SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 66 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
No more than that. <p>Overpriced and certainly not worth the C70 badge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Re: Nice S40 convertible (Johann)

Is it possible to give some more information <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/confused.gif" BORDER="0">. Did you drive the car, how was the feeling, ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,305 Posts
Re: Nice S40 convertible (lvertvel)

<IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/zeroforum_graphics/screwy.gif" BORDER="0"> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Re: Nice S40 convertible (lvertvel)

Didn't drive the car. It was side by side with a V50 and to me it didn't look anything different.<p>That front of the C70 makes the car cheap. It is no more than an S40. Dashboard also S40 and no added value. Rear is very nice I must say.<p>Still it is a small car. The price in my country is way to high for such an S40 based vehicle.<p>A downgrade from the earlier model despite the technological developments over the last 7 or so years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,305 Posts
Re: (Token)

I have the old C70 now and I can't wait for my new C70 <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>I think they did a great job with it. I mean, the old C70 looks exactly the same as the old S70/V70 (both interior and exterior) exept from the rear. So did you expect the new C70 to be a whole new car? That doesn't look like any other Volvo?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,263 Posts
Re: (Nebor)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Nebor</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Definitely right on it being a downgrade from the first C70.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Can you explain that, please? Or are you parroting the nonsense that has been posted above?<p>Tell us, all, HOW does the new C70 <i>downgrade</i> any of the old C70's features???<p>Yannis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Re: (GrecianVolvo)

Because it is a lesser car Yannis.<p>The old C was based on the 800 platform which was followed by P2. P2 is a totally different class car compared to C1.<p>So after 7 or 8 years with all the developments of the P2 the new C70 is a lot less car.<p>No nonsense at all but of course you won't or can't see that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,025 Posts
Re: (GrecianVolvo)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>GrecianVolvo</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Can you explain that, please? Or are you parroting the nonsense that has been posted above?<p>Tell us, all, HOW does the new C70 <i>downgrade</i> any of the old C70's features???<p>Yannis</TD></TR></TABLE><p>For example, it's smaller ... inside and outside... and the T5 is as fast as the old 2.5/4 LPT...<br>Interior looks a lot more basic... seat are more flat too...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,305 Posts
Re: (BenES)

Ok, I can agree with one thing. The old seats are better. If I could take the softleather seats in my C70 and put them in my new C70 I would do it. BUT, the new C70 maybe is smaller utside, but it's bigger inside (in the front). I'm tall, and have more room in the new C70 than my old C70. But with less space behind me of course. (I don't care I alwas drive <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> ). The interior in my old C70 couldn't look more basic.....but I like it anyway. The new interior is an improvment. And about the performance. The old C70 T5 convertible MY03 (with 245hp) does 0-100 km/h (0-62mph) in 7.5s, the new one in 7.6s. The old T5 is like....nothing.....nothing.....nothing....EVERYTHING! And wheelspin....The new T5 fits the car better. This is what <B>I</B> think, you don't have to agree with me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,025 Posts
Re: (T5_awd)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>T5_awd</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And about the performance. The old C70 T5 convertible MY03 (with 245hp) does 0-100 km/h (0-62mph) in 7.5s, the new one in 7.6s. The old T5 is like....nothing.....nothing.....nothing....EVERYTHING! And wheelspin....The new T5 fits the car better. This is what <B>I</B> think, you don't have to agree with me. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>My 2.4T goes 0-100km/h in 7.7s...<p>And my interior (dark grey with real wood) feels/looks a lot more luxurious then in the new one.<br>The roomy interior (space in the back) was also a big plus for the old one.<p>But I like the new one also, but I still see it as less luxury and a class lower then the previous C70.<br>This one compares exactly against the 3series and A4...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,383 Posts
The old C70 was indeed based on the S70, so why isn't the new C70 based on its equivalent saloon sibling... the S60?<p>The new C70 is based on a smaller category of car, the S40, hence it doesn't deserve the C70 badge. It doesn't have the road presence of the old C70, it doesnt have the same quality of materials inside, and overall it looks smaller (a somewhat melted and remoulded S40). Not really the Convertible Grand Tourer it aspires to being.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,263 Posts
Re: (Johann)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Johann</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Because it is a lesser car Yannis.<p>The old C was based on the 800 platform which was followed by P2. P2 is a totally different class car compared to C1.<p>So after 7 or 8 years with all the developments of the P2 the new C70 is a lot less car.<p>No nonsense at all but of course you won't or can't see that.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Let's see who "won't or can't see" what the <b>TRUTH</b> is, Mr. "I-love-bashing-Volvos-but-I-can't-stay-away-from-them"... <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/zeroforum_graphics/screwy.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>1. The old C70 had ABSOLUTELY nothing with the P2 platform so I do not even understand why you are bringing the 850 and P2 platforms. Are you considering the P2 platform and evolution of the 850 platform? And the C1 as the run of the litter? Because we are comparing apples to oranges to...well, whatever else fruit you want to use.<p>2. The new C70 ias LOTS of BETTER and MORE AVANCED features than the old C70:<br>* Better chassis that ensures a much more compliant (not in a bad way, of course) ride than the old car<br>* Better brakes<br>* Better engine (and do not concentrate on the "measly" 218-hp...the new engine is more compact and has to potential for even more power output...wait and see what will be coming up)<br>* The manual transmission was only 5-speed, 6-speed on the new model<br>* Suspension is vastly improved. Plus, drive an old C70 with 18" alloys and drive the new with the 18" MIRZAMs...HUGE difference.<br>* Top? We all know how many problems THAT <i>SOFT</i> top had even before the car was introduced. We have, yet, to see any problems with the new one.<br>* Soft top vs. hard top? Differences are abound with most pronounced in the noise, safety/security departments.<br>* Trunk space...downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* Audio systems? Downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* Stability control? DSTC being standard in the new car? Downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* Steering input? Downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* Cowl shake? Downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* Navigation system (or lack thereof in the old C70)? Downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* More advanced safety systems regarding front and side impact collisions? Downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* Quality of leather upholstery...a downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>* FOUR different grades of steel...that is also a downgrade, Johann? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>I understand that you have a big problem that the new C70 resembles the S40 and that dies not bode well in YOUR status department. You are just not the type of buyer for that car. If you could understand that, you would stop trashing it.<br> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/redface.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>Yannis
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,263 Posts
Re: (Token)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Token</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The old C70 was indeed based on the S70, so why isn't the new C70 based on its equivalent saloon sibling... the S60?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Since when following OLD trends guaranteed progress?<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The new C70 is based on a smaller category of car, the S40, hence it doesn't deserve the C70 badge.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Who said that the S40 is smaller than the S60? You guys are all stuck in your old ways. Do an OBJECTIVE analysis and you will see that the interior dimensions of the two cars are virtually identical while the S40's trunk capacity is second only to the...<b><i>S80</i></b>. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> It doesn't have the road presence of the old C70</TD></TR></TABLE><p>So, all the focus groups (who spent MONTHS and MOMTHS in testing this car) were wrong. As wrong are all the reporters who call this car an <i>IMPROVEMENT</i> over the old car...wrong are all the prospects who come in and GUSH over the looks of this car and tell us the car lloks so much better than the old one.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">it doesnt have the same quality of materials inside</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Document that, please...<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Not really the Convertible Grand Tourer it aspires to being.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>That is <i>YOUR</i> aspiration. Not Volvo's.<p>Yannis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Re: (GrecianVolvo)

Oh Yannis, a lot of bull from a brainwashed Volvo sales representative who can't look any further than Volvo's propaganda...<p><br>The old C70 was an 800 series platform car. The successor of the S70 and V70 are the P2 S60 and V70. All Volvo to the last bolt, a development of the 800 series platform and a step up the ladder.<p>The S40 is a Ford Focus inside and out, I know it hurts your pride but those are the facts.<p>The S40 is a troublesome car, Weird constructed and the only Volvo thing about it is a <br> <B>WEAKER</B> version of the 2.4/2.5T engine used in the P2 range. I know your knowledge doesn't go that deep, you have probably never seen the inside of these engine's. The 2.5T is at the maximum of it's capability. In the S80 it also needed to be downtuned to reach emissions.. (or to preserve life expectancy?)<p>The new C70 should be a lot more advanced yes yet it isn't. Please learn to read my friend, After 8 years with all it's technological automotive developments the new C70 isn't on par with those developments. OK Volvo placed two diagonal bars underneath the car to stiffen up the rear and prevent the cowl shake... <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>The M66 6 speed as used in the S40 is weaker compared to the M56H which has proven it's strength over the years. I agree a 6 speed it nice, more a necessity I guess since the engine can barely pull the car.. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> `<p>Brakes... A company all about safety... It took them more than 10 years to come with better brakes? I don't consider this to be a plus Yannis. It's a thing Volvo should have done a long time ago. Apart from that it still remains to be seen if these brakes are really better. The C70 is an extremely heavy car for it's size.. 3500+lb <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/eek.gif" BORDER="0"> Full options probably over 3750... <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/eek.gif" BORDER="0"> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/eek.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>About the foldable roof, the first problems of failing roofs have already been reported. Volvo doesn't allow dealers to repair anything but hired special trained companies to perform repairs... <br>This because of the complexity of the system. If it was foolproof why do you think these measures have been taken upfront? The whole C70 delay is concentrated around roof funtioning problems.<p>Then about your electronic gadgetry,<p>Compare to the competition and see what a s-hit load of extra's on top of this Volvo comes with these cars. Things we probably will only see in 3 or 4 years in a Volvo.<br>The old C was based on a 1991 car.. After 15 years Volvo came up with this Ford S40... And added a price tag of a car which should have been on par with a P2 car in it's 7th year of development.. Or better a C1Plus<p>Compare this S40 based convertible to a should have been 7th year P2 car and yes, it is a huge downgrade.<p>The old C was never my kind of car nor is the new C but I can judge a car for what it's worth Yannis, without the brainwashed opinions you have about the Volvo's.<p>You are totally ignoring the fact that this C is replacing a 15 year old car and from that point of view it really isn't the huge development one might expect.<p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,305 Posts
Re: (BenES)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>BenES</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My 2.4T goes 0-100km/h in 7.7s...</TD></TR></TABLE><p>And my in ~6.8 (not stock, and tested with stop watch a few times) <p>But the official times on a MY03 T5 <B>convertible</B> is 7.5s. <p><br>About the space in the back. I want the seat a few cm further back. But it's not possible. In the new C70 it is possible to move it further back = not so much space left in the back seat. I'm 190cm+ and I don't have any problems to sit behind a person who is ~1.75. (when the roof is down..)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,305 Posts
Re: (GrecianVolvo)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>GrecianVolvo</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">* Navigation system (or lack thereof in the old C70)? Downgrade? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/rolleyes.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I have RTI in my MY03 C70 convertible......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,383 Posts
Re: (GrecianVolvo)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>GrecianVolvo</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>1. The old C70 had ABSOLUTELY nothing with the P2 platform </TD></TR></TABLE><p>The old C70 is the 2nd generation of the 800 series platform. The S60 is then 3rd generation of the same platform.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Better chassis that ensures a much more compliant (not in a bad way, of course) ride than the old car<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes the chassis is somewhat better.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Better brakes </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Wow, 10 years after the old C70 was released you get better brakes. They're not significantly better anyway. The S60R has the best brakes and that car came out over 3 years ago.<p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Better engine (and do not concentrate on the "measly" 218-hp...the new engine is more compact and has to potential for even more power output...wait and see what will be coming up) </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Nonsense. You don't have a clue whats coming out, and the 220bhp T5 engine that goes to 62mph in 7.5secs is a joke. I can beat that in a 2.4T old generation C70. An old generation T5, using the engine from an 800 series, can beat the new T5. Pathetic.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * The manual transmission was only 5-speed, 6-speed on the new model </TD></TR></TABLE><p>So you have an extra gear to get through before you can reach top speed. And still the old C70 can beat you with 5 gears. Makes you look a bit sad doesn't it?<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Suspension is vastly improved. Plus, drive an old C70 with 18" alloys and drive the new with the 18" MIRZAMs...HUGE difference. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I guess you like the rocking boat motion? Nobody else does.<p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Top? We all know how many problems THAT <i>SOFT</i> top had even before the car was introduced. We have, yet, to see any problems with the new one. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>The top on the new C70 has many problems. Just read the other threads. It gets stuck whenever it wants to. You need to learn your product more if you think you make statements like that <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/zeroforum_graphics/screwy.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Soft top vs. hard top? Differences are abound with most pronounced in the noise, safety/security departments. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes and no. Many premium manufactuers such as BMW and Audi will argue that a hardtop is not that much better than soft top due to design and weight issues. Hence the BMW 6-series and future Audi A5 will still have soft top. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Audio systems? Downgrade? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>The old C70 had Dynaudio DP Surround Sound almost a decade ago. Whats the new C70 got? Ohh its the same sound system, par the so-called upgrade to DPII which makes no difference for music. Why doesn't it have a DTS and Dolby Digital encoder capable of playing DVD-Music discs and 8-channel surround? Because its a pile of crap.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Stability control? DSTC being standard in the new car? Downgrade? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Old C70 had STC. New C70 has DSTC. Pathetic for over a decade of development.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Navigation system (or lack thereof in the old C70)? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Now you really are an idiot. The old C70 had RTI navigation. So theres no 'lack of thereof'. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * More advanced safety systems regarding front and side impact collisions? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Its a Ford. Maringally better safety. In fact, with the extended bumpers on the old C70, the old one is probably safer.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Quality of leather upholstery...a downgrade? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes, the old C70 has better interior quality. The new C70 is an S40 which is a Ford Focus which is a cheapass car.<p><BR><BR>
<i>Modified by Token at 12:56 AM 5-8-2006</i>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Re: Nice S40 convertible (Johann)

Nobody is asking you to buy it. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/zeroforum_graphics/screwy.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>Buy the 6 series conv that seems more your style. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://********************/smile/emcocktl.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>
 
1 - 20 of 66 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top