Volvo XC40 / C40

[Condi]

oop north said:

There is a display that you can go to in central
Screen that shows that sort of info but the app is a bit feeble. No record of past trips like the ipace app has for example

Is this something people need with EVs? Never needed it with a petrol car, can't really see the benefit for an EV either. Who cares how much energy you used on a trip previously.

[SWoll]

Condi said:

oop north said:

There is a display that you can go to in central
Screen that shows that sort of info but the app is a bit feeble. No record of past trips like the ipace app has for example

Is this something people need with EVs? Never needed it with a petrol car, can't really see the benefit for an EV either. Who cares how much energy you used on a trip previously.

Needed? Probably not in most cases. Wanted? Most definitely.

As you've probably noticed, the vast majority are obsessed with EV range and efficiency.

[JackReacher]

I'm looking at one of these on my company car scheme, £380 a month after tax for the twin motor version.

Question is, it looks very quick according to the stats, but what is it like to drive? Any fun to be had or not? Its to replace an i3s. Thanks.

[hajaba123]

Ordered a C40 on the work scheme last night. Had a XC40 for a couple of days on trial and loved it. Great tech, big but not too big and rapid. For some reason the XC has dropped off the list so gone for the C. Due at end of August apparently so plenty of time to enjoy the GR Yaris ahead of that

[48k]

I've had an XC40 Twin Pro since November last year. Great car, very comfortable, excellent ride on the crappy rounds where I live, and startlingly quick when you indulge the twin motors and floor it for sts and giggles. Love it. But 250 miles range is very ambitious / not realistic IME (driving sensibly). Mine is currently charged to 100% and showing 160 mile range. I have a 210-ish mile round trip tomorrow so will be interesting to see what happens.

[JackReacher]

48k said:

I've had an XC40 Twin Pro since November last year. Great car, very comfortable, excellent ride on the crappy rounds where I live, and startlingly quick when you indulge the twin motors and floor it for sts and giggles. Love it. But 250 miles range is very ambitious / not realistic IME (driving sensibly). Mine is currently charged to 100% and showing 160 mile range. I have a 210-ish mile round trip tomorrow so will be interesting to see what happens.

That is pretty poor range, but is it indicating 160 miles based on recent driving and you've been flooring it?!

Does it have an eco mode that restricts power and response to gain extra miles?

[pills]

The XC40 twin motor is on my short list for my next car. Popped into my local Volvo dealership earlier and was very impressed with both the car the salesman. I think someone on here replaced their BMW X3 with one, how does it compare?

[Diderot]

JackReacher said:

I'm looking at one of these on my company car scheme, £380 a month after tax for the twin motor version.

Question is, it looks very quick according to the stats, but what is it like to drive? Any fun to be had or not? Its to replace an i3s. Thanks.

It is quick - mid 4s to 60. The pull from 30-70 is bonkers too.

I love the way it drives: smooth cosseting ride (we have the 19s), wafting along with instant torque and power in near silence, the drivetrain is excellent, traction is superb in all weather, rolls in the corners far less that I had expected given its 'non-sporty' setup. We had an X3 35d before this, and the ride was crashy on the 20s, and it rolled just as much as the XC40.

The seats are very comfortable as you'd expect too, so all in all a very relaxing, comfortable and surprisingly roomy for the footprint SUV.

Range wise, summer last year we've had 240 ish easily in it at 65mph on the motorway on longer journeys. Our range on the 'new' in car app shows 210 at the minute, but the wife's commute is 6 miles each way NSL and town. If I take the Ovlov it's a 4 mile commute along the coast average 30 mph.

I've just had the convo with Mrs D and we both agree that it's the best practical family car we've ever owned (well, in this case lease through the Ltd).

[pills]

Thanks Diderot, this will be my first venture into electric cars and I do like the X3 so nice to know it's a good replacement.

[Diderot]

pills said:

Thanks Diderot, this will be my first venture into electric cars and I do like the X3 so nice to know it's a good replacement.

Np. Our first electric car too.

[48k]

JackReacher said:

48k said:

I've had an XC40 Twin Pro since November last year. Great car, very comfortable, excellent ride on the crappy rounds where I live, and startlingly quick when you indulge the twin motors and floor it for sts and giggles. Love it. But 250 miles range is very ambitious / not realistic IME (driving sensibly). Mine is currently charged to 100% and showing 160 mile range. I have a 210-ish mile round trip tomorrow so will be interesting to see what happens.

That is pretty poor range, but is it indicating 160 miles based on recent driving and you've been flooring it?!

Does it have an eco mode that restricts power and response to gain extra miles?

I suspect the indicated 160 miles is because all my journeys are short. And also the software/display is slow to update - did a long run yesterday and it was still showing 160 miles range when we were 35 miles in to the journey.

Yesterday's long run - left home on 100% having preconditioned the car plugged-in as the frost icon was on the battery icon meaning battery performance is limited. 116miles of A-roads and motorways (M40, M25, M23) with cruise set to 70 but a lot of hold ups on the M25 and a comfort break at the services on the M40. Arrived at Pease Pottage Services on 45%. 42 minutes of charge - 35.249kWh at 39p/kWh (Ouch!) - whilst we had breakfast and a bathroom break took the battery up to 84%. A-roads to rellies, then A-roads and motorways back home (A24, M25, M1, A5) with some holdups on the M25 again. 129 miles since charging, arrived home on 34%. The direct route without detouring for charging/breakfast/bathroom is about 105 miles so the car should get there and back on a full charge. Will probably go on my own next time and go straight down and back to try it.

[JackReacher]

I had a brief test drive in an XC40 yesterday. Very quick for sure, probably too quick for the chassis but better to have speed than not. Ride and handling were decent enough, and it certainly would make better family transport than our i3s, bigger boot and access to rear seats. Felt more substantial as well which is not surprising given the weight of it!!.

Downsides for me, the steering is overly light with no connection at all. Too much emphasis on touch screen controls, and while the interior was ok it felt a bit cheap compared to my 3 series. Plus no android auto which is odd if it is a google based system.

Getting back in the i3 after, it felt more enjoyable to drive but think we need to move on from that for space reasons.

My main concern with the xc40 is the lack of efficiency, it has a battery that is 80% bigger but doesnt seem to offer a big real world range increase, maybe an extra 30-40 miles at most.

[SWoll]

JackReacher said:

I had a brief test drive in an XC40 yesterday. Very quick for sure, probably too quick for the chassis but better to have speed than not. Ride and handling were decent enough, and it certainly would make better family transport than our i3s, bigger boot and access to rear seats. Felt more substantial as well which is not surprising given the weight of it!!.

Downsides for me, the steering is overly light with no connection at all. Too much emphasis on touch screen controls, and while the interior was ok it felt a bit cheap compared to my 3 series. Plus no android auto which is odd if it is a google based system.

Getting back in the i3 after, it felt more enjoyable to drive but think we need to move on from that for space reasons.

My main concern with the xc40 is the lack of efficiency, it has a battery that is 80% bigger but doesnt seem to offer a big real world range increase, maybe an extra 30-40 miles at most.

You want more space and practicality then that's the price you pay unfortunately, especially when shifting from a ground up EV using clever construction methods to a platform share EV made with traditional materials. Add considerably wider tyres and worse overall aero and no surprise.

The range on our etron 55 is approx 20% better than we had from our i3 120ah despite having a battery 130% larger. (37.9kW v 87kW). It does however also weigh more than twice as much.

99% sure we'll end up back in an i3S some point soon with an ICE car to compliment it for longer journeys and holidays.

[Condi]

SWoll said:

99% sure we'll end up back in an i3S some point soon with an ICE car to compliment it for longer journeys and holidays.

In Norway which has the biggest EV take up in the world (by population), that is exactly how it works. Many people have a small EV for around town and daily driving, then an ICE car for longer trips. For most people a 60 mile range is sufficient for 95% of their days - the whole push for more and more range is simply a case of carrying more and more battery around for little benefit most of the time. Companies are starting to tap into the market for cheap city EVs, a French company will convert your old Fiat 500 from ICE to EV for only €5000. It won't get you far - only about 60-70 miles - but the average commute is 6 miles and the average trip to the shop about 4 miles.

[JackReacher]

SWoll said:

You want more space and practicality then that's the price you pay unfortunately, especially when shifting from a ground up EV using clever construction methods to a platform share EV made with traditional materials. Add considerably wider tyres and worse overall aero and no surprise.

The range on our etron 55 is approx 20% better than we had from our i3 120ah despite having a battery 130% larger. (37.9kW v 87kW). It does however also weigh more than twice as much.

99% sure we'll end up back in an i3S some point soon with an ICE car to compliment it for longer journeys and holidays.

Agreed that is the price I will have to pay unfortunately. The i3s is a second car, but does all the local and semi local driving. We have a 3 series estate for longer drives and when we need more space. But even as a 2nd car I think we need a bit more space. I could of course buy it at the end of the company lease, but the tax advantages of having a new company car mean it's as cheap if not cheaper to get something new. Sadly there is nothing else like the i3. The id3 is another option, but looks incredibly bland and not sure on the cabin and software issues they seem to have.

[moonigan]

JackReacher said:

My main concern with the xc40 is the lack of efficiency, it has a battery that is 80% bigger but doesnt seem to offer a big real world range increase, maybe an extra 30-40 miles at most.

I looked at these briefly and came to a similar conclusion. The car I was looking at was around £56K. In the end I opted for a BMW iX3 M Sport which is imho a level above the Volvo in every area except outright performance for not a lot more money.

[maddog993]

moonigan said:

I looked at these briefly and came to a similar conclusion. The car I was looking at was around £56K. In the end I opted for a BMW iX3 M Sport which is imho a level above the Volvo in every area except outright performance for not a lot more money.

No 4wd option with the iX3 though, which may or may not be an issue.

[anonymous-user]

SWoll said:

99% sure we'll end up back in an i3S some point soon with an ICE car to compliment it for longer journeys and holidays.

I3s and Transporter T6 derv here for exactly those reasons!

The I3 is simply far too fun a car to get rid of ;-)

[greggy50]

moonigan said:

JackReacher said:

My main concern with the xc40 is the lack of efficiency, it has a battery that is 80% bigger but doesnt seem to offer a big real world range increase, maybe an extra 30-40 miles at most.

I looked at these briefly and came to a similar conclusion. The car I was looking at was around £56K. In the end I opted for a BMW iX3 M Sport which is imho a level above the Volvo in every area except outright performance for not a lot more money.

IX3 is a solid product if you don't need silly performance, however it has massive lead time to my knowledge? A work colleage is waiting 12 months for his I4 M50!

[JackReacher]

moonigan said:

JackReacher said:

My main concern with the xc40 is the lack of efficiency, it has a battery that is 80% bigger but doesnt seem to offer a big real world range increase, maybe an extra 30-40 miles at most.

I looked at these briefly and came to a similar conclusion. The car I was looking at was around £56K. In the end I opted for a BMW iX3 M Sport which is imho a level above the Volvo in every area except outright performance for not a lot more money.

I didn't think the ix3 was that efficient either? Maybe slightly better than the XC40. Anyway not an option for me really, as its more expensive on my car scheme than the XC40 for whatever reason. I could get an i4 40 for the same price as the ix3 and I would probably go for that if I wanted to spend more.