Closer to Volvo C30
August 14, 2008
Start with one of Volvo’s popular S40 compact sedans. Eliminate the rear doors, lop off several inches in the car’s length, slim the car down by a couple of hundred pounds, add a hatchback at the rear and you have the C30. It’s a three-door hatchback runabout that’s similar — kinda, sorta — to an Audi A3, Mini Cooper or Volkswagen GTI.
The C30’s styling is both distinctive and attractive. The front end is pure S40 sedan. But the C30’s roofline flows nicely into a steeply reverse-sloped rear end that’s unlike that of any current Volvo. Muscular rear shoulders give the car a hunkered-down look. And when viewed from above, the car has a teardrop shape that’s probably good for aerodynamic efficiency.
The C30’s styling is also a little bit retro. The rear lids of hatchbacks typically consist of a metal frame with a glass window. But the unusual all-glass hatchback lid of the C30 is reminiscent of Volvo’s P1800ES sport wagon from the 1970s — still a favorite design of Volvo aficionados.
Inside, the C30’s styling is very Volvo — which is to say, simple and clean in good Scandinavian fashion. Volvo’s trademark interior feature, a slim waterfall-like center stack with controls for the audio and climate systems, highlights the cabin. The Volvo’s controls and switchgear are logically arranged and easy to find. Plenty of glass area means that the visibility from the driver’s seat is generally unobstructed and the interior feels especially open and airy for a coupe.
Volvo ( www.volvocars.com) offers the C30 in two trim levels: Versions 1.0 and 2.0. My test car was the former. It’s the least expensive C30 edition — and in fact, the least expensive model of any Volvo — with a base price of $23,695, including destination charges. The 2.0 costs about $3,000 more and adds several body, suspension and interior enhancements, including upgraded wheels and sound system.
Volvo also offers something called “Custom Build” if you wish to trick out your C30 with unusual paint schemes or such accessories as keyless start or bi-xenon headlights. One problem, however: Going Custom Build will tack on a one-time $300 fee to the car’s price, even if you just want to add cruise control or a trip computer. That seems chintzy to me.
So did the battleship gray interior of my test car. Though the car’s fit and overall finish was well done, large expanses of boring gray plastic looked low rent. But I liked the comfortable and supportive seats, covered in Volvo’s good-looking T-Tek fabric upholstery.
Both Versions 1.0 and 2.0 come with plenty of standard equipment, including air conditioning, tilt-and-telescoping steering column, keyless remote entry and — as expected of any Volvo — a complete set of safety features. Both versions also share the same drive train, a 227-horsepower turbocharged five-cylinder engine connected to either a six-speed manual or five-speed automatic transmission.
According to www.fueleconomy.gov, fuel economy is 23 mpg combined city/highway driving for the manual gearbox (22 mpg combined for the automatic transmission). That’s not an impressive rating for a compact car. And Volvo recommends premium grade gasoline, though the owner’s manual says regular grade gas won’t damage the engine.
The five-cylinder Volvo engine was smooth, quiet and pulled strong. The six-speed manual transmission, as fitted to my test car, was slick shifting and pleasant to operate. The steering too, was nicely weighted and gave good feedback. And the brakes were powerful.
But despite the C30’s sporty looks, the car doesn’t deliver the sporty driving dynamics of a Mini Cooper or VW GTI. For hard driving on a twisty road, I’d pick the latter two cars over the Volvo any day. Instead, the Volvo is the more comfy highway cruiser, with a quieter interior and a less jittery ride.
To be sure, styling sells cars. But there’s a practical price to pay for the C30’s handsome lines. The rear seat is best described as “for occasional use,” as both reaching it and sitting in it for long periods are challenging undertakings. The rear seatbacks fold down to increase the cargo area, but a fairly narrow hatch opening makes loading and unloading cargo something of a chore.
Which brings me to this right-brain/left-brain question: If the C30 drives much like the S40 sedan from which it is derived, why not just buy the sedan with its useful rear doors and extra passenger room? The S40 costs only a little more than the C30 but is far more practical.
Ah, but that’s left-brain thinking. Beauty has its own rewards and so does the C30.
Comments
Got something to say?
