Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

New S40/V50

1356722

Comments

  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    http://autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_cod- - - e=carnews&loc_code=index&content_code=04498892

    "Under the new skin is Volvo’s version of the Ford/Mazda C1 platform that also underpins the new Mazda 3, Ford C-Max and next-generation Focus. That means independent rear suspension and the promise of ride and handling to far exceed the Mitsubishi-derived set-up of TODAY'S S40."

    volvomax - Sounds like today's S40's suspension & even steering set-up is from the Mitsubishi Carisma, or would you believe the multi-link from the 960/S70 AWD is also shared w/ the Japanese-designed Carisma?
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    Sure give a lot of info. I'd consider this over the BMW 1-Series any day. (1-Series starts with a 110 horsepower engine)
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    Just because some idiot jounalist says it doesn't make it so.

    A suspension is more than just some metal parts under a car.
    Consider the 960 and the S40.
    Both use multilink setups, yet the S40 rides much tighter than the 960 did.
    SUSPENSION TUNING is the key.
    The Carisma might use the same design of suspension, but differences in tuning and esp in chassis rigidity makes all the difference in the world.
    The S40 is a 15 yr old design creakid, of course its not up to the current standard.
    The new S40 should be and that is what I get out of that quote.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    The S40 and Saab 9-2 will have a big war over who's the better car from Sweden. The S40's argument: "You're a rebadged Impreza, so you're not really from Sweden!"
    9-2's argument: "You're not even made in Sweden!"
    S40: "You aren't either!"
    9-2: "I have japenese engineering backing me up!"
    S40: "whatever. I'm the better car!"
    Argument goes on and on until Edmunds settles it and declares a winner.
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    The public will ultimately settle the argument.
    In the S40's favor I believe.
  • fdannafdanna Member Posts: 263
    I've never owned a Volvo and the upcoming redesign of the S40 has really got me interested and I'm going to check it out when it arrives. Two things of concern to me: I'm curious about what kind of mileage a 5cyl manual would get (gas ain't cheap anymore)
    and 2) This was a big pet peeve of mine on the current S40 (though a small detail).... I hope they design the rear license plate holder to actually hold an American license plate well. The current one CLEARLY is for a European plate and, in my opinion, the overhang of the North American plate looks bad.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    well, I average 24 mpg with my auto S70 T5. Figure I would probably get at least 25 with a stick. So given the S40t5 will be lighter and have a little less power, I would venture to say you could see 26-27 average mpg with a stick. That would put the EPA estimates around 23city to 29highway?? Just a guess.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "I'm curious about what kind of mileage a 5cyl manual would get"

    Well, either FWD 5-cyl w/ auto or AWD 5-cyl w/ stick or auto. So FWD 5-cyl w/ stick may not be available here. Besides, AWD models, which already use a little more fuel than the FWD, might even require the 5-cyl turbo. So to get a stick, you might end up using even more fuel due to both AWD & turbo. I hope the turbo part is not required for stick, as I hate turbo & kompressor. I'm sure this car is too light to fit the 5-cyl turbo in FWD form due to torque steer & wheel spin.

    Judging from the S60R's AWD characteristics, it doesn't take advantage of driving the rear wheels sufficiently. So unless you really need the snow traction, which a Californian like me don't, having S40 non-turbo AWD probably only slows the car down due to mechanical drag, & might not increase your handling fun, which the future AWD BMWs do, by incorporate power rather than braking in the ESP program to control under & over steer, & possibly retaining some power oversteer(but safe) drift when switched to the "semi-off" position!

    A recent AUTOCAR issue was disappointed w/ S60R's handling in this comparison:
    creakid1 "Acura TSX vs Audi A4" Aug 30, 2003 3:03am

    I didn't want to post this bad news here before, as most people on this board probably don't like to hear it. But then, what the heck, this might be related to the future of our baby - the new S40/V50.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    I think that since the 9-2 has the price advantage, that it might be able to pull something off. Motor Trend said something like this:
    Price Range:
    Saab 9-2: $21K-$24K estimate. (Would fall perfectly with the 9-3, which starts at $25,995)
    Volvo S40: $24-$29K estimate. (Would overlap the S60 just a little bit at the top end, but that's fine.)
  • wsag26wsag26 Member Posts: 124
    Volvo's are in bad shape. I mean, I believe they are in a horrible position. WHY WOULD I PAY $800 A MONTH FOR A WEAK ENGINE. Doesn't make sense to me. Volvo's safety. GIVE ME A BREAK. Last time, they MEANT SAFETY, was back in the 50's and 60's. All of them are using dual side airbags. The only time I SAW a VOLVO that met more than the regular safety requirements was in the concepts.

    I know Volvo fans are sure on this page, that is why everyone keeps on getting mad at me, but I have a little words for you myself.

    1)BOO Volvo!
    2)BOO Ford!
    3)BOO to unreasonable vehicles, LIKE VOLVO's
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    The Haldex equipped XC90 2.5T AWD gets the same mileage as the FWD version.
    According to the EPA there is a statistical difference, but its too small to justify a different rating.
    In the S60's, there is only 1MPG difference between the S60 2.4 and the 2.5T.
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    What are you smoking???

    I mean seriously, open your eyes man.
    Volvo is having a banner year, their pipeline is loaded w/ new products, and even the problem child S80 is getting good ratings now.

    As for safety, their record speaks for itself.
    Volvos always go above and beyond what the Federal Govt requires.

    If you have a concern please be specific.
    Otherwise go flame somewhere else.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "The Haldex equipped XC90 2.5T AWD gets the same mileage as the FWD version."

    Is that a constant AWD or the lazy FWD that switch to AWD only when the front driving wheels begin to spin?

    If it's the latter, then the fuel economy shouldn't be affected much.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    I saw that blurb in MT as well. If the 9-2 is priced between $21k-$24k, then it will have nothing over the WRX that it is created from. It makes no sense. I just can't see that happening. The only reason to make the WRX a Saab is to offer more luxury. And this, of course, has to come at a price. I'm expecting the 9-2 to be priced very close to the S40. So a loaded up T5 should be very similar in price to a loaded up 9-2 Aero (or whatever they call the high hp model). Maybe a hair more for the 9-2 since it will be AWD.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    The AWD system is part time.

    Doubtless SAAB will stress the lux car experience, longer warranty and free maintenance.

    The S40 T5 AWD 6spd should sticker just under $30k
    The 9-2 should be in the same neighborhood.
    Hey, at least it will be built better than the current SAAB/Opels
  • benjaminsbenjamins Member Posts: 56
    Well, Creakid, of course found another negative comparison with a Volvo. XC70 owners may be pleased with the comparison test of the Volvo xc90 with the VW Tourag and Chrysler Pacifica in the latest Moter Trend. The oldest platform won in handling and ride quality and special mention was made to its improved steering. Maybe all Volvos have the improved steering, now.

    The s60R will be a great car in 2 or so years when Volvo really refines it. I think how it compares to German cars depends on your preferences, whether you like the taut German feel or the more relaxing and isolating Swedish feel.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    Why would the 9-2 cost just a little more than the WRX? Why not upgrade to the 9-2 then? But, you have a $25,995 price cap to the base price of the midline model (probably ARC) because the 9-3 Linear starts there. Volvo has no such problem because the base S60 2.4 starts at $29K. So, Saab has one of two things they need to do: A) keep the 9-2 at the Motor Trend projected price or B) Raise the price of the 9-3 Linear to $27,595 to make room for the 9-2 Arc. My pricing estimates: (based on MT)
    9-2 Linear: $23,995
    9-2 Arc: $25,995
    9-2 Aero/Vector: $27,995
    9-3 Linear: $27,595
    Volvo S40 Base: $25,995
    Volvo S40 2.5T: $27,995
    Volvo S40 T5: $29,500
    Volvo S60 2.4: $29,750
    That would work just fine for both automakers. Now, about the problem with Mercedes:
    A-Class is coming, but that would overlap with the C230 Kompressor Sport Sedan.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    looks fine, but that's not what MT estimated. They commented on the WRX based 9-2 and included that in their $21k-$24K number.

    The numbers you give are a little more realistic, I think, because you hit the Impreza TS based model at about $5K more than the Subaru version. I do think its a bit high, though, considering that $27K is only a couple grand higher than a WRX. So I would say the base Saab 9-2 could very will dip below $22K to keep it $2-$3K higher than a base TS. The ARc will be based on the RS, so that should start at roughly $1500 more. And then the jump up to the $27K range for the WRX-based version. So it looks more like MT's numbers only incorporated the first 2 models and not the WRX model 9-2.

    Could be higher all around, we'll see.

    If folks do cross-shop the base s40 with the base 9-2 and the 9-2 does come in around that $22K number, it will look like a bargain if its is as well appointed as a Saab should be AND since it comes with AWD. Tough competition for Volvo in that case.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • mgpark103mgpark103 Member Posts: 5
    Has a nice feature where you can compare their models to "comparably equipped" competitors ... Like the S40 ... I think I am all set to swap my leased 2000 S40 next year on the sweeeeeet 2005 model ... Can't wait to test drive the more powerful engines ... You can keep the manual transmission though - in Atlanta traffic it is too much wear and tear on my calf muscles! LOL
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    About the 1-Series, we have a problem. (Small Engine, smaller than a Civic)
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    Folks,

    I don't think you folks need to worry about the new S40 that will arrive in the US market late winter of next year.

    Unlike the current S40, the new car will have way more interior space, better handling, and definitely more power with the 170 bhp normally-aspirated and 220 bhp turbocharged I-5 engines. Given the major improvements, I expect the S40/V50 models to eventually become Volvo's best-selling models. :-)
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    Maybe, but I think that award resigns in the Volvo V70 wagon. Highly popular. Yes, it may be. But some people would still buy a CamCord over an S40/9-2/1-Series.
  • twilliatwillia Member Posts: 29
    Does anyone know what the interior space will be for the 2005 S40? I was considering a S60, but the back seat leg room is pretty tight - 33.3 inches. I heard that the S40 should be a little better, but I haven't heard any details.

    Thanks.

    Tony
  • crikeycrikey Member Posts: 1,041
    AutoSpies seem to like the S40.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    What I'd really enjoy is a Carisma for $9K loaded. Sure better than driving a Rio or an Accent or maybe an Aveo. Yes, the interior is ugly, but I can always call Martha.
  • sozersozer Member Posts: 12
    hi does anyone have a clue about the new 2005 S40 pricing, i don't know much about the car but from the looks and the little i have read about it i LOVE it! If anyone can help that would be great.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    one source says that the new S40 will be more inline with the current S40 minus rebates. So starting at around $22K base and going up to around $28K for a T5. Not sure of the validity, though, time will tell. I hope he's correct.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    I hope the pricing will start like this:
    Saab 9-2 $21,995
    Volvo S40: $22,005
    Volvo S40 T5: $28,999
    Saab 9-2 Aero: $29,001
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    After reading the 03 CAR, I believe only the T5 turbo gets AWD & 6-sp manual. That means the non-turbo only gets FWD & should be available w/ 5-sp manual.
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    should be one heck of a comparison!
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    just reviews what Edmunds has been telling us all along.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    I'm sure the T5 won't have AWD and 6-speed. That would be an S40R. The T5 will still be FWD.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • frenchy2002frenchy2002 Member Posts: 40
    Gbrozen: Many articles in the US report that the T5 will come with AWD and a 6 speed manual. And I hope it will! My guess is that a fully loaded one will be over $30K
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    I don't see why they would go against their current strategy. If the T5 has AWD and 6-speed, then what will the R have?? The s60 T5 is FWD and 5-speed (stick or auto) and the S80 T6 is FWD and 5-speed (stick or auto), so, unless those change, I think you can expect the same in the S40 t5. Maybe volvomax can clear this up. If not, we'll just have to wait and see. Until then, i'm sticking to my guns. ;)

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 10,236
    The T5 could have a medium pressure turbo, and the R a high-pressure turbo?

    I'm kind of disappointed with the limited specs offered by the Volvo website. I am anxious to find out the interior dimensions (legroom, etc.).
  • frenchy2002frenchy2002 Member Posts: 40
    Who says there will be a S40R? Is there a S80R? Maybe it is preferable that there is no S40R to keep the uniqueness of the S60R.
    The interior dimensions are probably comparable to an Audi A4, a typical compact European sedan. But it is just a guess.
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    Will be available w/ Haldex AWD and a 6 speed manual.
    Actually, the AWD will be available w/ a manual only.
    Car won't be available at intro though.

    The R is safe for now, the S40 won't have 4C or brembos or more hp.
    Look for the R to be upgraded in 2005, and maybe,maybe an S40R then.

    As an aside Volvo is commiting more resources to AWD on its future models. The S40, S60 and S80 will feature multiple models w/ AWD.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    Will there be a non-AWD T5? I love AWD, but I think it would be quite a hinderance on the 220 hp T5. I hope I'm wrong. But, if I'm not, would I have a FWD T5 to choose instead?

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    The auto T5 will be FWD.
    The problem w/ FWD and horsepower is torque steer.
    Its fine if your driving a Dodge Neon but unforgivable in a luxury car.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    of course its a problem, but I find it very manageable in my T5 99% of the time. Its only when changing lanes and stomping the gas that it might could get a bit unruly. But, overall, its not an issue. I found my rear drive V8 pickup to be much more of a beast to control upon acceleration around a turn.

    Are you saying no stick FWD S40 T5??? Please say it ain't so!

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    A V8 pickup has its own handling issues.
    But a properly setup lux sedan shouldn't.
    Hence AWD on a powerful car.

    At this point I don't know if there will be a FWD T5 manual.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,889
    just like FWD properly set up on a lux sedan shouldn't be a problem. ;)

    i heard on another board there will be manual and auto available on all levels of the S40, so I'll keep hope alive.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • benjaminsbenjamins Member Posts: 56
    It's funny, C&D is a professional car magazine yet they say, "appears to be a chopped and slightly chubby version of its larger S60 sibling"

    If you look at the s40, it has a different front and rear than the s60, but more than that, the s60 has a totally unique greenhouse. The s40 is a smaller version of the s80's greenhouse, not the s60s. I tihnk it is more accurate to say that the new car has Volvo's current styling characteristics, the rear lights, the pronounced shoulders, but the s40 has some unique aspects to its styling and isn't a shortened s60.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    But saying what you did doesn't sound as exciting!! You must read engineering journals!! LOL (just kidding).
  • jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    I know this is somewhat of an issue over on the 2004 TL board, so does anybody know how big the trunk is?
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 50,433
    The Mazda 3 is supposed to be decent sized, and since they share a platform, and the Volvo looks kinda boxy in the bag, I would assume average+ for the class.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

This discussion has been closed.