Find Reviews by Make:
17 Comments on “S60 Concept: The Car That Won’t Save Volvo...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
suicide doors?
If Volvo is to survive it needs to go back to boxy. A curvaceous Volvo is and has always been against the order of things.
How will this not save Volvo?
I disagree, Jimal. The C30 is a wonderfully attractive car and has a nice Volvo quirkiness to it. The problem with it for me, and I assume most Americans, is the price. We’re not comfortable with the idea of paying more for smaller cars. Volvo’s selling point used to be safety, but now most manufacturers are right up there with them in the safety ratings. They’re not ultimate driving machines like BMW or prestigious nameplates like Mercedes or pillowy-la-z-boys like Lexus or the poor man’s BMW like Infiniti. They don’t have any reason to stand out from the crowd, and the unfavorable Euro-Dollar exchange rate doesn’t help the situation.
Orangutan: Euro-Dollar exchange rate? You might want to look up what Sweden’s currency actually is. This doesn’t make Volvos any more affordable, I’ll give you that.
@Jimal
Volvo Amazon?
444/445?
Seriously, Volvo made very curvy cars before the boxes.
kovachian: The Krona would be relevant if the C30 were built in Sweden. Alas, it’s built in (pardon the language) Belgium.
The Krona is relevant because Volvo is headquartered in Sweden and this concerns Volvo’s entire range, not just the C30. Not a very important detail of course, I’m just nit-picky.
ANYWAYS…..
I still fail to see how Volvo is doomed. Believe it or not, I still see some brand cache in Volvo and dammit they make some good-looking cars! Am I supposed to assume that the S60 wont at least play a small part in helping Volvo? Just the mere fact that they’re not an American brand means they have a good shot.
@Orangutan
You kinda proved my point. Volvo has lost what made them unique. When everyone was making gumdrops in the 80’s, Volvo was making peanut brittle. Tasty peanut brittle.
@Mirko Reinhardt,
They also made two generations of P1800’s, but the boxes (140/240/260/740/940) are what Volvo was built upon. Once they went FWD and tried to fit in, Volvo lost the quirkiness that made Volvo Volvo.
Disclaimer: I drive an ’85 240 wagon I picked up in November as a winter beater, but I might keep it longer. It just rocks.
Bring back the 244.
In my opinion, the 240 is not some kind of classic car design. Granted, it had a certain charm or cache in the ’80s because it was different.
I owned an ’86 in college (mid ’90s). It was a solid, reliable RWD car, but nothing more. You could say the same thing about Ford’s Panther platform now.
The FWD Volvos in the ’90s were a bold step forward, and they were way ahead of the 240 in every way. And they were introduced when Volvo was still 100% Swedish, so there is no way to blame Ford or other outside influences for betraying the brand’s identity.
Volvo’s 21st century incarnations have a very stylish, distinctive design — which is coherent from the top to the bottom of their line. In terms of looks, they compare favorably with any brand in my (biased) opinion. Prices have gone up, but you get what you pay for.
If someone wants to buy an underpowered, plain-looking car reminiscent of the 240, then there are other options for less money. I think Volvo correctly decided to aim higher than that, and they have succeeded.
And there is no Volvo 9-7X or Saabaru in their line-up.
It’s funny that people think it’s so great that the 240 design didn’t change for 100 years, but now Volvo gets a bunch of s–t for being conservative with the S60 design (which is indeed a bit stale, but the new one looks like it will be worth waiting for). Better vehicles create higher expectations. Again, I think Volvo is correct to be aiming higher than every before.
In truth, no one car can save Volvo. Or GM, Ford, Chrysler, for that matter.
If things keep going as they are, the only cars Americans will be able to afford will be used.
Other than that, the S60 looks real nice and I am sure it has nice seats and brakes and decent traction.
Once Volvo sells it with a 25 percent discount, it will be more attractive still. Now, if Volvo could just ditch their current 3.2 straight six porker, and sell a nice diesel, they would be even nicer.
@CAHIBOstep
I’m not saying that they should still make the 240, but Volvo used to have a small but loyal following by making somewhat quirky cars that were safe at a time when safety still didn’t sell many cars. They sold their soul for a move upmarket (and later to Ford) and in the long run it hasn’t worked for them.
Pretty cool update on the current Volvo theme–but what’s the point exactly? Lexus does better relaxed luxury, Audi does better FWD-based sporty prestige, and BMW runs circles around Volvo in performance. It’s not so much that Volvo needs to bring back the 240-series as that it needs to bring back a distinctive identity. The C30 is the best shot it has right now, imho. Should quickly become the basis for a whole entry range that would then define the rest of the brand.
I’m clearly in the minority, but I like the styling of the current Volvo line. I think the principal problem is that Ford’s desire to push it further into “luxury” territory has driven prices beyond the point of reason.
I like the S40. I like the looks, I like the interior. The problem is that with a modest load of options, it runs well into the 30s, at which point its commonality with the Mazda3 (which shares its body shell) becomes troublesome. The S40 has a different engine (the 2.4L five), different interior, etc., but for ten grand more than a loaded 3? Nooo… Likewise, the S80 would be a fine choice if it were priced like a Maxima or an Avalon, but for $45K-ish, it doesn’t make a strong case for itself.
Of course, Volvo was having that problem in the 90s because of exchange rates and cost issues, which is part of what led to the Ford purchase in the first place. When a 9-series ended up being almost as expensive as an early LS400, there was clearly a problem. Volvo has a certain image, but badge snobbery is not its forte, despite Ford’s assumption that European = premium.
Once they went FWD and tried to fit in, Volvo lost the quirkiness that made Volvo Volvo.
No, they lost relevance in the market because they wanted to follow Audi and Lexus’ road to glory; they wanted to be a BMW/Merc competitor, when they would have been safe battling Subaru, Volkswagen and Acura for for the mid-market.
Now they’re squeezed on the low end by top-tier versions of “normal” cars like the Accord, and can’t possibly compete with the 3-Series. Saab has the same problem, so does Acura (almost). If Subaru gets arrogant, it will, too.
You can charge twice as much as an Accord EX V6 for a smaller, slower, only slightly-more-luxurious car unless you have three-pointed star on the hood. Otherwise, it’s brand suicide.
@Jimal
I think it is overly sentimental to say that Volvo sold its soul when it went to FWD.
The 240 was indeed a safe car. The solid steel cage around the passenger compartment saved many lives. But its only other safety feature was three-point seatbelts (first used by Volvo in 1959).
The FWD Volvos incorporated now ubiquitous modern safety features into one package: ABS, front and side airbags, a whiplash protection system, seat belt pre-tensioners, etc.
When Volvo REALLY sold its soul to Ford in 1999, it sold more cars than ever before — about 3.5 million in nine years. 2004 was an all-time high for Volvo with 460,000 cars sold. They have never sold less than 400,000 a year under Ford (until 2008).
In comparison, Volvo sold 2.8 million 240s — between 1975 and 1993 (18 years).
Numbers don’t tell the whole story, of course. We all have expectations for what a car should or shouldn’t be, and what its value is to us.
But I don’t see where Volvo has betrayed its identity by moving upmarket. Volvos are the best they have ever been in every way. My V50 T5 makes my old 240 seem like a Model T. And it is every bit a Volvo to me — a much better, safer one.