New S40/V50

jchan2 · October 2003

measurements? Cubic Feet? Or what?

grecianvolvo · October 2003

Yes, there will be a manual version of the FWD T5 model.

The FWD S40 T5 will not have any more torque steer than the S60 2.5T (which is not a lot when compared to other FWD cars). Amd the S40 will not be classified as a "luxury" car, anyway.

Someone posted a concern about the HALDEX system "hindering
the 220-HP T5 model...that is absolutely not true. A simple question goes as..."has the haldex hindered the S50 2.5T AWD"??? Anyone who has driven that car will say "NO"! And the S60 2.5T is a low-pressure turbo engine!

Yannis

creakid1 · October 2003

"Yes, there will be a manual version of the FWD T5 model."

According to EVO, there will only be FWD T5 for now. The AWD won't be ready for another year possibly sometime in '05.

creakid1 · October 2003

"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."

Which class? The new S40 got a longer wheelbase than the Mazda3/Focus II, & more passenger room than the S60.

qbrozen · October 2003

thanks for stopping in.

however, i have to respectfully disagree that the AWD won't affect it. It adds weight, period. Ok, so, if designed properly, it won't affect it MUCH, but the extra weight will slow it down even if its just slightly. Its a trade off. I've really grown to like AWD in some cars, so it might be a worthwhile tradeoff. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

by the way, if you feel up to it, there is a question on the s60 forum regarding the demise of the T5??

jchan2 · October 2003

we're debating dealer service now. Anyone know how "nice" typical Volvo dealers are?

creakid1 · October 2003

Once you lived w/ the powerful FWD new Maxima/Altima V6, you will be annoyed by the torque steer. The only way around is to apply Audi's steering axis geometry to cancel the torque steer, but unfortunately it also cancels steering feedback. The Focus-steering S40 will have excellent steering feedback, so AWD is the only way to avoid torque steer in this 220-hp light-weight car.

Since I don't like turbo/kompressor, I might even prefer a non-turbo AWD S40.

qbrozen · October 2003

what makes you think it will be lightweight? The current S40 is fairly light, but since this one is, by all accounts, growing in size, content, and drivetrain, then I'd guess its going to be over 3K lbs.

the S40 T5 is, according volvo, going to have about the same 0-60 as my s70 T5. And, as i stated before, the torque steer on that is not bad (compared to some others I've driven). Its not all about power-to-weight that causes torque steer. Many other factors go into it. For instance, probably the worst example of torque steer I ever experienced was an Alfa 164. 210 HP in a fairly heavy luxury sedan. 0-60 somewhere in the 7.5 sec. range. So there are others that are more powerful and much faster that have LESS torque steer. Its all about engineering.

Of course, I'm not saying the S40 WON'T have bad torque steer because, obviously, I have yet to drive one. But don't count it out until you do.

volvomax · October 2003

Saying that torque steer isn't bad is like telling a guy w/ a toupee that you can hardly tell he's got one!

Torque steer is fine if your buying a Dodge, but when your spending real $$ for a (near) luxury car it should be unacceptable.

Hence the need for Volvo to go AWD, and the Haldex is a great system.

qbrozen · October 2003

"not bad" in this context doesn't mean its good, it means that its not very pronounced and not very intrusive.

by the way, a limited slip differential would eliminate torque steer just as well, but cost less and impact weight less than a full-blown AWD system. So that is not an excuse for volvo going with AWD. They are doing it purely to step up to the plate in a competitive market.

volvomax · October 2003

S80 T6 had a limited slip diff in 1999, didn't make any difference at all, so they dropped it.

Volvo is stepping up as you say because there are other choices in the marketplace with superior driving dynamics

qbrozen · October 2003

if the limited slip made no difference, then there either wasn't a problem in the first place or something was terribly wrong in the design of the L.S.

Hey, I love Volvo, but there has ALWAYS been cars in the marketplace with superior driving dynamics.

Again, i like AWD, but its not necessarily the cure all. There are plenty of incredible cars that do incredible things without AWD. Volvo is adding it for marketing purposes and possibly safety. Driving dynamics is last on their list. If it were top of their list, then they would offer RWD and AWD instead of FWD and AWD.

creakid1 · October 2003

"if the limited slip made no difference, then there either wasn't a problem in the first place or something was terribly wrong in the design of the L.S."

LSD on a FWD does help putting the power down accelerating hard out of a corner by avoiding just having one tire spinning. But torque steer? I don't think Nissan Maxima got rid of it w/ LSD. In fact the latest Mazdaspeed Protege turbo has its LSD shifting torque left & right, & tugged the steering annoyingly.

"Driving dynamics is last on their list."

I sort of agree. That high-performance AWD S60 didn't provide any bit of the drifting fun from the rear. But at least the Focus-steering S40/V50 should have the best steering feel/feedback ever.

I guess only BMW bother to power, rather than braking, in their next AWD vehicles' ESP program to adjust the understeer/oversteer balance. Now, that would be lots of fun driving an AWD.

qbrozen · October 2003

torque steer, as i understand it, is the habit of the driving wheel pulling the car one way or the other. With a true LSD, the front wheels would lock together, putting power down to both sides equally. This would negate torque steer. If there is a type that actually transfers power from one wheel to the other (i don't know of this type and would like to read about it), that, IMHO, is a bad design.

sometimes i think manufacturers should consider developing new versions of the old posi-rear (positraction differential) to use in some applications.

volvomax · October 2003

Even w/ a LSD there is still physics to consider.
You can ask the tires to perform only one function at a time.
Either steering, or traction. But not both.
In a turn the front wheels are ALWAYS moving at different speeds, so a true posi trac won't work.
Even an LSD has to let the front wheels turn at different speeds.
The torque effect can be reduced, but never eliminated in a powerful FWD car.
Hence AWD, or re-engineer your car as RWD.

qbrozen · October 2003

a positrac would work. the tires just get punished. for cars that had it, this is what happened. The rear wheels have to turn at different speeds when turning, just like the front.

AWD has its issues as well. So does RWD. Each configuration has its pros and cons. None is the perfect solution. Hence the existance of all these setups.

you can't ask for steering and traction? Obviously, if that were true, the car would never turn since the turning wheels actually need traction to make your car go where you want it to.

jsrdlr · October 2003

I apologize if this has already been answered but... does any know if/when an AWD/Auto/Turbo version will be released? Alternatively FWD/Auto/Turbo. Everything I've read so far has pointed to manual only for the turbo.

Thanks

qbrozen · October 2003

nah. Since they put an auto in the R, I'm SURE you will find an auto in the s40 turbo.

jsrdlr · October 2003

I hope so. I fell in love with this car after doing some research, it will fit my needs perfectly and looks great too.

volvomax · October 2003

Will be coming, all Volvo will say is "late availability"

The FWD turbo will be available from the start w/ auto and manual gearboxes.
Dealers should have 1 test vehicle by Mar 1 and saleabe cars in either May or June.

jchan2 · October 2003

he, he, he.... that tuned civic at the stoplight will be really mad at you when you pass them in your S40 or 9-2. Both look like family cars in their opinion.

tiredofmanual · October 2003

From 4Car (a UK site).

The new S40 gets an excellent review, and I suspect that their one complaint (occasional transmission "snatch") will be addressed before production starts.

qbrozen · October 2003

what the heck is transmission snatch??

creakid1 · October 2003

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/openpic.php?name=../picture_library/- dir_24/car_portal_pic_12086.jpg
Nice seats. Dorky interior styling, though.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/?previews/previews_story.php?id=4108- 6
The chassis does things that have never been done in a Volvo before. None of its models has ever steered as crisply, keenly and fluidly as this oneVolvo engineers knew the steering has been a past weakness of their cars, and at last they have done something about itThis is more fun to drive than the S60

benjamins · October 2003

Regarding car mag reviews I find myself with different priorities than what they tend to stress. What I want to know about the new s40 is how comfortable it is to drive in the real world, the real world with blind curves, tons of traffic, sun glare, nasty weather. I want to know about visibility and blind spots, seat comfort, real ride comfort at all speeds (too often they say cars with very firm low speeds ride comfortably when this gets very tiring in town, and I'm talking about cars like the BMW Ms and Mercedes AMG--they do NOT have a supple ride in town and have no use for me where I seldom drive over 80 mph). I also want to know about turning circles where Volvo used to have very tight circles have gone fully the other way in having unacceptably wide turning circles. Curves and twisties on tracks and steering feedback at the limit are NOT as important as how a car is to LIVE with day in and day out.

So, all this talk about the great handling of the s40 vs. other Volvos may not mean that much to most Volvo owners who value the overall comfort and day in, day out, feel of the car as well as active and passive safety features.

creakid1 · October 2003

are for people who like to show'em off. I feel sorry for all the punishment & suffering they get in ride, not just the wallet.

Even a base BMW 3-series coupe is pretty pathetic in town(& even on the fwy) for its lowered std sport suspension.

Volvo isn't doing that well in the following 2 areas for convenience & accident prevention:

Volvo isn't just ignoring the importance of curb-to-curb turning circle, they also made the wall-to-wall u-turn worse by stressing the importance of long front overhang.

At least the new S40 has its front corners pretty much rounded off so the wall-to-wall u-turn isn't that bad. The Mercedes C-class has the wtw turning circle nearly the same as the ctc.

Volvo's recent pronounced shoulder "trade-mark" that makes the car look tough for side protection actually hurts the rear glass width, which makes a difference helping the driver seeing the vehicle on his right lane right behind. For example, the car in front of you suddenly stopped, & you don't want to miss any opportunity changing to the right lane immediately & safely. Or you're simply doing passing on a 2-lane hwy.

darnac · October 2003

Yes, what is it with the trend for manufacturers to ignore this engineering detail. Before I bought my 02 C-class I drove the S60 and it felt like a boat when trying to park/dock. The compact Acura TSX (smaller than an Accord) has a turning circle of 40 feet! That is the same distance as a Crown Vic. For those of us who live in big cities, being able to turn in tight quarters and parallel park is of high value. Anybody have any idea what the radius specs will be for the V50? I hope less than 38 feet.

volvomax · October 2003

FWD cars, like the Acura TSX and the S60 can't turn like a RWD Mercedes.
You can't turn the front wheels 90 degrees, the front axles won't allow it.

darnac · October 2003

Yes, but the Accords turning circle is 36.1 feet and the Camry's is 34.8 (with the 4 cyl and auto according to Edmunds). The Camry's is better than my rwd C240 and it is considerably bigger.

robr2 · October 2003

The Accord isn't wearing wide 17" tires either!! It's a function of car size, wheel size and space between the wheel and body.

benjamins · October 2003

Volvomax,

The turning circle of the 850 is 33 feet. Volvos were always wonderful at turning around in a small amount of space for their size and making tight turns, they've gone backwards in this regard.

Can't Volvo put in some rear steering or something to improve the turning circle to about 35 feet or so on the s60? I think on the new s80 and v70, s60 replacements reducing the turning circle must be a priority. Now it's a chore to park these cars in tight parking lots.

volvomax · October 2003

The 850 circle was 35 ft w/ the 15" wheels.
The 960 was 31 ft. Because it was RWD

The S60 is wider than the 850, and has much wider tires with no corresponding increase in the wheel well size.
4 wheel steering adds weight and complexity to the car, so I doubt that Volvo is seriously considering it.

jchan2 · October 2003

I do 90% of my driving in town, so I want something mildly sporty but still not punishing. I wonder how Volvo is doing in this regard.

explorerx4 · October 2003

have had the opportunity to drive an '02 m3 several times, due to a very generous neighbor.
imho, the harsh ride of the m3 doesn't exist.
it is definitly 'firm', but nothing out of the ordinary compared to my '02 explorer or '91 mustang gt. too many people take what c&d says as gospel.

jchan2 · November 2003

my commuter car is a Honda Odyssey...... (but my next car won't replace the Odyssey- it'll replace the 99' Civic I have as my wife's car...)

creakid1 · November 2003

"FWD cars, like the Acura TSX and the S60 can't turn like a RWD Mercedes.
You can't turn the front wheels 90 degrees, the front axles won't allow it."

W/ RWD, turning the front wheel 90 degrees won't even allow the rear wheels to push the car forward. Only FWD can roll the front wheels side way at 90 degrees.

It's all conspiracy from car companies to make the small cars' turning circle about as large as the bigger cars, so when people stepping up to the next higher model won't get upset when they have to sacrifice the convenience & pay more $.

Nissan didn't want to disappoint the people used to the old RWD Datsun 210's convenient tiny turning circle. So the FWD replacement - the Sentra - kept the tiny turning circle for several years!

The V6 Camry had 36.7 ft curb-to-curb turning circle. The RWD V8 '95-98 Lexus LS400 has only 34.8 ft ctc! When measured wall to wall, that LS400 is even smaller than the 4-cyl Camry, as the FWD Camry has a longer front overhang.

"Yes, but the Accords turning circle is 36.1 feet and the Camry's is 34.8 (with the 4 cyl and auto according to Edmunds). The Camry's is better than my rwd C240 and it is considerably bigger."

The C-class has a very short front overhang corner so the wtw turning circle should beat any Camry.

Honda is actually a very pretentious company. They tried to earn business from people who are against Japanese cars by claiming that the company headquarter is in America & called themselves "American Honda". Next, they kept the required "CHECK ENGINE" dash warning light from coming on so the customer satisfaction rate went up, & ended up w/ a big fine from the U.S. government. Since we used to associate Honda w/ the tiny Civic CVCC hatchbacks, Honda purposely kept all the Accord's exterior dimensions AND turning circle bigger than Camry's to sound like a big car, although, in fact, the Accord had rather poor stretch out leg room up to '97. Wasn't that "36.1" vs Camry's "34.8" sound peculiar? As if "36" is whole lot bigger than "34". Come on, only in American do we use "feet", as rest of the world is all metric.

creakid1 · November 2003

"imho, the harsh ride of the m3 doesn't exist.
it is definitly 'firm', but nothing out of the ordinary compared to my '02 explorer or '91 mustang gt. too many people take what c&d says as gospel."

Duh, mentioning the buckboard-riding crude vehicles is out of the question. There are always the Suzuki Samurai & the Jeep Wrangler WW2 military vehicle.

The BMW 3-series sport suspension's ride comfort is still a dream compare to other sports cars, per C&D, etc. But I'm only willing to tolerate the ride of the non-sport longer-travel suspension found in the base 3-series sedan(not including the recent 330i).

creakid1 · November 2003

Boy, wasn't I so right. The Dec CAR just complained about the new S40 T5's turbo torque steer & understeer plough, excessive traction control cut in, & somewhat fidgety ride. Saying that all these are the typical problems w/ all the high-power FWD Swedish cars.

Also, when the road surface gets ragged, the torque-steer tugging becomes more obvious.

They also warned you that you better back off the throttle when the front tugs/understeers, or else. Once the traction control kicks in, it won't let go for a long time!

No, the light pressure turbo doesn't have enough delay to create lag, just soft throttle response. Low end is so rich that the 6-sp isn't even needed. The R model will be the one w/ the hardcore turbo setting.

The non-turbo model may be much weaker at lower rpm, but is enjoyable to rev, plus w/o any of the vices of the turbo model mentioned above so handles more fluently. The higher-profile tires on smaller diameter wheels are just as wide as the turbo model at 205/55, so the road contact/grip is still there. Along w/ the softer suspension, the ride is better, too. For sure they like the non-turbo more than the FWD T5!

qbrozen · November 2003

so one review makes it right?
well, then how about this one:
http://www.swedespeed.com/features/road_tests/s40_t5_2004/index.s- html

They seem to love it. Best handling Volvo ever (aside from the R) and handles like a RWD, according to that article.

And considering the S40 T5 will have about the same rate of acceleration as my current T5 and I have none of the issues to the degree of severity that CAR supposedly states, I find their review less credulous. But, only time will tell. We'll find out the truth for ourselves.

creakid1 · November 2003

"Toss it into a corner, lift off the throttle and the back slides into line."

Not bad, now the new S40 gives you the choice to do some rear slide.

frenchy2002 · November 2003

Does anyone know when then new S40 will be available for configuration on the Volvo website? Thanks.

jchan2 · November 2003

probably when the S40 goes on sale in Feb 2004.

and is the S40 roomier or less roomy than my 99' Civic????

creakid1 · November 2003

You got to be kidding. A Civic sedan? Just check out the back seat room of the S60. The new S40 is suppose to be even bigger.

Remember it's the stretch-out leg room that counts, not the knee room. That's also why I found the Civic sedan roomier than the pre-'98 Accords.

jchan2 · November 2003

oh.

jchan2 · November 2003

that the S40 was smaller rear seat wise.

jchan2 · November 2003

just marginally larger.

creakid1 · November 2003

Volvo should change the name of this superb new vehicle from the old hopeless S40, but there's no other choice staring in the even numbers. They can't call it S20 sedan! That almost sound like a 2-wheel motor bike. From all these new articles, you can tell that, w/o adopting Focus II's steering/suspension, the new S40 can't achieve this level of competence & fun in steering/handling, while the ride is still good.

creakid1 · November 2003

The T5 has the same springs as the non-turbo. Only the dampers & sway bars are stronger. They said the non-turbo has a less-stiff ride, lighter steering & drifts more easily, but still fun like no other Volvo. At very high speed, the T5's steering is a tad sensitive. Sounds sort of like how C&D complained about the American non-SVT Focus's light power steering that became too darty when upgrading from 15" to 16" low-profile tire.

creakid1 · November 2003

"Curves and twisties on tracks and steering feedback at the limit are NOT as important as how a car is to LIVE with day in and day out."

Driving enthusiasts like it. Unskilled drivers need it EVEN more! Some steerings seem firm, but feels totally washed out at the limit, such as the present Jetta. The steering of the '86 760 Turbo I used to own is simply just heavy w/ no feeling, & worse, can't even track straight on the fwy w/o lots of concentration!

NOT just at the limit, the steering should be able to inform the driver if the tire still has adhesion EVEN WHEN going in a relative straight line, as an Focus engineer pointed out. An example is the Acura TSX's steering. It always feels like there's no tire adhesion, despite feeling firm due to strong self-centering action. Sure, the car goes fast around corners & even able to absorb bumps the same time. But an average driver who drove it on a high-speed fwy curve got scared & complained that his Mercedes C220 didn't have this problem.

wantapassatnow · November 2003

With this new one coming out, should I even consider getting a 2004 S40? I need a new car by the beginning of January, and the 2005 won't be out yet. There are some great deals out there for the 2004s, given the redesign. But after reading some of the reviews, I'm not sure the 2004 S40 will even be worth my while.

Bottom line: Is the 2004 S40 a good car or not? Other options I'm considering are the new 2004 Mitsu Galant and possibly a Subaru Impreza, which a friend just told me was a great car; the Subaru is pretty ugly IMO, so I don't know if I can get past that!

Thanks!

New S40/V50

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles