Volvo S40 - a compromised car?

pburns

Just pondering...

I was looking at a well-speced S40 in traffic the other day. Quite a nice car but I really feel it is spoiled by being based on the Focus. It's way too small & it's narrow track makes it look weedy. There's also far too big a gap between it & the S60 in the Volvo range.

Why could it not have been developed on the Mondeo platform? This would have made ideal sense. Or even the Mazda 6 platform - all part of the same family??

Lex Luthor

I suppose the gap is similar to the gap between a 3 & 5 series. Would you not just go for the S60? Anything in between would be pointless

junkyard

Volvos are only bits and pieces of other cars nowadays, Mitsubishi floorpans, Renault engines, they lost the plot years ago.

gyppo

You could say the same about the V50. Dimension wise, its no bigger (indeed it could be smaller) than the current astra estate model.

going back to the original post, I think the saloon model focus is a far more substantial car to look at compared to the S40.

Lex Luthor

gyppo wrote:

You could say the same about the V50. Dimension wise, its no bigger (indeed it could be smaller) than the current astra estate model.

its a small estate alright....for 36k, you get get a lot more car for the money although they do come well equipped

crosstownk

if your a Volvo fan then I don't think the S40/V50 will disappoint you. It's quite comfortable to drive and the interior is well laid out. The 2.0TD is decent engine - very torquey with ample power. If, on the other hand, your not a Volvo fan then an closer inspection the Focus may seem a better buy, but it tall depends on your taste in cars I suppose.

Personally, I'd go for the S40 above a Focus as I quite like the Volvo finish which I consider somewhat more refined than the Ford finish.

BrianD3

I'd have mixed feelings about the S40, in one way it's good that it's more compact than most of its competitors. For instance an S40 1.6 is 176 inches loing and weighs about 1230 kg. For comparison a VW Passat 1.6 is 188 inches long and weighs about 1530 kg. 300 kg of extra metal is a helluva lot extra to be dragging around and I'm not convinced that most buyers will need the extra room that the Passat has.

In this era of rising oil prices we may see manufacturers getting away from the bloatmobiles many of them are producing now and moving towards S40 size/weight.

Having said that I don't really like the styling of the S40 and yes it is heavily based on the Focus Mk2. The Focus is a fine car in many ways but the ride and refinement are poor IME. Don't know if these characteristics have been carried over to the Volvo but if it has then I'd say Volvo owners will be disappointed. Also the 1.6 petrol engine in the Volvo is the same 99 bhp unit as in the Ford, 99 bhp from a 1.6 is a bit pathetic in this day and age. A more powerful engine would have enabled the Volvo to maximise the advantage of its low kerb weight.

Also, what exactly does Volvo stand for these days? In the 80s Volvos were defintely above average when it came to safety and they bragged about this a lot. They built most of their image around safety and Volvo owners enjoyed the peace of mind of driving around in "tanks". Nowadays with EuroNCAP and all manufacturers paying more attention to safety Volvo is just another car make that gets 5 stars in crash tests. If anything Renault is now the manufacturer doing the most bragging about safety and Renault has in effect become "the new Volvo"

ninty9er

I've always liked them. I remember car shopping with my mam in 1990 when I was 3. I wanted her to get a mid 80s 760 with all the trimmmings, but she had to go and buy the cute little 205

maidhc

crosstownk wrote:

The 1.9TD is decent engine - very torquey with ample power.

I though it had the 2.0 HDI?

crosstownk

maidhc wrote:

I though it had the 2.0 HDI?

You could be right - I just assumed 1.9 as the previous S40 was 1.9. Me and my assumptions..........:rolleyes:

EDIT - Yes you are right - the new model S40 is 2.0TD - apologies. Earlier post editied accordingly.

unkel

BrianD3 wrote:

it's good that it's more compact than most of its competitors

LOL! Amazing that Ford's marketing department has convinced us that the S40 belongs to a higher segment than it does. It's a Focus, not a Mondeo...

maidhc

unkel wrote:

LOL! Amazing that Ford's marketing department has convinced us that the S40 belongs to a higher segment than it does. It's a Focus, not a Mondeo...

It is impressive.

.. but then again the A4 is only about the size of a focus... or the size of a Fiesta if you got for a long journey in the back seat. Ouch... painful memories.

tred

crosstownk wrote:

You could be right - I just assumed 1.9 as the previous S40 was 1.9. Me and my assumptions..........:rolleyes:

they have a 1.6 and 2.0 diesel both PSA engines.
there is a rumour that the 2.0 is not so frugal on deisel either so maybe its tuned differently.

Do-more

unkel wrote:

LOL! Amazing that Ford's marketing department has convinced us that the S40 belongs to a higher segment than it does. It's a Focus, not a Mondeo...

The power of marketing! The same folks even convince some people that a Mondeo is in fact a Jaguar! (When we all know that Mondeos are in fact much more reliable than that! lol)

sk8board

I would never have said the S40 'is just a Ford Focus'. It only uses the chassis from the Focus, nothing more.

Just like the Saab 9-3 uses the Opel Vectra chassis. Drive a Vectra, and then a 9-3 Vector and see the difference.

VAG started all this sharing lark, using chassis and VAG engines everywhere. A golf is a Leon, is an Octavia, is an A3, is an A4, is a fabia, and many more.

If the A3 is an expensive Golf, is the golf not an expensive Leon, and so on ....... you see where this is going ...

On the higher end, anyone paying the 100k for the Range Rover 'Sport' is buying a Discovery, NOT a range Rover.

So the S40 and Focus share a chassis ... so what. The s40 is a million miles apart from just being another ford focus.
Its not marketing, its business. Share parts, engines and chassis, or go broke.

maidhc

sk8board wrote:

Its not marketing, its business. Share parts, engines and chassis, or go broke.

The marketing bit is where you convince people that an A3 is worth the extra over a Leon, or a RR Sport is superior to a Disco!

Although I love Fords, the S40 is a poor effort at platform sharing, it looks too much like a Focus saloon to be worth the extra money. At least VW can differentiate quite well between an Octy and a Leon and Golf to some degree. But a s40 and a high spec Focus? I'd take the Focus and use the change for a bigger engine or something.

useless

maidhc wrote:

But a s40 and a high spec Focus? I'd take the Focus and use the change for a bigger engine or something.

Theres not as big a price gap as one might think if you compare like with like in terms of spec. For comparison, I used the .pdf price lists form www.volvocars.ie and www.ford.ie.

A 1.6 Focus Ghia saloon is 25,250. An S40 1.6SE is 29,840. However, to get a similar spec on the Focus to what's included as standard on the S40, you'd have to spend at least another 3,080 (525 for a 6CD changer, 1825 for leather, 730 for climate control). That takes you to 28,330, leaving the S40 1,510 more expensive than the Focus.

Interestingly, a 1.8 petrol Focus saloon doesn't appear on the Ford price list...

sk8board

maidhc wrote:

The marketing bit is where you convince people that an A3 is worth the extra over a Leon, or a RR Sport is superior to a Disco!

Although I love Fords, the S40 is a poor effort at platform sharing, it looks too much like a Focus saloon to be worth the extra money. At least VW can differentiate quite well between an Octy and a Leon and Golf to some degree. But a s40 and a high spec Focus? I'd take the Focus and use the change for a bigger engine or something.

Car marketers would NEVER suggest the link between different brands; mainly because it begs the question (as you correctly pointed out), why buy an S40 when you could have a Focus and a Family Holiday. The Passat/A4 are probably the closest 2 cars for platform sharing. The Golf drivers that have figured that out are all buy Octavia's and Leon's! and not A3's.

The thing is tho, I'd pick the Volvo over the Ford EVERY time. Can't really say why, but I would. Perhaps its one look at the extras as standard on the S40 (pretty much ALL of them!) The focus is (and always was) a Mass Market car; and styled as such. The Volvo (just like Audi/Seat/Skoda/VW, and Saab/Opel) is somehow different, and is more a personal taste. Anyone will drive a Focus, but the same person wouldnt be seen dead in a Volvo, just because its a Volvo. Personally, I will never ever buy a Peogeot or Opel. Its personal taste. But yet i'm the proud owner of a '00 1.4 RXI Megane ) and I love it. So work that one out.

Look on carzone for a 2005 5 door 1.6 Golf. Now search for a 5-door 1.6 A3. The A3 is as rare as hen's teeth.

For this reasoning, my next car will be a 1.6FSI A3 Sportback.My wife will be the one driving daily, and has not been driving long, so the hatchback is perfect. I use our public transport *spit*. It costs 5-6k more to buy the A3 over the golf, and will still cost 4-5k more in 3 years time. But we will have a rare car, easy to sell on 2nd hand market. The 5-6k is partly made up of the standard ESP, climate control and curtain airbags (not even available on the Golf)

unkel

sk8board wrote:

If the A3 is an expensive Golf

Or an extremely expensive Skoda Octavia

sk8board

Exactly Unkel )

I mentioned the Octavia further up. Its a case of where does it all end. Why does anyone buy a Leon, Golf or A3 when we can have the perfectly fine Octavia. Its budget, requiremetns and taste. Rarely does a car tick all 3 boxes.
it really comes down to personal choice when it comes to preferred manufacturer.

copacetic

sk8board wrote:

Car marketers would NEVER suggest the link between different brands; mainly because it begs the question (as you correctly pointed out), why buy an S40 when you could have a Focus and a Family Holiday. The Passat/A4 are probably the closest 2 cars for platform sharing. The Golf drivers that have figured that out are all buy Octavia's and Leon's! and not A3's.

The thing is tho, I'd pick the Volvo over the Ford EVERY time. Can't really say why, but I would. Perhaps its one look at the extras as standard on the S40 (pretty much ALL of them!) The focus is (and always was) a Mass Market car; and styled as such. The Volvo (just like Audi/Seat/Skoda/VW, and Saab/Opel) is somehow different, and is more a personal taste. Anyone will drive a Focus, but the same person wouldnt be seen dead in a Volvo, just because its a Volvo. Personally, I will never ever buy a Peogeot or Opel. Its personal taste. But yet i'm the proud owner of a '00 1.4 RXI Megane ) and I love it. So work that one out.

Look on carzone for a 2005 5 door 1.6 Golf. Now search for a 5-door 1.6 A3. The A3 is as rare as hen's teeth.

For this reasoning, my next car will be a 1.6FSI A3 Sportback.My wife will be the one driving daily, and has not been driving long, so the hatchback is perfect. I use our public transport *spit*. It costs 5-6k more to buy the A3 over the golf, and will still cost 4-5k more in 3 years time. But we will have a rare car, easy to sell on 2nd hand market. The 5-6k is partly made up of the standard ESP, climate control and curtain airbags (not even available on the Golf)

just so you know the esp and climate control aren't std on the a3, they are expensive options over and above the already big price difference... prefer the a3 though.

sk8board

Thats no problem Davey; but you get my point yeh? That the extra 5-6k IS definitely made up by additional extras, and partially by the pomp of owning an audi )

Pump for the Audi, you'll get most if not all the extra money back on re-sale, and it will sell in a heartbeat. How long does it take to re-sell a Golf (for a reasonable price, not a knock-down)?

unkel

sk8board wrote:

Why does anyone buy a Leon, Golf or A3 when we can have the perfectly fine Octavia

Because the vast majority of people have absolutely no idea that all these cars are pretty much the same thing. Ask in the pub, many will be saying that Golfs are built to last, rock solid and very reliable and that Skodas are junk

sk8board

I know a guy who bought an A3 a few years back and was absolutely disgusted when he realised that things like the Electric window/mirror switches, and the rev/speed dials were the same as were in my brothers Leon )

A lot of it is ignorance, people don't realise they are all essentially the same company: VAG, GM etc etc. But then, as IO said earlier, why would Volvo EVER advertise that the S40 was a Focus with a few more extras.

So forget this platform sharing things that car buffs love to talk about and just buy personal choice.

maidhc

sk8board wrote:

How long does it take to re-sell a Golf (for a reasonable price, not a knock-down)?

The Golf is probably the best secondhand seller in Ireland!

sk8board

I was talking about Sellers Market for a golf, not Buyers market )

Lex Luthor

maidhc wrote:

The Golf is probably the best secondhand seller in Ireland!

it sure is...I take it you mean the Corolla is top slot?

sk8board

Have been looking at the 1.6L market over the past few months (am thinking of changing), and without a doubt there is a race to the bottom goin on, as regards prices.
As a south-east garage guy told me recently, when people like me are (for example) looking for a 2004 1.6 Golf on the on-line sites, we go to to very end of the search results, and work our way back. You will notice people actively advertising their car as the 'cheapest online'! What a buyers market.

When it comes to an abundance of base models on the market, corolla's golfs and of course Almera's are top's. they can lose 50% of value in 3 years, which is usually reserved for the big Saabs or high mileage Merc's.

Donie75

Have to agree with Sk8board, I went shopping for a new car exactly 2 years ago. I was looking at a new 1.6 golf comfortline or a 2 or 3 year old Passat Tdi. I couldn't find a good straight Passat Tdi with reasonable mileage so I decided to concentrate on the Golf. I really liked the A3 but I always thought they were way dearer than a golf. I then sat down with the salesman who is also a mate of mine. He gave me a price of around €24,500 for the Golf Comfortline 1.6. Then I added in a few extras that I really wanted like AC, armrest, metallic and suddenly I'm up at over 27 grand and that was for basic AC not Climate. I also asked about discount for a straight deal and I was getting around 500 to 1000 off.
So then I asked about the A3. They gave me a price of just over 30K for a 1.6 A3 with 16' Alloys, Metallic, armrest and Digital Dual Zone Climate. I couldn't believe it. Then it turned out that they had one in stock in MDL with the spec I wanted. After some serious haggling I got the car for €27,700 on a straight deal. I love the car. It has been superb in every way for the last two years. Everyone admires it. Two people have asked to buy it off me recently and my mates girlfriend keeps telling me to mind it for her because she wants to buy it off me. I regularly get Golf drivers checking it out.
The car is still worth 22 to 23K secondhand. There are currently 184 04 Golfs for sale on Carzone but there are only 24 04 A3's. The A3 goes for 22 to 25K depending on model and spec. The Golf goes for 16 to 20K.
The garage gave me a loan of a golf for a week because my car was delayed slightly. The A3 is a far superior car to the golf when you look at ride, handling, interior finish and build quality. I'm certainly glad I went for the A3 over the Golf.
Just my 0.02c.
D

jimmycrackcorm

I drove a friends 2.0 turbo diesel S40 and it is certainly no focus. Beautifully crafted leather and wood cabin and lethal torque. you might as well say it shares a pin head with the focus.

sk8board

Donie75 wrote:

The car is still worth 22 to 23K secondhand. There are currently 184 04 Golfs for sale on Carzone but there are only 24 04 A3's. The A3 goes for 22 to 25K depending on model and spec. The Golf goes for 16 to 20K.

Thats my point exactly. as it happens I'm gonna be a dad in Oct, and my wife is hell-bent on getting an A3 Sportback as the starter famity car. who am I to argue )

copacetic

Donie75 wrote:

Have to agree with Sk8board, I went shopping for a new car exactly 2 years ago. I was looking at a new 1.6 golf comfortline or a 2 or 3 year old Passat Tdi. I couldn't find a good straight Passat Tdi with reasonable mileage so I decided to concentrate on the Golf. I really liked the A3 but I always thought they were way dearer than a golf. I then sat down with the salesman who is also a mate of mine. He gave me a price of around €24,500 for the Golf Comfortline 1.6. Then I added in a few extras that I really wanted like AC, armrest, metallic and suddenly I'm up at over 27 grand and that was for basic AC not Climate. I also asked about discount for a straight deal and I was getting around 500 to 1000 off.
So then I asked about the A3. They gave me a price of just over 30K for a 1.6 A3 with 16' Alloys, Metallic, armrest and Digital Dual Zone Climate. I couldn't believe it. Then it turned out that they had one in stock in MDL with the spec I wanted. After some serious haggling I got the car for €27,700 on a straight deal. I love the car. It has been superb in every way for the last two years. Everyone admires it. Two people have asked to buy it off me recently and my mates girlfriend keeps telling me to mind it for her because she wants to buy it off me. I regularly get Golf drivers checking it out.
The car is still worth 22 to 23K secondhand. There are currently 184 04 Golfs for sale on Carzone but there are only 24 04 A3's. The A3 goes for 22 to 25K depending on model and spec. The Golf goes for 16 to 20K.
The garage gave me a loan of a golf for a week because my car was delayed slightly. The A3 is a far superior car to the golf when you look at ride, handling, interior finish and build quality. I'm certainly glad I went for the A3 over the Golf.
Just my 0.02c.
D

thanks for the info on your deal am looking today myself an if I can get 10% off my preferred spec that comes in at 34 I'll be sold in a heartbeat...

Donie75

Daveym,
Best of luck with the deal. I got a great deal because my car was already in stock in MDL in Dublin. Also, Audi dealers seem to do much better deals if buy straight without a trade-in.
I found Michael Moores in Athlone very good to deal with.
D

EIN

crosstownk wrote:

You could be right - I just assumed 1.9 as the previous S40 was 1.9. Me and my assumptions..........:rolleyes:

EDIT - Yes you are right - the new model S40 is 2.0TD - apologies. Earlier post editied accordingly.

the new s40 2.0 TD is 136bhp. nice and pokey and with 6 speed gearbox nice and fast. the SE spec comes in well specd.... climate, leather, cruise, 6 stack cd upgraded sound system , 17inch alloys , auto wipers, lights, chromatic rear view mirror,etc etc.

it doesnt handle anything like a focus, totally different cars ..like chalk and cheese.. also the body work is a lot more substantial.....

EIN

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

I drove a friends 2.0 turbo diesel S40 and it is certainly no focus. Beautifully crafted leather and wood cabin and lethal torque. you might as well say it shares a pin head with the focus.

exactly!!

EIN

tred wrote:

they have a 1.6 and 2.0 diesel both PSA engines.
there is a rumour that the 2.0 is not so frugal on deisel either so maybe its tuned differently.

the s40 2.0 D with PSA engine gives about 45mpg.....

however if you drive it hard, and its quite easy to do, goes from 50mph to 70mph in a flash......then it drinks..

the 6speed gearbox is nice,, you can sit at 120kph in 6th gear at 2,000rev.

i have found that these engines take bout 10k kilometers to reach optimal fuel efficency...


i have done various tests and get on average , 660km for 45 euros of diesel.

so not bad overall. very pokey engines....

Lex Luthor

I saw an S80 yesterday and would say there is little size difference between that & the S60.

speedfreak

Interesting thread. We looked at the V50 (S40 just too small boot wise) and test drove a few variants. Coming from Audi ownership I have to say the interior is fab... a milllion miles away from a focus.. lovely centre console, really comfy supportive leather seats. The 1.6d had decent poke too. But we didnt get it! Instead got a Sportback ambition with CC etc. As previous posters have said when u spec a 1.6 Golf with aircon etc it really isnt that must cheaper over 2/3yrs and there is a S***load of them about AND they arent that exciting to look at (imo). sportback does get admiring comments... but I STILL think its too expensive .. goddamn VRT.

unkel

Lex Luthor wrote:

I saw an S80 yesterday and would say there is little size difference between that & the S60.

They might look very similar, but the S80 is nearly a foot longer!

sk8board

speedfreak wrote:

Interesting thread. We looked at the V50 (S40 just too small boot wise) and test drove a few variants. Coming from Audi ownership I have to say the interior is fab... a milllion miles away from a focus.. lovely centre console, really comfy supportive leather seats. The 1.6d had decent poke too. But we didnt get it! Instead got a Sportback ambition with CC etc. As previous posters have said when u spec a 1.6 Golf with aircon etc it really isnt that must cheaper over 2/3yrs and there is a S***load of them about AND they arent that exciting to look at (imo). sportback does get admiring comments... but I STILL think its too expensive .. goddamn VRT.

Unusual to move from a V50 to a Sportback, if its capacilty you're after Its the Sporkback for me tho. Its maybe too late now; but I hope you didn't get the 'old' 1.6 engine? and instead got the 1.6 FSI or the 2.0 TDI!