posted by
someone claiming to be Andy P
on
Fri Feb 9 00:59 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Anyone else see this? They compared the XC with the Audi allroad. It's not a bad comparison, but I think its a little unfair as the allroad is a lot more expensive and has a lot more standard equipment.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Eric G.
on
Fri Feb 9 02:22 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Was that the review from www.audiworld.com you're referring to? I think the newer XC is doing pretty good so far in those reviews. They've even preferred the XC for offroad! If I remember correctly, the tire selection was an issue. Anyways, for the additional expense, I would expect at least more power, fit and finish and unbeatable service. Moreover, that air adjusting suspension sounds neat but may be calling for serious repair bills in the long run. For people (like me) who just can't afford that much money on the Allroad, the XC and even the new Subaru Outback VDC H6 3.0 are wise hybrid choices. Insurance rates are lower too!! I own a 2000 XC which I plan to chip and add the dual exhaust. That'll get it closer to the Allroad performance specs and I won't have to spend 10K$ more!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Fri Feb 9 04:41 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
One thing that a lot of people do not realize is that if you set the Allroad in its highest (4th) suspension level in order to get the height clearance that is STANDARD in the XC (8.2"), the ride becomes very harsh and very unluxury-like, unlike the XC where its ride is very nice. I drove the Allroad and when I mentioned the harsh ride to the salesperson, he replied "how many times will you need to be as HIGH as that"??? Go figure!
Yannis
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be rich
on
Fri Feb 9 08:28 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Yea, go figure. I know I for one would certainly want to cruise around all day sitting nearly a foot off the ground, not. We have a 2000 XC, I wish I could bring it down to a more normal ride height, I have yet to encounter a circumstance where the ride height is useful, yet often it is a hinderence.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Big
on
Fri Feb 9 11:16 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Our 2000 XC works well for mixed driving from highways to unmaintained forest roads. It could use a tad bit more clearance on heavily rutted tracks where it is difficult to straddle the center crown without scrapping. The 2001 XC should be better off-pavement but I wonder how it compares on-road. I have yet to drive the newer model--maybe the next service loaner with be one.
The Audi variable height feature is intriguing. Reminds me of a Citroën I rode in once. As we reached a dirt road, the driver flicked a switch and the body lifted several inches. Cool! Several years later low-riders started to install devices that raised the bodies so they could get over driveways and such. When is IPD going to come out with a Volvo ride-height kit?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Fri Feb 9 14:18 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
True, the AUdi can be crisper when it is lowered down to position 1 but you will be surprised at how agile the new XC is...despite the pereceived notion that because of its height it would not handle well, the suspension tuners at Volvo have worked wonders with it and because the body is much more rigid than that of the previous XC.
I personally think that the Audi is a very ncie car but it is very "one-sided". I agree with the review that it is a fun "on-road" car and it limits itself when it comes to a rougher pavement. They claim that it can get a ground clearance of 8.2 inches, which is great. But once there, it is limited and the ride STINKS! The XC does not over the "ground-hugging" capability but its 8.2-inch clearance (that is there ALL the time) is much more tolerable than the AUdi. And for the price of the Allroad, I am sure that Volvo could have a V70 R AWD that would leave the Audi behind!
Yannis
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Steve Evans
on
Fri Feb 9 09:17 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I must have missed something on my 99 XC - with the exception of body roll (which is actually more a suspension issue than pure ride height)- I don't notice the additional inches. Well, not until we drive into the Sierras during winter storms and I don't have to use the car as a battering ram to get through berms from the snow plows or worry just because there's 10 inches on snow in the roads. It's also pretty nice when we cross speed bumps and the suspension travel soaks up the jounce. And then my visibility is probably a little better than when I'm driving the 854 with lowering springs.
Maybe a variable height suspension would give the the best of both worlds (although Audi doesn't seem to be able to at max elevation) I don't think it's worth very many additional dollars.
If you don't encounter situations where the additional ride height on the XC is useful it may be worth going for the non-XC version...
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be John R
on
Fri Feb 9 11:33 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I found the article to be fair and objective as far as it went, and I appreciated the avoidance of declaring a "winner" as in most of the pupular car magazines. It's good that there are enough differences between two nice vehicles to give the purchaser another choice to match individual needs, which I think is the most important.
I don't recall the article discussing weight. The Audi, at 4233 lbs in in the Acura MDX weight territory and uses up some of the extra horses to compete with the lighter XC. It accounts for the poorer mileage when included with the extra rotational transmission parts using up a bit of power.
It may be that the bigger Audi engine will encourage Volvo to put the 6 cylinder S80 into the XC so as not to seem outdone. Meanwhile, I suspect that the XC will greatly outsell the Allroad (allroad!)...? I am still happy with my choice of the 2001 XC for my needs as I am sure will be the buyers of the Allroad. If I may be excused a little digression: for those new Brickboard browsers looking for reassurance after seeing many tales of woe about Volvo quality, I am happy to say that I haven't found even a minor problem, or anything needing adjustment - touch wood, admittedly after only 2000 miles, but it's a good start, with a great dealer "experience"!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Fri Feb 9 14:23 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Volvo does not (and will not) need the T6 engine in the new XC....fairly "soon", you will see the V70 R that with its venerable 5-pot engine will smoke the Allroad. And the XC, so far, outsells the Allroad 4 to 1 but that is to be expected. I do not think the Allroad was meant to be produced in the volumes that Volvo will produce the XC and Audi, overall, sells far fewer cars than Volvo, in the US.
Now, what I would like to see is a comparison of an Allroad TDI and a XC TDI!!! The battle of the great turbodiesels!
Yannis
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Eric G.
on
Fri Feb 9 16:41 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Something I think many owners would like to see is a "pepped" version of the XC although it will offset Volvo's plans with the V70R.. If I ever hear "XC-R", "XC T5" or whatever the badge name, you can be sure I'd trade my car anyday. At the price the vehicle sells, I'd like to be given engine options.. at least get over the 200HP mark. Frankly, a 230HP/250lbs-ft. torque XC sounds reasonable to me given the extra AWD weight. There's always the aftermarket to help, however I'd feel more comfortable when it is prepped from the factory. The car's a dog to get moving. There's always the daily commuter and the express demon! I've already chosen mine!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Sat Feb 10 04:53 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I personally do not think that the old XC was a dog...definitely not a speed demon but not a dog!
Have you driven the 2001 XC? You will be pleasantly surprised that it is much quicker than the previous model!
Yannis
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Eric G.
on
Mon Feb 12 02:58 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I have yet to drive the '01 XC. The more I see it, the more it appeals to me. I would definitely like to compare it to my current '00 XC. It may be the new 5 speed transmission with better gear ratios selection that makes one feel it is more quicker.. however it is not an additional 7hp/11lbs-ft of torque that makes wonders...
Hey, you gotta forgive me.. I was used to drive a GT Mustang for years, so that may explain my gripe against neck-snapping acceleration.. ;)
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Russell D. Ollie Sr.
on
Sat Feb 10 18:01 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Let me back what what Yannis stated. I had an '01 as an overnight loaner recently and was very surprised at the overall handling and sprite feel for such a heavy wagon. It moves very well if you step into the gas pedal. Further, for the ride height, the handling is exceptional. I read a couple of years ago that Volvo lured a couple of BMW suspension engineers and I now think I know what they've been working on!
Thanks.
-rdo
p.s. - With a little more power, I could seriously consider replacing our '01 V70 T5 with a new Cross Country.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Tue Feb 13 03:04 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Your dealership has 2001 XCs as loaners??? Wow...they (Volvo) will not allow us having XCs as loaners. Every other model except that.
BTW, how do you like your T5? At least in CA you can DRIVE the car...here on the East Coast the cops are terrible...You must always be on alert. Can wait for mine to arrive! 18 more days!
Yannis
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Russell D. Ollie Sr.
on
Wed Feb 14 11:11 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hi Yannis. My local dealer, Volvo Irvine, has at least one 2001 XC loaner that I know of.
Regarding the T5, we love it so far. One of few things better about living here in Southern California over Boston is that there are opportunities to hit mile after mile of S-curves going un and over mountains. I've made special trips twice in the S80 T6 and once in the V70 T5 just to hit CA 243 going up to Idyllwild and the San Bernadino National Forest. I must say that in general there are much fewer cops on the road here by comparison to Massachusetts.
We really like our V70 T5 but if we could get the Cross Country with the T5 engine.....
Thanks.
-rdo
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Carl
on
Mon Feb 12 19:53 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Sounds like that little german alllroad is causing more than it’s fair share of envy, inferiority complex, and throw in a good dose of buyers(or leasers)remorse to boot.
If the COST issue was not a factor, If the COST issue was not a factor, given the choice of both vehicles which are available today (not tomorrow), the Allroad wins hands down. And I'm positive that an overwhelming % of XC owners, regardless of model year, would choose the upgrade to the Allroad. Let's be honest.
Use your imagination for a moment and fantasize what an extra cylinder and an extra turbo would feel like. You can then pop in a chip, if you desire, & get 300hp out of the Audi power plant and most folks won't even know what just passed them by. And lets get serious, if one spent more than 50% of the time offroad, you wouldn't have bought an XC in the first place.
So wake up Volvo. XC is a nice platform that has some rough edges. Your s60(s60r?),s80t6,v70t5 platforms show that performance is starting to run through your veins, but lets not be so stingy on the hp's with your XC line. And where in the world did you find those 16 inch rims - ugggh! The competition is heating up.
So until then, I'll let my wife shuttle the kids to the Saturday soccer games in the XC, while me and the boys head to the hills in the Allroad for a real driving experience.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvoFan
on
Tue Feb 13 04:20 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Carl wrote:
> Use your imagination for a moment and fantasize what an extra
> cylinder and an extra turbo would feel like. You can then pop in a
> chip, if you desire, & get 300hp out of the Audi power plant and
> most folks won't even know what just passed them by.
You're not describing an average XC buyer here. People don't buy XCs to drive them at insane speeds and leave people wondering "what just passed them by." It's a vehicle designed to bring luxury SUV buyers back to cars.
> So wake up Volvo. XC is a nice platform that has some rough edges.
> Your s60(s60r?),s80t6,v70t5 platforms show that performance is
> starting to run through your veins, but lets not be so stingy on the
> hp's with your XC line. And where in the world did you find those 16
> inch rims - ugggh! The competition is heating up.
What competition. Audi?? You're kidding right. Niche at best.
> So until then, I'll let my wife shuttle the kids to the Saturday
> soccer games in the XC, while me and the boys head to the hills in
> the Allroad for a real driving experience.
Allroad??? "real driving experience"???? Get real. If cost is no object as you stated earlier I'll be sure to "... pass you by." in my M5 while I'M having my REAL DRIVING EXPERIENCE. It's a wagon folks. Not a Corvette. Please, start remembering that your represent a very small minority of performance minded Volvo buyers. The average XC buyer wants to make sure he/she isn't going to get hung up in the snow, better visibility, something that carries a good amount of cargo, a little bit of character in the way their vehicle looks and the ability to confidently state that if they should experience "the big one" that they'll likely walk away from it. That's your target customer. You're a niche customer. The V70R, a niche vehicle, will be built with YOU in mind.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Eric G.
on
Tue Feb 13 02:11 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
> If the COST issue was not a factor, If the COST issue was not a
> factor, given the choice of both vehicles which are available today
> (not tomorrow), the Allroad wins hands down. And I'm positive that an
> overwhelming % of XC owners, regardless of model year, would choose
> the upgrade to the Allroad. Let's be honest.
If the COST issue wasn't a factor, honestly, neither the XC nor the Allroad will make it on my wish list. No winners here.
> And lets get serious, if one spent more than 50% of the time offroad, you > wouldn't have bought an XC in the first place.
Correct, I would've bought a TRUE V8 4x4 is this case.. not a 45K$ Allroad.
So to sum it up without bursting your bubbles, that is if COST is still not an issue, I'd go for a MacLaren F1 should I feel the need to spank everyone's butt and probably a Hummer to get over those annoying Allroads, Outbacks and XC on my way in the woods..
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Tue Feb 13 03:01 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hahaha! Not bad at all, Eric!
Just to cap all this, what makes one believe that the Allroad would do better at an offroad course than the XC? So far, two comparisons that I have read show that the XC is as capable or more than the VW (Volvo Wannabe), er Audi...
Yannis
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Carl
on
Tue Feb 13 05:59 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Eric G. wrote:
>The car's a dog to get moving.
YUP
>I think many owners would like to see is a "pepped" version of the XC,
If I ever hear "XC-R", "XC T5" or whatever the badge name, you can be sure I'd trade my car anyday.
Allroad
>At the price the vehicle sells, I'd like to be given engine options.. at least get over the 200HP mark.
Allroad
>There's always the aftermarket to help, however I'd feel more comfortable when it is prepped from the factory.
Allroad.
Please remember you guys are comparing XC vs. Allroad...not BMW, McLaren, or whatever. But since you want to play outside of the ballpark, look to the LeMans circuit and kiss the tailpipe of that Audi, oops VW.
I own neither Volvo nor Audi. I am however in the position of deciding which to buy, now not later. Price is not a factor. I like both. But if 90% of my driving is going to be city and freeway, Allroad seems to be in the lead. And no, niche is fine, I hate to be driving a vehicle that everyone else has. Waiting for the great hope of a XC-r is rather remote and waiting for V70rAWD (not a true comparison to the Allroad) is not acceptable in my situation.
Audi boards have praised/defended their Allroad admirably. I would only expect the same from Volvo forum. In my mind my decision has been made. I'm not here to bash, I'm here to be swayed... if it can be done.
Sway me.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Russell D. Ollie Sr.
on
Thu Feb 15 08:49 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
> Sway me.
Hmmm...seems like a reasonable request to me. Let me try.
First, off, if both of these cars cost the same I would go for the Audi (although I would miss having a real navigation system). However, here in the real world, there is a LARGE disparity in prices between these two cars. The XC can be had for just over $32k delivered through the European Delivery program (and that includes airfare, first night hotel charge, euro insurance, etc.) http://www.volvocars.com/overseas_new/
The Allroad on the other hand will cost you at least $12k more based on the lowest price you will find in an Audi dealership. If you custom order a 'stripper' you could get a slightly cheaper price (and it should be noted that the Audi Allroad does include more options standard).
Here's the business case: if you are mostly interested in performance then you have no real reason to be looking at wagons (except the RS4). For less money than the Allroad you can have great cars like the Audi S4, new M3 (about the same price), etc. You mentioned that you would be heading up to the hills for a real driving experience. Well, all reviews I've seen indicated the XC is a better off road machine and with the Allroad at it's highest clearance setting the XC is markedly better in handling. Further, the Allroad is a bit of a pig weighing more than 500 pounds more than the XC and gets worse gas mileage as well (I'd much rather be in the XC trying an accident avoidance maneuver than the Allroad). That might not be so bad except for the fact that the XC has slightly more cargo and head room.
If you are really interested in off-road capabilities you're not going to put either of these CARS through their paces often unless you have a lot of discretionary cash to throw around to put them back together. The real off-road work should be left to Jeeps, Range Rovers, etc. Neither of these highly complex cars should be trusted to last long while being jostled around in the wild.
So that brings us back to the question at hand. Why do you want a car like the Allroad (again, I like it a lot)? Are you mostly interested in the performance, off-road capabilities, and or cargo room? If you are mostly interested in performance, you should look at cars like the V70 T5 5-speed with DSTC. If off-road capabilities are most important I would highly recommend skipping the wagons. If cargo room is most important...
However, I suspect your answer is that you are looking for the best blend of all three. In this case I think the Allroad is a good candidate but so is the Acura MDX, Volvo XC, Volvo V70 T5, Saab Aero wagon, etc. when you consider than none of these vehicles is a dedicated off-road machine.
Well that's my best effort. If you get the Allroad you still get a great car that really does sit in a category by its own (at least based on price) that will be more exclusive than the others I mentioned.
Good luck.
Thanks.
-rdo
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Eric G.
on
Tue Feb 13 08:28 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Carl,
Can you sway me by justifying the extra 10K$ besides quattro (gas thirsty), an additional piston (woohoo) and a second turbo (sounds expensive in the long-run eh?) Family-wise, the XC does everything the Allroad could provide us.. and even more if we jump on the safety issue.. I save the 10K$ for the future of my kids. I would hate to see it depreciate in one year.. Glad for you if you can throw that much money out the windows, but personnally I don't see any advantage.
If you're here to be swayed, you wouldn't have a decision in mind dude. It must be that you have a great interest in the new XC design and still, like me, can't justify the additional expense of an Allroad (oh, personally, I still can't swallow the Allroad look yet.. it just doesn't look like an Audi.. sorry!) or you have waaay too much spare time in front of you bud. I'm not interested to waste my time on the Audi boards since I'm just not interested in Audis period (How's their service btw?). There's no point in starting a "who's the best" for that matter. That is all speaking from my own personal taste and logical move. The specs and reviews and speaking from themselves out there, check it out!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Carl
on
Tue Feb 13 09:11 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Thank you Eric G. for your very emotional and spirited opinion.
sway (sw)
v. swayed, sway·ing, sways.
To incline toward change, as in opinion or feeling.
Sorry, no kids. But if you are counting your pennies, it's more like a $5k not a $10k diff for similarly equipped autos. But if I may reiterate again, cost not being a factor between these, and only these 2 vehicles.
"Gas mileage for the two cars was very close, with a slight advantage going to Volvo. The XC is rated at 17mpg city and 22mpg highway. The allroad slots in just below with 15mpg city and 21mpg highway." Non-event. Too close to call. Let's not get into counting the chads.
>(oh, personally, I still can't swallow the Allroad look yet..
> it just doesn't look like an Audi.. sorry!)
OK, and I suppose P26 looks like a classic Volvo?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Eric G.
on
Tue Feb 13 09:55 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
You're really convincing, gosh I gotta trade in for an Audi niche ASAP! You gotta be kidding.. Neither wagons are REAL DRIVING EXPERIENCE.. got it?? They are WAGONS?!?? go back to your Audi board and spread the word!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Carl
on
Tue Feb 13 11:22 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Ford Country Squire's were wagons.
I like to think of the Allroad/XC's as performance multitasking vehicles.
Hey... don't get me wrong, XC only lacks the get up and go. Looks obviously is in the eye of the beholder. Service is dependant on your local dealer, I am fortunate to have both Volvo & Audi establishment with fine service departments.
The Biturbo in combination with a five-valve V6-engine is a further world innovation from the Audi braintank. It has enormous pulling power and maximum torque in the 1,850 to 3,600 min-1 speed range which the LPT lacks. This therefor eliminates the turbo-gap.
You see, by introducing two small turbochargers instead of one large one, Audi has cheated the moment of inertia. Shortened exhaust distances and a charge cooling system for each cylinder block enable the engine to build up enormous power.
Warranties match up head to head and should offer peace of mind in regard to my worse Biturbo nightmare.
So please, if anyone has some interesting data that I can digest to help in my decision(rather than fire and anger), I am open ears. This is of course coming from someone who spends +90% of the time on the pavement and one who will not be jeopordizing his financial condition for another 5k, umm 10k.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Martin L
on
Tue Feb 13 16:14 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Carl;
I'm really not here to per-sway-de you as I, like you, given money no object, I would go for the allroad. In my view, it's got the edge on power, the AWD is somewhat more refined if not proven over the years and that 4 level air suspension is the neatest thing the pseudo-SUV manufacturers like Audi, Volvo or Subaru have come up with lately.
But having to live with a finite amount of cash and having to make these tough decisions (kids, wife, big house, etc), the Audiworld article has made me confident that the XC is a fine alternative. It holds its own in the test, you must agree (OK!, 215 or 225 hp would be nice)!
I hope though that the XC will demonstrate before we make the final decision that it will be a reliable machine. This has been a disputable point lately but the next few months should tell the story on that.
Cheers and be easy with these Volvo fans. They are a loyal bunch!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Carl
on
Tue Feb 13 18:19 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Martin L,
Both vehicles will be put through their paces this weekend. I have appointments with both Audi & Volvo. My understanding is that both sales reps know each other(the opposing dealerships are only 10 miles away from each other). This should make for a very interesting Saturday. Once my decision is made, that will be it. Hopefully without any regrets. But as you say, time will only tell when one bases their decision on reliability.
If you never hear from Carl again, you will know which way I went. If you see me around next week, well... "I told you so is definitely in order" and probably a few other superlatives.
You have a good board, though at times rather emotional. I like intelligent and spirited exchanges, it gets to the core of what one really feels & thinks... it makes us all better consumers. That is really the bottom line. Good luck to you all!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Eric G.
on
Wed Feb 14 02:55 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Good luck with your choice, either way, you'd get a fantastic vehicle. As I said, it comes down to your personal preference and needs with such comparable cars.. like I was trying to defend my points in having the XC over any other possible wagon/SUV. I was kinda short in $$ with a big house and kids, wanted a car-like ride, all-wheel traction, plenty of cargo room and last but not least, safety. Yup, safety since I got out (badly injured though) of an accident 2 years ago in a Honda Civic. Totalled, engine on fire.. long story. My decision was made since then and the Volvo came out first (yeah, the Allroad wasn't there yet). I will never look back at my decision and hopefully I will never have to experience the safety components. For piece of mind, I know I'm driving a brick.
The lease on my XC is ending in two years from now and I'm not sure if I'd be able to spend the extra 10K$ on an Allroad (that's Canadian monopoly money btw, so we don't get confused again) so my choice so far will be to buy the XC and cross my fingers asking for it to last at least 15 years. My only complain with the XC is the engine power which can be rectified with a chip and exhaust. I'll be a happy guy when that moment shows up!
Again, good luck with your test driving and please come back and tell us which one you have in order!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Martin L
on
Wed Feb 14 14:55 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Carl;
I echo Eric's request for you to get back to us after your weekend test drive experience and tell us not only about the car you made a decision on but perhaps share with us your buying experience. We would certainly appreciate it!
Cheers!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Linda
on
Wed Feb 14 07:21 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I wonder, am I the only woman on this board and what kind of driving experiences do people want here???? We own a BMW 328 convertible and the 2001 XC. We take frequent and long drives on both I5 (straight through from LA to SF) and 395 along the spine of the Sierras from LA to Tahoe. I have now driven both cars several times on these long drives. I have had both cars up to 100 mph and my choice hands down is the XC. It handled better, got up to speed better and felt more 'secure' on the road. I thought I would never give up my love for manual transmissions and sporty cars but illness forced another lifestyle on me. Little did I know that the XC would rise to the occasion. Of course I can only get away with that kind of speed while my husband is sleeping!!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Martin L
on
Wed Feb 14 14:47 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Way to go Linda! I declare you one of the boys!
Do you really mean it that the XC with 8.2 in ground clearance is better than a mighty Bimmer!?? Oh! Sacrilege!
... but thanks for sharing that with us and let's hope not too many Volvo salespersons (gender sensitive) get to view this testimony. It might bode badly on the asking price when I decide to pick one of them bimmer beaters.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
