By on December 21, 2014

2015 Volvo S60We’re still a few months away from seeing the first new XC90s at Volvo dealers in North America and many more months away from discovering whether it can rescue the brand’s fortunes on this side of the Atlantic.

Like an overdue baby who doesn’t want to leave his mother’s womb for this cruel, cold, callous world, the XC90 must be planning to dig in its heels (or wheels?) as stevedores attempt to drive it off Swedish docks onto North America-bound ships. Surely Volvo’s newest three-row crossover can’t be looking forward to joining a family of progressively more disappointing vehicles.

Setting aside the fact that Volvo Canada didn’t sell a single S80 in November 2014 – that’s just plain embarrassing – the U.S. situation last month was especially poor. See, it’s not just the age of the outgoing XC90 that’s been bringing down Volvo sales. The brand’s other models, almost without exception, are selling at a far slower rate this year than last year even as the U.S. auto industry expands at a healthy 5.5% clip.

The C30 and C70 left us before the second XC90 could even arrive, and their disappearance resulted in 3539 fewer January-November sales this year than in 2013.

The new V60 attracts an average of 420 buyers per month, but only 314 V60 sales were reported by Volvo in November, the model’s lowest-volume month so far.

S60 sales are down 13% this year but fell 29% to just 1017 units in November. That total marks the lowest-volume S60 month in nearly four years. (398 were sold in December 2010 when the second-generation car was ramping up.)

2016 Volvo XC90The always-unloved S80? Volume is down 4% to 1674 units this year and fell 10% in November to just 155 sales. No, the S80 was never popular, but Volvo USA sold an average of 11,350 S80s on an annual basis between 2002 and 2008. 2014 will be the sixth consecutive year of U.S. sales decline for the outdated sedan.

The XC70 posted a 4% gain in November and sales are up 4% to 4623 units this year. Likewise, XC60 volume was up 10% in November, but sales are down 5% in 2014 to 17,197 units. The Acura RDX and Audi Q5 sell more than twice as often; the Mercedes-Benz GLK nearly twice as often.

Brand-wide Volvo sales tumbled 14% last month as U.S. new vehicle volume rose 5% to 1.3 million units. Volvo earned 0.3% of the industry’s new vehicle volume. In 2004, the XC90’s best year, Volvo’s market share was a completely respectable 0.8%. They sold more than 39,000 XC90s that year and more than 100,000 other vehicles. In other words, the XC90 didn’t carry the brand on its own. 72% of Volvo sales in 2004 were generated by something other than the XC90. Hypothetically, if the S60, S80, V60, XC70, and XC60 could do nothing more than halt their decline in 2015, Volvo would still need to sell approximately 45,000 XC90s in order for the brand to top the 100K mark.

That’s not going to happen, particularly not in 2015, as the XC90 will be late getting started. But even if the XC90 is nothing more than a sign that Volvo has returned to form, even if it’s  nothing more than sufficiently successful to halt Volvo’s decline – Volvo brand sales are down 9% in the U.S. this year – we can hope that its successors will be prepared to restore Volvo to North American health.

Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

150 Comments on “U.S. Volvo Sales Situation Getting Uglier As New XC90 Is Readied...”


  • avatar
    Alfisti

    They just do not listen. The only really competitive product is the xc60 which is way, way over priced. The v60 and 70 are essentially niche products.

    Fundamental issue is price in canada anyway. Even if product matches germans the badge does not have the prestige to charge so much. The high end of the market is so crowded and so cut throat,why not play half a step down where theres a yawning gap in the market?

    If i am not buying an xc60 volvo are in trouble. I am 38, wife and i are both professionals, not crazy about showy or douchey aspect of germans, value safety and we have a saab wagon ffs!

    But an xc60 trimmed out to a reasonable level is near $55k! Thats insane.

    • 0 avatar
      Sjalabais

      Now that is actually a question I’ve been wondering about for a while: Canada has a pretty Scandinavian climate, from the west to the east. It is a liberal democracy. People have a sense for design, but they are not carrying their noses pointing to the skies. Everything tells me Volvo should be a massive success.

      But sales are dismal. Don’t. Understand.

      Btw, you treat price like a free-floating variable. I’m not sure tiny Volvo can push prices much further. They’re not exactly awash with cash.

      • 0 avatar
        Lie2me

        Canadians are a frugal people, Volvos are expensive. There are too many other choices that offer the same or better value for less money

      • 0 avatar
        maestromario

        In the late 20th century, Volvo’s were plentiful in Montreal Canada. Any school parking lot had a respectable amount of 240’s and 740’s. And yes they were the proof that with proper weight distribution, RWD and winter can coexist in harmony. We all know that the last true Volvo was the 850, and the S70, v70 and XC70 were the last popular Volvos here up north.

        Now former Volvo owners who appreciate well engineered simple transportation purchase VW’s. The current Volvo offering in Canada is not necessarily overpriced, but it cruelly lacks entry level trims. They should have an S60 version that competes with 4 cyl Accords, Camry, Passat, Sonata… in the mid $20K with a stick and cloth seats.

        To me, Volvo was never a prestige brand like BMW, Mercedes and now Audi. They seem to fight the same battle as Lincoln.

    • 0 avatar
      tariqv

      Dont know about Canada but in the US a reasonably equipped xc60 is more like 45K, besides if the xc60 were indeed that expensive noobody would buy it. It is clear that the buyers do not find it expensive enough to prevent them from buying half as much as the leaders of the segment, despite volvo as a brand being in less than perfect condition to say the least.

      I find it sad to read comments that volvo should go back to its roots of affordable, quality family cars. Volvo has the technology and the imagination to compete with the Germans and I am looking forward to their new SPA models; I’m sure they will best their counterparts in areas other than safety as well.

  • avatar
    johnhowington

    Dear Volvo of America/Canada, North Americans are not fooled by a 54 thousand dollar Chinese (Geely) special. In other words, “there aint nothing price wont fix.”

  • avatar
    Alex D

    I hope this comes to nobody’s surprise.

    Two key mistakes:
    One – Stopping to sell your most successful (and volume!) product without replacement (Volvo V70 Wagon). This is like Ford stopping to sell the F-150, duh!! —
    Two – Overpricing your products without a solid value proposition to allow for such price.

    Volvo is soon going the way of Saab. Sorry to see it.

    • 0 avatar
      Sjalabais

      Agreed with #1. Stopping the sales of wagons was a massive mistake. Even in Europe Volvo tried to get away from wagons (the S40 was presented before the V40, the S80 sucked up too many resources). That’s over now, luckily.

  • avatar
    Fred

    3-400 wagons a month is pretty good. When I bought my Acura Sportwagon in March there were about 300 left. Now there is just a few.

  • avatar
    bufguy

    Talk about an irrelevant brand….Subaru has stolen the safety/ yuppie cache, the Germans own performance and snob appeal and the rest of the Japanese own reliability….Poor Volvo…I honestly didn’t know the S80 was being produced anymore

    • 0 avatar
      hreardon

      I think this is the key to Volvo’s issue: they’re irrelevant since other brands have co-opted their value proposition. Between Subaru, Audi, BMW and Mercedes – what is the Volvo brand proposition? Sure, they have some nice cars. The S/V60 are nice – but what about them makes me WANT to buy one?

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    When I can get safety and reliability in a Kia for half the price, the market doesn’t need Volvo any more.

    • 0 avatar
      petezeiss

      This. No one need pay more than high-20s for a safe, fast, squashy-roofed sedan if that’s what you want.

      Granted, Sportage and Sorento are top-notch, too.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      Well, to take an alternate stance, the answer to every automotive question isn’t a $25K Kia. My relatives’ 2-year old S60 provides a better driving experience, nicer interior materials, far better seating, etc than an Optima. It’s clearly a step up. I personally think the problem comes when you price out an S60 and see what entry-level luxury metal that price will buy from other brands. The S60 is a nice car. It isn’t $45K nice.

      • 0 avatar
        johnhowington

        the fact that i enjoy is how volvo’s 10 year depreciation is pretty much in line with kia.

        • 0 avatar
          petezeiss

          I take it you mean simultaneous with Kia’s spectacular rise in quality?

          Ki-A!

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Honestly, most vehicles have similar depreciation at year ten assuming similar condition and mileage. The only other factors are popularity/demand. A Toyota, Volvo, and KIA all sit on a lot 10yo with 120K apiece for the same money I can guarantee the Toyota sells first.

      • 0 avatar
        hreardon

        My thoughts exactly on the V60 I test drove back in the spring: very nice car, best seats I’ve ever enjoyed, nice engine and transmission. Downsides were that the interior/infotainment was lacking, there was more road/wind noise at highway speeds than I expected at this price range, very small backseat and cargo area. The FWD sport model, without xenons or navigation priced out at around $40k.

        That’s silly money, especially in a market where there are a large number of CPO’d Audi allroads for similar money.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        @30-mile

        You hit the nail on the head. The problem is that the Germans provide just as big a step up over Volvo as Volvo does over the Camcordima for a *much* smaller increase in cost.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      “When I can get safety and reliability in a Kia…”

      And when is that going to happen, exactly? What I’m seeing in 4 or 5 year old Hyundais and Kias is not good. They’ve learned from the GM school where all of a sudden everything is too worn-out to be worth fixing. The buy-in sure is cheap, but who wants to be surrounded by “cheap” all the time?
      On top of that, there’s not a Kia or Hyundai that offers any excitement or even feedback. Even their sports cars are like limp handshakes.

      Back to Volvo: let’s see what they come-up with. Ford didn’t leave them with much in the pipeline, so they’ve got nothing to sell. A lot of their problems are self-inflicted: the so-so handling, their Ingmar Bergman interiors that make you question your will to live, their pretentious/defeatist (not sure which) unwillingness to send over the V40 even though it the CLA and A3 are killing it in the same segment, their uncompetitive prices (it’s a put-on: they’ve been rental staples for years).

      On the plus side, their new engines are some of the most exciting and innovative around, Polestar has real potential, the new XC-90 hints at an interior renaissance, and their new owners look to be in it for the long term.

  • avatar
    Truckducken

    Enough with Volvo already. They have completely lost their way and shall be the next Suzuki. Once they represented a solid, reliable product that was safer than the competition. Those days are long over. Now they represent unreliability, obscurity and China. That’s a deep hole. Let’s wave goodbye and move on.

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    Volvo: Volkswagen reliability, Jaguar depreciation, Jaguar NAV/infotainment, BMW pricing, Honda styling, Toyota driving experience. Why aren’t people buying these things? WHY!?

  • avatar
    EAF

    I found all of the above posts to be absolutely hilarious, thanks for the laugh!

    If not mistaken; new platform for 2015 (SPA), new 4cyl engine (double vvt / super/turbo charged direct inj), new 8 speed geartronic (Old ones were junk), plug-in hybrid (re-gen braking), electric motors provide all wheel drive, somehow the Chinese are involved (Geely).

    Seems like a recipe for a disaster.

    I do like the exterior styling cues though.

  • avatar
    AlexMcD

    I had a 96 850R. Every single problem required a unobtanium part from Europe. Valve cover gasket required removing the head. $200 pcv kit, special spark plugs and injectors, timing belt required special tools, constant pain. Never, Never again.

    Who wants the headache of owning a Volvo? If I wanted to make searching for parts the central part of my life, it would not be for one of these frankensteins.

    • 0 avatar
      EAF

      The valve cover gasket was just RTV I believe. I agree, that valve cover cam cradle design is so odd.

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      Owning a plain 850 I get your pain, couldn’t get the newer styled dipstick without paying a fortune. Every 5 mins either the ABS light went on, SERVICE was always on (costs $30 to shut it off), and that dreaded CEL light.

      The secret to getting a good Volvo is getting one with RWD, Volvo has a history of shoddy FWD models.

    • 0 avatar
      Superdessucke

      Google FCP Groton and IPD. Ebay has tons of used parts too. They’re easy to keep online,

  • avatar
    Trail Rated

    I wonder what Mahindra might have done different for the company had they not walked away and let Geely buy Volvo with nearly the same money Mahindra was willing to bid against Tata for JLR.


    General Motors and Ford are trying to sell Hummer and Volvo to help them raise cash in the face of slumping sales.
    Mahindra said Volvo was a great company with a great brand, but added it was not “affordable and digestible.”

  • avatar
    Trend-Shifter

    What everyone is saying is true. It was true even before Geely bought Volvo.
    As an example I was fascinated with Volvo after buying my 1973 1800ES. I thought I might want a C30 for the wife and use as our traveling car.
    She liked it and was OK with getting the T5 stick-shift for my needs.
    It would have looked great in the garage next to the 1800ES.

    Then we went out to priced it. Ouch, it was so expensive at that time.
    We did not buy it.
    Now that same Volvo dealer just closed 3 months ago.

  • avatar
    Landcrusher

    Most of the comments here sound pretty much like those about BMW and Mercedes.

    The point about safety is week made though. The problem is not that they are not safer, just that the marginal increase seems much smaller than it used to.

    At any rate, safety was never a huge selling point for cars. It’s even worse with light aircraft. You are five times less likely to die in a Diamond than a Cessna, but Cessna still sells more planes. People still call flight schools to compare prices to rent a Cessna.

    Volvo needs to figure out an “and” as in “safety and something else” and they need to do it quickly.

    • 0 avatar

      “safety was never a huge selling point for cars”

      wot mate?

      • 0 avatar
        Landcrusher

        Want to make the opposite point or just not believe me? Seriously.

        Getting labeled unsafe is a killer, but being labeled as safer never really was a big winner. It’s just not. Sure, it’s valued, just not as much as many other things. People say the opposite, but THEY LIE. Usually, it’s a rationalization for buying something we otherwise want even though we really don’t know if it’s safer.

        Lastly, we buy the perception of safety over actual safety almost every time.

      • 0 avatar
        MPAVictoria

        I totally agree with you. Volvo’s are not currently a great proposition new. Used however they can be a ton amount of car for very little money.

        One thing I am curious about is why people are attacking Volvo’s reliability. They are probably the most reliable European brand in my experience.

        • 0 avatar
          Dave M.

          The key word is European. We excitedly bought our S70 new in 1998, and couldn’t get rid of it fast enough 70k miles and 5 years later. I loved that little tank, but it was killing us with repairs. When we traded it in for a Toyota, it needed new ac components and ABS computer, along with a few other things. We took a bath financially, but returning to the Japanese fold made huge financial and reliability sense to us.

          Currently Volvo’s problem is design and price. I briefly looked at the XC70 and XC60 last year when I was in the market. I really liked the 70, but I couldn’t put aside our experience. I could have gotten a steal on a year-old off-lease XC90, which I think is one of the best looking vehicles out there, even after 10 years of the same design.

          Volvo is premium, not luxury. They, Acura, Lincoln and Cadillac are all in the same genre whether or not they accept it.

          Volvo needs to return to boxy, useful designs, with doubling down on reliability design. I was hoping Geely would help with Pacific Rim manufacturing abilities, but little data indicates Volvo has greatly improved.

    • 0 avatar
      bufguy

      Safety was always a Huge selling point for Volvo…The thing is that all cars are safe now. Regulations and the market dictate that.
      Even with that, Subaru has stolen that perception as the safe, yuppie, family car….Volvo has no unique qualities anymore

      • 0 avatar
        Sjalabais

        Yet…the ancient XC90 bests the newish IIHS tests while newer and even more expensive cars fold.

        The difference might be that Volvo develops cars based on their own safety data and experience. Their safety center is huge and Ford said it was one big selling point when they acquired Volvo in ’99. How much bigger is Ford?

        Makes such as Renault, GM or BMW do well in tests with these tests in mind. Nothing more.

        I agree though that this is not a stro g selling point in itself.

      • 0 avatar
        Landcrusher

        What is this Subaru safety thing? Is it fact, or is it just AWD? Subaru was one of the last brands to put in nanny skid control tech except as only an option on loaded vehicles. If they are winning anything, I must have missed it.

        • 0 avatar
          Quentin

          Subaru tends to do well on the new IIHS small overlap crash while most other brands are all over the board. They also play up the “all AWD” aspect, too. Funny, the Subaru I own is RWD and didn’t do amazing on the small overlap test. I don’t really care for the rest of the lineup.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Agreed on the safety thing, Landcrusher.

      People believe safety is mostly within their control, and also believe that since they are superior drivers, accidents will happen to other drivers, not them.

      Besides, Volvo poisoned their own water by designing safe cars that were boxy. Consumers have figured out that safe cars don’t have to look that way.

      Even though I think the S60 is one of the most beautiful cars on the road, most drivers would be hard-pressed to identify it as a Volvo.

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      Where did you get that statistic? I’ve never heard of such a discrepency. I’d be very surprised if this is actually true. If it was, Cessnas would have astronomical insurance rates, which they do not.

      I was up in one of our club C150s today doing pattern work. It’s a 1969 model and it flies beautifully with absolutely zero bad habits. It lets you know when you are close to the limit, stalls cleanly and is responsive on the controls. Despite being 45 years old and having endured generations of student pilots, it’s as solid as they come.

      • 0 avatar
        Landcrusher

        Bunker,
        My reply got eaten apparently.

        Check out the fatalities per 100,000 hours stats. Diamond is indeed that far out in front. The Bell Jet Ranger is similarly outside the curve for the competition yet insurance isn’t much better. Your assumption that insurance rates are based on real world logic is false. Insurance companies are based on processes that work and politics and finances, but they really, really reject the real world principles others live by.

        Your 150 is not solid and never was. It was an excellent design for its day, and it was engineered to last a good 15 years without any airframe issues. Today, you are in a bent airframe and just don’t know it. Measure the distance from the vertical stab to the same point on each wing tip. Try a similar trick on the tail horizontals.

        If you enjoy antiques, keep flying, but if you want to be safer, find a Diamond.

        Cessna’ intransigence is the primary reason for the failure of GA. The FAA, insurers, and the lawyers are vying for second. Of course, say that in a room full of pilots and just look out.

        Hope you get this.

      • 0 avatar
        Landcrusher

        Your 150 is not solid and never was. It was an excellent design for its day, and it was engineered to last a good 15 years without any airframe issues. Today, you are in a bent airframe and just don’t know it. Measure the distance from the vertical stab to the same point on each wing tip. Try a similar trick on the tail horizontals.

        If you enjoy antiques, keep flying, but if you want to be safer, find a Diamond.

        Cessna’ intransigence is the primary reason for the failure of GA. The FAA, insurers, and the lawyers are vying for second. Of course, say that in a room full of pilots and just look out.

        Hope you get this.

        • 0 avatar
          Landcrusher

          Half that got lost, and edit isn’t working. Wtf? Third try did get something up though.

        • 0 avatar
          Landcrusher

          Okay, Bunkie, what got lost was the most important part.

          What you need to look for are accidents and fatalities per 100,000 hrs statistics. Diamond is a real outlier by really that much.

          Your insurance logic fails. Insurance is based on processes and politics and finances which they understand and not deaths, which they don’t. Try to talk to an insurance guy about the disconnect and they really, really don’t get it.

  • avatar
    jacob_coulter

    I’m sure a big Made in China sticker on the window in their upcoming models will turn that around.

  • avatar

    But if you must have a Volvo, now is the time to buy one. The current crop out there hitting the used market are still Sweedish made by a Swedish company, so there’s that. Plus, they have truly Lincolnesque depreciation accelerated by the massive (for a boutique low-volume ‘luxury’ brand) daily rental fleet dump of XC60s, XC90s, and S60s.

    A friend of mine leased a ’14 S60 for like $37k. I told him to wait eight months and I could get him one for ~$21. He didn’t believe me. I showed him MMR and he nearly shat himself.

    • 0 avatar
      petezeiss

      “leased a ’14 S60 for like $37k”

      Holy balls, you could get a Row of Urinals for that. Trailhawk!

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      S80 might be a move for me in the future for just this reason (also the drivetrain and platform are quite proven)

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        Yea, the old S80 V8 was definitely on my radar when I was last car shopping but I couldn’t find a decent example within 300 miles of me.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          I’ve found a decent Volvo of nearly any model is not an easy find in the used market.

          • 0 avatar

            Just got in a 2004 XC90 front-drive w/3rd row and a sunroof with 68k miles – one-owner with all the books and records.

            Come at me, bro.

            And if you’re that picky, I’ll spray the cladding/door handles silver and put LEDs in the foglamp housings so you can tell you friends its a ’13.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnnyFirebird

            @28-Cars-Later Did I tell you I finally got rid of my SRT4 Caliber and got a 2008 V70 3.2 FWD? I’m really digging in. 40,000 miles, was $11,500, leather, sunroof, power liftgate. Then my mom’s Suzuki died so I am lending it to her for the foreseeable future. Dammit.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @Flybrian

            I can’t see myself in the faux SUV coming up on timing belt service, especially given some of the quality issues of that period Volvo.

            Actually if you have low money in it you should do the ’13 “conversion” and use it as a selling point. Only superficial stuff should have changed right? Grille maybe, emblems, taillights?

            @JohnnyFirebird

            Ah you did not. Good call on the later gen V70 I suspect you’ll have interest in it well into the future.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnnyFirebird

          We’ve sold two low mileage V8 S80s this year. They’re awesome cars. The only issue is the AC / HVAC systems on them. The fans start squeaking because of the horizontal orientation and the AC compressor clutch gives out easy.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnnyFirebird

      I dunno, we just got a 2011 Lincoln MKZ (I think, the ex-Zephyr) on our lot from a fleet return that black book lists at $11,000 while a similarly equipped S60 T5 would go for around $16,000 – 18,000 at the auction. To me both are really good cars, although the MKZ is… aubergine.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Who wants a Chinese car? Price it like a Chinese car, move to subprime brand status with cars below 15k, that’s the only hope for the brand.

    That second picture screams Chinese copycat design.

    • 0 avatar
      Sjalabais

      Where do you even get that from? Any clue as to who developed these cars when? It takes time to put four wheels on the road.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      @Hummer,

      Your Chinese-built laptop, phone, or tablet seems to be working just fine!

      Once you start looking at the labels in a comprehensive way, you’ll find that Chinese manufacturus make some really good stuff…. And the cheap crap you buy at Wal-Mart. Whatever the customer is willing to pay for.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        This Chinese built phone is expected to last 2 years, and costs ~$600 to me.
        Most cars are expected to last 10-20 years and these cost $45000+/-.

        Just because something works when you first get it doesn’t mean it will continue to function. There’s no way you could trust one of these cars that are designed by a Chinese firm, and in worst case scenario built in China.

        I’d be willing to give a Chinese truck a chance but there’d have to be a lot of steel, a curb weight over 2.5tons a price below 12k, and a a very large N/A engine that didn’t require a large amount of precise calculations to put together. And I still wouldn’t take it out of the county.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          “Just because something works when you first get it doesn’t mean it will continue to function.”

          Although I understand your overall point, what I highlighted is why junk has been allowed to proliferate in the world. Please realize this is the wrong attitude to have as it wastes resources, money, and time. I paid $200 for a new VE465 in 2009 which I only retired this summer and replaced it with another NIB VE465 for $40. I would run it another five years if CDMA weren’t going away. I should get ten years out of a $600 phone, assuming 1/3rd inflation in the period 2009 to now. Cars are no different, but I promise you a significant portion of today’s junk won’t be around in ten years.

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    I just priced out a XC90 AWD with pretty much just the basics $ 56,275. Then I went and priced a similarly equipped Acura MDX AWD $47,040…

    … and the winner is

  • avatar
    makofoto

    Such lack of imagination … sad. Where is the new P1800 ?!!!!!!!!!!

  • avatar

    The stereotypical Volvo buyer used to be the college professor – educated, upper-middle class, urban, looking for something to signify they were successful without being flashy, and that they were a little iconoclastic.

    At the university I work at, the faculty seems to have moved to Subaru and Prius. Except for a few who are still hanging onto their 20 year old 740 wagons.

  • avatar
    CowDriver

    My 1996 850 wagon (V70) with 230,000 miles is ready to be replaced,
    but with what? Volvo does not currently make an equivalent car.
    Unless a miracle occurs, it looks like I will be getting a Subaru
    or VW.

    I can keep the current wagon running for another couple of years,
    but it is getting expensive. It will need a new cat in two years
    (it just barely passed the Calif. smog test last week), and the
    engine is using a couple of quarts of oil every 5,000 miles.

    Please, Volvo, give us a boxy wagon like the ones which made you famous!

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      Get a Ford Flex, you get a Volvo platform and good ol’ boxy styling.

      I wouldn’t bother with a Subaru, 850s were virtually dent/rust proof, just leaning on a Subaru can cause damage.

      • 0 avatar
        makofoto

        Love our Suby’s … along with an awful lot of Mountain state folks.

      • 0 avatar
        CowDriver

        The Flex, while a nice package, is larger than I’m looking for.
        We don’t have any kids, so lots of seats are unnecessary. In
        fact, the rear seats only get used to strap in the cat carrier
        for trips to the vet, or hold packages. What the 850 shines
        at is being able to hold a huge amount of cargo, yet still be
        lots of fun to drive.

        • 0 avatar
          Ryoku75

          I guess you’re looking to downsize then, the Flex isn’t all that much bigger than an 850.

          I parked my 850 sedan beside a Ford 500 (a sibling to the Flex), the 500 was just a tiny bit longer, but otherwise it was pretty close.

          If you want a smaller, fun cargo carrying car you should consider Ford Focus ST hatchback.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I hope when its time to let go you find your 850 a home away from the reach of the CARB (assuming its still straight and runs well).

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    Back in the early 80’s Volvo conceived the 480, nearly EVERY Japanese car company copied it, notably Honda with their third-gen Civic, and Nissan who copied some of the controls for the Z31.

    Now we have Volvo copying a Maxima from 2007, and demanding Audi money for it.

    Volvos were rarely cheap in the states, but they atleast felt fancy while being cheaper than a Benz and less weird than an Audi.

  • avatar
    MPAVictoria

    You would have to be crazy to buy an S80 new these days. They are nice cars (full disclosure I bought a 2012 CPO S80 about 6 months ago and am very happy with it) but they are not 50,000 dollars nice.

  • avatar
    lOmnivore Sobriquet

    Volvo’s sales are low and getting lower in the US market, allright.
    But are these cars good ? or bad ?

    My guess is that over there in America all those new bargain car-loans… aren’t fitting well with Volvo’s ever ‘volvoesque’ offers.

    Sales are low ok, but who’s deciding that : customers ? or credit brokers ?

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    I don’t think the question is marketing or which models should or should not have been discontinued. I also don’t think it’s China, I doubt the average car buyer has any clue about that.

    The issue is this, the competition has gotten too strong, and Volvo just can’t hack it anymore. Think back to when Volvo was still a major player. What did Infiniti have then? What did Lexus have then? What did Audi have then? What do they have now?

    When the luxury market was comprised largely of BMW, Mercedes, and a bunch of oddballs, there was space for Volvo to sell premium wagons. That’s all over. Audi, BMW, and Mercedes can invent a new segment every ten minutes, and release a model to fill that segment just as quickly. Volvo can’t even operate on the industry standard 7 year model cycle.

    Beyond that, Volvo has no identity. Ultimate Driving Machine. Vorsprung durch Technik. The Best or Nothing. Volvo’s got none of that. Yes its cars are safe. BFD. Everybody’s cars are safe. A Honda Civic can get an IIHS Top Safety Pick. Safety is no longer a selling point. What are your cars about?

    Volvo can’t out luxury Mercedes, they can’t out uber tech Audi, and they can’t out handle BMW. The premium pricing strategy was always doomed from the start, the Germans are impenetrable. Volvo should leave it to Cadillac to bash their heads against that wall.

    So who is weak? Volkswagen and Acura. That’s where Volvo should be. Make a better Passat than VW, and you might have something.

    • 0 avatar
      Sjalabais

      Honestly, the best post so far. Well said!

      But…was Volvo ever a “major player”? 240, 740, 940 were solid designs, but what people say here – pricey, somewhat outdated cars – was even more true back then. The 1991 850 was the first all-new car without significant carryover parts since 1944. That was a turnaround moment in an earlier crisis. Maybe the new XC90 can do that magic again. It appears to be an outstanding design.

      • 0 avatar
        Lie2me

        Back in the ’70s and ’80s Volvo was perceived as a premium alternative to the junky cars the US was putting out. The only other alternatives were German. Volvos were a better value. They were safer, utilitarian and conservatively styled. They were also perceived as built well and long lasting. Everything Americans were looking for. Then the Japanese came along and offered more with the Lexus, Acura and infiniti. Even American cars got better, but Volvo seemed to remain the same or even go down hill. People lost interest

      • 0 avatar
        Ryoku75

        In the 70’s you brought a Volvo so you could have a cheap Benz, safety, and real brakes in an area of huge cars and tiny drum brakes.

        In the 80’s you brought a Volvo so you could have something almost as reliable as a Japanese car, but much more substantial materials, better safety, and comfier seats.

        In the 90’s you brought a Volvo because you were 6-feet and had trouble with the smaller soap-bar cars of the time, otherwise they were very dated by now and still a bit niche.

        Enter the 850, Volvos attempt at becoming mainstream with a huge marketing champaign followed up with decent sales, but not enough to save the company.

        And why buy the 850? It had a cheap interior, the looks of a 740, rock hard front suspension, some truly bad design choices like the curved dipstick, and none of the charm nor simplicity of the RWD models.

        At that time if you wanted a 5 cylinder Audi knock-off you could buy the Acura Vigor, easily more reliable and more than likely more solid than the 850.

        Yes an 850 will withstand rust and dents better than anything from Japan, but I doubt that many Acuras have their “Service” lights popping on.

        My 850 ownership made me want my 240 back.

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          Volvo had probably one of the best ad campaigns of any auto manufacturer, which didn’t hurt…

          http://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/1971-market-for-a-hardtop-ad.jpg

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          Volvo had probably one of the best ad campaigns of any auto manufacturer, which didn’t hurt…

          http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FM0vvvNpKaE/T2zewRe_1bI/AAAAAAAAAnU/-WZOch_3fMU/s400/old%2Bad.jpg

          • 0 avatar
            Ryoku75

            I like to think that whoever made those ads went on to make the recent ads for Volvo trucks.

            Volvo cars though, in the 90’s most of the 850s ads were “Not your average Volvo” stuff, like what Buick and Cadillac did for a while, an only recently Toyota with their “all new” Corolla.

            Volvo didn’t want people to think of the 850 as a tank, moreso a boxy racecar, they bit the bullet and tried to get the younger yet rich crowd on board.

          • 0 avatar
            petezeiss

            Here’s a nice compilation of video ads for the 140s:

            http://tinyurl.com/n4qhxze

        • 0 avatar
          heavy handle

          Judging by my Mom’s friends, people bought a Volvo in the 1970s because they were tired of obese American cars that broke-down all the time. Mercedes was still incredibly expensive back then (more than Cadillac), so it wasn’t Volvo’s competition.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      Dave,

      Some good points, but also a defeatist attitude. There’s nothing special about Audi/BMW/Mercedes that Volvo can’t compete against.
      All three have had periods of abysmal reliability, none are all that special to drive unless you drop 50% more for their performance variants.

      There’s no strong reason to choose a Q5 an X5 or an ML over the new XC-90 pictured above. It’s all down to personal preference. They could do alright, provided they haven’t botched the details.

    • 0 avatar
      tremorcontrol

      Volvo “can’t hack it anymore” (or more precisely wasn’t able to hack it…) because the bean-counter geniuses at Ford let Volvo waste away while Ford tried to fix itself or resurrect Lincoln (or whatever Ford was doing…). No major investment in new products for Volvo brought them to the brink.

      So yeah, now Volvo is owned by Geely. The clock is ticking, but I think it will be interesting to see if Volvo can come up with some competitive products… before they kick the bucket.

      “Everyone’s cars are safe” –> lol. Why does the IIHS even test and give ratings? Every car gets an A+ now?

      • 0 avatar
        Sjalabais

        I’m not sure Ford was that bad an owner to Volvo as everyone claims. Just look at the P2 platform being employed all over Ford – what a compliment that the giant deems the dwarf’s work superior!

        The XC90 was already a development in progress and Volvo’s were refreshed more often than usual during Ford’s reign. They’re not exactly GM.

        • 0 avatar
          Ryoku75

          Its thanks to Ford that Volvo could finally sink their hooks into the American Police Force for real, just under a different badge.

          Before that you’d occasionally see 240 cop cars, 164s and V70s were tested too with much praise. The former cost too much so Novas were picked, the latter was rejected for being a wagon.

          I still say it was the 850 that did Volvo in, that and their quality issues on the higher end models.

    • 0 avatar
      Richard Chen

      Oh, and Volvos stayed the same size as the competition grew. When my folks got their 740, the Camry had been introduced to the US the year prior. A couple of generations later, the Camry had caught up in size. Nowadays, a 740 looks rather when in traffic compared with today’s midsize sedans.

      So, who wants a new 240, a 3-Box the size of today’s Corolla? Nope. An XC40 that’s a plush counterpart to the Subaru Crosstrek would likely be successful, but did (then Ford-owned) Volvo management even bother with getting the V40 US complaint? No.

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    The more apt question is, what is the strong reason to buy the XC90 over the new Q7, (Q5 competes with the XC60) X5 or ML? The Germans are known quantities with strong badge appeal for those that care about that sort of thing.

    The new Q7 is state of the art, and both MMI and iDrive have gone through many many revisions and are reliable and work well. The XC90 is an unknown quantity, with unknown reliability. The electronics are brand new, and could be an absolute disaster like MyFordTouch at launch. Ask Infiniti how well their brand new system in the Q50 is doing.

    Even if the XC90 can go toe-to-toe with the German trio, will it be enough, especially when the Volvo badge is stuck in second tier status with Acura and Buick? The other guys all have plenty of fresh iron to get buyers in the showrooms. Volvo doesn’t. If Volvo could afford to run on 7 year cycles, they’d have a brand new S80 sitting there, and would be prepping to launch a new XC70 next year. Instead these two ancient cars will soldier on for several more years to come, gathering dust. Who knows when the S60 and XC60 will be replaced. That’s not good.

    Not even Jaguar tries to survive on the strength of ONE car.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Geely is at a crossroads, either they go the route I suggested in the past and get butts in the showrooms by seriously marketing the S60 as a Fusion competitor (for mid spec Fusion money) or they continue to do nothing and leave the brand and dealer network in a holding pattern while they ready *their* investment. They appear to the doing the latter which is dangerous because they are punishing every new Volvo buyer with crippling resale due to the absurdly high prices on their products. The S80 does not sell because its a “big” car, it is not, it does not sell because its a 25K car they want 50K to purchase. However I imagine the actual costs of the product in Swedish Krona, varying costs on converting the currency to USD/EUR, shipping costs, and dealer markup, the 50K figure probably only has a few K of wiggle room, so its a tough situation on everyone. I fear it will get worse in the future as Geely moves the production to China but conceivably keeps the prices high while potentially cutting materials or build quality.

    • 0 avatar
      Spiro

      As a resident in Sweden, I find it peculiar that most of you do not check your facts.
      Volvo will remain a Swedish brand. Volvo has for the last 4 years invested approx. 11 billion EURO in new tech and new factories in Sweden. Geely seems to be a great owner that really wants to maintain Volvo as a Swedish brand. Much more so than Ford. Ford was in many ways a disaster when it came to quality and development.
      For the first time in nearly 18 years, Volvo will present a completly Swedish product. Built and developed in Sweden. That is what the new XC90 is, the first car of many. The whole range of models will be replaced before 2018.
      I do not know if Volvo will succeed, but it will be interesting!

  • avatar
    petezeiss

    Egad! I just turned over a Wiki-rock and found some little Volvos, the 300 and 400 series sold only in Europe.

    The 300s kind of look like a Chevette-Golf mix. The 400s look like ass and were Volvo’s first FWD cars.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      The 300 series was already developed by DAF when Volvo purchased the DAF car division in 1975, its legitimacy as a “Volvo” certainly has an asterisk.

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      Another oddity is the Volvo 66, which was just a slightly tougher DAF 66.

      The 300’s are supposedly okay 2nd hand buys in Europe, the 400 series was the beginning of Volvos end, a deformed yuppie sports-sedan thing that eventually became the 850.

      The 480 was a nice looking hatchback intended for the US market but burdened with quality issues, luckily Japan copied it.

      • 0 avatar
        Sjalabais

        The ugliest Volvos ever. The 300 is among the cheapest used cars you can get – I wouldn’t pay more than 800€ for grade 2 2.0 340 – but avoid the CVT. Fun fact is they go as fast in reverse as forward.

  • avatar
    facelvega

    I predict that the XC90 is going to kill it simply because it is nicer than the other Euro land yachts, and that this in turn will boost sales of the S/V60. I think the S/V60s are not selling already just because ordinary luxury car buyers have forgotten that Volvo exists, not because there is anything wrong with the products or even with the price point. If these hit, then Volvo needs to get us a small car asap, and all will be well for the brand.

    Yes, the XC70 and old 90 are outdated whales, but the XC60 is actually pretty good, just as nice as the more popular Q5 and nicer than the Acura or Benz competitors. A good, professorable hatchback/wagon/crossover would clean up for Volvo. Trust me, I’m a pipe-smoking, tweed-clad professor. My colleagues are all buying VW Sportwagens or leasing small Audi/BMW/Benz sedans– we don’t like those cars. We want our 240 wagons back.

  • avatar
    cartunez

    Make modern day 240 sedans and wagons they will sell all day.

  • avatar

    The Swedish home grown auto industry is on life support. I guess the situation in Detroit is not all bad in comparison.

  • avatar
    PriusV16

    “But an xc60 trimmed out to a reasonable level is near $55k! Thats insane.”

    Not really, the XC60 plays in the luxury class (at least when properly equipped) and is, generally speaking, a very refined, durable, comfortable and safe automobile.

    That, and it does hold its value really well, at least over here in Europe.

    We have a 7-year-old XC60 in the family with around 50,000 miles on it, bought it new for 50,000 Euro. Current residual value is 25,000 Euro, that’s a 50 % depreciation over 7 years.

    Not bad, I’d say.

    Just the other day at a dealer, I saw a 3-year old XC60 in pretty spartan trim, with 80,000 miles on the clock, and an asking price of 22,500 Euro.

    These things are practically indestructible when properly taken care of and in high demand even when used.

    And the local Volvo dealer recently told me that Volvo is selling each and every XC60 they make without a discount. If you order an CX60 at the factory today, the average waiting time until delivery is 1 year.

  • avatar
    slance66

    I bought a brand new 2000 S60, which was a darned good car. It was $27k with incentives. Unfortunately, somebody, possibly at Ford, decided that Volvo was a European luxury brand like Audi, MB and BMW. It isn’t, and never was. It was the Buick of Europe. Slightly upscale, reliable and safe. The pricing has been crazy for a decade now, and the cars are rarely updated. That S60 sold almost unchanged for a long, long time. The XC90’s run has been absurd. On top of that the dealer experience is also too expensive, with shop rates higher than at the Lexus dealer with the amenities, and even part pricing that is marked up 300% over what I can order them for online.

    I’ll never buy another one. Looked at the XC60, which fits what I need, and couldn’t go through the Volvo experience again.

  • avatar

    Well, at least the swedes gave us mindcraft.

  • avatar
    JohnnyFirebird

    I’ve sold plenty of S80s this year. Of course they were used, which suggests perhaps a price point problem. The amount of people looking for 2012-2013 XC70s does as well. Unfortunately they’re tricky for me to find since people aren’t buying them new.

  • avatar
    Landcrusher

    All you guys begging for boxy, do you really want boxy? Or do you really want something you think comes with boxy?

    Boxy does not improve reliabilty or price.

    Now, I hate bad design for the sake of visual appeal, AND I love me a tall boxy cabin from old Fiat or Range Rover days. Just not sure that’s plausible much anymore. Is today’s RR boxy enough for you?

  • avatar
    Landcrusher

    One more thing. I sometimes have to wonder if some of us here are not getting paid for promoting brands and beating up others. My shill detector is wearing out on this thread.

    I know Subaru lovers. Lived in Colorado, friend worked at a dealership, almost bought one myself, etc. There is plenty to love, but opera fans don’t rave about the funky beat. I know that sort of thing works, but it can fail in a big way when you get caught. Just saying.

  • avatar
    Landcrusher

    Dear TTAC,
    You and Safari are not getting along. just saying.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      No surprise, although to its credit it adheres to an open standard to some extent (unlike IE which is a disaster version to version). Safari still gives us headaches for some of our online products. I’m not a Mac user, but as a Windows user I learned long ago to install a third party browser which worked better than the OEM offering (first Opera, then Firefox, and now Chrome)

      • 0 avatar
        Landcrusher

        IPad.

        The PC is dead, long live the tablet. Unfortunately, iOS is now going the way of windows and government. They keep adding crud and taking out very little. In their defense, a lot of the adds are now security which is necessary because we don’t beat people for their hackery.

        Maybe we can start a thing where people beat up on script kitties and post it to You Tube? Denial of service? The stocks for you zit face! The higher tech the crime, the more medieval the punishment should be.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          I respectfully disagree as doing actual work with those toys is difficult. I see them as merely another repackaged iteration of existing technology designed to trick the proles into buying the same thing again (PCs) after sales have slumped for years (after retail computers haven’t changed all that much in terms of raw speed).

          I could see this sort of punishment you refer too in the future.

          • 0 avatar
            Landcrusher

            You are falling into the same trap as the folks who think AWD is silly because they live in Florida. More jobs are enhanced with a tablet nowadays than with a PC. Higher end folks get plenty of value from both plus a smart phone.

            I don’t consider TTAC work, so I want to sit in my leather chair with my feet up. If I have to go sit at the desktop, we’re done. I can use other sites for this.

            Scott Mcnealy always said that Sun was just about work, and that would never go after the consumer market. As soon as we got leaped by IBM, there wasn’t enough chip volume to stay in the game to leap them back. Sun is dead.

            Ignore the business market. Consumers make better decisions because they use their own money. Where goes the consumer, goes tech. Business only wins if they somehow guess how best to serve the consumer or by letting the producers choose the best tech for themselves.

          • 0 avatar
            Landcrusher

            My reply was eaten.

            I’m now just going to respectfully say you are wrong. Tablet is the superior consumer good, and will win.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Ne-VAH! I work with a Galaxy Note all day at work and look forward to coming home, climbing into my La-Z-Boy with my desktop beside me and my 32″ monitor… ‘puter heaven

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Ne-VAH! I work with a Galaxy Note all day at work and look forward to coming home, climbing into my La-Z-Boy with my desktop bes1de me and my 32″ monitor… ‘puter heaven

  • avatar
    PriusV16

    “’ve sold plenty of S80s this year. Of course they were used, which suggests perhaps a price point problem. The amount of people looking for 2012-2013 XC70s does as well. Unfortunately they’re tricky for me to find since people aren’t buying them new.”

    You’re raising an important point here, and one that I don’t quite understand myself.

    It seems that, when people buy an expensive vehicle, they are still looking for “brand cachet” and image above all.

    I, personally, couldn’t care less about that. As I mentioned above, I come from a Volvo family, and the main reason why people in our family continue to buy new Volvos isn’t because of what the neighbors or other people whom we don’t even kow might think about our choice. It’s the durability and long-term quality that we buy and the comfort and safety of Volvo vehicles.

    Why do even petrol heads fall into that trap of “An expensive car has to have some certain image”? I really don’t get it, and at the same time, that is a real problem for Volvo from a marketing perspective.

    Prospective buyers ignore the quality of their products an instead look for the bragging factor, which Volvo can’t quite offer.

    That said, even I have to admit that Volvo’s current product line-up is in quite some dire need of a general overhaul. Their current cars are still great, but some (most?) of them are getting a bit long in the tooth.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnnyFirebird

      They’re all due to be replaced by 2017. I think the S60 / V60 is a great vehicle that unfortunately costs more to lease per month than a base C class, A4, or 3 series. They come with more powerful engines and more options standard, but can’t compete with the sub-500 per month lease prices that the other luxury brands are peddling here in Canada.

      As for the XC70, the only real issue is not-great mileage. They’re amazing wagons. I love my V70. You can, now, get an XC70 front wheel drive that is pretty much a V70 lifted with plastic add on bits. They *will* replace the cars with newer technology and the downsized 4 cylinders so they meet new fuel economy standards. But I kinda like the old, big, thirsty platform and straight sixes they’ve been running on for the past eight years.

      People consider Volvo on-par with Subaru, and expect them to be priced similarly. The ten thousand dollar difference gets you a much nicer interior and better materials, but that’s not really why a person buys a Subaru or Volvo in the first place.

    • 0 avatar
      Spiro

      Then it might be interesting to know that Volvo will replace all of their current models before 2018. The first model to be replaced is the current XC90. From this point on all of Volvos new models will be updated and modified after 18 months. All this will be possible because of the new achitecture of the cars.

  • avatar
    Spiro

    As a native and curious Swede, I find it a little strange that so many of the commentators on this site do not check their facts. Yes, Geely owns Volvo. But Geely have on several occasions shown that they want Volvo to remain a Swedish brand. Geely have poured in money into Volvo in a way Ford never did (not even close), and they have let Volvo choose its own way.
    For instance;
    The new XC90 will be built in Sweden with a new motor developed and built in Sweden. The whole car will be à completly Swedish car. The first car in nearly 18 years that is Swedish (and not based on something from Ford, or China either). The new XC90 is really completly new and developed for the future. It has taken 4 years and 15 billion dollars to change the course for Volvo. And I think this car, the first of many, will change a lot for Volvo.

  • avatar
    DrGastro997

    I agree with most- just because their cars won’t crush like a can, it doesn’t mean it’s worth a $55K+ tag. Volvo’s logic wont work here. It’s too bad because they made great wagons.

  • avatar
    Tostik

    As of mid-March, pre-orders for the new XC90 are at 18,000, which is above what Volvo expected. By comparison, pre-orders for the old XC90 topped-out at 15,000 in 2002. Yes, it’s starting to look as if the new XC90 will be a stunning success for Volvo. And 40% of old-XC90 sales were in the US. It is, after all, Volvo’s “American car”.

    As for the legacy V60 selling about 450 cars/mo in 2014. Well, that’s about what Volvo expected. When Volvo announced it would sell the V60 in the US, I saw two predictions from different Volvo officials. One said, about 300/mo, the other said about 4,000/year. And Volvo did beat the larger figure of 4,000/year, by a little, in 2014.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    “No, the S80 was never popular, but Volvo USA sold an average of 11,350 S80s on an annual basis between 2002 and 2008.”

    If you look at the footprint of the P3 S80, it is very close to that of the 240 sedan which was Volvo’s best seller for many years (P3 S80 does have a longer wheelbase but strangely no more leg room).

    240:

    WIDTH 5 ft. 7.3 in. (67.3 in.)
    HEIGHT 4 ft. 8.3 in. (56.3 in.)
    LENGTH 15 ft. 9.9 in. (189.9 in.)
    GROUND CLEARANCE 0 ft. 4.3 in. (4.3 in.)
    WHEEL BASE 8 ft. 8.3 in. (104.3 in.)

    FRONT HEAD ROOM 37.9 in.
    FRONT LEG ROOM 40.1 in.
    REAR HEAD ROOM 36.1 in.
    REAR LEG ROOM 36.4 in.

    http://www.edmunds.com/volvo/240/1993/st-6272/features-specs/

    P3 S80:

    WIDTH 6 ft. 1.3 in. (73.3 in.)
    HEIGHT 4 ft. 10.8 in. (58.8 in.)
    LENGTH 15 ft. 11 in. (191 in.)
    WHEEL BASE 9 ft. 3.6 in. (111.6 in.)

    FRONT HEAD ROOM 37.8 in.
    FRONT LEG ROOM 41.9 in.
    FRONT HIP ROOM 54.8 in.
    FRONT SHOULDER ROOM 57.4 in.
    REAR HIP ROOM 54.7 in.
    REAR HEAD ROOM 38.3 in.
    REAR LEG ROOM 35.0 in.
    REAR SHOULDER ROOM 56.3 in.

    http://www.edmunds.com/volvo/s80/2015/?tab-id=reviews-tab

    “2014 will be the sixth consecutive year of U.S. sales decline for the outdated sedan.”

    If you believe this than the S60, V60, XC70, and pretty much every model other than the new XC90 is also outdated as they are all use the same circa 2006 platform. Volvo this model year also introduced their new I4 across the lineup of the FWDs.

  • avatar
    Tostik

    A new thread recently appeared over at the SwedeSpeed forum, called “XC-90 (2016- )”. The people posting there are complaining that if they pre-order a new XC90, it won’t arrive till after Sep. Volvo can’t keep up with the surging demand. The other complaint is that the dealers won’t budge on prices – full price or nothing. With 18,000 pre-orders for the new XC90, the abyssmal Volvo sales in the US in 2014 are starting to look like the quiet before the storm.

    And in 3 years, The new XC90 will be the oldest model in the Volvo stable.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • JimZ: Since that’s not going to happen, why should I waste any time on your nonsensical what-if?
  • JimZ: Funny, Jim Hackett said basically the same thing yesterday and people were flinging crap left and right.
  • JimZ: That and the fact that they could run on gasoline, which was considered a useless waste product back in the...
  • JimZ: Gas turbines are less efficient (more so the smaller you make them,) only like being run at 100% load, and have...
  • JimZ: Oh look, another geek who’s obsessed with the “purity” of a series hybrid.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States