is a must-have on this vehicle. The B-pillars are simply too large and are positioned just behind my head in the 8 o'clock position, interfering with manual blind spot checks. That's a major problem in my book, because driver aids should never be required to make up for shortcomings of the car.

The navigation is effective, but its directions in busy urban areas can be incomplete. For example, in some cases it might tell you to turn right or exit in some distance, but fail to mention the road/exit name. In other cases, particularly with complex junctions, the rudimentary directions don't give you a good enough idea of which road to take. This is compounded by the fact that the "next turn" is displayed in a tiny corner of the screen and isn't visually evident at first glance.

Well, that's it! I hope my rambling thoughts are helpful to someone out there considering this car. I've been very pleased with it so far and I'm looking forward to more road trips as the weather warms up.

Blending right in

This is just the usual scene at our local grocery co-op. If you've got CSI enhance skills, you can even spot a V60CC in the back right corner and what looks to be an old 240 in the distance. I didn't even realize the 240 was there until I looked at the photo on my computer.

There are also 3 Subarus in this photo. See if you can find them all.

Winter tire users rejoice - no TPMS

I had a pleasant surprise with the V60 when I took delivery of the car and installed my winter wheel set. Like many New Englanders, I have a separate set of wheels with winter tires mounted, specifically Dunlop SP Winter Sport 3Ds. All of my previous cars have had a tire pressure monitoring  system (TPMS) in place. This is a nice little feature when driving with stock tires, but I typically don't waste my money on a separate set of sensors for winter. They can cost $30-50 per wheel, like these here. For 6 months out of the year, I would simply put up with the TPMS warning light on my dash.

No such warning light occurred after I installed my winter wheels and tires onto the V60. Curious to know why, I delved into the owner's manual and discovered the following:

The V60 can have a regular TPMS system, or the confusingly-named Tire Monitor (I'll call it TM for short). There's no outward clue on the car, to my knowledge, as to which system you have. How do you check? Go into the My Car menu --> Settings --> Car Settings. If you have an entry called Tire Pressure, sucks for you! You have TPMS and you must now suffer the warning light in wintertime, or pay out the nose for a separate set of sensors, or pay out the nose to have a tire shop swap your tires twice per year, or move to Florida, or crash and die on your all-season tires (and pay out the nose in medical/funeral bills). If you have an entry called Tire Monitoring, congrats! You have TM and you will suffer none of those indignities.

TM must be calibrated with the tires at their correct pressures to begin with. You can do this in the settings menu. It will then use the ABS sensors to track the rotational speed of the tires individually. If one tire becomes low, its diameter becomes smaller, and thus will rotate faster - the ABS system senses this, and warns the user that a tire might be low on pressure. It can determine which tire is low to some degree, but not with pinpoint accuracy, since it's indirectly measuring pressure.

The benefit of this whole thing is that cold-weather drivers who use TM don't have to suffer an annoying warning light on their dash for the entire winter. Or move to Florida. Thank goodness.

MPG update

I just completed my fifth tank at 87 octane.

Tank 1 - 26 mpg (90% highway)
Tank 2 - 21.2 mpg (50/50)
Tank 3 - 25.5 mpg (95% highway)
Tank 4 - 23.5 mpg (75% highway)
Tank 5 - 24.2 mpg (75% highway)

Average - 24.1 mpg. This is actually pretty good for a fairly heavy, powerful, AWD car in cold temperatures on winter gas. Apart from this past week of freakishly balmy weather, most of this driving has been in below-freezing temps. It's not much worse than the ~26 mpg I averaged in my Focus ST.

I absentmindedly put in 87 today, so I'll start the wash-out tank on 93 octane next, and then do five tanks at that level. Unfortunately for this test (fortunately for everything else) the weather is warming up much more rapidly than expected, so this comparison may not be completely fair. Also, a significant portion of tank 3 was in severe heavy snow and the AWD system was likely engaged more.

The car's own fuel economy meter is surprisingly accurate. After each fillup I've been zeroing out the meter, and typically it is only about 3% optimistic.

Raising the low beams

One of the worst things about the V60 has been the headlights. Consumer Reports actually gave the V60 headlights their worst possible rating, which I agree with. They are worse than both of my previous cars, the Ford Focus ST and Honda Fit. Even driving on a darkened road at 40 mph makes me feel uneasy - it would be hard to spot a sudden obstacle such as deer or severe potholes with these lights.

IIHS also gave the S60 and V60 halogens their worst rating. The halogens received a rating of "Poor", while the xenons received "Acceptable." Their scale runs from Poor -> Marginal -> Acceptable -> Good. Here are their comments about the halogen lamps:

Low beams: On the straightaway, visibility was inadequate on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was inadequate in all 4 tests. 

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams: On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and fair on the left side. On curves, visibility was inadequate in all 4 tests.

It's interesting to note that many of the V60 and S60's peers also receive subpar ratings. For the Mercedes C300, for example, both the base halogen and upgraded LED headlights receive "Poor" ratings. The BMW 3-series halogens and mid-level LEDs both receive a "Poor" rating, while the highest trim Lighting Package LEDs receive a "Acceptable" rating. The 2017 Audi A4 does better, earning "Marginal" and "Acceptable" ratings on their base and upgraded models, respectively.

I began researching ways to improve the situation soon after discovering this limitation. Sylvania and several other companies produce higher performance halogen bulbs that are reportedly whiter, although I've read mixed things about whether they actually improve illumination distance.

The V60 headlights are tuned oddly from the factory. They point more downward than most cars, perhaps to avoid blinding other road-users. Luckily, Volvo has made it extremely easy to adjust the level of the beam.

Here are the low beams at stock setting:

Notice how at around 15 feet, the beams are already starting to hit the ground.

To adjust the beams, you need to pop the hood and locate the small plastic white nut on top of the headlamp unit:

The hole above the headlamp just allows a 6 mm socket to fit through. Turning the nut counter-clockwise raises the beam, and clockwise lowers it. My initial adjustment turned out to be too high:

I went for a brief drive and it felt like the beams were shining off into the woods, rather than onto the road. Another quick adjustment later, and...

Much improved! The brightness of the lamps remains a little unsatisfying, but driving at night feels far safer. I tested my usual roads at my usual speed of 40 mph and felt comfortable driving on low beams. They don't seem to be high enough to cause issues for oncoming drivers but I can certainly adjust them downward if people flash at me. Later on I might still consider upgrading the bulbs, but for now this seems to be a good solution.