By on February 8, 2017

Volvo V90 Location 7/8 Rear, Image: Volvo

Volvo has officially revealed pricing for its newest wagon, the V90.

Available in two trims, the V90 R-Design will start at $49,950, while Inscription will start at $51,950.

Both come standard with Volvo’s T5 turbocharged four-cylinder, which sends 250 horsepower and 258 lb-ft of torque to the front wheels. A more powerful T6 four-cylinder, fed with turbocharged and supercharged air, will be available as a $6,000 option. Those models send 316 hp and 295 lb-ft of torque to all four wheels as standard.

The R-Design and the Inscription trims both come with Volvo’s 8-speed automatic transmission, but the Inscription comes with Volvo’s dynamic chassis while R-Design models comes with a sport chassis.

The real differences between the two are inside: Nappa leather and more comfortable, ventilated thrones are all the sole remit of the V90 Inscription.

Buying a V90 can be done online through Volvo’s Online Concierge. From the brand’s website, buyers can configure their V90 with the help of a specialist who helps them through the process remotely, notifying them when the car is shipped and when it’s available for pick-up at the dealer.

Alternatively, owners can opt for the full Scandinavian experience with Overseas Delivery. The option provides buyers with two plane tickets and hotel accommodations in Gothenburg, Sweden, where they’ll get a tour of the factory and drive their V90 around Europe to the port from which it will be shipped back to the U.S.

A version of this article originally appeared on SwedeSpeed.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

79 Comments on “2018 Volvo V90 Wagon Immigrates to America with Sub-$50,000 Price Tag...”


  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    It’s beautiful. I can’t afford it. If I could, I wouldn’t be thrilled about a 2.0-liter four at that price.

    I heard a XC90 with this motor wind up while accelerating out of a parking lot the other day. It sounded like an economy car. I had to stare as it went by to be sure the reedy buzz was coming from 4700lb luxury SUV and not a Honda Civic.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      For a mere $6000, you can get an extra 66hp!

      • 0 avatar
        MAGICGTI

        And AWD.

        I sell Volvo, I have seen plenty of “know it alls” apprehensive about a four in the XC90. After the test drive in a T6, they are believers.

        No need for a six, and the twincharged four makes satisfying noises and crackles on downshifts in Dynamic mode, very fun to drive.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          I’m sure the twincharged four has fine power delivery, but I can’t suspend disbelief quite enough to think that any four “makes satisfying noises.”

        • 0 avatar
          2manycars

          But how long will it last and how much will it cost to repair once out of warranty? Will it have the anvil-like reliability of the 240? I’m much more interested in that than “satisfying noises” or “crackling downshifts.”

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            “Will it have the anvil-like reliability of the 240?”

            That’s a negatory good buddy.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Volvo doesn’t make 240s anymore. The closest thing to a Volvo 240 in today’s market is a Camry (sedan) or Highlander (wagon).

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            While both certainly have great merits, neither is a 240. Tough to explain.

          • 0 avatar
            rmwill

            I bet anyone praising the 240 on this thread has only owned one via a blog or forum post. Average cars with a great marketing presence. I have owned 3.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I have an MY93 and its been a tank, although I don’t put 20K a year on it. Some annoying issues over the years and dated in many ways, yet it can be kept going nearly indefinitely and the chassis can be used for other purposes (Rally car, Ford 5.0/T5 swap, LSx swap. a manual Volvo transmission can be added to an auto with all the right parts, etc). Volvos beyond the 900 really don’t fit into this paradigm at all.

          • 0 avatar
            MAGICGTI

            The 240 was not reliable, it was durable. Different concepts.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I see what you’re saying, but at this point the evidence is all anecdotal. In order to establish that we’d have to see data of when the cars were still under warranty.

        • 0 avatar
          brn

          A Volvo car salesperson is speaking well of a Volvo product? You’d be negligent in your job if you didn’t.

          Yes, AWD. Still a lot of money. Volvo’s former parent company (Ford / Lincoln) charges $2K for AWD and wouldn’t think if putting 250hp in a luxury vehicle that size.

      • 0 avatar
        Thinkin...

        In fairness, the extra $6k also gets you two additional driven wheels. I’m far from the target market for this car, but $6k for a significant power boost and AWD sounds pretty reasonable.

        After all, consider the price differences between the Focus ST vs RS, or Golf GTI vs R.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Lease it.

      • 0 avatar
        jkross22

        ajla, This is the right answer. The complexity in the XC90 (and most modern turbos) is shocking. The idea that such a complex car will also be reliable doesn’t pass the sniff test. At least not yet. Add to that Sensus and color my skeptical that this XC90 will bare any resemblance to anything reliable.

        Same goes for many cars MY2011 and forward except Lexus who has managed to until recently avoid turbo charging.

        • 0 avatar
          MAGICGTI

          Don’t worry, for you and half of TTAC there are still many used Panthers on the market.

          For the rest of us, modern turbocharging is reliable. Volvo has been doing turbo for quite a while, I would hold the concern.

          You know turbocharging is for the masses when it’s the highest take rate on an F150.

  • avatar
    colin42

    Yay more wagons. Now I just need to wait 5 years so I can get one for $10K. Will they put in the hybrid from the XC90?

  • avatar
    slavuta

    I am wondering if I can make my price offer to that online Volvo concierge?

    4cyl for 50 large? Well, this is a dicount considering that MB E-class I saw at the mall with 4 cyl had sticker of 73K

    • 0 avatar
      Thinkin...

      Do people really still care about cylinder count for family cars? Would you rather a 140hp v8?

      I’ve never understood the preoccupation with the number of cylinders under the hood. Horsepower? Sure. Torque? Absolutely. But cylinders? Those stopped being directly correlated to speed and power decades ago.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Let there be torque, we don’t need speed much in that 45 min of daily traffic.

      • 0 avatar
        stevelovescars

        Not so much speed and power as NVH and long-term reliability and ownership costs. In my experience, few small highly pressurized turbos have the long-term reliability of a low-stress bigger motor. They also seem to score well in EPA mileage ratings but rarely in real world driving.

        Advantages do include lighter weight and often better handling as a result, though.

        • 0 avatar
          heavy handle

          As someone who has owned Saabs, my experience is that high-stressed turbo 4s are unkillable, provided you change the oil on schedule.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I can’t speak for Saab, but if the motor was anything like the Redblock, that’s probably true. However the difference is today’s motors are not built like the Redblock. They have like, technologiez and shiznitz [which are not unkillable].

          • 0 avatar
            stevelovescars

            Funny, I based some of my comments on my personal experience with Saabs. I suppose a lot of these issues have to do with the engineering and quality control of the manufacturers. While I would choose a Saab turbo from the 80s over a Chrysler turbo from the same era, Saabs overall never had a great reputation for long-term reliability.

            My GF’s 2008 Audi A4 turbo recently blew seals on its turbos after 80k lightly used miles and regular dealer maintenance.

            You may have had good experience with your Saabs but generally speaking, putting high-speed turbines, high temperatures, high-pressure, and additional complexity on a vehicle doesn’t bode well for long-term ownership costs.

          • 0 avatar

            as a Volvo owner (2001 xc70) the general engine is not bad and is fairly durable but the running costs to keep it moving are pretty high with Volvo and from what I hear from coworkers and family Saabs are the same way. Things like overly complex PCV systems and turbo controls can be a real pain in the butt later in life.

            So for me, love the look of the new v90 but 4cyl power trains and Chinese ownership means it’s a nogo. Won;t matter much to Volvo as I’m a used only cash buyer.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “Do people really still care about cylinder count for family cars?”

        Yes. I care so so so so so so much. There are a handful of objective-ish things I like about the V6/I6/V8/V10/V12, but it is largely a visceral attraction for me. I figure if I’m going be spending $40K+ on something I should aim for a degree of emotional attachment.

        “Would you rather a 140hp v8?”

        No but luckily 400+hp V8s exist.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        It’s about one thing and one thing only: sound.

        I don’t keep cars long enough to care about what happens to the engine at 150k miles. I’m more or less OK with turbo torque curves in most cases. 2.0Ts have enough power except in full-sizers and big CUVs. But no one has yet made a four with a pleasing sound. The best out there is the VW/Audi EA888, and it’s just “OK.” Almost any five, six, or eight on the market sounds better. Or no sound — I’d rather have an electric motor than a four.

        I really wish Volvo had broken with conformity and done their 2.0T as a five, not a four. Then I’d have no problem with it.

        • 0 avatar
          stuki

          S2000, ITR and other Hondas of the “Vtech Yo!” era did sound pleasing. Or at least exciting. And ditto, 100 times over, for 600cc I4s at 16000 rpm…..

          But those were a far cry from this era’s turbodroners.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            8000 rpm VTEC Hondas have a sound that’s all their own, but (a) it’s not remotely appropriate for any luxury-ish or expensive-ish car and (b) it couldn’t hold a candle to the Mazda 1.8 V6 which was appropriate for similar applications.

            I really really want someone to differentiate themselves by making a 2.0T engine that’s an I6 or V6.

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            “I really really want someone to differentiate themselves by making a 2.0T engine that’s an I6 or V6.”

            You mean, again?

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            In the US market, it would be the first time. We never got any of those great little Japanese turbo sixes. Or even the tiny versions of BMW’s NA straight six.

        • 0 avatar

          I buy my cars at 80-90k so that durability matters to me. If I was buying new the sound would annoy and the fact that despite the great looking torque curves all the turbo 4’s don’t feel the same as the bigger displacement mills on the road.
          The ecoboost mustang would be a good example of this the sound is awful and the feel is just not right for a muscle car. it’s like driving a first gen wrx with a mustang body, fun but not right.

        • 0 avatar
          iganpo

          Agree 100% that cylinder count matters. Luxury (and Volvo is selling luxury, right?) means getting stuff you don’t actually NEED. All the visceral noises and higher order harmonics make the experience more satisfying even if it objectively isn’t faster or more efficient.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        Of course you care of cylinders when you pay 50K. It is just not solid to have such car with bunch of buzz under hood.

      • 0 avatar
        Tomsriv

        I would take a 140hp V8 over a 274 hp 4 any day. I test drive a BMW 538 with 270 odd hp and couldn’t figure out why the throttle was so sluggish. It was impossible to accelerate out of a corner because by the time the power came on you had completed your turn. It makes me laugh at people who think their 60k BMW is soooo much better than a 30k Chrysler 300 when you can get the 300 with a real luxury motor that responds when you tell it to go.

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        140 hp might be a little weak for a car this size, but 190 hp in a decent sized (say 3.5L+) V8, especially a long stroke one, would be perfectly adequate, and yes, I’d take that over the 400 hp 4 cylinder every day (I said that about Volvo’s old 2.9 I-6 in my comment below). As others have said, it has nothing to do with the power and everything to do with the NVH. Unless perhaps you’re Italian and going for maximum charisma, I don’t think you’ll ever make a 4 cylinder sound appropriate for this sort of car. That’s not to say a 4 cylinder can’t be made to sound good. My 500 Abarth sounds awesome, but the obnoxiously loud gurgles burbles whistles pops and snortles that are fun and entertaining in a goofy Italian hot hatchback are not what you want in a upscale luxury sedan. The same goes for the high rpm Honda VTECH howl. What was exciting in a TSX sport sedan is not in a luxury car. I think about the best you can hope for in a 4 cylinder is that it is smothered and muffled to the point you forget your car even has an IC engine. I noticed that was the route BMW took in the 528i I had as a rental once.

  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    Love the look and size however like pretty much everyone else here. I cant do that price for a 4cyl. I am a CX9 fan and wont get new one of those either. I have driven the XC90 and he drives fine and sound bad…I dont get anything out of it. Say what you want but part of my driving pleasure is the sound of the engine.

    • 0 avatar
      TonyJZX

      I also dont get why it has the stance and look of an RWD car and yet its FWD.

      I’m not comfortable with Volvo as a brand anyway but to add 4 cyl. and FWD? No thank you.

      If I pay $50k I expect a format that isnt in $20k econoboxes. I think the above car makes all the sense in the world to Euros and Scandinavians….

      Hard pass says the rest of the world and nothing new to Volvo.

  • avatar
    Not_a_luddite

    Hybrid?

  • avatar
    Acd

    This is my nomination for sexiest station wagon. Too bad most of them sold here will be jacked up, clad with plastic and hauling around an extra couple hundred pounds of AWD.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    So once we switch to “real world” emissions testing will this turbo 4 be switched for a I-6 like God intended?

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    Nice! I would rock this. I do know that when the current XC90 debuted, it was ineligible for Euro delivery. It might still be.

  • avatar
    Nostrathomas

    As an XC70 owner, I’m a bit conflicted with the V90. I mean it looks great, but the wagon portion is quite compromised with its somewhat severe rake. Also not a huge fan of the iPad dashboard.

    Most of all though, it would be tough to go from the excellent T6 to a 4 cylinder. The T6 pulls like a train and is all around really refined. It’s honestly one of the best aspects of an already great car. It has that quality luxury cars have….reserve.

    I feel like this car has more style, but the 70 had more substance.

  • avatar
    MRF 95 T-Bird

    Is a third seat available? Even a rear facing one. From the looks of the web site apparently not.

  • avatar
    OldManPants

    Look at dat mizzable thang…

    Roofs been low so long dey look like tall to juniors.

  • avatar
    notapreppie

    I miss the days when T5 meant “turbo 5-cyl” and T6 meant “turbo 6-cyl”.

    Other than that, it’s beyond “sexy for a wagon” and is just “a sexy wagon”.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    I drove the sedan a couple of weeks ago, and the C-class and E-class last weekend. I like the Volvo WAY more. A much more refined cabin, very luxurious. The handling/ride balance is excellent, and it just feels a cut above the Benzes.

    I was nervous about the sounds I’d here from the 2.0T, but it wasn’t much of an issue, and far better than the C300. Yes, I’d prefer an inline 6 for a $60K luxury car, but it wasn’t a deal breaker in the Volvo.

    I still need to test the new 5-series as well as Audi. If there is a candidate missing from my list, I’d appreciate the feedback!

    • 0 avatar
      Car Ramrod

      I really hope you’ll consider doing a guest post on the site with your thoughts on all these test drives, we would all really benefit from the time you’ve put into it. I’d like to think I’m in the market for one of those cars, but am probably too cheap to go lease a new one.

    • 0 avatar
      01 Deville

      Lexus ES, G90, CTS/CT6?

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      Jaguar XF is new as of 2015. Supercharged V6 comes at modestly-optioned C-Class money.

      The Continental? I’m starting to see them around. They have quite a bit of presence, and start in the $40s.

      G80, if you don’t want to spend a lot.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        Good suggestions. Thank you.

        I hadn’t thought of Hyundai/Genesis – probably worth a test drive.

        Cadillac – I like the CTS, but I’ve never had good luck with the dealers. They seem to thrive on leasing big sedans to men in their 70’s who are trying to impress their buddies at the golf club. They don’t seem to get why someone would be interested in an engaged driving experience.

        Lincoln – I hadn’t considered. My concern is that the Continental isn’t very nice unless you option it up to big bucks territory, and the depreciation will be horrid. But probably worth a drive.

        Jaguar – great idea. They have a 5 year warranty now, which allays my biggest concerns about the brand. The F-Pace is probably the only crossover I’d consider.

      • 0 avatar
        jkross22

        I think the XF was new as of my2016.

    • 0 avatar
      Acd

      I can’t help but think that these new Volvos are the kinds of cars that Cadillac should be building–comfortable, luxurious and a ride and handling balance that coddles the occupants a little more instead of trying to set lap records.

      Four cylinder or not Volvo may be on to something here.

  • avatar
    True_Blue

    The proportions are simply stunning. I’m unsure if any company does taillights as well as Volvo.

  • avatar
    jmo

    To me, this and the E wagon give off a certain old money vibe. Like you’d see one on the ferry to Nantucket all packed up and headed for an old and grand cottage that’s been in the family for generations.

  • avatar
    Garrett

    So I have a few issues:

    1. If you price them both out, avoiding stupid upgrades that don’t actually change the driving experience, the V90 becomes more expensive than the V90 Cross Country for an AWD equipped vehicle.

    2. Can you haggle with the Volvo conceierge? If not, the price gap grows.

    3. They still need to post the overseas delivery pricing.

    4. Mussel Blue metallic is not being offered on either wagon. This is an outrage.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Garrett,
      Some thoughts:
      1. Good point. I think the V90 is overpriced vs. the S90 and V90XC

      2. Probably not. But you can always order at the dealership. They should be willing to deal, given that all they’re doing is passing the paperwork.

      3. Agree – I suspect that Overseas Delivery costs the same as MSRP, but they throw in airfare and a few nights in a hotel.

      4. Not true! You have to spec the V90 with Inscription (not R-design), but there is Mussel Blue AND denim blue metallic. But you’re right about the XC90 missing out on the Mussel Blue.

      In my book, if I can’t get Mussel Blue, I’m out.

  • avatar
    xflowgolf

    These are out of my price range, but they are beautiful, and I’m glad they exist, and I hope people buy them.

  • avatar
    jkross22

    This checks off so many of my wants:

    – great seats
    – wagon
    – great interior
    – great stereo
    – design???

    This is where something is off with the V90. It looks too long, which is an odd reaction to have for a wagon. To me, Volvo means a more boxy, upright but well designed aesthetic. This wagon looks like it’s trying way too hard to be something different. Maybe it’s the slope of the rear glass that’s throwing it off.

    I think the XC90 is the best looking SUV other than the Touareg. Both are stylized bricks with well designed front and back ends.

    The V90 lacks this idea and went for swoopiness instead. I don’t think that helps Volvo, at least in a wagon.

    Right now, the XC90 is Volvo’s best looking vehicle, and I say that as a devoted wagonista.

  • avatar
    tjh8402

    This car kills me. I love that we can get a proper wagon and that it looks so good inside and out. But Volvo KILLS me with their powertrains. $49k+ with only 4 cylinders available is utter malarky. I’ve driven the Volvo 2.0t in a V60 and it was a total let down. Reviews of the powertrains have been mixed at best. A 4cylinder will never have the NVH that is appropriate to a luxury car of this price. At best, you’ll smother the engine enough that you don’t even know you have an IC one and the car could pass for electric. SMH.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Yeah, but this is the market now. The GS, 5-series, E-class, A6 – these are all $50-60K vehicles with 2.0T 1-4s. The Volvo T-6 at least is the most powerful.

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        @Vogo the engines don’t belong in those cars either. That being said, at least they offer six cylinders to those who wish to upgrade. Volvo doesn’t anymore. I could care less about the horsepower; its all about NVH. I’d happily have my V90 with the old 190 hp 2.9 I-6 than any of the current powertrain offerings, whether its the 250 hp T-5 or the 400 hp T8.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          TJH,
          Have you driven the new, large Volvos?

          I’ve driven the S90 and the E300. I would take the Volvo all day long. Better interior, better seats, better NVH, better ride/handling balance.

          • 0 avatar
            tjh8402

            no I haven’t only the V60. I wouldn’t want an E300 either, nor a 528, GS200T, A6 2.0T, CT6 2.0t, etc. Just because Volvo may have managed to make their the least offensive of the 4 cylinders doesn’t make it acceptable.

          • 0 avatar
            Tomsriv

            I find it hard to believe that the driving dynamic of a front wheel drive volvo was better than a rwd Mercedes.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    I could see this as a successor to my dear, departed ’02 Saab 9-5 Aero wagon, which I owned for 10 years and something like 110K miles. IMHO, assuming equal weight, 250 hp is plenty of power for the car. The Saab had a wicked “passing speed” in sport mode, which allowed the engine to rev beyond 3500 rpm before shifting . . . albeit with gobs of torque steer. I never, ever felt the car was underpowered. While not a paragon of reliability, the Saab’s issues in my hands did not involve the turbocharging. The most serious ones were a rear main seal leak that developed at 90K miles and some issues with the transmission that were fixed with a flush at about 75K miles. The car did reliably achieve 30 mpg at Interstate speeds with a moderate load and rolling terrain, with the a/c on.

    No one seems to build wagons with squared-off rear tailgates anymore, I presume for aerodynamic reasons.

    As for the engine sounds . . . seriously folks, it’s a cotton-pickin’ station wagon! Under normal operation, the engine never spun up much over 2300 rpm. Having a boost gauge, the Saab’s engine management strategy was revealed: lots of boost at low rpms. Sure, it was as coarse as any other 2+ liter 4 in the higher rev ranges and yes, the 3-liter 6 in my BMW and the 6.2 liter V-8 in my truck are smoother and sound better over 3000 rpm.

    This could be nice.

  • avatar
    simiansaw

    Beautiful automobile. Masterful design. I covet it in my garage. Except, for $67 large it boasts manual steering column adjustment and the sun visors aren’t extendable. Isn’t sun glare a safety issue? Volvo? Seriously?

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • HotPotato: DAMN. That thing is, like the Telluride, shockingly good looking…inside and out. If they...
  • HotPotato: A buddy of mine has the manliest leather satchel I’ve ever seen. My cowboy quotient would go up...
  • GenesisCoupe380GT: I’m grateful Cad has this option at all. BMW took it away from the M5 and now it’s...
  • ToolGuy: That hood graphic reminds me of the circuit board out of my WiFi router which suffered a lightning strike in...
  • ToolGuy: Those A-pillars look refreshingly slender (could be the camera angle).

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber