MM Condensed Static-Review: 2017 Volvo S90
01-11-17, 05:08 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
MM Condensed Static-Review: 2017 Volvo S90
A short, Static-Review of the all-new 2017 Volvo S90
http://www.volvocars.com/us/cars/new-models/s90
IN A NUTSHELL: The forgotten flagship....but some things about it are indeed forgettable.
CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Lincoln Continental, Infiniti Q70, Acura RLX, Lexus GS (more so than the LS), Genesis G80 (more so than the G90), Mercedes E-Class (more so than the S-class), Audi A6 (more so than the A8), and BMW 5-series (again, more so than the 7-series).
OVERVIEW:
Volvo, especially after being sold off by Ford in 2010 to the Chinese Geely automotive firm, has not been a major player in the American market in recent years. Indeed, I was told today at a local Volvo dealership, while looking at the new S90, that Volvo will not even have a display at the upcoming Washington D.C. Auto Show later this month, which I can't ever remember happening before. The brand, of course, built its reputation on advanced safety features, crash-test performance, and the business of protecting its occupants. But it was also widely viewed by the American public (somewhat inaccurately, as many stereotypes are) as a stodgy brand primarily for schoolteachers, college professors, safety-advocates, and those with distinctly left-wing views of the automobile business.....indeed, Ralph Nader's protege, ex-NHTSA Director Joan Claybrook, drove Volvos for years. This, despite the fact that several distinctly sport-oriented Volvo models were developed to try and compete with BMW in the American market, without much success.
And, of course, their old flagship sedan was the S80, a somewhat half-hearted attempt to replace the excessively stodgy Volvo 940/960 series (the stodgy image DID fit in that case LOL). The S80 looked more modern both inside and out than the shoebox-styled 940/960 (and replaced the standard RWD with FWD), but, IMO, still drove somewhat like an appliance...I sampled one of the early S80s. It certainly did not have the road manners of an equivalent BMW, Mercedes, or Audi....though one could drive down the road knowing that, along with the Mercedes S-class, they were protected in the S80 by some of the best safety-technology available at that time for a mass-produced car.
Well, the S80's time came to an end.....to some extent, a victim of poor sales, though the company, under the Geely management, chose to go ahead and replace it with a new flagship sedan....the S90. The S90 is all-new for 2017, and remains Volvo's top-line sedan in the American market. The S80 was often overlooked or forgotten by those considering an upmarket European-badged sedan, as many naturally gravitated towards the far greater nameplate-cache of BMW, Mercedes, or Audi (even Jaguar in some cases)....the new S90 is likely to be overlooked as well. So, considering that I planned to stop at one of my favorite Italian restaurants today for lunch, and a mini-strip of dealerships (Honda, Nissan, Volvo, and VW) was literally right around the corner at the next stoplight, I decided to at least check out the new S90 in the showroom, even if I wasn't going to do a full-review or test-drive (I will do so, if I get specific requests for a test-drive, or if some forum-members are seriously interested in a new S90). I got a unexpected surprise at the dealership in the meantime......I was able to pick up some free tickets to the aforementioned D.C. Auto Show, though, with some lines of our local Metro system being erratically shut down for maintenance/track work and other problems during the show, and my less-than-perfect knee and lower-back, I'm not sure just how much of the show I'm going to be able to attend this year. (Trying to drive down there and park, of course, is hopeless).
For 2017, the new S90 comes in four versions....a FWD T5 in both Momentum and Inscription trim-levels, and an AWD T6 in the same Momentum and Inscription levels. Base prices run from $46,950 to $55,450. T5 models, like on the base Cadillac CT6, come with a small 2.0L turbo in-line four of 250 HP and 258 ft-lbs. of torque. T6 models come with the same engine and BOTH a turbo AND supercharger (Go figure?), with 316 HP and 295 ft-lbs. of torque. To not offer at least a normally-aspirated V6 in a car of this class, IMO, is absurd, and, in my view, gives this car at least one strike against it before it even gets out of the showroom. Yes, the T6's four does offer some impressive power figures for something that size, but, depending on the firing-pattern and other factors, four cylinders typically don't offer the smoothness and refinement of six. And, of course, a lot of power in a small block like that that often means high stresses as well. All versions come with an 8-speed Geartronic automatic transmission, with (thankfully) a conventionally-done fore/aft shift lever that avoids the E-shifter annoyances.
For the static-review, I simply checked out a nice dark blue S90 T5 FWD that they had parked in the showroom, with a moderate number of options on it. It listed for roughly 53K.
On the outside, the new S90 has the same humpback-whale roofline as its predecessor (what sedan doesn't these days?), but the new front end and headlights are considerably sleeker and less-conservative looking than before. The car (now) has the basic look of a stretched, 4-door pony-car, with a long hood and very short deck-lid in back, somewhat like a Porsche Panamera (I test-drove a former Panamera, but not the latest version). The paint job is generally well-done, with only a very small hint of orange-peel. The super-dull (and I mean DULL) paint colors all have the typical European-manufacturer extra-charge for all the metallics, leaving only the standard, non-metallic black and white without the charge. The exterior sheet metal for the body panels seemed solid enough, but the pull-out door handles, though themselves made of very thick and strong plastic, had a light, flimsy feel to their pull-action. Likewise,the otherwise solid-feelng doors did not have the same thunk that they did on the predecessors S80. In typical European-upscale fashion, the exterior trim was all of high quality and well-attached. One drawback to the styling of the roofline is that it cut into the size of the trunk-lid opening (more on that below).
Open the fairly solid-feeling hood, and the turbo (or turbo-supercharged) 2.0L four fits in fairly well, space-wise, though a very large engine cover blocks most of the top-engine access. As usual, an insulation pad is attached to the underside of the hood. The engine cover was not the usual hard plastic, but a very unusual soft-rubber material almost of a foam-like nature. While I was examining it, a salesman came by and remarked..... "We don't want owners doing their own servicing". I simply turned around, looked at him, and said...."That's obvious". The battery was also similarly hidden, requiring a game of Hide-and-Go-Seek. There is no separate dipstick for the oil, with that function having been relegated to an electronic sensor, so you can't visually check the oil level in the crankcase. The filler-caps and fluid-reservoirs, though, are readily accessible.
Inside the cabin, with some exceptions, the general level of fit/finish is very high, and most of the hardware seemed well-attached and of good quality. The stalks themselves, on the steering column, were the usual flat-black cheap plastic, but they felt very securely-attached...something that is often not the case. The ceiling/headliner and sun-visor material was a nice-to-feel soft fabric, and, except for the cheap-looking upper-dash panel, most of the interior trim materials seemed well-finished and well-attached. The front seats were firmly-padded in the usual Volvo style, but, even though I usually like softly-padded seats, the contouring in them, was good enough for my wide frame that I generally felt comfortable in them. I didn't care for the (IMO) somewhat cheap-looking grain and feel of the leather used on the seats and door-panels, though.....the specs say it is real leather, not the fake stuff, but I've seen some fake leather (like the excellent Lexus Nu-Luxe used in some of their models) that looked and felt nicer than this (supposedly) real stuff. The main gauges were electronic, but analog in style...probably the best of both worlds. The large center video touch-screen is very complex, but rich-looking and extremely well-finished. many of the car's functions are done through that screen, so there aren't many separate buttons, and the ones on the dash are aren't particularly well-marked. Due to scalloping in the ceiling and setbacks, There is adequate headroom and legroom in both front and back for fairly tall people.....one of the car's better features, though I don't remember this particular car having a sunroof housing, which often cuts into headroom. The stereo sound quality is good, as expected in a car of this class, but IMO not outstanding....I've heard better.
In general, I thought that the light-color S90 interior, with the lighter-color wood trims (which I included in the above images) looked better than the darker and/or black/tan combination.
As mentioned before, the cargo area has a rather short trunk-opening due to the long raked roofline restricting the size of the trunk-lid. But, still, most packages and reasonably bulky items can be loaded in and out with ease. The cargo area itself, though a little shallow in height, is quite deep and roomy from from to back. It is not well-finished, however for a car of this class, with a somewhat cheap-feeling liner used for both the trunk floor and walls. Under the floor, of course s the usual temporary spare tire and jacking tools.
Though I did not do a formal test-drive, overall, I wasn't terribly impressed with the new S90 (some other sources and reviewers, which HAVE test-driven it, report a fairly stiff ride, unrefined transmission shifts, and buzzy engines). I'm sure it ranks at the top of the class on safety and occupant-protection features, as Volvos usually do.....generally, only the Mercedes S-class can compare in that area. But I don't think this car seems designed or marketed well, the engine offerings border on absurd for a large flagship, both exterior and interior materials seem less-solid than before (with some exceptions). Indeed, there was a white XC90 in the showroom, parked next to the S90 I was looking at, and I gave it a quick static-review for comparison. I thought the XC-90, overall, had much better interior materials and general build-solidness...which is perhaps not surprising, given that it seems to be the company's halo product in the American market, and they apparently put the most effort into it. So, for the S90, Thanks but no Thanks....despite the safety advantage, I don't think this car is going to stack up well against most of its American-market competitors.
And, as always......Happy Car-Shopping.
MM
http://www.volvocars.com/us/cars/new-models/s90
IN A NUTSHELL: The forgotten flagship....but some things about it are indeed forgettable.
CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Lincoln Continental, Infiniti Q70, Acura RLX, Lexus GS (more so than the LS), Genesis G80 (more so than the G90), Mercedes E-Class (more so than the S-class), Audi A6 (more so than the A8), and BMW 5-series (again, more so than the 7-series).
OVERVIEW:
Volvo, especially after being sold off by Ford in 2010 to the Chinese Geely automotive firm, has not been a major player in the American market in recent years. Indeed, I was told today at a local Volvo dealership, while looking at the new S90, that Volvo will not even have a display at the upcoming Washington D.C. Auto Show later this month, which I can't ever remember happening before. The brand, of course, built its reputation on advanced safety features, crash-test performance, and the business of protecting its occupants. But it was also widely viewed by the American public (somewhat inaccurately, as many stereotypes are) as a stodgy brand primarily for schoolteachers, college professors, safety-advocates, and those with distinctly left-wing views of the automobile business.....indeed, Ralph Nader's protege, ex-NHTSA Director Joan Claybrook, drove Volvos for years. This, despite the fact that several distinctly sport-oriented Volvo models were developed to try and compete with BMW in the American market, without much success.
And, of course, their old flagship sedan was the S80, a somewhat half-hearted attempt to replace the excessively stodgy Volvo 940/960 series (the stodgy image DID fit in that case LOL). The S80 looked more modern both inside and out than the shoebox-styled 940/960 (and replaced the standard RWD with FWD), but, IMO, still drove somewhat like an appliance...I sampled one of the early S80s. It certainly did not have the road manners of an equivalent BMW, Mercedes, or Audi....though one could drive down the road knowing that, along with the Mercedes S-class, they were protected in the S80 by some of the best safety-technology available at that time for a mass-produced car.
Well, the S80's time came to an end.....to some extent, a victim of poor sales, though the company, under the Geely management, chose to go ahead and replace it with a new flagship sedan....the S90. The S90 is all-new for 2017, and remains Volvo's top-line sedan in the American market. The S80 was often overlooked or forgotten by those considering an upmarket European-badged sedan, as many naturally gravitated towards the far greater nameplate-cache of BMW, Mercedes, or Audi (even Jaguar in some cases)....the new S90 is likely to be overlooked as well. So, considering that I planned to stop at one of my favorite Italian restaurants today for lunch, and a mini-strip of dealerships (Honda, Nissan, Volvo, and VW) was literally right around the corner at the next stoplight, I decided to at least check out the new S90 in the showroom, even if I wasn't going to do a full-review or test-drive (I will do so, if I get specific requests for a test-drive, or if some forum-members are seriously interested in a new S90). I got a unexpected surprise at the dealership in the meantime......I was able to pick up some free tickets to the aforementioned D.C. Auto Show, though, with some lines of our local Metro system being erratically shut down for maintenance/track work and other problems during the show, and my less-than-perfect knee and lower-back, I'm not sure just how much of the show I'm going to be able to attend this year. (Trying to drive down there and park, of course, is hopeless).
For 2017, the new S90 comes in four versions....a FWD T5 in both Momentum and Inscription trim-levels, and an AWD T6 in the same Momentum and Inscription levels. Base prices run from $46,950 to $55,450. T5 models, like on the base Cadillac CT6, come with a small 2.0L turbo in-line four of 250 HP and 258 ft-lbs. of torque. T6 models come with the same engine and BOTH a turbo AND supercharger (Go figure?), with 316 HP and 295 ft-lbs. of torque. To not offer at least a normally-aspirated V6 in a car of this class, IMO, is absurd, and, in my view, gives this car at least one strike against it before it even gets out of the showroom. Yes, the T6's four does offer some impressive power figures for something that size, but, depending on the firing-pattern and other factors, four cylinders typically don't offer the smoothness and refinement of six. And, of course, a lot of power in a small block like that that often means high stresses as well. All versions come with an 8-speed Geartronic automatic transmission, with (thankfully) a conventionally-done fore/aft shift lever that avoids the E-shifter annoyances.
For the static-review, I simply checked out a nice dark blue S90 T5 FWD that they had parked in the showroom, with a moderate number of options on it. It listed for roughly 53K.
On the outside, the new S90 has the same humpback-whale roofline as its predecessor (what sedan doesn't these days?), but the new front end and headlights are considerably sleeker and less-conservative looking than before. The car (now) has the basic look of a stretched, 4-door pony-car, with a long hood and very short deck-lid in back, somewhat like a Porsche Panamera (I test-drove a former Panamera, but not the latest version). The paint job is generally well-done, with only a very small hint of orange-peel. The super-dull (and I mean DULL) paint colors all have the typical European-manufacturer extra-charge for all the metallics, leaving only the standard, non-metallic black and white without the charge. The exterior sheet metal for the body panels seemed solid enough, but the pull-out door handles, though themselves made of very thick and strong plastic, had a light, flimsy feel to their pull-action. Likewise,the otherwise solid-feelng doors did not have the same thunk that they did on the predecessors S80. In typical European-upscale fashion, the exterior trim was all of high quality and well-attached. One drawback to the styling of the roofline is that it cut into the size of the trunk-lid opening (more on that below).
Open the fairly solid-feeling hood, and the turbo (or turbo-supercharged) 2.0L four fits in fairly well, space-wise, though a very large engine cover blocks most of the top-engine access. As usual, an insulation pad is attached to the underside of the hood. The engine cover was not the usual hard plastic, but a very unusual soft-rubber material almost of a foam-like nature. While I was examining it, a salesman came by and remarked..... "We don't want owners doing their own servicing". I simply turned around, looked at him, and said...."That's obvious". The battery was also similarly hidden, requiring a game of Hide-and-Go-Seek. There is no separate dipstick for the oil, with that function having been relegated to an electronic sensor, so you can't visually check the oil level in the crankcase. The filler-caps and fluid-reservoirs, though, are readily accessible.
Inside the cabin, with some exceptions, the general level of fit/finish is very high, and most of the hardware seemed well-attached and of good quality. The stalks themselves, on the steering column, were the usual flat-black cheap plastic, but they felt very securely-attached...something that is often not the case. The ceiling/headliner and sun-visor material was a nice-to-feel soft fabric, and, except for the cheap-looking upper-dash panel, most of the interior trim materials seemed well-finished and well-attached. The front seats were firmly-padded in the usual Volvo style, but, even though I usually like softly-padded seats, the contouring in them, was good enough for my wide frame that I generally felt comfortable in them. I didn't care for the (IMO) somewhat cheap-looking grain and feel of the leather used on the seats and door-panels, though.....the specs say it is real leather, not the fake stuff, but I've seen some fake leather (like the excellent Lexus Nu-Luxe used in some of their models) that looked and felt nicer than this (supposedly) real stuff. The main gauges were electronic, but analog in style...probably the best of both worlds. The large center video touch-screen is very complex, but rich-looking and extremely well-finished. many of the car's functions are done through that screen, so there aren't many separate buttons, and the ones on the dash are aren't particularly well-marked. Due to scalloping in the ceiling and setbacks, There is adequate headroom and legroom in both front and back for fairly tall people.....one of the car's better features, though I don't remember this particular car having a sunroof housing, which often cuts into headroom. The stereo sound quality is good, as expected in a car of this class, but IMO not outstanding....I've heard better.
In general, I thought that the light-color S90 interior, with the lighter-color wood trims (which I included in the above images) looked better than the darker and/or black/tan combination.
As mentioned before, the cargo area has a rather short trunk-opening due to the long raked roofline restricting the size of the trunk-lid. But, still, most packages and reasonably bulky items can be loaded in and out with ease. The cargo area itself, though a little shallow in height, is quite deep and roomy from from to back. It is not well-finished, however for a car of this class, with a somewhat cheap-feeling liner used for both the trunk floor and walls. Under the floor, of course s the usual temporary spare tire and jacking tools.
Though I did not do a formal test-drive, overall, I wasn't terribly impressed with the new S90 (some other sources and reviewers, which HAVE test-driven it, report a fairly stiff ride, unrefined transmission shifts, and buzzy engines). I'm sure it ranks at the top of the class on safety and occupant-protection features, as Volvos usually do.....generally, only the Mercedes S-class can compare in that area. But I don't think this car seems designed or marketed well, the engine offerings border on absurd for a large flagship, both exterior and interior materials seem less-solid than before (with some exceptions). Indeed, there was a white XC90 in the showroom, parked next to the S90 I was looking at, and I gave it a quick static-review for comparison. I thought the XC-90, overall, had much better interior materials and general build-solidness...which is perhaps not surprising, given that it seems to be the company's halo product in the American market, and they apparently put the most effort into it. So, for the S90, Thanks but no Thanks....despite the safety advantage, I don't think this car is going to stack up well against most of its American-market competitors.
And, as always......Happy Car-Shopping.
MM
Last edited by mmarshall; 01-11-17 at 05:32 PM.
01-11-17, 05:35 PM
#2
Lead Lap
Great review. I was personally disappointed in the ride quality, engine sound profile (only so much you can do with an I4), and what seemed to me to be a structure that's not as stiff as the competition. I didn't drive it but I have a coworker with a S90 and a XC90 for the wifey.
01-11-17, 05:39 PM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks. 
Really, it was only half of a review. 
The new XC90 is NICE. 
In the showroom, at least, it seems noticeably more impressive than the S90. Its new interior is (roughly) equal to that of the new Lincoln MKX...it uses some of the same trim-materials. And its sheet metal and doors seem more solid than the Lincoln's.
Really, it was only half of a review.
I was personally disappointed in the ride quality, engine sound profile (only so much you can do with an I4), and what seemed to me to be a structure that's not as stiff as the competition. I didn't drive it but I have a coworker with a S90 and a XC90 for the wifey.
In the showroom, at least, it seems noticeably more impressive than the S90. Its new interior is (roughly) equal to that of the new Lincoln MKX...it uses some of the same trim-materials. And its sheet metal and doors seem more solid than the Lincoln's.
01-12-17, 06:47 AM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
I see and hear a lot of recent build-quality and reliability complaints in the forums, in Consumer Reports, and auto press about newer Hondas, compared to older versions ( and this, from a company with a well-known, stellar reputation). I reviewed the latest Accord and found it virtually as well-built as anything I've seen from the company before, at least on the surface.....but some of those problems could (?) be hidden under the skin and don't show up when the car is brand-new. It might (?) be worth a look to see what kind of a job they did with the new Civic. In 2012, they really screwed up the Civic's interior with all-plastic cost-cutting, but then quickly reversed that the very next year (2013) with an emergency redesign.
Last edited by mmarshall; 01-12-17 at 06:50 AM.
01-12-17, 06:58 AM
#5
I agree with you on the leather they use in their lower trims. I sat in a Momentum XC90 and the leather was just bad. They can call it whatever they want, but if it looks and feels like vinyl, it's vinyl. Supposedly, the Nappa leather is a considerable step up, but when I visited my dealer, they didn't have any Inscriptions on the floor
Trending Topics
01-12-17, 11:38 AM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
CL member Afrosheen recently traded in his '13 GS for a new S90. His thread can be found here.
He has posted some initial ownership impressions in the thread if you are interested.
He has posted some initial ownership impressions in the thread if you are interested.
Thanks for the input.
I did take a look at it. He seems pleased with it.
01-12-17, 06:47 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
01-12-17, 09:50 PM
#10
Lexus Fanatic
I'm surprised you didn't like it. All the reviews I've read of the interior are gushing with praise...
01-13-17, 01:15 AM
#12
Marshall I'm surprised you didn't like it, and found cheap bits on the interior. I've sat in my buddy's new XC90, man that thing is NICE on the inside, I love the color combo with that light beige/tan leather and the wood in his car. Nothing on the inside of that XC90 screamed cheap either. Style wise I think both the XC90 and S90 look awesome, I figured the S90 would just be the sedan version of the XC90 with the same interior.
01-13-17, 08:09 AM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Aron9000
Marshall I'm surprised you didn't like it, and found cheap bits on the interior.
In my reviews, I rarely, if ever, come out and call a vehicle either a complete piece of junk (the closest to that was probably the Smart-for Two LOL), or so saintly that it wears a halo (the closest to that was probably the supercharged Jaguar XKR convertible I sampled several years ago for the Annual Holiday Review, which, as I wrote, driving it was like dating a supermodel). Most vehicles are somewhere in between, and I try and be objective as I see it....while also respecting the views of others.
01-13-17, 08:40 AM
#15
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Nope......not by a long shot, at least in the cases of both that I looked at (I can't vouch for every possible combination-comparison of every trim level on either one). But, in general, there are major differences in trim, hardware, and (especially) in seat upholstery.