By on January 24, 2019

2019 Volvo XC 40 front quarter

2019 Volvo XC40 T4 FWD Momentum

2.0-liter turbocharged inline four (187 hp @ 4,700 rpm, 221 lb-ft @ 4,000 rpm)

Eight-speed automatic transmission, front-wheel drive

23 city / 33 highway / 27 combined (EPA Rating, MPG)

29.4 (observed mileage, MPG)

Base Price: $34,195 US

As Tested: $37,965 US

Prices include $995 destination charge in the United States.

No Canadian pricing/mileage as FWD/T4 engine package not available in Canada.

I get it. No real enthusiast should like crossovers. They’re tall, handle poorly, slurp gas, and aren’t as space efficient as the cars upon which they’re based. They aren’t a true sport-utility vehicles, either, as their on road-focused designs can’t handle rough terrain.

I used to be like you. I’m a car lover, and always will be, but the market has spoken, and it seems that most new vehicles coming our way will be high-riding wagons of some sort. So it’s time to get on board.

The 2019 Volvo XC40 T4 might be the tipping point for me. It’s not perfect — few cars are — but it works so incredibly well for its mission, moving people and stuff in style. That it is reasonably priced and has truly excellent fuel economy are merely bonuses.

2019 Volvo XC 40 profile

I love it when automakers send cars that aren’t fully loaded. I have to believe that this front-wheel-drive XC40, equipped with the 187 hp T4 engine (rather than the 252 hp T5 engine that comes standard on the all-wheel drive version) is more representative of what many buyers will select — especially those stretching their budgets toward a luxury European brand. For those buyers, often the perceived style and cachet of the brand might outweigh any value added by power and AWD.

2019 Volvo XC 40 front seat 2019 Volvo XC 40 rear seat

The kids noticed a lack of dome light in the rear — they struggled finding their seat belt latches at night. Otherwise, the rear seats were impressively comfortable, even for a long trip. Smaller luxury crossovers don’t always have enough knee room for my growing tweens, meaning dad gets the occasional impromptu, unwanted lumbar massage. Not so in the XC40.

2019 Volvo XC 40 Passenger Seat Adjuster

My wife hated the seat adjuster on the passenger side. While the driver gets power adjustments, the seatback tilt function on the passenger seat is of the twist knob variety. When the lower cushion is adjusted where she needs it for her long legs, twisting the knob is an exercise in repeatedly mashing one’s hand against the B-pillar.

2019 Volvo XC 40 dashboard

Take a look at that upward sweep of the C-pillar. That is a wide expanse of metal that could easily be glass. However, I was pleasantly surprised to find that my vision over the shoulders wasn’t compromised. I figured I’d have a massive blind spot, and I was wrong. The greenhouse is airy, allowing great views at all corners.

2019 Volvo XC 40 front 2019 Volvo XC 40 rear

The XC40 is an incredible highway cruiser, which is something I rarely say about any small crossover. Typically, a crossover’s short wheelbase and high center of gravity yields uneasy driving manners at interstate speeds. The XC40, even in this relatively base trim, drives without drama on the slab. I had to drive late one night to and from Cincinnati in some unpleasant storms and it handled the crosswinds and sleet like a much larger vehicle. I never felt a need to switch the optional active chassis settings out of the ECO setting for comfort — and I don’t see myself needing the Sport setting in any driving situation I might find myself when wheeling a crossover.

[Get new and used Volvo XC40 pricing here!]

2019 Volvo XC 40 gauges 2019 Volvo XC 40 interior

Honestly, the premium one pays for a luxury brand such as this isn’t as overwhelming as it used to be. This lightly-equipped XC40 T4, with the Multimedia Package, heated front seats and steering wheel, active chassis, and metallic paint, stickers at just under $38k. Adding all-wheel drive, which nets the more powerful engine, puts a similarly-optioned XC40 T5 AWD at $40,465 delivered. It’s not a stretch to configure the class-leading Toyota RAV4 to a similar price, whether front or all-wheel drive, optioned similarly.

2019 Volvo XC 40 cargo area

Like I said, I’m surprised at how much I like this Volvo XC40. I’d be quite happy living with this Belgian-built beauty.

2019 Volvo XC 40 rear quarter

[Images: © 2019 Chris Tonn/TTAC]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

102 Comments on “2019 Volvo XC40 T4 Review – The Crossover That Made Me Love Crossovers...”


  • avatar
    Bill Zardus

    Soy wire insulation and subsequent costly, rodent damage has become such a huge problem for car owners in this country; that every new car review should tell potential buyers if a specific new car model is still using this in my opinion.

    I will not buy any car using soy wire insulation and I tell anyone who will listen the same thing

    WRZ
    Delaware County, PA
    .
    Delaware County, PA

    • 0 avatar
      Tosh

      Wire insulation made of soy is a MYTH. Rodents chew on anything and everything all over the world.

      This SOY MYTH came out of a sad period in European history (1980’s) when some Euro makers were using easier to recycle wire insulation which decomposed too early and needed expensive repairs.

      • 0 avatar
        Chris Tonn

        I’ll admit, I haven’t tasted the wiring on any of my test cars. Last wiring harness I chewed on was on a 1970 MGB. Had a lovely sauce made of rusted British steel and ten-year-old Castrol.

        I’ll note your feedback, and gnaw on every car going forward.

        • 0 avatar
          Bill Zardus

          Chris:

          How hard would it be to include that small amount of information in a review ? To the people in the northeast US where “eastern grey squirrels” originated, this is already a big issue. And since these squirrels continue to move west, the issue is increasingly becoming a nationwide problem.

          There have been 2 class action lawsuits within the last 5 years against 2 different mfgs (Honda and Toyota) in CA and FL. How many people would have to fall victim to this problem before it stops being funny ?

          -News.GoogleSearch mice+auto
          https://www.google.com/#q=mice+auto&hl=en&tbm=nws

          If you google on soy and auto you find many stories online and some of them are local reporters talking about local people.

          If you then do the same search for squirrels, rats, or rodents, you find additional stories.

          It takes a lot of time to research this because when victims tell reporters it is a squirrel or mouse problem, some reporters will then think the problem is specific to that one rodent.

          I’m pretty sure the reason this problem wasn’t noticed much sooner by Japanese venders is because there are no grey squirrels in Japan, where they probably tested this wiring. Judging by what I read, grey squirrels are the biggest problem.

          Regards

          WRZ
          .

      • 0 avatar
        ToddAtlasF1

        The self-recycling German wiring was used starting in the mid-’90s, not the ’80s. Edible soy-based wiring insulation is a very real thing. Honda sells pepper infused tape under part #4019-2317 for wrapping their moronic ‘green’ wiring. Why do some people come on here to spread misinformation? Ignorance is one thing, this is something more sinister.

        • 0 avatar
          Tosh

          I’m not sinister.
          Thanks for the correction on the era.
          Honda selling this rodent tape is not an admission of guilt; it’s to satisfy their customers’s demand for a solution to the ever-growing problem of humans and rodents living closer together.

          • 0 avatar
            Tosh

            And about that Honda rodent tape: Look on Amazon customer images, and you’ll see a pic of a rodent having eaten through the tape!
            Rodents MUST chew…

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Trick in our area is to put poisoned bait under the car. Works most excellently!

            Problem is that a few cats also died in the neighborhood from eating poisoned squirrels, field mice or other dying rodents.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        @tosh

        Myth/shmyth.. When rodents eat it – this is reality. For some reason they never ate my 2011 Mazda but 2017 is apparently tasty to them.

      • 0 avatar
        Bill Zardus

        Thanks Tosh, Please let us know when this happens to
        you, so the rest of us can begin taking this a lot
        more seriously.

        I never take any problem seriously, unless it happens
        to me or someone named Sosh.

        WRZ

        • 0 avatar
          Tosh

          But is HAS happened to me! My 2001 Acura was nibbled by mice, as was the neighbors’ 97 Hyundai and 2007 Mazda, costing us all hundreds in repairs. And worldwide rodent damage to wiring is an ENORMOUS problem. But it’s not due to the wire insulation being FOOD. It’s because there are more humans, cars, and wires sharing habitat with rodents, and rodents CHEW on everything….

          • 0 avatar
            Bill Zardus

            I’m only asking professional car reviewers to begin considering this issue and advising consumers of the wiring being used.

            If other people still want to buy cars with soy based wiring, let them make that informed decision. Other people could buy peanut butter based insulation for all I care.

            I’m not saying that this will end all rodent issues with cars. I’m still trapping and disposing of squirrels and mice as fast as they show up on my property. I bought 2 of the newest model #1083 Havahart easy set traps about 18 months ago and the rate I am catching squirrels has dramatically increased. It has taken 4.5 years to trap 225 squirrels but I am now on a pace to catch more than 100 a year with 2 traps.

            And since I began trapping mice outside my suburban home. I have been surprised to discover we also had a mouse infestation that I was unaware of. Since November 1, I have caught 42 mice and all my neighbors tell me there aren’t any mice in the neighborhood when I ask them.

            WRZ

      • 0 avatar
        TrailerTrash

        no, you are dead wrong.
        speaking from experience now with two vehicles…the last one costing nearly 3000 solving the problem…if it has been!

        and the difference is food vs just toothing.

        once the food is realized, it becomes so much more of a destination rather than just hiding.

        • 0 avatar
          Bill Zardus

          TrailerTrash:

          You are much more patient than I am. If you ever decide to get a trap, get the Havahart # 1083 easy set trap. You can’t get them at Home depot or Lowes for some crazy reason. You have to buy them online. Then just drop squirrels or rats in a fish tank for 10 minutes. I take the carcass to the exact same spot in the nearby woods and scavengers always take them. Always use Peanut butter to catch rodents.

          WRZ

          • 0 avatar
            LockHIMup

            Drop n fish tank…. Because letting them go away from ur car is too much to deal with. Ur login profilr couldn’t b more right on.

    • 0 avatar
      don1967

      Volvo and Toyota – two brands known for longevity – using mousebait for wiring is just sad. All in the name of eco-marketing.

      Then again, mice have been chewing wires for as long as there have been mice and wires. And anecdotal stories have been terrifying people for as long as there have been anecdotes.

      I’ll wait for some hard statistics before adding this to my list of reasons to lie awake at night.

      • 0 avatar
        Bill Zardus

        Don:

        If I am reading you right, we should all just be happy they aren’t
        using peanut butter based wiring because then the problem would
        be 10 times worse ?

        Is that how you see it ?

        WRZ

        • 0 avatar
          iNeon

          My 1984 245 wagon would honk on left turns by that junky wiring.

          He’s not telling stories. These are well known issues with the cars.

          The car’s (manual transmission) electronic overdrive button had to be rewired by the same fault.

      • 0 avatar
        Bill Zardus

        The question I have is: did the government require auto makers to begin using this “eco friendly” soy based insulation or did the automakers decide to make this ill advised change of their own accord ?

        I am beginning to ask reporters this question, but I haven’t received an answer yet.

        WRZ

        • 0 avatar
          AtoB

          @Bill Z

          We also have a rodent problem, mostly agricultural but there have been multiple automotive instances too.

          One solution I am trying is barn owls. I ran across a study done a few years ago which showed barn owls as a very effective, very cheap, low maintenance pest control solution.

          https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2016-4-july-august/green-life/are-barn-owls-nature-s-best-pest-control

          After I read about this I found these plans and used them to build a few owl boxes:

          https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.scvas.org/pdf/cbrp/BuildingBarnOwlBoxes.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwidhInJ0ZDgAhUFPK0KHVZ4AB0QFjAFegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw1axRHBS6-rzCliLSQtHuVf

          I then began to notice these boxes springing up in parks and fields all over my area!

          No owls yet but I’m hopeful!

    • 0 avatar
      DuffMan

      Here’s my 2018 squirrel story. Easter weekend wife driving solo from Oshawa to Ottawa on secondary highway (#7) when Ford Escape’s electronics going crazy. Wipers randomly moving, lights dimming. Lucky there is a Ford dealership halfway in Perth . Found nest that filled most of passenger side engine compartment. Quick repair to get back on journey and further repair when she returned home in Oshawa. $468. Started treated engine compartment with coyote urine. August squirrel attacked again just before lease return. Since Ford already signed off on lease return, I kinda hid/patched as much of the damage I could. n/c. October, new Mazda CX-5 make it to bottom of our street and dies. Towed to Mazda. $680.00 Car returned Saturday, sprayed with urine and attacked Sunday and towed to dealership. $1600.00. Now everything plastic in engine compartment is wrapped in Capsaicin (hot pepper) and stored indoors. I wish I could post pictures of the damage. More was done to control squirrel population in my part of Oshawa that I won’t share. Also attacked neighbour’s Dodge Grand Caravan. However, there is about a half a dozen other vehicles they ignore for some reason. Bottom line is squirrels need to constantly chew because their teeth are constantly growing, and they do have preferences

  • avatar
    jack4x

    29.4 MPG is “truly excellent fuel economy”?

    $38,000 is “reasonably priced”?

    Maybe compared to other crossovers, but this one still seems to give up too much to a sedan to be considered any type of tipping point.

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      This comes across like a more mature MINI. It has the silly youthful look that MINI buyers like, it sounds like it drives well, it’s short on power like every MINI but it seems like a better value than MINI.

      For 40k you’re in an XC60, so it seems like Volvo is charging a hefty premium for their version of a MINI.

      • 0 avatar
        Felix Hoenikker

        jkross,
        Having completed an exhaustive to me car shopping spree for my wife, let me say there is no such thing as a $40k Volvo XC60. $55K is more the norm. Too much for me to spend on this type of sled, but I was saved by the bizarre center console in the XC60. It’s so high that you seem to be sitting in a tub. My wife sat in it for about a minute and declared it unacceptable. There are $40K Infinite QX50s that are more powerful and have better interiors.

        • 0 avatar
          jkross22

          Felix, I should have known better than to trust Google on such things. I agree with your take… $55k is too much for the XC60. It’s nice, but that pricing, like for many lux branded cars, is absurd.

          • 0 avatar
            Prove your humanity: 9 + 8 =

            Wait a few years, and find a well-cared-for used one for 80% off of MSRP.
            Then you can pay cash and not have to worry about making monthly payments for the better part of a decade.

      • 0 avatar
        TrailerTrash

        actually, it comes across as a jeep compass to me.

        and is it just me or is there a horrible rear corner view!?

    • 0 avatar
      johnny_5.0

      Indeed. Especially the anemic 187hp version here. I get why people like crossovers, and I like the taller trunk area. But I’d honestly take an Accord Sport 2.0 10AT over this base trim FWD version all day long. Apples to oranges I know, preimium CUV vs non-premium sedan. But even ignoring passing power and driving enjoyment, “boring” stuff like rear seat legroom matters.

    • 0 avatar
      Flipper35

      Our sedan cost half as much, has twice the horsepower and delivers better mileage. The only option I wish we had was leather seats.

      I bet we can stuff just about as much stuff in the trunk as you can usably put in the back of the Volvo. If I wanted a taller seating position I would get a minivan. Similar mileage with more hp and far more seating and cargo.

      At least the Volvo has a nicely integrated screen as opposed to plopping it on top of the dash.

      I guess I am a grumpy old man because I don’t understand the purpose of a vehicle like this. Get off my lawn!

  • avatar
    dwford

    Why do all the entry crossovers have to have “funky” styling? They all scream “I bought the toy version.”

    • 0 avatar

      Because that’s what the people this market targets wants. I sell Volvo’s and up until this month we’ve been 100% sold out of this model, we finally have a few on ground to pick from. Every one that has been sold had folks who loved the style. They love that it’s different than the sedan and also that it’s different than the XC60 and XC90. I’m obviously a little brand biased, but I think Volvo has done a good job making each series of vehicles not simply a different price point but a slightly different style and feel as well, while at the same time having good brand continuity of technology and features.

    • 0 avatar
      sgeffe

      As in AMC Gremlin! Yuck!

  • avatar
    BrentinWA

    This entire class of vehicles reek of 1987 Dodge Colt hatchback to me. That is all.

  • avatar
    SlowMyke

    “I used to be like you. I’m a car lover, and always will be, but the market has spoken, and it seems that most new vehicles coming our way will be high-riding wagons of some sort. So it’s time to get on board.”

    No, we don’t. That’s exactly how we lose the option not to have all these crossovers. “Everyone else is buying them, so you should too” only encourages automakers to accelerate the takeover of crossovers and drop other options. If you don’t like crossovers, it’s important not to buy them. Foregoing what you like because it’s not the popular choice is stupid.

    All that said, i like Volvo’s, and i don’t mind the xc40. I think the 2-tone paint job they offer on it is ugly, though. Oh, and were i to be in the market for a compact crossover, as much as i like Volvo and this car in particular, that idiotically large c-pillar would keep me from buying an xc40.

  • avatar
    gtem

    That stupid C pillar kick up on the rear door is simply unforgivable IMO. A) ruins passenger’s view significantly, and B) makes me thing of a Jeep Compass.

  • avatar
    MoparRocker74

    “Time to get on board”? Step in line, join the trend?

    Yeah, no…F that. Dropping Scat Pack money on what looks like a beefed up Yugo is basically just grabbing your ankles willingly. Seriously this offers nothing that an Elantra GT can’t do just as well or better for half the price. $38-$40K buys a LOT of desireable vehicles including Hemi Challenger/Chargers, Wranglers, even a Hemi Ram singlecab. But for a road going little tykes cozy coupe? FAIL.

    • 0 avatar
      Garrett

      You list only FCA vehicles in your list of “desireable” vehicles.

      Frankly, I’d have serious reservations putting my family in any of those vehicles you list. FCA manages to have the worst safety performance of the big three, and definitely nowhere near where Volvo was 20 years ago.

      Hyundai’s are safer than FCA vehicles, but nowhere near Volvos.

      At the end of the day, Volvos offer snazzy looks, the most comfortable seats on the market (far better than the crap I’ve sat in from FCA), and they are designed to pass the sort of crash tests we may see a decade from now.

      • 0 avatar
        volvoguyincanada

        Amen! There is nothing comparable in terms of safety than a Volvo. The feeling of driver confidence behind the wheel is tank-like.

        • 0 avatar
          gtem

          “tank-like”

          A Soviet T72 on its torsion bar suspension might ride better than the XC90 rental I had, it was truly horrid on broken downtown pavement, in no way befitting a crossover that easily crests $75k.

      • 0 avatar
        MoparRocker74

        Didja notice my screen name? If you didn’t think I might have a slight affinity for Ma Mopar, then I don’t know what to tell you.

        The point stands. While the rest of the D3 do offer a muscle car and pickups comparable to FCA’s, how about a V8 rwd sedan or a balls-out offroader? That’s right, crickets. If you wanna drag up chintzy fwd sedans in that price range, then you’ve missed the point entirely.

        Worst safety records …meaning what, exactly? If it has less than a 5-star rating in an arbitrary government test then I guess it randomly explodes into shrapnel, right? I didn’t buy a Challenger to wreck it, I bought it to drive. What Volvo offers rwd, V8s from 375-797 hp and classic muscle car style? Again: crickets.

        Hey it’s a (sorta) free market. You want to drop your $38K on…whatever that thing above is supposed to be and drive around either paranoid or overconfident about safety…knock yourself out. I don’t see any value here and I chose fun.

        • 0 avatar
          Garrett

          Look at IIHS tests.

          FCA products consistently underperform.

          They don’t care enough about their customers to do any better.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “Look at IIHS tests.”

            The older designed vehicles don’t do very well, but the newer stuff is fine from what I can see. I think it’s unfair for you to be singling them out considering this isn’t a situation unique to FCA.

            iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/minivans

            iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/small-suvs

            It’s cool that you love your Volvo, but don’t always need to white knight for them so hard.

        • 0 avatar
          Garrett

          Look at IIHS tests.

          FCA products consistently underperform.

          They don’t care enough about their customers to do any better.

  • avatar
    Fred

    I was foolishly hoping to see a V40.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Crossovers usually have more cargo and leg room than cars occupying a similar footprint so they are definitely more space efficient

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Yeah, I didnt get the “car is more space efficient” line. Seems to me that a vehicle of the same length yet boasting more interior room would be considered more space efficient.

      • 0 avatar
        Flipper35

        Our V6 Avenger has more people space than our 4 pot Rogue. We can fit as much luggage and coolers in both, unless you don’t want to see out the back window of the Nissan, then we can fit a couple more laptop bags in the Nissan. The sedan gets better mileage, has far more power, is more comfortable and has a better transmission. In 65k miles the Mopar has been more reliable.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      “Crossovers usually have more cargo and leg room than cars occupying a similar footprint so they are definitely more space efficient…at a price.”

      There, fixed it for you. In terms of interior room, this is probably a bit larger than something like a Golf…for twice the money. Add AWD – which you’d have to think would be standard at this price – and you’re looking at a serious pricetag.

      I’m not singling this car out – I actually like it. But the same is true for pretty much everything it competes with.

      Well, I guess if car purchases were required to make sense, we’d all be driving Corollas.

  • avatar
    ajla

    I don’t *hate* crossovers. Make them RWD & give them over 300hp and I’m pretty chill. But, I don’t have children and don’t transport grandfather clocks so buying one is likely not in my future.

    That said, c’mon man. This is what made you love CUVs? The usual dazzling Volvo interior aesthetics are obviously cut to the bone and the exterior is only a small notch above an Encore. This is a $38K front-drive egg with the power of a VW Beetle and questionable ergonomics. All from a brand that came in dead-a$$ last in CR’s last reliability survey. What are you really getting here to earn your praise? How many CUVs fail at being able to ‘haul people and stuff’?

    • 0 avatar
      Garrett

      Drive one. They’re fun vehicles for what they are.

      That being said, they need to make the T6 engine available. In the XC60, it’s a great setup. In the XC40 it’d be hilarious.

  • avatar
    Trend-Shifter

    What, no floating roof design with the rear door designed like that?
    Rebels!

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    After leaving the Tesla store empty-handed last October, I stopped at the Volvo store to test drive an XC40. I had seen glowing reviews, and I thought it could be a nice first CUV in my life.

    What a disappointment.

    The dealer’s people were chilly, and they had no product to offer. They had two demo XC40s (none of the T4 trim, only the T5 trim), and they told me that all production was spoken for, for the next 5 months. They said if I ordered one, I *might* receive it in March 2019. I never bothered to test drive it.

    I found the interior to be cramped and cold, with hard plastics everywhere. And for me, the numbers didn’t work; spending nearly $40k on a FWD vehicle that didn’t offer anything special in performance, economy, etc., just didn’t make sense. Plus, Volvo is sitting at the bottom of the reliability ratings lately.

    FWIW, I’m actually a fan of FWD CUVs (e.g. Nissan Kicks, Compass Sport), but I’m thinking that resale on a Volvo CUV is significantly hurt if it doesn’t have the AWD option.

    • 0 avatar
      SSJeep

      Agreed on all counts, and if this is the vehicle that made Chris love crossovers, give it a year and it will be the vehicle that makes Chris hate Volvos!

      “Production is spoken for, for the next five months – service bays are spoken for, for the next year.”

  • avatar
    thegamper

    I cant get on board for small crossover love, regardless of manufacturer. As the author said, its not a stretch to option up a RAV4 to $40k. At least the RAV4 is pretty roomy. This Volvo doesnt appear all that spacious inside. Even so, I simply cannot wrap my head around why anyone would pay $40k for a reasonably well equipped, modestly powered, not really all that spacious AWD hatchback.

    As you may recall, we were paying $25k for this type of vehicle not that long ago when it had 2.5 fewer inches of ground clearance.

    For the Same price as this, you could buy a Toyota Avalon, and everyone would be more comfortable, probably similar fuel economy, faster, more luxurious cabin, etc, etc.

    And for the record, I generally like Volvo’s new vehicles, incredibly attractive. Not this one so much.

  • avatar
    random1

    So, sounds like it’s got less interior room and cargo capacity than a Gti. Slower, worse mileage, much more expensive, and amazingly enough, even less reliability than a GTI. Which part was the tipping point?

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      It sounds like you need to read up on the specs. A quick glance at each car’s dimensions show the Volvo mostly ahead, if only by a little. The cargo capacity is more on the Volvo with the seats up, more on the golf with the seats down. As for other things like rear seat leg and head room, its advantage Volvo.

      • 0 avatar
        random1

        I checked Edmunds. Cargo has the GTI ahead pretty substantially, seats up(22.8 vs 20.7 cu ft) or down(52.7 vs 47.2 cu ft), and the other seating specs are fractions of an inch plus or minus. Not sure Edmunds is 100% right, but they’re usually good.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          So…about the same size as a Golf/GTI, and this one has 180 hp and FWD, just like a ’18 Golf does, and costs about twice as much.

          I like the style, and I’m glad to hear it drives nicely, but I don’t see how this car makes much sense.

      • 0 avatar
        Flipper35

        The cargo area in a CUV is nice and tall, but if you are going on a road trip and plan to see out the back window or not have bags tumble forward on your passengers, there is a lot less cargo space than you think.

        BTDT.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    A twist knob to adjust the backrest angle? Are you kidding me? I thought this went out with the ’80s.

    My ’78 Audi Fox used twist knobs for that. But at least they were on the inside edge of the seat, and easy to reach. The one in the XC40 looks like it’s down low, on the outside. Is this a Geely thing?

    Also, they’d better add another dome light for rear seat passengers.

  • avatar
    sckid213

    The author makes reference to people stretching to afford a luxury European brand, but in my experience here in Los Angeles, Volvo still has a ways to go in terms of brand perception. A co-worker of mine (a very materialistic, late 30s female) has an XC90. I asked her how she likes it, and her response was “I like it…except for the brand.” People seem to associate Volvos with “mom cars” – maybe it was all those square wagons toting around in the ’80s and ’90s?

    I personally like Volvo and think they are indeed quite premium, but it sounds like most folks consider them on par with ~Acura. I don’t like the XC40 for me, but for their target demo, this nails it.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    I’m with Chris here – I mentioned yesterday that there’s a short list of CUVs I could see driving, and this is another one.

    Here’s the problem, though – give this the engine and suspension it deserves, and you’re looking at over $40,000. That’s a lot of money for what amounts to a compact car.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Most compact cars dont have 252 hp, AWD and such as that. This isnt pretending to be an alternative to a Corolla. As he mentioned, it isnt hard to spec up mainstream CUVs past $40k, either, and even if you do, I dont believe they’d have the power or features this does.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        This car doesn’t have 252 hp and AWD either. It has 180 hp and FWD, just like a Golf. It’s a touch bigger inside than a Golf. And as tested, that’s what this boils down to – a higher-riding Golf at almost twice the price.

        Taken strictly on its’ own merits, I don’t dislike this car at all. I think it looks cool. If you buy the uprated model, it comes with great-looking orange/red leather seats and tons of brushed aluminum trim. With AWD and the uprated motor, it’d be fun to drive. It’d be a cool ride…just not $45,000 cool.

        A Kona with the 1.6T would make a lot more sense and come in at around 30 grand loaded up.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      You not going to buy it. Hecho en China

  • avatar
    Grenade

    Volvo has been on a styling home run hitting streak for several years now (looking at you XC90, XC60, V90, V60, and V40), but this thing looks like a first gen Jeep Compass crossbred with 2010 CRV, with a Volvo grille. Would it have been so hard to make a half sized XC90?

    The front end and rear end straight on views of this bastard child look great. The side and three quarter views look awful with that weird C pillar kink.

    Also 38k for this mid range model will get you a full tilt boogie Rav 4. A comparably equipped Rav 4 would be much less. The Rav 4 really is a great value.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    I have too many problems with Volvos

    1. this one is made in China
    2. No buttons. At least, give command center like Mazda
    3. Drive mode joystick
    4. Those Volvo engines. . .
    5. You will probably find some funky stuff if you look at suspension from under

  • avatar
    don1967

    Crossover Hate is getting really old.

    It’s a silly exercise in virtue-signalling among car and truck enthusiasts who share little in common except the desire to stroke each other’s egos.

    I’ve owned all vehicles types and would gladly buy another crossover. They’re as handy as a hatchback or wagon, only they come in more choices and have greater capacity for ramming snowbanks and seeing over traffic. Not quite as capable as a truck, but cheaper to operate, easier to park, and not requiring Olympic-level gymnastic skills to check the oil or retrieve luggage.

    The market has concluded that crossovers are the optimal single-vehicle choice, and as usual the market is right. Car and truck enthusiasts, not so much.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      I would argue that general, knee-jerk crossover hatred has heavily died down on TTAC over the past year.

      HOWEVER, I will also argue that every CUV should not automatically be labeled good just because it can haul around 4 boxes in the boot and/or has a higher ride height. At this point, that’s just the virtue of its body style. By that sort of reasoning every convertible that ever existed is also “good” because the top came off in some fashion.

      • 0 avatar
        iNeon

        You just made the opposition’s point for me, Ajla—

        I tried to think of the crappiest convertible in the world— came up with… the Geo Metro.

        It’s fun af and you know it.

      • 0 avatar
        don1967

        I’ve never heard anyone argue that a CUV is good just because it holds four boxes. Although I’m sure somebody has. But I’ve also seen praise heaped on a cheapened Camry for its “legendary quality” and a dubious new Apple product for its “cool factor”. The problem is not unique to CUVs.

    • 0 avatar
      deanst

      And the market once concluded that the pinto was the best compact car (based on sales).

    • 0 avatar
      Flipper35

      I have one and cant imagine why anyone would buy one. A minivan is far more capable as a hauler, better mileage as well. A minivan has the seating position height requirements met as well. I for one would never buy another crossover.

  • avatar
    jatz

    I think you’d have to double the population percentage of car guys who simply Will. Not. Consider. CUVs! in order for them to match that noisy 10% minority who’ve recently been permitted to suck each others’ faces in movies and on TV.

  • avatar
    Mike-NB2

    Here’s the best compliment I can come up with: it’s not as ugly as most of its competition.

  • avatar
    jatz

    By God that thing is Old Honda pretty!

  • avatar
    ixim

    A comparably equipped [minus the Volvo mystique] Equinox would be just as good for maybe $8K less?

  • avatar
    SPPPP

    A Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring with FWD and the 2.5 prices out at least $3000 less with better options and 3.5 inches more rear legroom. The Volvo does have better torque, but it also requires premium gas.

    This Volvo doesn’t look bad, but it will probably only appeal to a select few.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    This seems like a deal! Not much more than the new Mazda 3!

    I normally don’t notice/care so much, I like plenty of other cars like this one, but this car to me screams “designed for women” (not that there’s anything wrong with that, Kramer) from every corner.

    The styling is short and tall and “cute” in every way. The interior is soft and light and airy. It unfortunately looks too feminine in nearly every regard for me to consider something like this. That is probably exactly the intent by Volvo. I’m sure nearly every woman I know in my life would love this car. I’m pretty middle of the road when it comes to styling. I definitely don’t need a Wrangler with a lift or huge pickup to be a man. But this might be a bit too far the other direction even for me.

    Which is funny because I don’t feel that way about any of the other new Volvo models, which I find excellent, classy, and well-proportioned and well-designed inside and out and I’d love to own one.

  • avatar
    Bill Zardus

    Chris Tonn:

    Also ….

    Why can’t you just tell us how many pounds the car is rated to carry ?
    There is a decal in the door of every car that I’ve ever seen that gives you this information so it would take less than a minute to get this information and then publish it.

    It’s not like I am asking you to do stuff that is complicated or hard to find.

    This may surprise you, but we have an obesity epidemic in this country and since obesity tends to run in families, some families need to have this information.

    And since I have obese nephews who are frequently in my car, this is also important to me.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Then you better buy something bigger, independently of how much this car can carry. I don’t think this is a car where obese people will easy get into rear seat.

      • 0 avatar
        Bill Zardus

        They don’t drive with us every day.
        I let one of them drive and then my wife
        and I can sit in the back if we need to.

        I know you are probably trying to be helpful but comments
        like yours are just excuses for PROFESSIONAL auto reviewers
        not using their common sense.

        WRZ

  • avatar
    cimarron typeR

    Yeah, I’m thinking there are better options. I’d seriously look into a CX9, CX5 2.5t twins, an RDX or qx50.Both compete in the same segment with likely better resale and reliability. I have never compared Volvo to the big 3 Germans. When Genesis releases their line, I’ll drop Volvo further down the list.
    I shopped this segment recently and ended up in a Disco Sport and have been mostly satisfied, it rides rougher but handles fairly well.Only one callback for a sticky bypass valve resulting in occasional CEL.There are better driving /owning cars but I’ve never owned a British car and the Loire Blue over Tan leather is fetching.I get 25mpg mixed on 91 octane.I didn’t pay a whole lot more than this Volvo would cost. LR deals on these, not the pricier luxury models.

    • 0 avatar
      scooter81890

      Six months later, are you still mostly happy with your Disco? My wife will be trading her X3 soon and I was looking at the Disco,the Volvos, the Acura RDX, and the soon to arrive Hyundai Palisade…I have to admit, British reliability is weighing against the Disco but I am keeping an open mind.

  • avatar
    scooter81890

    I like it! It has a certain style that some of these smaller crossovers lack and it can be configured to be decently priced for a “premium” marque. Finally, while I realize Volvo is no longer the only car company emphasizing the importance of safety, I still believe it to make cars much safer than most. Who can put a value on that?

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @JD-Shifty – They aren’t vastly superior to domestic trucks. My 2010 F150 is still going strong....
  • FreedMike: That truck really did have God’s Own Engine.
  • FreedMike: 1) The O.G. ’83 Rabbit GTI (particularly the seats and the dash). 2) 240Z, as part of the intro...
  • dukeisduke: You mean like the million mile Tundra? That “wives tale”? https://www.motortrend.com/...
  • FreedMike: The right spec is over at the Ram or Ford dealer, where you can find trucks that aren’t ridiculously...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber