If you compare the economy to the performance competition it looks great.

In other words, it’s neither fish nor foul. That makes it a very interesting potential acquisition for the right buyer – all twelve of them.

I might well be one of the twelve, but a lot of good that does Volvo.

Build for the masses, then squeeze the car nuts. Or something.

If you compare the economy to the performance competition it looks great.

However, I don’t think it works the other way. I will give it best looking award, and agree it is more comfortable than some of the others.

I will say I’ve heard a lot of stories about guys who beat the snot out of their Cooper S’s constantly and still hit about 28-29mpg in em….

I’m also curious why the engine keeps getting bashed for having “poor” fuel economy and bad performance. It’s no gem, but 19/28 is pretty decent for that performance.

See where I’m going with this? The other cars you mention can get away with selling in small numbers because they are based on bread and butter cars. They don’t need to be brisk sellers to make money for their creators. They are basically halo variants. Volvo doesn’t play that game. That’s why the C30 is judged by different standards. It’s playing a different game (and losing at it).

I’m really curious. Seriously. 19/28 does not scream gas guzzler to me here, and is within spitting distance of the GTI, and beats the WRX and Mazdaspeed 3 by several MPG. I don’t really hear people complain about the 26mpg the MS3 is rated, though the 24mpg from the WRX does get complaints. As it should.

Meanwhile the C30 makes more horsepower than the WRX and gets 4mpg better doing it.

Gas guzzler??? If that’s the definition, the only one NOT a gas guzzler would be the Mini.

But once Volvo started to compete with the BMW’s and Mecedes’s…well let’s just say they should have stayed in their segment.

They’re the safety car that people knew as reliable. There is always a segment of people ready for cars like that. Trying to compete in the luxury market was a definite no-no for them.

Volvo’s were practical. Not luxury boxes!

My friend bought a s60 a 2 years ago and yes it was nice but not worth the 35 grand he paid. Volvo should get back to moderately priced practical safe cars. That’s their heritage!

That would be the wagon with a diesel would it not?

First, the GTI is an iconic vehicle. Iconic vehicles can often defy logic. Second, without looking it up, I believe the GTI gets better performance.

Overall, the C30 needed to come to the game with a much better solution in order to get people to swap. This is something the 2.8 can’t get their heads around. It took the japanese years of trying to find success, and they were helped by fuel prices that made compacts a better value. Instead of resting on their compacts, they then went to work to try to win over other segments.

OTOH, the 2.8 got really successful building SUV’s so the just kept at it. They didn’t put enough effort into taking back other segments. Instead, they produced also rans.

When you enter a segment. You won’t succeed until you offer a significantly better product. That is what gets folks to switch.

Volvo needs better engines in this car, badly. It will likely succeed if they offer an efficient one, and a sporty one instead of the kinda efficient and kinda sporty one they have now. Or, they could just make it lighter. And, they better make it cheaper.

As a fan of the C30 (but not a buyer) I’m happy to see that. What I think I’m hearing from most people is that in the segment they are competing in, the C30 should be more economical to drive. Also, Volvo’s “up market” trend is working against them when they try to do a fun & stylish small car.

It is expensive and it gets bad mileage. Volvo has not had the luxury to spend a lot of money on powertrain development and thus their entire lineup of vehicles suffers from terrible fuel economy. It’s just particularly glaring on this small car.

All in all, I think Volvo had the right idea when they envisioned this car. Too bad they weren’t able to bring a small diesel engine with it to give it the full effect they probably intended.

I’ve actually considered a V50 AWD for the Mazda3 wagon’s replacement. But, I might as well jump to a last-gen XC70 with about the same economy from the similiar drivetrain. Or just breakdown and get an Outback…I do live in Idaho.

* In the original press pics, I loved the style. Really. Thought it was terrific. But in the metal, I find it less so. It’s not ugly, but somehow it just loses the flair and rakishness that it has in photos.

* Space efficiency is a joke, especially in the rear. I cannot comprehend how something with a wheelbase that is basically the longest going in the European C-segment can possibly be that cramped. Although in fairness, apart from this, I like the interior style.

* The mechanical package, as mentioned above, is off-the-pace and delivers woeful efficiency. And whilst the chassis is OK, it’s certainly not best-in-class.

The optimistic pricing and limited range are merely the final nail in the coffin. This car would sell, even at inflated prices, if it was really good. But it’s simply not good enough to command that sort of premium. Which, for mine, is a real pity.

Why does the C30 get blasted for poor fuel economy (19/28, 23 combined) while the GTI gets 20/29, 24 combined and people say they’ll buy it?

Is 1mpg the difference between acceptable and poor fuel economy???

That is one lousy engine, fuel-wise.

I just see no reason to have an I5 as it doesn’t give the power of a 6 or efficiency of a 4…it did in 1992 but not anymore.

This car would be the perfect little commuter and highway cruiser with a DISI 2.0l I4 from Mazda/Ford, or at least the MX5’s 2.0l I4 (as opposed to the Mazda3 and Focus version).

“Wild Ass Rumor” is a gross understatement.

Lots of power from the 1.8T, nice ride given the lowered suspension, sweet Monsoon stereo, cloth Recaro seats, aluminum trim items, 18″ wheels, I could go on.

All the things I would modify myself on the standard GTI have already been done by the factory.

It’s probably the first car that I’ve owned that I haven’t wanted to tweak myself.

I drove the Cooper S before I bought the GTI.

I’ve always loved the exterior styling of the Mini, but was underwhelmed with the interior ergonomics. Unnecessarily retro and plastic-like for me.

The overall performance was quite good, but not great.
At the time, for the price, the 20th AE GTI was hard to beat.

Apparently there is a slew of configuration options and often resulted in unhappy customers who could not preview their options without first ordering them. Which meant the customers were unhappy once they actually took possession of their car.

In reality I think car dealers are annoying beyond belief and I’d just hope these crappy dealers just pack up and retreat back to wherever it is in the center of the Earth that they come from.