It seems an odd choice to say three turbochargers in an article that references superchargers when it reads as an electric supercharger plus sequential turbos.<p>Personally, I'd much rather see advancement / acceptance of self-drivers even if limited to highways than incremental improvements to traditional cars.<p>The main, perhaps only reason I really care about response and acceleration is the generally selfish, adversarial behavior of human drivers.<p>The contrast between the same daily drive in a 4-cyl compact and torquey V8 is stark. In the former, every lane change has to come with permission - that drivers are often unwilling to give. In the latter, I'm in complete control.<p>I'd much rather the third possibility - to know we're all on autopilot gliding along at a safe, predictable rate to our destinations.
I own two Volvos and I can tell you that with the new insanely complicated engines no mechanic will touch the car. You will be stuck servicing it at Volvo dealership at lawyers hourly rates. And this will be aggravated by the fact that with more moving parts the car will break more often. Plus the cost of the new engine is much higher. The base price of the 2016 XC90 with the new engine is well above what the previous model cost. The fuel efficiency savings are unlikely to come close to offsetting the increased cost of ownership.<p>It seems that Volvo adopted the "differentiation" strategy of some hardware manufacturers - needlessly boosting the specs which looks good on paper but doesn't do squat for the end user.<p>In my opinion it's move in the wrong direction for Volvo that used be known for it's simplicity.
Volvo isn't the only one. One of the new Ford Mustangs is running a 2.3L turbo 4-cyl. Some Mustang fans complain because they like that classic V8 rumble but I don't think the people buying Volvos are too worried about showing off at the each red light.
My current ride is a 1992 Volvo 740 Wagon. It only has 12 volts, 1 turbo, and 192,000 miles. In another twenty years from now maybe I'll upgrade to one of these fancy 3 turbo, 24 volts cars, but only if my current Volvo has stopped running ;)
I have to admit that it comes close to Volvo's best achievement today. But not quite. I've managed to cram a 2m (6.6 ft) ladder into my 15 years old S40. Which makes me even more fond of it than ever before.<p>It has no touch screens - just terrific hardware controls. No fancy electronics, manual transmission, a 2.0l petrol engine without turbos (not even one). All this makes me believe that this incredibly sleek and calm vehicle has its best days ahead of it! I got a bit carried away, still, that durability and utility of these older Volvos... There is something refined about them even when carrying ladders around.
I'm not sure offhand how well this will work, but it is good to see real innovation in car engines, in a time when most manufacturers seem content to punch out the same stuff with a few percent more efficiency.
Kawasaki has their 300hp turbo 4 cylinder coming too. Super similar <a href="http://www.kawasaki.com/Products/2015-Ninja-H2R" rel="nofollow">http://www.kawasaki.com/Products/2015-Ninja-H2R</a>
Having driven a Tesla, IMO if this engine still burns fossil fuels, it has no future (edit, folks, where "future" is the "5 to 10 years" noted in this article). Tesla should be proving that the combustion engine [will within the next 5-10 years, note this article is titled "Volvo <i>bets its future</i>"] no longer have a legitimate reason to exist for passenger cars.