I was considering the purchase of a 2008 Volvo C30 T5 version 2.Anyone have experience with this vehicle or know anyone that has? They have only been out a few years. Here is the link http://www.stadelvolvo.com/certified/Volvo/2008-Volvo-C30-22f710817f00000100fef26a125b4399.htm# Thanks.
2008 Volvo C30 T5 Version 2
- Thread starter S_Walmer
- Start date
- Status
No comments? Thanks anyway.
I dont know people who owned the C30, but I know a few who owned S40's, s60's and an s80. Overall consensus is that the cars a sturdy and feel nice and safe, but maintenance wise they can be much improved. Electrical problems galore that will nickel-and-dime the life out of you. With an 08, problems shouldnt arise for a few years, but when they do, its probably downhill from there.
Nice cars, if we did not have kids, one of these would be my daily driver. The only Volvo Ive owned with excessive issues was a 96 850 with 250k+ on it that was not well cared for before I bought it. The average yearly cost to run our 02 XC is on par wit our 98 K1500. You wont be disappointed.
I didn't check this thread for a while thank for the input.
There are a few of them running around the roads here.
Sharp looking, and they are like a cool, updated, higher performance, 1800ES.
Sharp looking, and they are like a cool, updated, higher performance, 1800ES.
I considered buying a C30 a few years ago when they first came out. My dad owned a 2001 S40 1.9T for a few years. He bought it secondhand. The only issues he had was that it ate passenger side headlight bulbs every few months, and he had to have an o2 sensor replaced, which costed quite a bit. We also noted that on S40s of that vintage, interior materials wore very quickly (steering wheel and leather seats, specifically). Other than that, the car was great, and got pretty impressive gas mileage. Cruising at around 45 mph he would get about 39 mpg. I've always had a thing for Volvos
Last edited:
Well, since I've driven one, briefly--I'll give my feedback. I only have about 30 minutes behind the wheel of a friend's car, but here are my observations:
-styling: 10 It's the best-looking coupe/hatch on the market, IMHO-but then again, the 1800ES is probably my favorite car of all time, so that's no suprise
-driving experience: 7.5 It you recognize this car for what it is, you'll be happy. It's a sporty coupe, not a sports coupe. It's emphasis is more on luxury and less on performance. So, if feels solid, stable, and a little dead/slow. It's a FWD car though, so you're only going to get so much performance out of it. It's a very neutral handling car and the engine is well-mated to it. On this platform, the high-boost engine would probably need AWD to feel right. Still, it's a shame there's no "R" version w/AWD and the high boost motor.
-reliability/durability: 8 It's a V50 without the room. There really aren't many surprises on these cars. The 2.5T has been around forever. There will be the typical Volvo annoyances, such as suspension components that are designed to be replaced @ 100K and fast-wearing rear brake pads--but overall the car seems to be really solid. My friend's car has 80K on it and she's done nothing to it outside of regular maintenance.
-fuel economy/cost of ownership: 7.5 pretty good. She gets 32 or more on the hwy, 24-26 in mixed driving. For a heavy-ish turbo coupe, that seems pretty good. Maintenance on the car is fairly straightforward. It uses a timing belt, but the change is really easy as timing belts go.
-utility: 4. It has a hatch, which I love--but it's a really small opening, and the rear slope cuts out a lot of room. The rear seat is small--this is more of a 2+2, not a 4 seater--and I don't like the way the seats fold up.
I read Consumer's Report's snapshot on MSN, just to see what someone else had to say about it, and they described it as "pleasant". Twice. That about sums up the driving experience. They also rate it 'above average' in reliability, for what that's worth. Overall, I really like it, and if you're looking for a fairly luxurious, kinda sporty, really cool-looking coupe, it would be a great option. For me, the V50 makes way more sense. And if I were going to give up the utility of the wagon, I'd want something that was a little more fun to drive. So, if it ever comes out, the new Subaru/Toyota FT-86/BRZ has more appeal; lighter and RWD.
-styling: 10 It's the best-looking coupe/hatch on the market, IMHO-but then again, the 1800ES is probably my favorite car of all time, so that's no suprise
-driving experience: 7.5 It you recognize this car for what it is, you'll be happy. It's a sporty coupe, not a sports coupe. It's emphasis is more on luxury and less on performance. So, if feels solid, stable, and a little dead/slow. It's a FWD car though, so you're only going to get so much performance out of it. It's a very neutral handling car and the engine is well-mated to it. On this platform, the high-boost engine would probably need AWD to feel right. Still, it's a shame there's no "R" version w/AWD and the high boost motor.
-reliability/durability: 8 It's a V50 without the room. There really aren't many surprises on these cars. The 2.5T has been around forever. There will be the typical Volvo annoyances, such as suspension components that are designed to be replaced @ 100K and fast-wearing rear brake pads--but overall the car seems to be really solid. My friend's car has 80K on it and she's done nothing to it outside of regular maintenance.
-fuel economy/cost of ownership: 7.5 pretty good. She gets 32 or more on the hwy, 24-26 in mixed driving. For a heavy-ish turbo coupe, that seems pretty good. Maintenance on the car is fairly straightforward. It uses a timing belt, but the change is really easy as timing belts go.
-utility: 4. It has a hatch, which I love--but it's a really small opening, and the rear slope cuts out a lot of room. The rear seat is small--this is more of a 2+2, not a 4 seater--and I don't like the way the seats fold up.
I read Consumer's Report's snapshot on MSN, just to see what someone else had to say about it, and they described it as "pleasant". Twice. That about sums up the driving experience. They also rate it 'above average' in reliability, for what that's worth. Overall, I really like it, and if you're looking for a fairly luxurious, kinda sporty, really cool-looking coupe, it would be a great option. For me, the V50 makes way more sense. And if I were going to give up the utility of the wagon, I'd want something that was a little more fun to drive. So, if it ever comes out, the new Subaru/Toyota FT-86/BRZ has more appeal; lighter and RWD.
I like them, but I think they are overpriced for what they are.
You are getting essentially the same platform with a Mazdaspeed 3. The same with more doors, more horsepower, Mazda handling, and unfortunately, more torque steer.
The rear hatch reminds me of the last incarnation of the Ford Pinto.
You are getting essentially the same platform with a Mazdaspeed 3. The same with more doors, more horsepower, Mazda handling, and unfortunately, more torque steer.
The rear hatch reminds me of the last incarnation of the Ford Pinto.
- Status
Similar threads
