Talk:Volvo C30

The car will not be based upon the European Ford Focus or the Mazda Mazda3. So i removed the line saying so. It will share platform with the focus and the mazda 3 thats a whole other thing. That platform was co developed by Ford, Volvo and Mazda. --Dahlis 18:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC) That is true but Ford owned both Volvo and most of Mazda back in 2003 so it is Ford's platform because for was boss! Simple as that!ZunaOFP (talk) 21:20, 1 January 2013 (UTC)ZunaOFP

I removed a statement indicating that the hybrid C30 would be introduced in 2008. I can't find any confirmation of this, and the statement may have stemmed from confusion related to the fact that the US introduction of the standard C30 will be in 2008. If anyone knows differently regarding the release of the hybrid C30, please add a release date with citation.

Can anyone confirm whether the diesel-electric hybrid will be made available in American, specifically Californian, markets?

The article has a reference to Volvo Development Center in California. There is no such center here, I have verified with Volvo people and a Ford engineer. There is the sales HQ in Orange County (near Los Angeles), but they do not deal with engineering. There is a VolvoTech center elsewhere (I believe Virginia), but there ares no details about the type of research. As a research engineer in an automotive company in California, I can say with quite some certainty - THERE IS NO HYBRID PRODUCTION C30 IN THE DEVELOPMENT. The news was pure speculation -more like wishful thinking, unfortunately.

Mini Cooper is not C30's rival

The C30's rivals should be 3-door hatchbacks or coupes in the same class: BMW 1 Series Coupe, VW Scirocco, Opel Astra, Audi A3, Citroen C4 Coupe, Honda Civic Coupe... But NOT Mini Coopes which belongs to entirely different class.

C30 Hybrid Availability

I've scoured the web myself looking for an answer to this question, but as best as I can tell, as of today, the only public statement from Volvo is that they're working on it, and hope to show an operational prototype in late 2007. I'll be like those guys camping on the sidewalk for the new Playstation when the hybrid C30 reaches the US market.

The technical hurdles for this car are probably similar to those facing the Chevy Volt, a car that GM says has a 90% chance of being in dealerships by 2010. Toyota will still be using parallel hybrid technology (internal combustion engine directly drives the wheels) for the new Prius, due in 2009. So GM (or Ford/Volvo) could actually leap-frog Toyota with a more advanced serial hybrid design (where the internal combustion engine just charges the batteries, and never drives the wheels). The Volt or hybrid C30 could in theory never use any gasoline/diesel, for those driving less than about 40 miles / 60 km per day (most people). That's pretty huge.

So with nothing more to go on than that, I'd guess 2010 to 2012 for a serial hybrid C30. Volvo is so much cooler than Chevy, but if GM succeeds in 2010 where Ford and Toyota have thus far failed, I'll swallow my pride and become a Chevy owner in 2010.

Vjockin 22:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The important thing to note is that all of the necessary parts and technology are available, except for the batteries. The main difficulty for Volvo will be to integrate all of the parts into an existing platform and then go through all of the engineering and validation tests.

The current weight of the C30 is pretty high, which is what is making me lean towards the 2009 Toyota Prius. They will have to make significant weight reductions in order to meet their range and performance goals.
--Ng.j 00:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Range of Hybrid version

Under Hybrid, bottom most sentence, it says "Range, 100km". However, if one follows the citation (4), you will find information mentioning 60. If you follow citation (5), it says 100. This may need attention, since 60km (45mi) is more commonly found when doing a search on this subject. Regards. Tkemmere 20:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Shooting Brake

could this car possibly be classified as a shooting brake ?

just asking Retroqqq (talk) 16:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hard to say. The shooting-brake article lists the Volvo C30's predecessors as examples, although the rear of the C30 is more slanted like a hatchback. But then, the New York Times article linked to in the article does give the C30 as an example. The question is, do people consider it more of a wagon or a hatchback. If the former, then you can call it a shooting brake. I don't know if there's any size "rules" for it (such as length behind the side doors). --Vossanova ^o< 16:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, I myself tend to think of shooting brakes as variants of 2-door sports cars - the BMW M Coupe being a perfect example. The C30 is not based on any other 2-door model. --Vossanova ^o< 16:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

AWD Variant

Several sources are talking about a 350hp awd model to come out in the next few years. worth a mention? Benshimshak (talk) 15:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

At this point, it's speculation - even if a bunch of reliable sources mention it, they're still speculating. This article shouldn't be spreading rumors, just facts. --Vossanova ^o< 16:48, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Picture of the rear-end

Love it or loathe it, the rear-end of this car is one of its most distinguishing features, I'm surprised that a picture of it doesn't feature in this article. Oosh (talk) 12:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Diesel version in North America?

The article doesn't seem to say the diesel versions aren't available in North America. They aren't available here, are they?... --98.246.156.76 (talk) 03:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Volvo C30. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070210152249/http://www.channel4.com:80/4car/rt/volvo/c30/1042/7 to http://www.channel4.com/4car/rt/volvo/c30/1042/7

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Cleanup

I've begun article re-organizing and cleanup which has been badly needed. The "Initial version" and "2010 update" sections should be merged, since they are not separate generations. They don't need separate engine/transmission tables -- I've grouped them together but they should still be combined. There is WAY too much emphasis on individual special editions and concepts in this article, as well as too many laundry lists of model features (WP:NOTCATALOG/WP:IINFO). The grammar needs work (e.g. sections starting with "It is a.."). I know which editor was behind all this; he's done it with many other car articles. But I've at least laid out a basic structure we can work off: 1. Pre-production, 2. Production, 3. Special editions (& post-production concepts), 4. The DRIVe version (another special edition, really, but has enough content to go in its own section), 5. Motorsports, 6. Marketing & sales, and 7. See also/refs/external links. --Vossanova ^o< 22:47, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Why does the history only go up to 2013? I

It’s still a current car in the Volvo rangeTalltim (talk) 11:40, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Actually, ignore that, seems I’m wrong!Talltim (talk) 11:44, 17 March 2019 (UTC)