According to Autospies' spies, Volvo NA is shipping C30s "back to Sweden." Yes, well, the C1-based hatch is assembled in Ghent, Belgium. In any case, the C30 seems to be selling poorly; Volvo's dropped C30 prices in Australia and Old Blighty. This might have something to do with a $22k base price for what is, in essence, a tarted-up Focus. Though the C30 offers more cargo space than, say, a MINI Cooper, the C30's practicality is hurt by its awkward hatch shape. And then there's the Swede's EPA 20/28 mpg via a turbo I-5. The poisoned cherry on top: the Volvo brand is in the weeds, facing a date with Ford's corporate strimmer. Add it all up and the C30 boomerang story seems plausible. Throw a little anecdotal evidence into the mix (how many C30s have you seen on the road lately?) and well… if Volvo can't sell its smallest, most efficient car, what does that say about its odds of survival?
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
It always disappointed me that this car never took off. It’s different, and it’s cool, and the price genuinely is great at $22,000. Not to mention, the T5 is way faster off the line than my GTI is. Even if the chassis can’t compare.
Would’ve been a good time to give it a 2.0 or 2.3L engine. Making a niche engine (I5 turbo) the only engine available just guarantees a niche car.
I’ve seen one so far, filling up at a station.
At first, I thought it was an Astra.
And I’ve never figured out this thing with I5s. What is it, endemic to V-named automakers:-)?
I assume a software hack could make the I5 engine quite a powerhouse, but between vibration, relaxed suspension, floppy stick-shift or slushy slushbox, lack of AWD option, and lack of the R package, I think I’d rather go with the Audi A3.
I’ve seen exactly 1 of these on the road and was quite impressed by its appearance.
It’s good looking, but it’s just not very good. It’s also very, very expensive–at least in Canada.
I looked at it, and I could in no way justify it over a Cooper S, let alone an Acura CSX/Civic Si, MazdaSpeed3, GTI or WRX, of which it is either more expensive than, or much slower than.
It’s the same problem with all of Volvo’s models: too expensive, not good enough, no “gotta have it” feature. The same is afflicting Saab and, to a lesser degree, Acura and VW.
Oh, that’s interesting: they only sell the turbo in the States. Up here in Canada, we also have the non-turbo 5-cylinder. I still haven’t seen too many around, but then again, the nearest Volvo dealer is 200+ kilometres away, so that’s probably not too surprising.
I drove it. I liked it. Got a CPO BMW 325i instead which has a ton more room, gets better MPG (31 on the freeway if I don’t drive like a hoon).
I see then on occasion around Los Angeles. Usually, I think “Wow, someone bought one.”
# andyinsdca Says:
July 23rd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
I drove it. I liked it. Got a CPO BMW 325i instead which has a ton more room, gets better MPG (31 on the freeway if I don’t drive like a hoon).
That’s surprising to hear. The 325i, at least in sedan form, doesn’t have a lot of interior space to begin with.
It’s a very interesting looking car and I’m really not normally attracted to Volvo designs. I especially like the way they desgned the rear of the car. The all glass hatch is very cool.
The let down is only being offered the turbo I-5 motor. I’d prefer a NA I-5 or a decent I-4. I’d be happy with 50 less HP but I’d expect the price to be a little lower as well. For the price of the C30 I can buy a MINI Cooper that gets really good mileage and is a hoot to drive.
It’s the only Volvo that ever caught my attention. I liked it, but doubt I would ever buy one anyway. I’d take a Cooper S or maybe a GTI DSG over it if I wanted something small and quick.
The comments here surprise me a bit. I don’t know why the car isn’t selling (I suspect nobody even knows about it….when was the last time you saw any advertising for this car or any of the other Volvos?), but I for one am down to this and the Cooper S as my choices for next new car.
There is the GTI. But something about it just doesn’t work for me. I can’t get comfy, all the controls/pedals just don’t work for me. So I said no to that one. Just didn’t like it.
I drive pretty much all freeway from city to burbs. 70 miles a day. Sometimes travel to Indiana for work….on the freeway also. Don’t really get out there flying around corners and such, but I do like my cars to have some sport and be tidy in size. I don’t want a 4 door (so no A3…though more expensive too, no Mazdaspeed3…4 doors and a little too boy-racer for me, no Civic Si, Accord coupe too expensive with manual, don’t really care for Altima coupe, WRX is 4 door and costs WAY WAY too much (insurance!!), so there really aren’t a lot of choices out there).
Anyway, the Cooper S is the real hoot. Great MPG, perfect pedal placement, pretty solid shifter, easy to park in Chicago and insanely high resale value. 3 years of maintenance is another plus. Downsides are the fairly stiff ride and noise, the price for the features, the horrid stereo system, the closest dealer is 45 minutes from both my home and my office, as well as room, obviously.
Which is why I think I really like the C30. Its still handles quite well, but it has better seats, better ride (it is SO quiet and absorbs bumps and potholes far better than a MINI), super stereo, more room (back seat is actually comfy for me at 6 feet), is nice and torquey and really I found was a great blend of firm and sport when you want it but with a relaxation when at cruise on the highway that I just haven’t found in anything in the price range. Volvo dealers are close as well. I also can get supplier pricing on the car vs full MSRP on the MINI. Downsides are basically everything opposite what the MINI does well: the long clutch and rubbery shifter (though I say no worse than the GTI), lower MPG, and what appears to be pretty poor resale value.
While the MINI is the one that makes me really smile most when on a 20 minute test drive, the Volvo is the one I found myself growing to like more the more time I spent inside it. It is a car I see as being able to do what I need a car to do for the next 5+ years while still giving me a good dose of fun when I do wanna fly around a corner or down an on-ramp. Really, I think this would be the one I’d choose but for ownership costs. If I can drive a MINI 5 years and lose 5K in depreciation vs probably 10K or more on the Volvo (not to mention MPG….though I haven’t checked insurance on the Volvo yet…might offset a bit), its a pretty compelling argument in favor of the MINI. On the other hand, I tend to keep my cars a very long time, and 5-6-7 years of living with a car make it important you buy what you want, not necessarily what feels best to your wallet….if you can afford it.
But this news doesn’t surprise me. Volvo can’t be making much if any money at 23K with the USD/EUR exchange rate. Production is limited. If other countries want the car they prob make more money overseas as well, so why keep sending cars to the US and put rebates and financing on cars you make no money on? Would also make sense as I think the only incentives are something like 5.9% interest or $750 cash back. You’d expect something better if a car wasn’t selling well.
Really, I do like the car a lot. Go drive one. I just suspect it is due to lack of knowing this car is out there (nobody would expect at 23K Volvo if you asked the average Joe….they think they’re much more expensive). And I suspect Volvo doesn’t advertise it because they don’t make any money when they sell one. They’d RATHER be able to sell it overseas than in the US.
So there ya go :)
This car, in turbo I5 trim, is 34K in Canada. Add the R-Design package and you’ve exceeded 38K. Add Navi, an automatic and/or the better stereo and you’ll kiss 40K. Add all three and you’ve broken 45K, and this is after Volvo adjusted prices due to the value of the dollar–it used to be much, much worse.
That’s about what you pay for a base Acura TL. Even the Mercedes B-Class is more cost effective. Ouch.
I’m all for the premium small cars, but that’s nuts.
You know, I was just thinking about the C30 yesterday when I drove by the local Volvo dealer (didn’t see any in the lot). Before it came out it looked and sounded cool. But once I saw more it just looked unbalanced somehow – too much like a bigger sedan front end stuck onto a shrunken hatchback rear end. I guess I would buy a regular Volvo sedan before I would get this (both aren’t too likely).
Seen 01 last year in the suburbs of Vancouver BC. 60+ y/o white male driving.
My wife saw one on the road, liked what she saw, and we headed to the Volvo dealer to investigate. It’s all good on the outside, in fact more than good in Cosmic White, which isn’t really white but maybe really cosmic, and comes with some very cool root beer colored trim.
Putting aside appearances, the car underwhelms. The interior’s tight and the ambiance is just a shade past econo-box. Start it up and you find yourself driving… a Volvo. Very front wheel drive, turbo-laggy and not much fun. You know, like a Volvo.
Then there’s the gas mileage, which is a total disconnect with this class of car. We’re talking 19 mpg city (with auto.) for a Corolla sized vehicle. Um, no.
Finally, there’s price. The cars on the lot aren’t $23K, they’re closer to $33K. Out local dealer had one stripper, and half a dozen others priced north of $30. Which is easy to do ’cause the options come in a Porsche like rush, and for a number of them, the customer is privileged to pay a $300 “custom build” charge. You know, for crazy ass shut the assembly line down items like Xenon headlights. Um, no again.
Had the car been even marginally in the ballpark we might have gone for it, since our real objective was the two free tickets to Sweden under Volvo’s outstanding overseas delivery plan. But it wasn’t, and it looks like it will be the C30, not us, making the trip back to Scandinavia.
Gorgeous car.
However, it completely missed the audience. Hatches are bought to be very practical and efficient, or very fun to drive. Both types of buyers are looking for VALUE. Cheap to own hauler, or cheap to own performance car, or both in one (my attraction to hatches anyway).
With poor gas mileage and a high price, neither buyer finds that value in the car. Add to that the mediocre performance and feel and you are left wondering why you should buy one.
Frankly, when I heard about the gas mileage I thought they put to much power in it. Then I saw the performance numbers and wondered how they blew it so bad. I was then at least hoping for some Miata like praise of it’s driving characteristics in spite of mediocre numbers, but that didn’t come either.
I decided that the engine must simply be a piece of crap. I certainly have no other reason to disrespect the drivetrain, but then, I don’t need one. It’s my money. They keep the car.
Likely, they will all just say that hatches don’t sell in the US, and fail to look at the obvious faults of their product.
I have MINI S, and I really like the C30 in general. Someone in our building has a T5.
For me, the matte black cheap looking rear bumper/fascia spoils the whole deal. If Volvo is so cost conscious on something like that, it makes you wonder what they have done in places you can’t see. And of course the matte black will look awful in about six weeks.
I have seen photos from Europe in which the bumper is color matched and it makes the car look much more attractive.
If it was $20k, could crack 30mpg highway, and if I was more sure of the reliability, I’d buy one.
And if Volvo can’t sell its smallest, most efficient car on the market, what does that say about its odds?
The base V50 is a lot more practical and gets the same mileage, so that would have to be considered the most “efficient” Volvo in this market despite its larger size.
One would think that Volvo planned to increase the engine choices for the C30 here over time. They should have sent the secretary’s version over first if they weren’t prepared to federalize several configurations from the gitgo. And the hot version coming after it should have been an “R” model. It would have sold in the same numbers as the current version, if not better, and no one would have thought twice about the low volumes for the R. As it is the thing is just too thirsty and expensive for the masses, especially when compared to the Prius for basically the same money.
Among the traditional Volvo demographic Prius is the new Volvo, so the comparison between the C30 and the Prius is more valid than Volvo would care to admit.
I own a 1972 Volvo 1800ES which I enjoy very much, but in it’s day the thing sold poorly because it was overpriced for a 4 cylinder little beast. Several years ago I went to a Volvo Club of America event where one of the guest speakers was from Volvo NA. We were treated to a sneak peek at the upcoming C30 and a discussion of how to position it. I argued for offering base versions priced just several $k above a Focus or Civic as a way to introduce people to Volvo. They were having none of it and insisted on bringing in heavily optioned versions with sporting pretensions. I still think I was right.
Offer a 4 cylinder manual transmission version with all the basics, but no leather or sunroof for around $19,500 and you would have a vehicle only $3k above the top of the line Focus coupe and $5k above the base Focus. price. If Volvo can’t put a compelling version of the Focus platform together for a selling price 40% greater than a base Focus then they need to give up.
P.S. Why did those fools ever close Halifax?
Volvo is still trying to convince people an I-5 from the early nineties is a modern engine. Seriously, the C2 platform Volvos should have all had Mazda tuned MZR four cylinders, so Volvo could be what it really is, Luxury Mazda.
Sat in it, played around in it. Justin, you SAY 22k, but there are like no base C30s. They all have so many packages and options on them. Norm is much more. I’d rather have a GTI if I wanted a sexy hatch or if it had to be a Volvo, a used 2007 S80 for 27k.
The GTI is much more manlier, too!
I bought a V50 only because there was no Jetta wagon in the US last year and because I got it 7K off sticker price. I love the car. But if I were buying a hatch…no, I wouldn’t buy a C30 for many of the reasons cited in other comments (price/MPG/practicality). It seems like a packaging problem more than anything. Wrong engine, wrong price point. A nice 2 liter 4 cyl turbo and 25K price tag and it would be a contender.
I’m surprised no one mentioned one of the major drawbacks, IMHO. Volvo tried to sell this car as infinitely customizeable a la the Mini. Once you got this car decently outfitted, the car is at least $30k. I think this pricing strategy doomed the car.
@billh:
And I’ve never figured out this thing with I5s. What is it, endemic to V-named automakers:-)?
“V-named,” as in Vhevrolet and VMC (optional in Colorado/Canyon), Vummer (H3), Vaudi (5000/100), Vercedes (300D W115/123) and Vacura (Vigor)? ;)
Just kidding, of course…I’m sure I missed some others, but they’re not as uncommon as some think. I’m no engineer by any stretch, but some perceive the I5 as a compromise between the efficiency of an I4 and some of the smoothness of an I6. Credit that last advantage to an overlap in power strokes, which doesn’t exist with a four.
Volvo should be a boxy sedan or wagon with an appearance of obsessive safety. Kind of like a Subaru Forester
People seem to either love or hate I5s. I personally think they’re wonderfully growly.
.
Volvo sells offers nine models in Canada including the C-30. I have yet to see one of the latter on the road. Not good!
We cross shopped the C30 against a base Mini. The poor gas mileage plus the base model of the C30 started at $23K left us cold. We got the options on the base Mini for $22K (upgraded seats and leather). Needless to say the Mini is nice and my wife lets me drive it sometimes. I got her Volvo S60 so it isn’t like we don’t like Volvo.
I bought a C30 once I graduated from college and started my job, and it is a fantastic little car. The lack of turbo lag and practically flat torque curve make it a very fun car to drive, and it is incredibly comfortable on my long commute. Plus, to everyone who says it is too expensive, you can easily talk the dealer down a few thousand. But I think they would have done better if Volvo had offered smaller engines, instead of just the T5.
I attempted to buy a Volvo C30 and was told by the dealer he had no interest in trying to sell it since his margins were too low and the car was a pain to obtain.
Apparently there is a slew of configuration options and often resulted in unhappy customers who could not preview their options without first ordering them. Which meant the customers were unhappy once they actually took possession of their car.
In reality I think car dealers are annoying beyond belief and I’d just hope these crappy dealers just pack up and retreat back to wherever it is in the center of the Earth that they come from.
I bought a Jazz Blue 20th Anniversary GTI back in 2003 for ~$23K. Excellent car. Looks like the R32, but without the bigger motor and AWD.
Lots of power from the 1.8T, nice ride given the lowered suspension, sweet Monsoon stereo, cloth Recaro seats, aluminum trim items, 18″ wheels, I could go on.
All the things I would modify myself on the standard GTI have already been done by the factory.
It’s probably the first car that I’ve owned that I haven’t wanted to tweak myself.
I drove the Cooper S before I bought the GTI.
I’ve always loved the exterior styling of the Mini, but was underwhelmed with the interior ergonomics. Unnecessarily retro and plastic-like for me.
The overall performance was quite good, but not great.
At the time, for the price, the 20th AE GTI was hard to beat.
Only see women driving them in the UK – usually on the school run or shopping – not many though
How does it make sense to ship American-spec C30s with the least popular engine back to Europe?
“Wild Ass Rumor” is a gross understatement.
As a I4 Turbo Volvo owner, they need to drop the I5 and bring some great I4 engines to complement the I6 range.
I just see no reason to have an I5 as it doesn’t give the power of a 6 or efficiency of a 4…it did in 1992 but not anymore.
This car would be the perfect little commuter and highway cruiser with a DISI 2.0l I4 from Mazda/Ford, or at least the MX5’s 2.0l I4 (as opposed to the Mazda3 and Focus version).
We have that I5 turbo engine in a V50, and I cannot imagine why it’s so incredibly fuel-inefficient. Maybe it is because, as a previous poster said, it’s an engine designed in the early ’90s. In truly gentle rural driving–I’m old enough that I no longer particularly enjoy even getting into the turbo part of the throttle unless I have to–I can’t get better than 19 mpg. True, the car has awd, but I keep the tires at max pressure and take off the kayak rack unless I’m actually using it. Nor is there any extraneous cargo in the back.
That is one lousy engine, fuel-wise.
Wanted to add/ask one other item….
Why does the C30 get blasted for poor fuel economy (19/28, 23 combined) while the GTI gets 20/29, 24 combined and people say they’ll buy it?
Is 1mpg the difference between acceptable and poor fuel economy???
The biggest problem with the C30 is that it promises so much more than it actually delivers. Now you can legitimately level that accusation at a whole bunch of cars, but the C30 I regard as a particular disappointment for a few reasons.
* In the original press pics, I loved the style. Really. Thought it was terrific. But in the metal, I find it less so. It’s not ugly, but somehow it just loses the flair and rakishness that it has in photos.
* Space efficiency is a joke, especially in the rear. I cannot comprehend how something with a wheelbase that is basically the longest going in the European C-segment can possibly be that cramped. Although in fairness, apart from this, I like the interior style.
* The mechanical package, as mentioned above, is off-the-pace and delivers woeful efficiency. And whilst the chassis is OK, it’s certainly not best-in-class.
The optimistic pricing and limited range are merely the final nail in the coffin. This car would sell, even at inflated prices, if it was really good. But it’s simply not good enough to command that sort of premium. Which, for mine, is a real pity.
Stephan, sounds like you don’t get much better mileage than my old 760 Turbo! Of course, it has less power (~170hp/185 lb-ft) and probably about the same weight (~3000 lbs). And that car does move rather well for it’s age.
I’ve actually considered a V50 AWD for the Mazda3 wagon’s replacement. But, I might as well jump to a last-gen XC70 with about the same economy from the similiar drivetrain. Or just breakdown and get an Outback…I do live in Idaho.
I think this is the longest, most intense C30 discussion I have ever seen!
As a fan of the C30 (but not a buyer) I’m happy to see that. What I think I’m hearing from most people is that in the segment they are competing in, the C30 should be more economical to drive. Also, Volvo’s “up market” trend is working against them when they try to do a fun & stylish small car.
It is expensive and it gets bad mileage. Volvo has not had the luxury to spend a lot of money on powertrain development and thus their entire lineup of vehicles suffers from terrible fuel economy. It’s just particularly glaring on this small car.
All in all, I think Volvo had the right idea when they envisioned this car. Too bad they weren’t able to bring a small diesel engine with it to give it the full effect they probably intended.
How about a 5 door C30, price it under $20k & offer a clean diesel?
Jerome,
First, the GTI is an iconic vehicle. Iconic vehicles can often defy logic. Second, without looking it up, I believe the GTI gets better performance.
Overall, the C30 needed to come to the game with a much better solution in order to get people to swap. This is something the 2.8 can’t get their heads around. It took the japanese years of trying to find success, and they were helped by fuel prices that made compacts a better value. Instead of resting on their compacts, they then went to work to try to win over other segments.
OTOH, the 2.8 got really successful building SUV’s so the just kept at it. They didn’t put enough effort into taking back other segments. Instead, they produced also rans.
When you enter a segment. You won’t succeed until you offer a significantly better product. That is what gets folks to switch.
Volvo needs better engines in this car, badly. It will likely succeed if they offer an efficient one, and a sporty one instead of the kinda efficient and kinda sporty one they have now. Or, they could just make it lighter. And, they better make it cheaper.
Subi,
That would be the wagon with a diesel would it not?
The local Volvo dealer never had any in stock. When I was looking to putchase a car this was in the top 5. The next closest dealer (100 miles) had just one.
My mom and dad bought Volvos in the late 80’s and early nineties back when Volvo was not overpriced. They were tough and reliable! But they had some nice creature comforts.
But once Volvo started to compete with the BMW’s and Mecedes’s…well let’s just say they should have stayed in their segment.
They’re the safety car that people knew as reliable. There is always a segment of people ready for cars like that. Trying to compete in the luxury market was a definite no-no for them.
Volvo’s were practical. Not luxury boxes!
My friend bought a s60 a 2 years ago and yes it was nice but not worth the 35 grand he paid. Volvo should get back to moderately priced practical safe cars. That’s their heritage!
Still haven’t seen any response here as to why the 19/28 rating of the Volvo equals horrid fuel economy while 20/29 of a GTI is not.
I’m really curious. Seriously. 19/28 does not scream gas guzzler to me here, and is within spitting distance of the GTI, and beats the WRX and Mazdaspeed 3 by several MPG. I don’t really hear people complain about the 26mpg the MS3 is rated, though the 24mpg from the WRX does get complaints. As it should.
Meanwhile the C30 makes more horsepower than the WRX and gets 4mpg better doing it.
Gas guzzler??? If that’s the definition, the only one NOT a gas guzzler would be the Mini.
Jerome, the reason could be that those of us who have had actual ownership experience with the I5 turbo know that 19/28 bears little relationship with reality. That is the most inefficient engine I’ve ever owned. I’m fortunate to get 19 mpg not in “city” driving but in virtually traffic-free, one-red-light-a-day, extremely conservative rural driving. I suspect with a heavy foot I could easily get it down to 14 or 15 mpg. And when I say rural, I don’t mean suburban.
GTI = obvious Rabbit variant
MS3 = obvious Mazda3 variant
WRX = obvious Impreza variant
C30 = C30, period
See where I’m going with this? The other cars you mention can get away with selling in small numbers because they are based on bread and butter cars. They don’t need to be brisk sellers to make money for their creators. They are basically halo variants. Volvo doesn’t play that game. That’s why the C30 is judged by different standards. It’s playing a different game (and losing at it).
maybe the next ‘cult car’ like the P-1800 hatchback or VW Corrado!
It does look great!
Apparently this is totally untrue. In fact, most friends I have who work at Volvo dealers say the real problem is Volvo isn’t sending enough C30’s over because they don’t make money selling them. Same for why they don’t advertise them.
I’m also curious why the engine keeps getting bashed for having “poor” fuel economy and bad performance. It’s no gem, but 19/28 is pretty decent for that performance.
Hmmmm….I do appreciate the response regarding MPG. I will need to investigate real world economy more closely. I drive about 65 miles a day. If real world mpg on a C30 is closer to the low 20’s versus maybe 30mpg real world on the Mini, that adds up to a big difference in fuel cost over 20,000/year or so.
I will say I’ve heard a lot of stories about guys who beat the snot out of their Cooper S’s constantly and still hit about 28-29mpg in em….
If you compare the performance to the economy competition it looks great.
If you compare the economy to the performance competition it looks great.
However, I don’t think it works the other way. I will give it best looking award, and agree it is more comfortable than some of the others.
If you compare the performance to the economy competition it looks great.
If you compare the economy to the performance competition it looks great.
In other words, it’s neither fish nor foul. That makes it a very interesting potential acquisition for the right buyer – all twelve of them.
I might well be one of the twelve, but a lot of good that does Volvo.
Build for the masses, then squeeze the car nuts. Or something.