By on June 27, 2018

We’d like to apologize if our articles previewing the Volvo S60 T8 Polestar Engineered got you excited about the American-made model because you probably won’t get to lay your greasy little hands on one.

Volvo previously stated that the special sedans would only be available in extremely limited quantities. We assumed that meant the manufacturer would probably only build a couple hundred per year at most. As it turns out, that number was a gross overestimate. However, even if you are fortunate enough to have one in your garage, you still won’t be able to own it. 

According to a report from Autoblog, Volvo has decided to limit the United States to just 20 examples of the Polestar Engineered S60 sedans. Ready for more bad news? The model will only be available through the Care by Volvo subscription service, so you can’t just buy one. Instead, you’ll have to put $1,100 a month down to effectively make the sport sedan your long-term rental.

While that’s roughly on par with financing a BMW M4, and Volvo does supply you with insurance and maintenance, you still get to own the M model when all is said and done. Volvo isn’t even giving you the option. The closest you can get is purchasing the S60 T8 eAWD Plug-in Hybrid for $54,400 and spray painting the calipers gold.

If the subscription mandate hasn’t soured you on the model, you’ll have to be quick if you want become its temporary caregiver. Orders begin June 28th at noon (Eastern) via the Care by Volvo app. With only 20 examples on offer, we expect them all to be spoken for rather quickly.

[Image: Volvo Cars]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

39 Comments on “The Polestar Engineered Volvo S60 T8 Will be Extremely Rare in America...”


  • avatar
    TMA1

    Geely proves that it shouldn’t be taken seriously as an automaker. Yank the leash on Volvo. It’s a compact Swedish sedan, not a Rolls Royce.

  • avatar
    IHateCars

    ^Agreed….that’s just f*cking silly!

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    So we had “Lisa Catera” when Cadillac was pushing Catera leases, how about Lisa Volvo?

  • avatar
    "scarey"

    “She’s your Private Dancer, Dancer for Money”…

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Why does’t Volvo change its official name and branding to Geely?

    Are they afraid that affixing a Chinese name to their products would shine a light on the fact for those still unaware that Volvo is a Chinese-owned automaker, with all revenues flowing back to China?

    Why are Chinese firms, such as Volvo, and General Motors, afraid to promote and advertise their Chinese-ness?

    • 0 avatar
      Serpens

      The same reason Jaguar/Land Rover doesn’t shout that it’s Indian-owned, Rolls-Royce and Bentley don’t talk about being German-owned, etc. Brand heritage and value is important.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Same reason Bentley doesn’t call itself Volkswagen, Rolls-Royce doesn’t call itself BMW, Jaguar doesn’t call itself Tata, and Ram doesn’t call itself Fiat, and so on.

      Seriously, DW, you have a thing about China. And it’s not healthy. Did a Chinese girl dump you or something? Did you get food poisoning from dim sum?

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        I think maybe a Chinese girl (or boy, I don’t like to presume) took a dump on him. I agree with DW on a number of things, but he seems a tad deranged on this issue. Plus the amount of money flowing back to China has to be minimal at best. The expertise flowing back is possibly something worthy of more worry.

        That said, limiting this parts-bin and tuner software special to 20 “subscription-only” examples seems to be a great way to ensure absolutely no one cares, instead of almost no one. The market for hot rod Volvos is microscopic to start with.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          krhodes, I am not at all attracted to Asian women. That’s not some form of insult or slight, but just personal, ingrained preference that is not a conscious’choice.

          My female partner who is in her late 20s (I do not divulge too much personal information like so many do, but will allow this) is of 100% Scandinavian ancestry, and this has worked out well in terms of longstanding attraction and chemistry, as I find the women of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, etc., to be among the most attractive in the world.

      • 0 avatar
        "scarey"

        @FreedMike—Do YOU drive a Chinese car yet ? I bet you will. Or is your ride from ANOTHER despotic totalitarian dictatorship ? Maybe you have a car from Cuba, Zimbabwe, or Sudan ? Oh, wait ! They have no auto industries.
        BTW, have you ever been in a Turkish prison ? Do you like movies about Gladiators ?

      • 0 avatar
        seth1065

        DW lost the love of his life , a Chinese girl or boy , who are we to judge, when he was late to their first date because his Caddy broke down. Both have haunted him ever since but he tries not to show it.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      We in the USA (and in all likelihood, other western nations) will inevitably have to fight China in a major war.

      We have been giving them all of the resources that is allowing them to build up their national infrastructure and technological capacity, and letting them steal our most advanced technology or “allowing them that” through technology transfers (much of it with military applications) for the last 30 years, and that is continuing now, to the degree that they grow much stronger with each passing year.

      I advocate for designating China a direct, hostile actor, and major enemy of the United States, and for starting a new alliance with Germany, Japan, the UK, France, Canada, Italy, Spain, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Australia, and other nations, with the single goal of isolating China from further transfers of revenue and technology, and imposing crushing economic sanctions on China, while also preparing massive war plans to destroy its military, infrastructure and economy.

      The sooner we do this, the better hand we have to play, and it is inevitable.

      China is directly adverse to us, and a direct, strategic, growing threat, and it is inevitable that we will have to engage in direct, multifaceted conflict with China, and they are, by a wide margin, the leading danger and threat to us.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Also, I would immediately move to sanction General Motors heavily, appoint government and defense department officials to oversee all of their operations, in order to ensure that they under no condition, are allowed to transfer further production, revenue, technologies or other assets and resources to China or Chinese firms, and in fact, would compel them, under clear threat of criminal and severe economic penalties, to divest from any and all further Chinese interactions and activities in China and with Chinese firms.

        General Motors (aka Guangzhou Motors) and its Chinese State Owned JV Partner, SAIC, represent a clear and present danger to American financial and military and national security interests.

        • 0 avatar
          barksdale

          Given how AMAZING General Motors cars are (everyone dreams of having that advanced sweet, sweet GM auto tech in their driveway — much better than the Germans for sure), this must be done post-haste. If the Chinese get their hand on On Star… Hoooo boy.

          Expecting American car companies to actually produce the world’s best auto products that people love to drive and set the standard? Pffttt. For losers. Sad. Accountants wouldn’t let us. Etc. Better idea? War!!!!!!

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        and here we see the true end game.

        The Boomers and Gen X never had their big war to cripple the rest of the world so we could look great in comparison. Now you have this guy here agitating for a war against a country of over a billion people run by a totalitarian government which would not shy away from throwing as many bodies into the conflict as they can. Starting a shooting war with China would not end well for anybody, and we’d get the worst of it. But what’s a few million dead people to an Internet Tough Guy like yourself?

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          China could have 10 billion “bodies” in arms to throw at a war, and it wouldn’t make a difference.

          Owning superior technology and the skies above as far as deep space is the key.

          And I’m not agitating fir any war; it is clear to all rational persons with an eye towards history and the future, based on patterns and overt statements (by the those ruling “the party” in the PROC) that they are now, currently planning for a hot war with The United States of America, so as to supplant the USA as the world’s sole superpower, and be able to act with impunity on tne global stage.

          The USSR was never 1/3 the actual, serious threat to the west, and in particular, the USA, that China is at this very moment,

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          JimZ and any others who naively parrot his willful ignorance of current reality are part of the serious problem we will have preserving our sovereignty; they are the naive hippies of today, who will be among the first to be wiped out by a threat as real, as evolving, and as surging as the Chinese play for hegemony.

          Anyone here who is not educated and unaware of the complete lack of any moral or ethical standards, and the Machiavellian ruthlessness with which the Chinese view humans on an individual basis, and how China has pure, evil contempt for any notion or semblance of individual human sovereignty, is part of the problem.

          China has contempt and scorn for the concept of inalienable human rights, and lkterally views human beings as commodities, not entitled to due process, any inherent rights, or dignity whatsoever.

          The Chinese Government Party thinks the western concepts of things like constitutional republics, democracies, individual rights, and self-determination, or any checks on governmental totality, are laughable and contemptible.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            then you should be the first to pick up a rifle and go.

            but you won’t.

            we’ve become a nation of blowhards who talk big and do nothing.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            JimZ, you don’t GET IT.

            Rifle-welding troops are as effective as pocket lint in terms of military value.

            Technology has revolutionized the conflicts of the future (it’s absolutely true; we’ve reached an entirely nee paradigm as to how conflicts will be fought and won, or BETTER YET, avoided through deterrence, and it boils down to truly, supremely, superior technological means and capabilities).

            We are unfortunately allowing China to literally steal (they have stolen DoD schematics for everything from stealth fighters to silent naval propulsion methods and advanced warhead design, and everything in between, from the U.S., thus far) everything they need to build-out a modern, capable, technologically formidable military through the intersection of commerce, where their SOE JV “employees” (that are PROC military assets) are literally allowed to access the most sensitive information on the most secure platforms of western firms – all for the trade-off of having access to a relatively limited portion of China’s domestic consumers, at least for the time being.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          PRC is a long term threat but JimZ is right in not advocating for conflict. The Chinese I have dealt with want to do business, and yet as has been pointed out their gov’t does not respect us, engages in corporate espionage, and has manipulated their currency to remain competitive as an exporter. We can do business with the Chinese by fighting back but without military conflict.

          P.S. After watching for decades I don’t think the Chinese will engage in the same military blunders as the West and Soviets has/have.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Chines man/woman on street that you or I or anyone here knows or has made contact with or has done business with (or drank with) is irrelevant.

            They are pawns (far more so than in western nations, and maybe even to the degree that Russians were under Stalin) to their masters and complete slaves to and cogs in the machine of the desire of the political apparatus of the PROC).

          • 0 avatar
            Sub-600

            If everyone in China simultaneously flushed their toilets, the Kardashian’s hot tub would stop.

      • 0 avatar
        Astigmatism

        “I advocate for designating China a direct, hostile actor, and major enemy of the United States, and for starting a new alliance with Germany, Japan, the UK, France, Canada, Italy, Spain, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Australia, and other nations.”

        If only we had some sort of grand alliance to counteract China’s economic influence – perhaps some sort of partnership that spanned the Pacific.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          It’s in tatters and can’t properly acknowledge, let alone address, the true level and nature of the Chinese threat.

          • 0 avatar
            Astigmatism

            Of course it’s in tatters, because the President shredded it. But dealing with the Chinese threat was literally the exact purpose of the thing: it ring-fenced China with a group of American allies who agreed to open up their economies to each other on mutual terms while excluding China. Combine that with our leadership in the EU and NATO, and you have the entire developed world united against China.

            Oh well, it was a nice idea.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Corporate tribunals? No thanks.

            From the finest in fake news:

            “One strong hint is buried in the fine print of the closely guarded draft. The provision, an increasingly common feature of trade agreements, is called “Investor-State Dispute Settlement,” or ISDS. The name may sound mild, but don’t be fooled. Agreeing to ISDS in this enormous new treaty would tilt the playing field in the United States further in favor of big multinational corporations. Worse, it would undermine U.S. sovereignty.”

            washingtonpost.com/opinions/kill-the-dispute-settlement-language-in-the-trans-pacific-partnership/2015/02/25/ec7705a2-bd1e-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e39851715a7d

          • 0 avatar
            Astigmatism

            LOL. If I had a nickel for every time 28-cars approvingly cited Elizabeth Warren, I suspect I’d be quite a bit short of the cost of a roll of Pez.

          • 0 avatar
            Sub-600

            What’s with Patty Murray’s teeth? Did the ACA void the senate dental plan? Oh, yeah, I forgot, the Kenyan exempted them from his “good deal”.

      • 0 avatar
        Hydromatic

        You know, DW, that’s a great way to guarantee a war with China.

        Genie’s out of the bottle, at this point. You can blame Nixon for normalizing relations with China and Clinton for bestowing it Most Favored Nation status. You can also blame the British Empire for not forcibly partitioning China into 5 or 6 different nations, each ran by a kleptocrat preoccupied with fighting the nation next door, suppressing ethnic minorities and enriching himself and his inner circle. That would have been a great way to derail China’s ambitions.

    • 0 avatar
      barksdale

      Why does’t Dodge change its official name and branding to Fiat? Even by TTAC comment standards, this is really dumb…

    • 0 avatar
      seth1065

      DW are you really Donald Trump, most Volvos are made not in China but Sweden, oh and in the future a large amount will be made in the USA, perhaps Volvo should have changed their name back in the day to FORD. I am sure you drive a US built vehicle with only US made parts serviced by someone who I hope is a US indian , the rest of us are just nasty immigrants who got here one way or another over the years.

  • avatar

    Geely will probably lose money on Polestar products. It is more for show than for real. Thats only conclusion I can make from their reluctance to sell them. It is not a Ferrari or Ford GT.

  • avatar
    thejohnnycanuck

    Whatever. Just get the T8 if you so desperately need to own one. Not sure if I’ve ever seen this much fuss over 15 horsepower.

  • avatar
    ajla

    I must be a huge sucker for a pretty design because I’m extremely enamored by this new S60 despite it being 4-cylinder only, FWD based, and owned by a Chinese company.

  • avatar
    jalop1991

    “While that’s roughly on par with financing a BMW M4, and Volvo does supply you with insurance and maintenance, you still get to own the M model when all is said and done.”

    But in both cases, after spending $1100/month for 5 years, you absolutely do NOT WANT to keep and own the car.

    BMW makes you keep it. Volvo lets you get away with just handing them the keys back and walking away. Point, set, and match to Volvo.

  • avatar

    Personally, I’m holding out for a 2020 V60 Inscription via European delivery.

    Hopefully, Volvo wakes up and offers more exciting exterior color options like Passion Red w/ City Blond City Weave Textile Upholstery.

  • avatar
    Daniel J

    Aren’t S60s, in general, hard to find?

  • avatar
    seth1065

    Perhaps DW is right so that is why he has volunteered to be the first recruit of the Donald’s Space Force, of course our rockets and tech will only be 100% US made , and in truth we prefer made in the midwest , not sure we can trust the folks on the coast, they may be spies who voted for she who will not be named .


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • jh26036: Who is paying $55k for a CTR? Plenty are going before the $35k sticker.
  • 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...

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