Now That the XC40's a Hit, Volvo Wants More Small Cars

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Volvo, back from near death and feeling pretty pleased with itself, wants to capitalize on the modular platform found beneath the XC40 compact crossover. With 80,000 orders for the new-for-2018 ‘ute under its belt, the Chinese-owned Swede plans to spawn more models and reassert itself in the small car space.

On Thursday, the company said it would throttle up production of the XC40 at its Belgian assembly plant, which will soon boast quite a bit of usable space. The S60 sedan’s headed to South Carolina later this year. Meanwhile, the V60 wagon sibling will move most of its production to a Swedish plant.

What does this mean for the United States? Perhaps more than you’d expect.

We’ll definitely see the new S60, which Volvo wants to appeal to sporty, youthful buyers, but it’s difficult to see any real hope of a small passenger car coup in the American marketplace. It’s no longer a space many automakers are interested in fighting for. Still, the automaker, which said two years ago that the 40-series cars would certainly arrive on these shores, hasn’t publicly backtracked. Volvo trademarked the C40 name in the U.S. in 2015 and the V40 name in 2016.

A Volvo spokeswoman told Automotive News Europe that the company would replace the current, overseas-only V40 with a “range” of small models based on the XC40’s Compact Modular Architecture. These models would not be hatchbacks, she said, without going into detail.

The first XC40s trickled onto U.S. sales charts in February. Last month, Volvo sold 1,404 of them in the states, making it the brand’s third-best selling model after the XC90 and new XC60 crossovers.

“The XC40’s success has surpassed even our highest expectations,” Volvo CEO Hakan Samuelsson said in a recent media release.

Volvo has said that its CMA architecture can be easily shortened, paving the way for a smaller class of subcompact vehicles that more or less match the current C-segment’s width. It also seems pretty protective of its future model names. In the past couple of years, the automaker has filed U.S. trademark applications for the names V20, V30, S50, XC10, XC20, XC30, and XC50.

While a trademark is no guarantee of U.S. sales availability, a subcompact CMA crossover seems like a likely — and necessary — addition to its American lineup. While it pales in comparison to the kind of volume seen in the compact segment, it’s crowded enough to be worthwhile.

Besides the 40-series cars, Volvo is readying an all-electric model for a 2019 debut. This vehicle will apparently launch as a standalone model.

[Image: Volvo Cars]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 22 comments
  • Maxb49 Maxb49 on May 25, 2018

    Jeeze, who would have thought that a diversified portfolio minimizes your risk exposure?

  • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on May 27, 2018

    To my surprise, the XC40 is now on my list of cars to check out. Alex Dykes' review was very positive, and the prices aren't terrible. But I think I'd prefer the electric version, although it won't be cheaper.

  • MaintenanceCosts "GLX" with the 2.slow? I'm confused. I thought that during the Mk3 and Mk4 era "GLX" meant the car had a VR6.
  • Dr.Nick What about Infiniti? Some of those cars might be interesting, whereas not much at Nissan interest me other than the Z which is probably big bucks.
  • Dave Holzman My '08 Civic (stick, 159k on the clock) is my favorite car that I've ever owned. If I had to choose between the current Civic and Corolla, I'd test drive 'em (with stick), and see how they felt. But I'd be approaching this choice partial to the Civic. I would not want any sort of automatic transmission, or the turbo engine.
  • Merc190 I would say Civic Si all the way if it still revved to 8300 rpm with no turbo. But nowadays I would pick the Corolla because I think they have a more clear idea on their respective models identity and mission. I also believe Toyota has a higher standard for quality.
  • Dave Holzman I think we're mixing up a few things here. I won't swear to it, but I'd be damned surprised if they were putting fire retardant in the seats of any cars from the '50s, or even the '60s. I can't quite conjure up the new car smell of the '57 Chevy my parents bought on October 17th of that year... but I could do so--vividly--until the last five years or so. I loved that scent, and when I smelled it, I could see the snow on Hollis Street in Cambridge Mass, as one or the other parent got ready to drive me to nursery school, and I could remember staring up at the sky on Christmas Eve, 1957, wondering if I might see Santa Claus flying overhead in his sleigh. No, I don't think the fire retardant on the foam in the seats of 21st (and maybe late 20th) century cars has anything to do with new car smell. (That doesn't mean new car small lacked toxicity--it probably had some.)
Next