You didn’t think the V60 was going to save Volvo, and it hasn’t.
The job of saving Volvo in North America will be left up to the next XC90, a nameplate which accounted for 28% of Volvo USA sales in 2004, but just 9% so far this year.
The hope was that the V60 would show loyalists that Volvo is still in the wagon business, that Volvo is still Volvo. However, the owner of a one child/two dog V50 may not yet have even noticed one of the new wagons on roadways, as only 9% of the Volvos sold in the United States so far this year have been V60 wagons.
XC70 included, 17% of the Volvos sold this year have been wagons. Fortunately, that figure is up from 7% during the first eight months of 2013. But the overall Volvo free fall has continued regardless, as total eight-month volume has tumbled by nearly 5000 units, an 11% decline.
Clearly, America doesn’t possess a European-like level of fondness for wagons. S60 sedan sales are down 15% in 2014, but Volvo still sells more than four S60s for every single V60.
Before the XC60 crowded in, wagons were playing a diminished role in Volvo showrooms. From 31% in 2000, 34% in 2001, 30% in 2002, Volvo’s wagon responsibility in the U.S. fell to 24% in 2003, 22% in 2004 and 2005, 20% in 2006, 18% in 2007, and 20% in 2008. The XC60 joined the lineup in 2009, eating into the slice of the pie owned by the XC70, V70, and V50, chopping it down to just 16%. That figure perked up to 17% in 2010 then tumbled to 9% in 2011 and 8% in 2012, by which time the contributions of the V50 and V70 had ceased.
If Volvo was simply transitioning as a company away from wagons, these figures wouldn’t be concerning in the least.
Volvo was not transitioning in the U.S. market. The brand was simply crumbling. Year-over-year volume declined in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2013. Volvo’s U.S. volume fell 56% between 2004 and 2013.
It’s not as though a fleet of wagons would have completely saved the day. Other automakers sell very few copies of their wagons, too. Only 15% of the Acura TSXs sold in 2012, just 4234 units, were wagons. Audi sold 4367 A4 Allroads in the final eight months of 2012, 5386 in all of 2013, and year-over-year Allroad sales have declined 19% to just 2961 units year-to-date. Jetta SportWagen sales slid 6% to 22,534 units last year, less than one-sixth the total achieved by the Jetta sedan.
True, dealers don’t keep boatloads of wagons in their inventory, but why would they? Wagon buyers are few and far between.
The C30 and C70 have been cancelled, XC70 volume is down 3% this year, and sales of the S60, S80, XC60, and XC90 are all sliding, 15%, 3%, 13%, and 29%, respectively. Adding the V60 to Volvo’s lineup hasn’t been nearly enough to stymie the persistent declines generated by the rest of the brand’s lineup.
Not that you thought it would.
Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures.
Volvo also let their wagon models stagnate, then slowly eliminated them, so there’s that…. Also, the current V60 wagon is hardly the classic Volvo wagon, so maybe it just doesn’t appeal to Volvo wagon buyers sensibilities.
The V60 is a hatchback that has chosen to call itself a “wagon”. The cargo room is not even remotely in station-wagon territory. It’s telling that not a SINGLE spec sheet for the car even mentions cu ft. behind the rear seats. It took me a half-hour of Googling to find it; it’s 15.2 cu ft (according to another TTAC comment anyway); in comparison, a Honda fit has 16.6 cu ft.
That ain’t no wagon.
It has separate C and D pillars with a real window between them. It has a relatively vertical hatch (nothing is every going to be square again because of aerodynamics). Of every product sold today, this is definitely a wagon–just a smaller one. Being space inefficient–which it is–doesn’t cause it to cease being a wagon.
If you buy a wagon for it’s useful properties, the fact that the V60 is styled like a wagon, but with none of the benefits, is not going to convince you to buy.
I love my wagon (an ’04 VW Passat), but I’d buy a half-way decent CUV before I’d even consider this thing.
You honestly think the V60 has no benefits of a wagon? Hyperbole much?
Of course it has the usefulness of a wagon, just not to the degree of those old, boxy, fat ass wagons, and no wagon will every be boxy, fat ass like that again. But that doesn’t mean they lose all practicality. They still swallow bikes without problem; they still offer plenty of space for college kids moving their stuff. They still fit far more than any sedan.
And BTW, those CUVs have the same sloping roofs and other impracticalities, too.
Not all station wagons are a 1985 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser.
I own an A6 Avant, and I wouldn’t call it overly “boxy”. Heck, most modern, useful wagons, aren’t boxy:
In the last 10 years, I can think of many, non-boxy wagons:
*Audi A4 Avant
*Audi A6 Avant
*Audi Allroad
*VW Jetta Sportwagen
*Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable
*Dodge Magnum
*BMW 5-Series Wagon
*Mercedes E-Class Wagon
*Mercedes C-Class Wagon
*Toyota Venza
*1/2 the Volvo Lineup
*Subaru Outback
A lot of them have been useful in cargo storage.
Volvo must be inefficient with space usage???
Note that BMW made the 3-series wagon bigger and significantly squarer in the back with the F31 generation over the e91, and sales have taken off. My local dealer who only special ordered wagons previously, is now stocking them, and they are selling well despite being notably more expensive.
So the V60 is still more useful than a sedan (which I consider fairly useless) but it is not a whole lot more useful than something like a VW Golf that costs a lot less. I think bringing back the V70 would have sold a lot more cars. A lot of people, myself included, do not care for the jacked up “Volvo Outback” look of the XC70.
You are being deliberately obtuse, and a bit of an ass too. The V60 was nowhere near the V70 in space or packaging. Most Volvo fans sucked it up and went and bought Subarus instead.
Well said redav.; Thanks 4 ur comment.
This. Loved our 2012 S60 and when the lease was up we just KNEW we were going to buy a V60 to replace it, especially with the arrival of a new baby. Love the looks, love the comfort, etc. Tried to put a jogging stroller in the boot and it wouldn’t fit. No sale. Bought a new XC60 instead with the new T5 4 cylinder and have been happy with it, but still sad the wagon wouldn’t meet our needs.
In all fairness, you should plot the S40, S60, S80 and C70 on that same graph. It’ll make the problem fairly evident.
While wagons won’t save Volvo, the problem isn’t product mix; it’s that Volvo doesn’t make anything worth buying versus someone else product. It’s the same issue that sunk Saturn and Mercury and, to a lesser degree, faces Acura, Fiat, Lincoln, Jaguar and possibly Buick.
Side note: This “every marque must be full-line” is going to kill off a lot of brands by making entire lineups completely milquetoast, and in some cases it’s wholly undeserved.
But in the case of Volvo, there has to be a compelling reason to buy the car. “Safety” wasn’t a bad differentiator twenty years ago, but they’re going to have to find something else, and the pickings are slim: Toyota already grabbed “green” (honestly, Volvo and Saab could have made hay on hybrids fifteen years ago), Tesla has bagged “electric” and several marques are working on autonomous driving. Volvo needs to bring something to the table because the “Swedish Acura” isn’t working. Heck “Acura” isn’t working for Acura.
At least Acura tries to create the sense of great value (features for the money). I didn’t get that feeling at all with Volvo.
Volvo has no sense of value. They start priced just under BMW, and end up nearly parallel by the time you load one up – every single thing is an optional extra. You get more standard with a BMW.
So true about Volvo pricing… that’s why my wife’s (rare as hen’s teeth) 6-speed C30 was purchased USED. New (in ’08) they want nearly $30K for what is basically a Ford Focus/Mazda 3 with awesome seats and a stunning aluminum waterfall console. Thankfully used they are bargain since nobody buys them. Heck most people don’t even know Volvo made a VW Golf clone (turbo + hatchback).
The last few MYs of C30 are still going for stupid money, your wife should be able to do well in resale if the trend continues.
Just what you said, psar – excellent post.
Mitsubishi faces the same problem. Differentiation could save them, because competing toe-to-toe with the mainstream mfrs is a lost war.
The ‘safety’ label on Volvo is also its curse, just like an actor who becomes typecast.
Mitsu would also need to work on reliability…
When I was car shopping, I considered the V60. I genuinely liked it–mostly. It looks fantastic, but it was cut from my short list because I don’t have faith in the continuance of the Volvo brand, silly controls especially the picture of a person for HVAC, clunky & unwanted features like the cargo netting on the back of the rear seats, and it just plain costs too much for what it is. I also was surprised that despite its good overall size (larger than a compact but not excessive like many midsizers), rear seat space seemed tight.
redav –
Agreed on all points. I really wanted to like the V60, and when I drove a V60 sport I really liked it, but I too found it to be far too expensive for what it is. Great engine, great fuel economy, nice transmission (albeit, no manual….*sigh*), but the rear seating was on par with my ’06 A3 (read: tight), the wind and road noise was higher than I expected in a $40k car, and the infotainment system antiquated.
The seats, however, oh lord, those seats alone almost sold me on the car. No joke. I could live in the sport trim seats that came with the V60 I drove.
But alas, not to be. In FWD guise the car came in at around $42k and that was still without Navigation, and a bunch of bells and whistles (xenons aren’t standard at this price? seriously?). I can pickup a ’13 CPO’d Audi Allroad for $38-$42 that’ll run circles around this puppy.
It really just should not cost $42 being FWD.
I’m pretty sure the XC70 costs about that…
Yep. T6 Platinum trim AWD, $45,650. 3.0L I-6. That’s the most expensive one.
How would the Allroad run circles around the v60?? What does it do better?
Besides the v60 is a very refined car, wind and road noise is minimal, and tests prove it!
The thing with volvo is that they lack the brand image of say an Audi, as can be seen in above posts, it is percieved as a lower tier brand which it is no longer…
tariqv –
While there are aspects of the V60 I really like: the seats are outstanding, ergonomics are nice and the styling is, IMO, very nice, it lacks a lot that the allroad includes at similar price points.
Yes, Volvo lacks the brand credibility of Audi, but that’s not really something that’s important to me. The Volvo was a bit noisier, especially in regard to wind and road noise at highway speeds, and it also lacked cargo capacity. Dollar for dollar the allroad is a better buy, especially with the plethora of very low mileage CPO’d models available in the $38-$42 range.
I know it’s not fair to compare CPO to new, but the V60 at retail prices just doesn’t make sense to me. Were a V60 AWD with the bells and whistles available for $35 it would be a no brainer. As it is, the V60 is about $5k overpriced for what you get against the competition – especially if you include in the competition cars like the Q3, Q5, GLA, X1-X3.
Again – this is another place where “brand matters”. The mass market will look at a V60 and compare it to a comparably priced x1 and x3 and think, “Why not get the Bimmer?”
Agreed. We seriously considered a Volvo for my wife back in 2007, but while she found the ones we test drove perfectly acceptable, the cost was more than either of us could swallow.
Am I the only one who thinks that the death of the Volvo wagon was a key factor in the brand’s decline?
For a long time, these wagons were thick on the land in suburbia. And they were also ubiquitous in movies and TV – it seems that almost every time you have an educated suburban family, you had a Volvo wagon (or SUV).
Eh – the wagon has been in terminal decline since CUVs came to prominence and are now dominating the market. I have gotten over my CUV hatred since I realized that they are essentially the modern wagon/hatchback but with far greater utility for so many people.
“True, dealers don’t keep boatloads of wagons in their inventory, but why would they? Wagon buyers are few and far between.”
Maybe. Or perhaps people who want wagons can’t find them because there are few in dealer inventory… so they buy something else instead? Perhaps a comparison of relative days-in-inventory between sedans and wagons would be more telling?
Also, to be fair, VW redesigned the Jetta sedan a few years ago but the wagon hadn’t changed from the previous generation, so a sales slip would be a bit expected, no? When they had the roomy and attractive Passat wagon in the late 90’s and early ’00s, they seemed to sell a ton and used examples of these seem to be pretty hot on the used car market. The following generation of Passat was a dud, wagon or not.
Compare the values of used Mazda6 wagons and sedans as well. Double the price, at least from what I see on CL and eBay.
I made a special trip to a dealer to look at the V60. I wasn’t impressed. It had no pizzazz at all. It’s smaller than my CTS Wagon, has an interior designed by a Calvinist (in the case of the IP), a back seat designed by a self-flagellist and a cargo area that makes the one in my CTS seem cavernous. The price (once optioned up to reasonable levels), however, is premium. No sale.
I’m coming to the conclusion that, as much as I love them, wagons no longer make sense. There are hordes of competent, less expensive CUVs from which to choose. Game over.
Newsflash for wagonistas: the reason no one buys wagons is because they aren’t looking for more CARGO room, they’re looking for more BACK SEAT PEOPLE room. CUVs, by virtue of their more upright seating position (it takes less horizontal space to sit in a dining room chair thain a recliner) offer more back seat room. Wagons are just backpack-wearing sedans, and offer no rear seat room advantage over their sedan brethern, and most people run out of back seat room more often than they run out of trunk space.
This is true. I believe most “compact” CUVs (Escape, Rav4 etal.) have a smaller footprint than the midsize sedan counterparts that they compete with on price, but manage to have similar legroom. They’re narrower, though.
Personally, if Honda would make a proper Accord wagon, you could have both the cargo and passenger space. I wouldn’t even bother looking at a CRV. Compact CUVs essentially are midsize wagons, both in price and passenger/cargo room.
I’d also love to see an Accord Wagon brought back. The TSX wagon is nice (Rebadged European Accord Tourer), but rear seat room is pretty tight for the people that Acura is supposedly targeting: successful couples looking to start a family. The Acura’s premium fuel requirement is also less than desirable. Take the US Accord as it sits with the Earthdream 2.4, optional V6, and add a non-slantback looking rear end on it so it has some serious cu ft of space (40 cu ft with seats up, 80 with seats down would be a good target).
I could see such an Accord Wagon taking the place of the Volvo 240/740 wagons of old, bought by the ‘smart’ moneyed people. I see an incredible amount of older Passat Wagons, XC70s, Subarus and Prii in the non-McMansion well-off neighborhood near me. The V60 is just too small and sporty, and lacks utility IMO.
>End of Diesel brown Wagon fantasy
There is an Accord Wagon – it’s called the CrossTour…
And it’s basically a oversized 5 door hatch, which is nice, but it is no wagon in terms of cargo capacity. Crosstours also get significantly worse mpg than the 2013+ accord sedans, perhaps due to the higher ride height.
It’s *hideous*…
Agreed with gtemnykh, it’s more a stilted hatch than a real wagon. Just take a good midsize sedan and extend the cabin over to the rear bumper. That’s it, that’s all you need to do. Don’t donk the wheel size to 20 inches. Don’t put it on stilts. Don’t Venza it. Don’t Crosstour it. Just wagonize it.
A genuine Accord or Camry SE wagon with the V6 could be my forever car.
They did … http://www.accordwagonclub.com/5th.php should of bought one when you could.
That’s exactly my point, there was a 4th gen Wagon as well, with a larger cargo area than the slantback 5th gen. What I’m saying is that Honda should revive the formula, and yes I know it wouldn’t sell more than a few. With the TSX Wagon it was easy to bring over since they literally stuck some badges on an Accord Tourer. A USDM Accord wagon would require quite a bit more investment.
+Infinity.
Our Rogue never runs out of cargo space, and it has one of the smallest cargo areas for a crossover. I was going to type a DeadWeight-length praise, but I just want to say that you hit my exact desire in wagons. Thank you.
V60 isn’t a wagon, its an odd hatchback.
The pattern is that all the wagons are from expensive and/or unreliable brands. Throw in a trunk smaller than a Fit, and you see a small family can’t or won’t afford it. TCO of any Volvo, VW, Acura etc. Is higher than Honda CRV or Minivan et al.
I’m not giving up my 04 V70R wagon with 201K miles for the V60 or even the XC90. There’s no comparison between my 300hp grocery getter and the new-gen ‘wagon’.
I am a Volvo lover with an XC90 in the garage. I wanted to like the V60 but it is just not big enough for a family of 4 with 2 dogs. So I keep the XC.
…right or wrong, the geely sale hasn’t helped: i know several people who won’t even consider volvo because they want nothing to do with a “chinese” car…
For some reason my world if filled with a lot of (universally) former Volvo owners. At least half of them abandoned the brand when they phased out manual transmissions, these people ended up in Saab and VW’s. None of them are what we would call enthusiasts despite the transmission preference. The rest were already buying automatics, and have since moved on to more mainstream premium products of the large hatch variety (Q5’s, E-class/5-series wagons, etc…)
Others have pointed out the reason for this up above. What exactly does Volvo do that competes with the big luxury players they price against? I”m not even looking for a competitive advantage, just parity here.
“What exactly does Volvo do that competes with the big luxury players they price against? I”m not even looking for a competitive advantage, just parity here.”
I think this is their key problem. I just recently replaced my (troublesome but loved) G8 with a CPO 2012 S80 with only 14,000 KM. Comfortable, attractive and practical car with lots of nice features. A great deal at $28,000. However in Canada they sticker closer to $50,000 new. I like my car but I would never pay that much for it. It is the same situation throughout their lineup. Everything is $5,000 to $10,000 too expensive.
I really think there is room in the market for a Scandinavian near luxury brand but they have to price their vehicles for the upper middle class and not try and go toe to toe with the Germans.
As for the wagon issue, I tried to find a Volvo wagon before I started looking at the S80 but the nice ones were overpriced in the used market here in Canada. That means that somebody at least still wants them.
“I really think there is room in the market for a Scandinavian near luxury brand but they have to price their vehicles for the upper middle class and not try and go toe to toe with the Germans.”
In theory, but in practice the near-luxury class (say, $30-40k) is populated on the low/mid end by a lot of semi-rebadged cars (Acura, Buick) which are much cheaper to make, though they lack snob appeal, and on the high end by Zee Germans, which cost more (and if you equip them in accordance with what the category should include) they blow out the end of the class and end up at damn near $50k. Which doesn’t matter because everyone leases them for $499/mo anyways.
Making a $30-40k bespoke (ie, not ripped off an Accord) car is going to be a battle unless you can charge a premium price for it, and if you aren’t BMW/MB/Audi, you can’t.
If your labor costs are nil it becomes more feasible (read: Chinese assembly).
That would absolutely torpedo any chance any one would pay more than $12k for one. And if it doesn’t, it should.
Very doubtful, people said the same thing about Mexican assembly twenty years ago. American car buyers are fickle and have short attention spans.
The only way China assembly becomes remotely possible is if very desirable brands (BMW, MB, etc) partake. No one wants a Volvo bad enough to roll the dice on a Chinese car. Even if it’s okay product wise (and I’m skeptical that a Chinese-owned company can police itself well enough to keep quality high) there’s the political and social stigma will prevent it. No one wants their neighbors asking about their new $40k luxury car “ain’t that the one made in China?” Mexico may not have the finest reputation for quality (though our heche en Mexico MkV Jetta has been fine) but few people actively hate the country the way people feel about “they took our jerbs” China.
I still have to disagree, because everything you describe transpired exactly as you describe in my youth. My parents and their friends said the same thing about NAFTA and “Mexican” cars and they stuck to it. However today’s Gen X adults for the most part have no qualms about it, yourself included apparently. If the upcoming Chinese assembled S40 is not a complete disaster it will be the harbinger of things to come.
Well as a sample size of 1 this 30 year old would not have bought a used S80 if it had been made in China.
@MPAVictoria
I have to agree with you and S2K on my personal buying choices, I wouldn’t buy a Volvo not made in Sweden or possibly the Nova Scotia assembled models (this includes DAF models from Belgium). However we three are not the North American public at large.
In my experience, the people who used to buy Volvo wagons mostly moved to Subaru in the late 90s (a few went to Passat wagons). That’s around the same time that Volvo started pushing SUVs.
I’m guessing that Volvo wagons aren’t doing great simply because the wagon crowd is more conservative than the sedan/SUV crowd. Volvo can’t step-out of the segment for 15 years and expect to continue where they left-off.
I know I’m ignoring the V40, but that platform didn’t do anybody any favors. Safe to say that most former V40 owners will never come back to Volvo, and neither will their offspring. No point crying over spilt milk.
I’ve seen the same sort of behavior. However now that Subaru seems to be leaving the wagon behind, if Volvo wanted to put its feet back in the water now would be the time.
heavy handle
You are touching on an interesting question here re: brand defections, as that is my anecdotal experience as well. Every buys-new-cars volvo wagon owner I know has left the brand entirely when what they wanted was no longer available (price point, transmission etc…). If Volvo thinks they lose durable customers, as opposed to just sales, by abandoning the wagon segment it could make sense to continue that investment with low sales volumes. They certainly don’t have the cachet or unique product claims that will keep customers brand loyal to the same extent the Germans do.
I like wagons, but face it, for the general public — you know, the people that actually buy new cars — CUVs have become the modern day equivalent of the 1970s wagon.
And that isn’t going to change anytime soon.
The public can be convinced of anything with the right marketing. If the CUV is “hip”, find a way to make the Volvo product “hiper”.
I don’t know. I see a lot of Jetta wagons driving around. I don’t think it’s so much that no one wants wagons, it may be more than wagon people don’t want to spend $40k to get into one.
I own a wagon, I’d buy another, I like the V60, but going from mine to that would be a financial mistake.
I have a 2014 Jetta SportWagen. I’ve seen exactly three since I got mine in late July (all TDI examples), and each time, the other driver waved at me because it’s a very rare car in these parts. I certainly wouldn’t pay $40K for *my* car, and I’d only pay $40K for the V60 if it was a top-of-the-line, luxed-out T6 R-Design AWD example.
I see a fair number of Jetta wagons here too, but I don’t know if it is a good barometer for market demand. They are mostly diesels, which brings a whole different set of issues into the argument. Not sure how many VW diesel fans would even look at a Fusion-based wagon.
I’m told that the take rate on the diesel for the SportWagen is something like 90%. I’ve only ever seen one non-diesel (an SE w/sunroof and navigation), and it had been on the lot for nine months. I know *I* would have looked at a Fusion/Mondeo wagon, even without the diesel. For one thing, its bigger.
As a recent TSX Sportwagon owner let me tell you why you should by one of these wagons, 1. You don’t want to drive a high center of gravity SUV. 2. You want to carry items that don’t fit thru the trunk of a sedan. Works for me anyway, and I liked the V60 but it was $10,000+ more than the Acura.
Realistic pricing would also help the brand.
Yeah my problem with Volvo of recent years is the premium pricing. I would be comfortable with Buick/Chrysler pricing for Volvo, not Audi/Lexus/MB pricing.
Exactly. MPAVictoria opines on this from the Canadian perspective above. If you’re really keen on a Volvo product, new-used is a no brainer given the epic depreciation. I doubt it would depreciate the same percentage with a more realistic price point.
” I doubt it would depreciate the same percentage with a more realistic price point.”
Good point. And, I must admit, the cheap bastard in me loves the idea of getting a “FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLAR” car for 28K. Which is dumb if you examine it too closely. So I am not going to. ;-)
The cheap bastard in me feels the same way. In March I was contemplating the next (and likely final) automotive move for my Mother. The local (and only) Volvo dealer had an MY11 S80 with 22K listed for $25K USD and in the description I quote:
“You don’t have to worry about depreciation on this beautiful 2011 Volvo S80! The guy before you got it all! What a guy! Don’t be surprised when you take this superb S80 down the road and find yourself enamored with its handling and falling in love with REAL driving all over again.”
So even the DEALER thinks the resale is a matter worth joking about.
Wayback machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130320033048/http://www.billgrayvolvo.com/used/Volvo/2011-Volvo-S80-6f1dec70404638da0094e4f47f166fd0.htm
That is pretty funny!
An S80 would make an awesome final car for a senior citizen. Great seats, great safety tech and ride that favors comfort over handling.
I agree, and at the time my brother had just been involved in a collision in her “backup” car, a Saturn Ion. I wanted to take the insurance money from it, sell her Liberty, and then finance the remaining 10K through my brother’s credit union. She wouldn’t even go look at it, quote “I’m not buying some foreign job; too expensive to fix”. This despite the shop I deal with being a Volvo indy (and the fact she now drives maybe 3K a year after her job ended). Much facepalm on my part.
I’ve seen that exact same depreciation spiel from a couple of dealers in the DC area. They’ll apply to anything, from an M3 to a Mazda3.
Wow, someone bought one? That’s fantastic. I really wanted to like the TSX wagon, but it is hardly a Sportswagon when it comes with only a NA 4cyl and an automatic. It’s a shame they killed it off before giving the thing a chance, but I presume that most people just don’t want wagons anymore.
Makes me regret selling that old Volvo 960 even more. Inline 6, RWD and enough space to bring home a washer and dryer at the same time.
Now if only BMW made a 550 wagon with a 6MT…
If the Acura TSX Wagon had been available here in Canada I would have at least looked at one before getting the S80.
That’s odd to me since Acura seems to offer some models which were not available in the US (Acura CSX for example).
The CSX was a badge-engineered Civic.
That car existed because car prices are higher in Canada, and Honda wanted to be able to hit a lower price point for their Acura customers in Canada.
In the US, the price of the cheapest Acura was already low enough, so we didn’t need a cheaper variant.
“Makes me regret selling that old Volvo 960 even more. Inline 6, RWD and enough space to bring home a washer and dryer at the same time.”
Nothing says awesome like “saving $20 on delivery when I buy a new washer/dryer once a decade”.
The 900 series is incredibly accommodating of passengers and cargo, your snark notwithstanding. The 200/700/900 Volvo wagons make excellent cargo haulers for not very much coin.
Nothing says awesome like “saving $20 on delivery when I buy a new washer/dryer once a decade”.
Agreed. Wagons are gone because the people that had them mostly discovered that using them stunk. They weren’t good at carrying people and cargo at the same time. They’re heavier, more flexible, noisier, more prone to rattles and have higher centers of gravity than sedans. As people have gotten more insipid, hatchbacks have been making a comeback above the B-segment where they belong, but wagons will remain an anomaly of people that claim they care about how cars drive without having a clue whether or not a car drives well.
CJinSD
“they’re heavier, more flexible, noisier, more prone to rattles and have higher centers of gravity than sedans”
I completely agree with all of that, but your conclusion just doesn’t follow. If you own a medium to large dog + children your only other option is a CUV or SUV, which take those negatives to a wholly unacceptable level. There really is nothing else that can be bought. So the wagon is for people who do care how a car drives but have space or recreation needs that drive them toward a non enthusiast package. It’s the least bad option for a lot people, myself included (and my second car is a coupe so I really do get your point.)
It’s a similar dynamic to the diesel vs. hybrid debate. Both choices compare unfavorably to the gasoline default in performance and feel but diesel proponents can get carried away bragging about torque numbers and make it sound like it is a real performance option. That is only the case when your sandbox only includes they hybrid competition. I guess wagon guys can be guilty of the same implicit overstatement, but in the wagon’s sandbox it really is the best performer available.
CJ, I don’t know if those drawbacks apply as much anymore. Most mainstream wagons disappeared, what, in the mid 1990s? That’s a 20 year old reference point and I’d like to think that just as midsize sedans have become stiffer and sturdier since then, the same would be true for a wagon built on the same platform. The Jetta Sportwagen is neither flexible nor noisy. How are CUVs avoiding those drawbacks, and what makes it acceptable for that class of vehicle?
I would have chosen a v70 over the S80 if I could have found a good one in my price range….
@MPAVictoria
V70 manual or automatic?
Ha! Auto as the wife cannot drive a manual.
The 850/70 series have their own maintenance quirks, and one of them as I’m sure you’re already aware is the automatic transmission. The manual gets around that potential headache, although I seldom seen 850/S70 manuals and have only seen one V70 manual in my lifetime. I’m told they were more popular in Canada.
30-mile fetch,
CUVs don’t avoid those drawbacks. They simply don’t have any pretenses of performance, except for the ridiculous ones sold to brand-whores. As for modern technology avoiding the old pitfalls, this is 100% false since I said that I was comparing them to sedans. The best new wagons may be better than those of decades past, but they’re still completely inferior dynamically to the equivalent sedans. The Jetta may be an exception because it sat on a more expensive platform than the US Jetta sedan of the time, but that doesn’t mean it was as good as any of the better sedans in its class. I’ve driven two of them. Admittedly they were both diesels with DSG, but I know that they held no appeal for me.
tedward,
You have a good point. If someone really needs the room, lives somewhere it doesn’t snow, and wants a manual transmission and some approximation of handling, wagons start to make sense. I visit a board where the hive-think is that everyone should have a hatchback or wagon. They don’t make sense for most people, which is a big part of why they’re scarce.
“As for modern technology avoiding the old pitfalls, this is 100% false since I said that I was comparing them to sedans.”
Hmmm…100% is pretty darn certain. For instance, I’m 100% certain that I never said wagons would achieve parity with current sedans, but would be an improvement over the old wagons.
Now bring me a Camry SE V6 wagon post haste and I’ll show you that your “(wagons) weren’t good at carrying people and cargo at the same time” claim is 100% false.
Physics are still physics. Put a huge greenhouse on a car, and its center of gravity will be higher. Get rid of the rear parcel shelf and fixed back window of a car, and it will be more flexible or need to be built heavier.
Wagons had three rows of seats when they were popular, and people had larger families. A three-row wagon can carry people or luggage, but carrying both involves the loathsome business of roof-racks, which is why minivans murdered the wagon market.
The V6 and/or a manual transmission would have been nice in the TSX wagon. Considering its target market, either one of those options may have noticeably increased sales. But then, I also don’t blame Honda for not wanting to take the risk…
A good friend of mine is looking to replace his second Saab 9-5 wagon. Apparently, the vehicle of choice for him is going to be a Volvo wagon. He has a wife and a big dog, and his second home is a farm on the Shenandoah River near Luray, Virginia. I told him he should check out a crew cab version of one of the new Colorado pickups. Back seat is plenty good for the dog and it will carry more stuff, especially messy stuff associated with his wine grape growing efforts. He still has a BMW 3-series sedan and a 3-series convertible, so his cred with his urban neighbors won’t suffer.
No sale.
The S80 has the same problem as the now departed XC90. It’s actually ‘only’ 7 years old, but it already feels like it’s 10 years old, and Volvo will expect it to stay around for several more years.
The E-class on the other hand is just a spry four, M-B has already done a major update to keep it fresh against the new 5 and A6, and the next one will likely debut *before* the next S80 does. That’s a problem. You can’t operate on Jaguar’s product life cycles and expect the market to take you seriously. Lexus let the second generation GS300/400 rot on the vine for far too long, and it was never taken seriously as a result. They’ve stopped making that mistake.
If Volvo wants to price their cars against the Germans, they need to have the same clean sheet redesigns every 7 years. Otherwise stick to competing with Buick and Acura.
I agree with a lot of what you say. Volvo has to have a quicker product cycle if they want to be competitive. The XC90 is a nice SUV but you can certainly tell that it is getting very old.
The S80, and I am obviously biased as I liked them enough to buy one, while dated in some ways is still a decent used car buy. The interior, for example, is very nice and not dated at all. The safety features on the car are also competitive with most other vehicles and it still gets top marks in crash tests. I also happen to think the exterior design, while bland, is pretty timelessly handsome.
Of course the power-train and the infotainment all lag far behind its competitors. Though apparently some of this is has been at least partly addressed in the 2014 refresh.
I was actually looking at an S80 as a used car recently, but decided to pass. The interior is “fine” in that usual Volvo way, perhaps better than the ’03-’09 M-B E-class which was not a high point for that car, but it definitely feels past due for replacement. It was obviously better matched to the ’04-’10 5 series and ’05-’11 A6 than their replacements, or the old Lexus GS for that matter. It just has too many fresh faced, better equipped competitors to deal with.
The surprise for me having not driven a Volvo in awhile though was the seats, and not in a good way. The last Volvo I remember driving was an ’04 S60, and the seats in that car were superb. What happened? Aside from safety, Volvo used to be known for their great seats, but I thought the ones in the current S80 were mediocre, and seemed less comfortable than those in my old Audi. Same with the current S60 which I also drove, which had the worse problem of headrests that stick out too far.
Different strokes for different folks I guess. I love the seats in the S80.
Good article Timothy, but I would like to see one additional metric.
Can you attribute how many sales the XC60 (and, less recently, the XC90) took from the wagons? I think that’s a really important thing to look at. I imagine a lot of Volvo buyers just opted for the XC60, since it easily Volvo’s most competitive product and that that stole a lot of buyers from cars like the XC70.
You can see a definite decline in the XC70 right around 2009/2010 when the XC60 came out.
Let’s not ignore market shifts here, especially those that Volvo has actually been around for.
I’d also be curious to see European and/or global sales data in comparison to the US market.
No one thought the V60 was going to save Volvo – how TTAC could make such a statement is laughable.
They didn’t. They roundly stated, after it was announced, that the V60 would do nothing for Volvo besides perhaps develop some press interest.
Volvo’s saviours are the XC60 and XC90. No we just have to see if they do their job.
I think it’s gorgeous. I’d buy it…if it was in my price range…
Spoiler alert – I drive a wagon. I like wagons. Hell, I’d give up my non-wagon 2006 9114S (plus my left nut) for an RS6 Avant any day of the week.
And like many of you, I made a special trip to the dealer to check out the new V60. Actually, I made more than one trip, since the dealer never knew when it was coming or what engines/packages were coming. They had posters but no cars, information or appetite.
I don’t think it’s the size of the car that is the issue – the A3 doesn’t seem to be doing too badly and it’s smaller. And the V60 is really nice looking.
In fact, I’d hazard a guess that if Volvo (i) actually launched the car they said they were launching; (ii) had a limited number of configurations with NEW engines and NEW transmissions; and (iii) had a reasonably informed dealer network that actually gave a sh!t, they’d have sold a few more.
“In fact, I’d hazard a guess that if Volvo (i) actually launched the car they said they were launching; (ii) had a limited number of configurations with NEW engines and NEW transmission; and (iii) had a reasonably informed dealer network that actually gave a sh!t, they’d have sold a few more.”
Yeah, that kind of indifference would put me off, too. “So you couldn’t care less if I don’t buy the car at all? Fine. See ya.”
Jeez, yes, why do Volvo dealers suck? I went to buy a C30 toward the end if their production run. I love these cars, but nobody else did; Volvo couldn’t sell them to save their lives. So the dealer should have been thrilled to have a buyer specifically looking for one. Nope. Most insulting salesman / test drive interaction I’ve ever had, most halfhearted effort toward making a deal I’ve ever seen, despite a lot full of C30s that had sat undriven for many months. Another dealer 2 hours away was friendlier, but made less effort to find a suitable one than I could do in two minutes on my smartphone.
Yes, Volvo needs to SLASH prices, simplify and upgrade equioment configurations, and make better product (the S60 should not look and handle like an overweight Honda Civic), but like their troubled cousin Volkswagen, they also need to teach some of their dealers about this weird concept called “customer service.”
You had a crap dealer. Every US Volvo dealer got the same exact V60, a Drive-E V60 T5 Premier Sport, Ember Black/Beechwood
Maybe it’s just a coincidence, but the 2000-2012 31%->8% decrease in sales tracks well two other Volvo trends: the reduction of the useful cargo storage and durability, and the increase in complexity+price. They abandoned their original customer base of quality-minded, practical people.
The party is still on at that table, and if Volvo would like to see who is having a good time at their expense they should stop by a Subaru dealership, as I did this past Saturday. Not only every single table had people being written up, there were more people standing by waiting to be written up, and yet more people holding the door open for others following them into the showroom. It was almost beyond belief. I saw a similar picture at the other local Subaru dealership the same day.
Whereas the showroom at my Volvo dealer was nice and quiet – good to have some work done while waiting for your car to be serviced, but not so good for the continuation of the brand.
The 2015 Outback is on my short to-buy list. Roomier on the inside than it appears, great fuel economy, AWD, well built and well priced. Everything the Volvo could have been…
Stick a fork in it.
From the 120-series to the 800 series, Volvo triangulated between US and European/rest of world design and engineering. The result was cars a bit bigger than most European cars, conservative styling/engineering, and a definite value proposition…based on safety, good material quality, and general simplicity and durability. Size was also important. The 7/900 series was about the size of a short wheelbase W126, but typically cost less than a “regular” Mercedes. Now there are many more choices in the 105-110 inch wheelbase, 180-190 inch car market than in the 60s-90s. Volvo’s strength was that they built better Yank Tanks for a domestic market that wanted that… Wagons, CUVs or otherwise, I don’t see Volvo being able to go back to its pre-Ford identity. Unless they build some sort of Swedish Citroen Cactus. Apparently, the margins on the indistinguishable S60 and S80 are higher than that.
Over the weekend I had a brand-new nicely equipped Volvo S60 T5 rental, courtesy of Hertz. While it was perfectly OK, perfectly OK is simply NOT good enough for the money that Volvo asks for the car. There was just no reason I could see for buying that car over many cheaper cars. It is no nicer inside than a Kia Optima, and a lot smaller and more cramped. The ride and handling were absolutely nothing to get excited about, also on par with a loaded Optima, and noticeably inferior to the Fusion Titanium a friend just bought. All this meh for $38,825 per the Volvo website. The Internets may complain about how the latest 3-series has lost the plot, but I assure you it is one HECK of a lot more involving to drive than this Volvo, is noticeably more spacious, and costs about the same when comparably equipped.
The V60 is just more of the same, and is an even LESS practical wagon than my previous gen 3-series. This from a company known and loved back in the day for making very nice load lugging wagons (of which I have owned 7). There is just no reason to buy one. A Jetta Sportwagen is more useful and just about as nice for a LOT less money, a 3-series wagon is a LOT nicer for a bit more money.
So I don’t think the issue is that Volvo buyers won’t buy wagons, it is just that there aren’t many people who want to pay big money for meh cars.
I came *this* close to getting a S60 rental from Sixt for $27.99 a day, but asked for an ATS instead (which they rented to me for $20ish a day; $15 plus b.s. airport, taxes, fees).
Sixt is pretty awesome; My new favorite rental car agency.
I’m going to give them a try the next time I go somewhere that has one. Their rates seem too good to be true, given the kinds of cars they are renting. Shame they are so few and far between. What do they get for the damage waiver?
Honestly, I find your vehement dislike of the ATS surprising, and really look forward to your full post. I can’t say I loved the couple I have rented, but I didn’t hate them. I think it is a nicer car overall than the S60. It’s just that in typical GM fashion, they didn’t sweat the details quite enough. It DRIVES really well, but it doesn’t look nearly as good as the V60 inside. I agree the ATS back seat is a bit tragic – it is tighter than my 3-series, and that is saying something!
I didn’t think the E90/E91/E92 was that cramped. I thought it had a good amount of usable space and an excellent chassis/drivetrain family. But the E30 that Cadillac seem to have benchmarked the ATS off of *is* cramped by modern standards. So while Cadillac were highly-successful in creating the salvation of all small sport sedans, they neglected two factors: (1), big Americans, and (2), their big fat tuchuses. And that’s going to cost them a lot of sales…
The e9x is just OK roomwise. It’s just big enough for me (and I am a BIG guy), but I don’t care for a ton of extra space. It was OK for three good-sized guys to cruise around Europe in for a few weeks with all their stuff. Or just enough for two couples to out to dinner in. The ATS is the size of an e46 in the back, and that is just too small for today. The e46 was widely criticized for being cramped 15 years ago.
krh – sorry for the belated reply.
Sixt is a German rental company (you probably knew) and, understandably, has a much higher % of German and European vehicles in their fleet than most (any?) rental agency I’ve experienced.
Their premium sedans are Audi A3s, MB CLAs, Cadillac ATSs, Volvo S60s, etc., usually for around $30/day.
Moving up to the $35 to $45 bracket, depending on location, they have MB C classes, BMW 3s, Audi A4s (and A5s interestingly), etc.
Their rates, like most other agencies, get much higher for CUVs and SUVs, but then again, they actually rent German/European CUVs/SUVs that many competitors don’t stock.
The coolest thing about Sixt is the customer service agents, who will automatically bump you 1 or even 2 or 3 classes up at no charge, often, since they’re so busy and often don’t have any of the less expensive vehicles that are popular on the lot.
And their vehicles are clean, low mileage and well maintained, unlike some other agencies *cough-Enterprise-cough*
No worries. I’ve got a trip to Atlanta coming up next month, where they have a location. I am excited to give them a go! I have to think the silly cheap prices won’t last though. Looks like I can try out a CLA for $39/day! Or a 5-series for $65, which is what Hertz wants for a MALIBU. Crazy. Their damage waiver is cheaper too, only $24.99. Really crazy bit is the CLA is cheaper than a Versa from them! Too bad they are not in Dayton, where I will be tomorrow.
We’ve sold way more V60s than S60s at our dealership, but Quebec likes to think it’s Europe I guess?
Also used XC70s sell real fast. Especially with the T6.
And then there’s the polestar V60. Pretty sweet, but not 62 thousand sweet.
The bigger issue is Volvo buyers no longer buy Volvos. A close friend and his wife had a 2002 V70 wagon and a 2006 S60, both purchased new, both manuals. From a dealer (in suburban Toronto) they liked and had great (if pricey) service from. They liked the wagon despite some reliability issues but the S60 was a money pit without reward. The wagon was replaced with a Forester and the sedan with a BMW 3-series.
Ultimately, Volvo at one time had two big USPs: safety, which was less of a factor really from the late 70s onward as other makes caught up, and then – esp. in Canada and the US cold zones, great winter reputations (indeed, the old 122 was sold in Canada as the Volvo Canadian, and Volvo assembled 120s and then 240s in Canada until the mid-80s). But here, too, everyone else caught up, eso. once AWD became commonplace. They said something, too, back in the disco era: cool Scandinavian good taste and design restraint (the Bertone 262C aside) and high quality materials also impressed when everything else was just junky.
What makes a Volvo today?
Volvo can’t depend on the V60 – or any “naughty” Volvos – to make a comeback. OK, yes, the Polestar is awesome, and they should keep performance models around for image, but Volvo needs…well, Volvos.
They need an entry-level car – base it on the V40.
You’ll say – “well, the S40 and V40/50 were never a success, were they?”
No – it needs to be something unique. Something tall and BOXY! Think of the Subaru Forester, new Jeep Renegade, or Citroen Cactus. The Forester has been a smash hit, and I bet the others will be as well.
The anti-Evoque, the new 240.
In fact, compare it to the old 240 in advertising. Take inspiration from Subaru advertising and the ads for the original VW New Beetle.
Take styling cues from the new XC90 and, of course, old Volvos. Price it along the lines of the MINI Countryman.
You’re welcome!
Naughty Volvos?
I didn’t think the Swedish could do naughty anything.
Volvo wagon loyalists buy used and ‘never buy a new car’. Plus they are aging out.
Subaru’s Outback wagons are virtually SUV’s now, but not exactly outselling CR-V, RAV4, or Escape.
Strange how different markets can be. In Sweden there are about 4.5 wagons sold for 1 sedan. Volvo sells about 9 wagons for 1 sedan.