SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
329 Posts
Acceleration numbers are a shame - Volvo expects you to drop some serious cash on a cheaper (albeit better in many ways) platform yet acceleration numbers take a huge step backward from the first C70 convertible T5. Volvo could "own" this hard top 4 seater market being the first on the seen if they came out with guns blazing but they choose to offer one engine choice that is so-so. At least offer a Turbo + like kit like in the old days that gives some more ponies when demanded.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
807 Posts
Re: (swedishiron)

"With the top down, the C70 shields its occupants from gusts without the use of a windblocker, while providing the best head protection the industry has to offer in the event of a side-impact collision. Additionally, the Dynaudio system that seems overpowering with the top up offers ideally tuned bass response in the open air."

They should have had two different EQ settings - the car knows weather the top is up or down, and it could have EQed the stereo differently for the two situations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
454 Posts
Re: (swedishiron)

You don't have to buy one. If I only cared about acceleration, I would have bought a Mustang. The C70 is peppy and fun to drive, more so in manual than automatic, but it's not a mustang, and people who buy one don't expect it to be. I'm surprised at the number of people who complain about it, yet apparently have no real interest in one, except to denigrate it.

Oh, and only in the US is it sold with one engine choice. In Europe, there are several options including diesel, all are less powerful than the T5, for tax and gas consumption reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,839 Posts
Re: (swedishiron)

I'll tell you this. Nobody bought the old one because it was a burner.
In fact, most people who test drove the LT and HT really couldn't tell the difference. They weren't hot rodders to begin with. They wanted a car to go cruising in and the C70 satisfies that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
185 Posts
Re: (VolvoMax)

Quote, originally posted by VolvoMax »
I'll tell you this. Nobody bought the old one because it was a burner.
In fact, most people who test drove the LT and HT really couldn't tell the difference. They weren't hot rodders to begin with. They wanted a car to go cruising in and the C70 satisfies that.

This is true in fact many published reviews of the orginal C70 said that the LPT was a better match with the automatic transmission( the way the vast majority of C70s were equipped.) I've seen published first generation C70 zero-to-sixty numbers as low as 5.9 seconds, but I'm quite sure those times were achieved with the lighter manual coupes that were submitted to extreme levels of clutch abuse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,383 Posts
When it came out, the old C70 was a very good match for the powerful CLK's and 3-Series coupes. In fact it was much faster than those cars. If you have ever driven a T5 coupe, even in auto transmission, it is far better than the LPT versions.

The new C70 needed the 260BHP T5, not the piddly 220BHP. 0-62mph in 7.5 secs is terrible for a top of the range car.

They'll probably upgrade to the 260BHP engine soon enough because the C30 will have it I believe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63,543 Posts
Re: (Volvo Guy)

Quote, originally posted by Volvo Guy »
It needs a T SI6 that produces 300+ hp
It WILL have that engine (I-6) in TWO YEARS, MY 08, 09 the latest
I have no idea what HP it will be built with
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Re: (asja)

Quote, originally posted by asja »
You don't have to buy one. If I only cared about acceleration, I would have bought a Mustang. The C70 is peppy and fun to drive, more so in manual than automatic, but it's not a mustang, and people who buy one don't expect it to be. I'm surprised at the number of people who complain about it, yet apparently have no real interest in one, except to denigrate it.

Oh, and only in the US is it sold with one engine choice. In Europe, there are several options including diesel, all are less powerful than the T5, for tax and gas consumption reasons.

Funny you should mention Mustang. I went to pick up the ownership of my new 2007 XC90 3.2 and I was gazing at the black C70 outside. While the salesman was getting the paperwork he threw me the keys.

I took the C70 for a spin. Aside from the fantastic top and looks, it definitely seemed like a car to cruise in rather than throw around. I was very impressed with the rigidity of the car. Th interior and seats were beuatifully done and very comfortable. The steering wheel is very aggressive with the size and the metallic trim. The stereo is real nice and what you would expect from Volvo.

The tranny and clutch at first seemed quiet awkward. Of course I am coming from a Borg Warner tranny (or is it Tremec) that is designed for 300+ bhp. It is a great transmission with a generous engaging point. The Volvo's clutch, incomparison, initially needed ninja-like reflexes in comparison, with a very short window to engage the clutch. With time, however, you get used to it, but it definitely is a step backward from the S60 clutch I had in my 02 T5 and consistent with the transmission in the S40, which I also did not like. The shifter is a little rubbery and inspires zero confidence.

Great to cruise in and people stared at me in this car, but I somewhat felt disappointed with the C70. It could have been so much better and for the price, $65000.00 CAD, it is quite steep. I agree that for someone who wants to drive at max 8/10ths, they will be more than happy. All Volvos are great near the limit. But, geez, almost no aural satisfaction from driving this car.

Having driven the new I6 for a week, the engine at least sounds great, like a BMW. The C70 needs a heart transplant ASAP.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top