The end of the S and V ranges?

[blueg33]

missing the VR6 said:

Speaking as a salesman for Volvo, S/V cars don't sell (sadly). Just not worth importing them to the UK market and I'd venture pretty soon the rest of the world, given the publics predilection for SUVs. It's also due to the ongoing supply chain issues and the fact SUV's are far more profitable than cars, as witnessed by Ford dropping most of their cars and keeping SUVS.

Sadly I see it regularly, the SUV boom is almost entirely driven by women and their other halves trying to keep them happy.

There is talk of an electric saloon at some point in the next few years.

My wife has a 2020 V60 Cross Country. She doesn't like SUV's so has one of the last V60 CC's on order. She finds SUV's too big and bulky, harder to park and harder to see out of. I think women buy them because of some sort of myth that they are safer and for school run bragging rights.

[JustGetATesla]

missing the VR6 said:

Speaking as a salesman for Volvo, S/V cars don't sell (sadly). Just not worth importing them to the UK market and I'd venture pretty soon the rest of the world, given the publics predilection for SUVs. It's also due to the ongoing supply chain issues and the fact SUV's are far more profitable than cars, as witnessed by Ford dropping most of their cars and keeping SUVS.

Sadly I see it regularly, the SUV boom is almost entirely driven by women and their other halves trying to keep them happy.

There is talk of an electric saloon at some point in the next few years.

I loved my S90. Inscription Pro trim with the B&W audio - an absolute palace to sit in. It was a D4, and the drivetrain was set up for cruising rather than any fun at all. Had it not been for a change of job and usage need, I would probably have kept it.

Depreciation was entertaining. Bought as a pre-reg when the dealership had ticked every box on a quarter-end quota order. I bought it £17k off list. And then lost another £17k 2 and a half year later when I traded it in. And people tell me EVs depreciate!!!

[Simon-R]

I have just bought a 700 mile 2 month old ex demo V60 B4 Ultimate in Fusion Red for what I consider to be a cracking deal - very underrated cars IMO

[dhutch]

Simon-R said:

I have just bought a 700 mile 2 month old ex demo V60 B4 Ultimate in Fusion Red for what I consider to be a cracking deal - very underrated cars IMO

Cant fault that.

That age, as well as the Hybrids, where not really within out budget, but we are very happy with our well loaded T4 Momentum Plus.

[blueg33]

At the end of this month we will be picking up our new and one of the very last V60 Cross Country’s. Ultimate spec, iirc the only 2 options were tow bar and spare wheel, so a very high spec.

We have a v60 cc at the moment, it is my wife’s car, as the new one will be. It gets slot of attention, people often ask her about it, mainly men - I think she gets a kick out of that!

Current one.

Edited by blueg33 on Tuesday 23 January 21:40

[stumpage]

I am just getting the end of my time with this V60 PE, I did want the S60 PE but at the time of ordering the lease cost (Company car) of the S60 with no options on was way more than the V60 with all the option packs selected. It's been a good car, wouldn't say great but very good at a lot of things. I have had a quite a few conversations with people commenting how nice it looks with the mods I've done to the wheels and brakes, they seem disappointed when I tell them it's out of the factory like that.



It is a shame that Volvo have ditched these as I'm not an SUV fan and as such my future car choices are getting less and less.

[RizzoTheRat]

stumpage said:

It is a shame that Volvo have ditched these as I'm not an SUV fan and as such my future car choices are getting less and less.

I didn't think I was either until I test drove an XC60 T8 and absolutely loved it. Very comfortable, plenty of power, handled surprisingly well, and well equipped inside. Sadly my wife thinks it's too big and as she'll be the one that curbs it or scrapes the sides on gate posts I feel I have to take her opinion in to consideration. It's a shame they felt the need to make them quite so wide.

[dhutch]

RizzoTheRat said:

... It's a shame they felt the need to make them quite so wide.

Its not just a Volvo thing though is it.

The XC60 is 'only' 100mm wider than the V60 II, and a similar width to a Mondeo, Passat and Pug3008.

However the V60 II is a whole foot wider than my 20yo 3 series, and it does really feel it any time you get near a parking space!
The XC40 is pretty much the same width as the V60 II and V90.
Both XC40 and 60 are noticeably shorter than the V60/90 and have correspond less boot space.
The Volvo V60 II feels like it has an enormous bonnet, but actually the overall length is as per a Passat or A4 Avant, shorter than a Superb.

If anyone is really bored, this link should give access to a spreadsheet I put together to compare car dims/performance.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XIAa0ahoG3...

[RizzoTheRat]

Interesting that the widest one on your list is the Mondeo, I hadn't realised they were quite so wide.
Agree everything is getting wider though. I get that modern crash safety means thicker doors and pillars, but do they really need so much space between the driver and passenger?

When we downsized to a single car several years ago we sold the wife's Jazz and kept my Mk2 Octavia, which she still moans about occasionally. She is definitely a fan of small cars...even after having to play Tetris with the suitcases to get them in to the Polo she hired on holiday over Christmas

[blueg33]

RizzoTheRat said:

Interesting that the widest one on your list is the Mondeo, I hadn't realised they were quite so wide.
Agree everything is getting wider though. I get that modern crash safety means thicker doors and pillars, but do they really need so much space between the driver and passenger?

When we downsized to a single car several years ago we sold the wife's Jazz and kept my Mk2 Octavia, which she still moans about occasionally. She is definitely a fan of small cars...even after having to play Tetris with the suitcases to get them in to the Polo she hired on holiday over Christmas

I’ve been married 30 years. I need as much space as possible between driver and passenger…….

[dhutch]

RizzoTheRat said:

Interesting that the widest one on your list is the Mondeo, I hadn't realised they were quite so wide.

Yeah, they appear to have really grown. You also see a reasonable number of Focus Estates, which is about the size I remember a Mondeo being.

Also, that list while reasonable dataset, is far from well peer reviewed. Most data is from Parkers website, seats down capacities and a few cross checks from Autotrader.

[blueg33]

Just collected our new V60 cc from the detailer, it went straight there from the dealer.

We ordered this car from the factory in May. It must be one of the very last V60 CC’s for the UK.

Grabbed a few quick snaps at 8.40 this evening before bringing it home.









[url|https://thumbsnap.com/GtonAyLp[/url]

[soupdragon1]

FiF said:

Seems that Jonny Smith and I are on the same side of opinion on this so happy to disagree with your opinion.


https://twitter.com/Carpervert/status/168641991026...

https://twitter.com/Carpervert/status/168686657477...

Autos have evolved into these massive things, very heavy, and as for SUVs with sloping back windows. BMW X6 should have had an anti-tank round at birth. Never has so much metal contained such little useful space. Destroy.

These arguments aren't as clear cut as statistic make out

For example, the X6 which should have been shot at birth, has a bigger boot floor than the X5. The X5 has more volume, but only if you pack it to the ceiling. So which is more useful? People look at volume but pay zero attention to the floor area (2D measurement is important, as well as 3D, cubic litres v sqft)

Same with the SUV v estate argument. Throw cubic litres arguments at me all day, but if it's the difference between putting a bike in the boot without having to remove a wheel, then the cubic feet statistic is trumped by sqft.

[dhutch]

soupdragon1 said:

So which is more useful? People look at volume but pay zero attention to the floor area.

Same with the SUV v estate argument.

One of the reasons is its very hard to find the data!
When you look in person its fairly obvious the SUV tends to have a smaller boot area than the estate, often they are shorter vehicles overall too. But if you look online, as I just have, its nowhere to be found.

I did find the below extract on parkers, which gives to 'upto glass line' volume which is quite nice, and you would have thought should almost be the standard measure. But equally even if you load it to the roof, the XC40 has less boot volume than the V60 II which I is the equiv estate. The V60 has more seats up volume than most its size, although the Octavia has a lot more seats down, and BMW is awful for boot space...

[i]Boot space and storage
Volvo quotes two boot space figures. There are 452 litres of space if you fill the XC40’s boot up to the glass line and 578 litres if you pack it up to the roof. Fold the rear bench flat and the amount of maximum available space increases to 1,328 litres.[/i]

XC 40......452 . 578 . 1328
V60 II.......529 . 658 . 1441
Octavia 3...........610 . 1740
Octavia 4 ..........620 . 1700
3er Touring.......495 . 1500

Edited by dhutch on Friday 16th February 11:12

[Murph7355]

soupdragon1 said:

These arguments aren't as clear cut as statistic make out

For example, the X6 which should have been shot at birth, has a bigger boot floor than the X5. The X5 has more volume, but only if you pack it to the ceiling. So which is more useful?...

I guess when trying to put a couple of gangsta bodies in the back, the X6. Which starts to make everything about their popularity make sense

[Murph7355]

blueg33 said:

....
Grabbed a few quick snaps at 8.40 this evening before bringing it home.

I love Volvo blond interiors. One of the nicest places to sit in car-dom.

[FiF]

dhutch said:

soupdragon1 said:

So which is more useful? People look at volume but pay zero attention to the floor area.

Same with the SUV v estate argument.

One of the reasons is its very hard to find the data!
When you look in person its fairly obvious the SUV tends to have a smaller boot area than the estate, often they are shorter vehicles overall too. But if you look online, as I just have, its nowhere to be found.

I did find the below extract on parkers, which gives to 'upto glass line' volume which is quite nice, and you would have thought should almost be the standard measure. But equally even if you load it to the roof, the XC40 has less boot volume than the V60 II which I is the equiv estate. The V60 has more seats up volume than most its size, although the Octavia has a lot more seats down, and BMW is awful for boot space...

[i]Boot space and storage
Volvo quotes two boot space figures. There are 452 litres of space if you fill the XC40’s boot up to the glass line and 578 litres if you pack it up to the roof. Fold the rear bench flat and the amount of maximum available space increases to 1,328 litres.[/i]

XC 40......452 . 578 . 1328
V60 II.......529 . 658 . 1441
Octavia 3...........610 . 1740
Octavia 4 ..........620 . 1700
3er Touring.......495 . 1500

Edited by dhutch on Friday 16th February 11:12

I find the stats on the Ridc website very useful.

Link to the V60 dimensions as an example
https://www.ridc.org.uk/features-reviews/out-and-a...

[Elderly]

soupdragon1 said:

…………So which is more useful? People look at volume but pay zero attention to the floor area (2D measurement is important, as well as 3D, cubic litres v sqft)

Same with the SUV v estate argument. Throw cubic litres arguments at me all day, but if it's the difference between putting a bike in the boot without having to remove a wheel, then the cubic feet statistic is trumped by sqft.

I have occasion to transport an item of mine whose length fits perfectly between the glove compartment and the tailgate of my phase 3 V70.
There’s no rear seat squab that has to be folded and the front passenger seat back folds forward to create a perfectly flat floor for the entire length of the vehicle.

I was thinking that I should replace it now with a late V90 as I don’t know of another large estate with a perfectly flat floor.

But my local Volvo indie said that the maintenance costs of a V90 diesel are much higher than my V70 and that the mpg of the petrol version is dreadful.

[blueg33]

We got 33mph out of our petrol V60CC T5 and we get 33mpg out of the new mild hybrid petrol V60CC

I suspect V90 with the T5 (250bhp) would be similar. the questions is, whether 33mpg is bad or good or indifferent. I get about the same MPG from my Giulia which is also a 2l turbo petrol.

[soupdragon1]

Elderly said:

I have occasion to transport an item of mine whose length fits perfectly between the glove compartment and the tailgate of my phase 3 V70.
There’s no rear seat squab that has to be folded and the front passenger seat back folds forward to create a perfectly flat floor for the entire length of the vehicle.

I was thinking that I should replace it now with a late V90 as I don’t know of another large estate with a perfectly flat floor.

But my local Volvo indie said that the maintenance costs of a V90 diesel are much higher than my V70 and that the mpg of the petrol version is dreadful.

Maintenance costs should be fairly similar I would have thought, if he's talking about oil changes and consumables. If there is a difference in reliability, then perhaps that was where he was coming from, rather than day to day maintenance?

I got 30mpg in my petrol V90, a bit more on a run. Not great but its a big heavy car. The 2L diesel is much better on the fuel v the petrol.