Volvo's Limited FootPrint - Why Volvo Drivers are "unique"
Username
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
    Results 1 to 35 of 189
    1. #1

      Volvo's Limited FootPrint - Why Volvo Drivers are "unique"

      Here's a good Discussion I brought up in another thread.

      Why Volvo has such a limited Footprint in the U.S.

      1. Volvo Poorly markets itself in the United States

      2. Volvos are very expensive to maintain. Where as parts, labor, and repairs come at a huge premium compared to domestic or more popular brands (Toyota, Honda, Etc).

      3. Purchasing a Volvo is cheaper than a Mercedes or BMV, but on par with an Audi or Lexus. I.E. Mid-Range Higher End Vehicles.

      The one shocker is that Volvo's are known for their steadfast safety record. Something like no fatalities by 2020? With the ability to save lives, I am a bit surprised at how little Volvo Sells this point to consumers! If only Volvo Capitalized on its top selling asset (Safety).



    2. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    3. #2
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jun 2012
      Location
      Pittsburgh, PA
      Posts
      811
      Good topic.
      IMHO, Volvo does not market itself right.
      Marketing safety was a big thing for Volvo back in the day (and still is) but other manufactures have caught up. Many brands earn 5-star ratings these days so that aspect is not enough to drum up Volvo sales.
      Volvo has a reputation for being boring. They have to shake that off. They are being lost in the mix.
      In a buyer's mind:
      Mercedes = image and luxury
      BMW = image and performance
      Mini = image
      Audi = image
      Honda/Toyota = dependability and value
      Lexus = luxury and reliability and superb dealer experience

      and so on ...

      Volvo = ??

      They need to distinguish themselves and create an image that sells.
      Might need to add a sporty coupe or hatch to promote that.
      2012 S60 T5 Savile Gray/Beachwood

    4. #3
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Dec 2014
      Location
      DFW Area
      Posts
      245
      I think the poor dealer network has something to do with it as well. I live in the DFW Metroplex with nearly 7 million people. There are three Volvo dealers. I have noticed that in the areas near those three dealers, I do see quite a few newer Volvos, but get 15-20 miles away and they are quite rare. One of my coworkers recently was considering a Volvo to replace his cheating VW TDI, and in the end chose a BMW in part because there is a dealer close to him for service, while he would have to drive 25 miles through awful traffic to get to the nearest Volvo dealer. The other luxury brands have at least 5 or 6 dealerships in the area as a comparison.
      Current: 2014 Volvo S60 T5 Premier / Caspian Blue

    5. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    6. #4
      Quote Originally Posted by dmc79 View Post
      I think the poor dealer network has something to do with it as well. I live in the DFW Metroplex with nearly 7 million people. There are three Volvo dealers. I have noticed that in the areas near those three dealers, I do see quite a few newer Volvos, but get 15-20 miles away and they are quite rare. One of my coworkers recently was considering a Volvo to replace his cheating VW TDI, and in the end chose a BMW in part because there is a dealer close to him for service, while he would have to drive 25 miles through awful traffic to get to the nearest Volvo dealer. The other luxury brands have at least 5 or 6 dealerships in the area as a comparison.
      Nailed it. My local dealership consolidated two locations to one. This action might deflect me to another brand. Not a fan of a 20 mile trip (one way) through traffic to get service. To do a there and back is 80 miles!

      Local dealers are now offering to pickup your car. I'm not interested in that offering - I must have trust issues.


      Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

    7. #5
      I also factor in a bit of identity crisis. Actually I read an article / review about the S60 R design that said exactly that... That it's the car with an identity problem. It's a safe cushy car trying too hard to be a sports sedan (I don't agree with that I think it's a full fledged sports sedan).

      Also on that note. Why do reviews keep saying that the S60 R Design is not a driver's car. It absolutely is and I've never had more fun in a car as I have had with this.

      Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
      2013 S60 T6 R-Design PASSION RED

    8. #6
      Quote Originally Posted by Almaz View Post
      Good topic.
      IMHO, Volvo does not market itself right.
      Marketing safety was a big thing for Volvo back in the day (and still is) but other manufactures have caught up. Many brands earn 5-star ratings these days so that aspect is not enough to drum up Volvo sales.
      Volvo has a reputation for being boring. They have to shake that off. They are being lost in the mix.
      In a buyer's mind:
      Mercedes = image and luxury
      BMW = image and performance
      Mini = image
      Audi = image
      Honda/Toyota = dependability and value
      Lexus = luxury and reliability and superb dealer experience

      and so on ...

      Volvo = ??

      They need to distinguish themselves and create an image that sells.
      Might need to add a sporty coupe or hatch to promote that.
      I couldn't agree more. Volvo markets itself poorly. A matter of fact, I don't ever recall seeing a "Volvo Advertisement" on television. Compounding Volvo's poor marketing is their reputation as boring. Volvo's are known as safe (strong selling point), but up until a few years ago, Volvo's were that Odd Boxy looking Car.

      Volvo has set a goal of no fatalities in a Volvo by 2020. It kills me that Volvo doesn't start an ad campaign pushing their motto, brand, and overall build quality, to include safe. And quite frankly, I find my 2015.5 very sleek and sporty looking!

      Volvo - No Longer just a family Car but an Every Man's Car. Sleek, Sporty, Safe and Stylish! There's your slogan Volvo.

    9. #7
      Quote Originally Posted by dmc79 View Post
      I think the poor dealer network has something to do with it as well. I live in the DFW Metroplex with nearly 7 million people. There are three Volvo dealers. I have noticed that in the areas near those three dealers, I do see quite a few newer Volvos, but get 15-20 miles away and they are quite rare. One of my coworkers recently was considering a Volvo to replace his cheating VW TDI, and in the end chose a BMW in part because there is a dealer close to him for service, while he would have to drive 25 miles through awful traffic to get to the nearest Volvo dealer. The other luxury brands have at least 5 or 6 dealerships in the area as a comparison.
      Ah Park Place and AutoBahn Volvo =). Texas has the worst traffic known to man. I use to live in Houston and Dear God, talk about traffic jams from hell!

      You hit the nail on the head. Outside Volvo's "Target Radius" Volvos are a threatened species. BMW, Audio, Lexus are the first "luxury" brands that come to Mind. Volvo has an image problem and a network problem.

      1. All Dealers should offer a Loaner.

      2. All Dealers should implement a Referral program where as any Volvo owner who sends a recommendation resulting in a sale receives X. $500 in Free Accessories... $200 Dollars, etc. Brand loyalty is built when you give your core base incentives to bring more business! Think of it like a new restaurant opening. If you try their food and it's good, you tell people. If you try their food and it sucks, you tell ever more people!

      3. Volvo needs to standardized their dealer experience.

      A. Offer owners the choice of their own personal mechanic during service calls. I.E. Allowing the same person to inspect one's vehicle.
      (The one dealership here does that but ONLY for people that buy 2 cars a year). Then if there's a problem, you aren't starting from square one.

      B. Loaners at every service call. One dealer here offers no loaners. Just a shuttle ride home. So basically the businessman or woman that needs a service call has to miss a day of work, rent a vehicle, or own a spare. Very Poor Customer Service for a Brand trying to Enter and Grow in the "Luxury Car Market".

      etc etc.

    10. #8
      Quote Originally Posted by TheNip73 View Post
      Nailed it. My local dealership consolidated two locations to one. This action might deflect me to another brand. Not a fan of a 20 mile trip (one way) through traffic to get service. To do a there and back is 80 miles!

      Local dealers are now offering to pickup your car. I'm not interested in that offering - I must have trust issues.


      Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
      Pickup would be "OK" if that's followed by a loaner car for the entire day. I no longer go to my local Volvo. I drive 80 miles away.

      A. They aren't the must customer oriented and always argue with you when a repair is necessary.
      B. No Loaner. Just a shuttle ride home

      The dealership 80 miles away has a loaner outside and waiting when I arrive. Never an argument or a batted eye. Just a we're glad to see you again. We will call when your car is ready. Enjoy our loaner.

      Dealer A = Poor Customer Service
      Dealer B = Customer Oriented and Beyond Stellar Service.

    11. #9
      Quote Originally Posted by BIG ACH View Post
      I also factor in a bit of identity crisis. Actually I read an article / review about the S60 R design that said exactly that... That it's the car with an identity problem. It's a safe cushy car trying too hard to be a sports sedan (I don't agree with that I think it's a full fledged sports sedan).

      Also on that note. Why do reviews keep saying that the S60 R Design is not a driver's car. It absolutely is and I've never had more fun in a car as I have had with this.

      Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
      Call it a war of first impressions.

      I sit you down and say I've got two cars for you to test drive today.

      A. Porsche
      B. Volvo

      Porsche conjures up luxury, speed, design. You're going into the test drive with a bias, expecting Greatness.
      Volvo conjures boring, safe, mid-range luxury. Expectations are tempered, maybe for the better or maybe for the worse. I.E. unknown.

      Unfortunately, people hate the unknown and are often reluctant. Even if the unknown is far superior.
      Volvo's identity crisis is a brand killer. Volvo needs to start setting their brand apart from the traditional and begin revamping their image.

    12. #10
      You can't place the entire blame on the dealership experience or marketing. A lot of the lack of runaway sales success is due to the cars themselves, at least with the P3 S60. Much like the last run of Saabs, they are likeable cars that are the equal in cost but not the equal in some other ways as their direct competitors. You can get a lot more sport, or a lot more luxury, or both, spending the same money elsewhere. You may not get a "unique" experience doing that, but most Americans have proven themselves to prefer keeping up with the Joneses, buying exactly the same clothes, cars, and lattes as their peer group. So uniqueness or character aren't necessarily attributes that draw the majority of vanilla American shoppers. Instead they want a fashionable brand (and yes, that is influenced by marketing, no doubt), but they also want the most car for the money. P3 Volvos aren't exactly the standard of the world in their price range, at least in terms of driving dynamics, performance numbers, up-to-date infotainment features and tech, or in terms of refinement (these cars are very loud compared with other cars in the $40k+ category). They are good but not as good, in many respects, as their competitors, other than in terms of being safe. If I had bought my car new for the $50k it cost the former owner, I'd be pissed at the amount of road noise and wind noise, and the lumpy-shifting transmission and lack of paddle shifter, the cumbersome nav, etc. My dad's base MK7 Golf cost half that and is a quieter, more supple-riding car. I got my Volvo used for roughly half of its original price, and for $23,9 it is a really nice car, but no way would I, nor many other people, have bought it for $50k or even $40k given competitors' options. Volvo has to improve its marketing, its dealership experience, AND its cars themselves, if they expect to earn a big part of the marketshare. I think the new XC90 and the S/V90 are all much closer to being world class vehicles and as such should sell quite well.
      2011 S60 T6 with Polestar tune
      13.1 at 101 mph

      Current mods: KW V3 coilovers, DO88 fmic, Ferrita downpipe, Powerflex "race" torque mount inserts, more to come...

    13. #11
      Quote Originally Posted by Bunnspeed View Post
      If I had bought my car new for the $50k it cost the former owner, I'd be pissed at the amount of road noise and wind noise, and the lumpy-shifting transmission and lack of paddle shifter, the cumbersome nav, etc. My dad's base MK7 Golf cost half that and is a quieter, more supple-riding car. I got my Volvo used for roughly half of its original price, and for $23,9 it is a really nice car, but no way would I, nor many other people, have bought it for $50k or even $40k given competitors' options.
      And that's why these cars sell for big discounts, new. But a mk7 golf isn't anywhere close to being quieter, unless there's something wrong with your S60 (we have a v60 (which I believe is louder than the S60) and a mk7 gti). More supple... My GTI definitely isn't, but the base golf probably has pretty squishy suspension. Not a winner in my book, but ymmv.

    14. #12
      Quote Originally Posted by Bunnspeed View Post
      You can't place the entire blame on the dealership experience or marketing. A lot of the lack of runaway sales success is due to the cars themselves, at least with the P3 S60. Much like the last run of Saabs, they are likeable cars that are the equal in cost but not the equal in some other ways as their direct competitors. You can get a lot more sport, or a lot more luxury, or both, spending the same money elsewhere. You may not get a "unique" experience doing that, but most Americans have proven themselves to prefer keeping up with the Joneses, buying exactly the same clothes, cars, and lattes as their peer group. So uniqueness or character aren't necessarily attributes that draw the majority of vanilla American shoppers. Instead they want a fashionable brand (and yes, that is influenced by marketing, no doubt), but they also want the most car for the money. P3 Volvos aren't exactly the standard of the world in their price range, at least in terms of driving dynamics, performance numbers, up-to-date infotainment features and tech, or in terms of refinement (these cars are very loud compared with other cars in the $40k+ category). They are good but not as good, in many respects, as their competitors, other than in terms of being safe. If I had bought my car new for the $50k it cost the former owner, I'd be pissed at the amount of road noise and wind noise, and the lumpy-shifting transmission and lack of paddle shifter, the cumbersome nav, etc. My dad's base MK7 Golf cost half that and is a quieter, more supple-riding car. I got my Volvo used for roughly half of its original price, and for $23,9 it is a really nice car, but no way would I, nor many other people, have bought it for $50k or even $40k given competitors' options. Volvo has to improve its marketing, its dealership experience, AND its cars themselves, if they expect to earn a big part of the marketshare. I think the new XC90 and the S/V90 are all much closer to being world class vehicles and as such should sell quite well.
      I forgot a key point. Depreciation. Volvos lose about 1/3rd of their value in first year depreciation. I bought my 2015.5 T5 FWD S60 with BLIS / Convenience Package / Heated Front Seats as a loaner / demo in 2016 with around 2200 miles. Sticker was ~$41,000 and I paid $28,800 for a CPO (before tax, title, license). $31,900 with tax, title, shipping car to me, and a 7 yr 100,000 Factory Service Maintenance Plan + Wear.

      So about $9,000 less than "sticker" after taxes, shipping, and my 7 Year / 100K Maintenance Plan + Wear. As you can see, buying a Volvo New is an UNWISE decision.

      Another deterrent that scares buyers off!

      And I couldn't agree more about the outdated, clunky, tech. Volvo engineers are boneheaded. My Nav can't even tell me if the destination is on the right or left side of the road. merely, arrive at destination. My 10 year old Garmin is more intuitive!

      As for Marketing, Think Blackberry, MySpace, Yahoo. Three companies that dominated the market share. Proving Advertising is 50% (capturing the users) and Design is the other 50%. Once you got a customers attention, you have but a single chance to hook them. If people aren't instantly impressed, they shop elsewhere. MySpace, Blackberry, and Yahoo made tons of blunders. After capturing people's attention, their boneheaded moves drove people off to better, more user friendly, products.

      Cue Volvo's Hap-Hazard attempts at branding.

    15. #13
      Quote Originally Posted by poundsand View Post
      And that's why these cars sell for big discounts, new. But a mk7 golf isn't anywhere close to being quieter, unless there's something wrong with your S60 (we have a v60 (which I believe is louder than the S60) and a mk7 gti). More supple... My GTI definitely isn't, but the base golf probably has pretty squishy suspension. Not a winner in my book, but ymmv.
      2011 S60 T6 with Polestar tune
      13.1 at 101 mph

      Enough said why his car is loud? Polestar and T6! He's all performance.

    16. #14
      Quote Originally Posted by poundsand View Post
      And that's why these cars sell for big discounts, new. But a mk7 golf isn't anywhere close to being quieter, unless there's something wrong with your S60 (we have a v60 (which I believe is louder than the S60) and a mk7 gti). More supple... My GTI definitely isn't, but the base golf probably has pretty squishy suspension. Not a winner in my book, but ymmv.
      My dad's MK7 Golf is on 16" wheels so the tires have a lot of sidewall. It has far less road noise than my 2011 S60 T6 ever had on any of the 3 types of tires I've run on my S60 (Stock Contis, then DWS06, and now Pilot AS3+. His MK7 Golf also has less wind noise, which is a major gripe of mine in my Volvo, and probably has a lot to do with the big ole BLIS tumors on the mirrors of the earlier S60s. So yes, it's quieter than my Volvo. It's also quieter than the MK7 GTI I test drove, which had more road noise than the Golf, and also had, unsurprisingly, a stiffer ride than the Golf. The MK7 Golf seems to have a lot of compliance built not only into the springs and dampers, but also seems to have a lot of extra squish in the suspension bushings and motor mounts than any GTI I've driven, including the MKV GTI I owned for about 6 years (and which I did lots of mods to...K04, all the basic bolt-ons, Driver Motorsport tune, etc.) The newer V60 T5 rental I shared with a buddy was significantly quieter than my S60 as it seemed to have much more sound-deadening and probably also had treated side window glass that blocked outside noise better, as I heard less noise intrusion from other traffic, along with less road and wind noise. My Volvo is a nicer car than the Golf, tis true, but the Golf is definitely a quiet and comfortable cruiser. Super bland to drive though. I borrowed it for a few weeks when my Volvo was getting accident damage fixed, and it really impressed me initially with the perception of class and refinement at its price point, but after about a week of commuting in it, I was dying to drive something with more character and a lot more power again.
      2011 S60 T6 with Polestar tune
      13.1 at 101 mph

      Current mods: KW V3 coilovers, DO88 fmic, Ferrita downpipe, Powerflex "race" torque mount inserts, more to come...

    17. #15
      Junior Member Sven787's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Location
      Seattle
      Posts
      86
      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      I forgot a key point. Depreciation. Volvos lose about 1/3rd of their value in first year depreciation. I bought my 2015.5 T5 FWD S60 with BLIS / Convenience Package / Heated Front Seats as a loaner / demo in 2016 with around 2200 miles. Sticker was ~$41,000 and I paid $28,800 for a CPO (before tax, title, license). $31,900 with tax, title, shipping car to me, and a 7 yr 100,000 Factory Service Maintenance Plan + Wear.

      So about $9,000 less than "sticker" after taxes, shipping, and my 7 Year / 100K Maintenance Plan + Wear. As you can see, buying a Volvo New is an UNWISE decision.

      Another deterrent that scares buyers off!

      And I couldn't agree more about the outdated, clunky, tech. Volvo engineers are boneheaded. My Nav can't even tell me if the destination is on the right or left side of the road. merely, arrive at destination. My 10 year old Garmin is more intuitive!

      As for Marketing, Think Blackberry, MySpace, Yahoo. Three companies that dominated the market share. Proving Advertising is 50% (capturing the users) and Design is the other 50%. Once you got a customers attention, you have but a single chance to hook them. If people aren't instantly impressed, they shop elsewhere. MySpace, Blackberry, and Yahoo made tons of blunders. After capturing people's attention, their boneheaded moves drove people off to better, more user friendly, products.

      Cue Volvo's Hap-Hazard attempts at branding.
      I'm not sure the depreciation argument is entirely fair or true. If there is a product that people want and are willing to pay a premium for, it shouldn't play a huge role. We bought our S60 new because the features it had were worth the additional up front cost, and waiting weeks or months for the right CPO car to show up wasn't worth the couple thousand dollars we may save. Not to mention Volvo had amazing incentives to buy new at the time that didn't work for CPO...

      Anyway, all of these issues become a chicken and egg argument in a way, but I think the bulk of what we are seeing is the fallout from the Ford era that left the brand withering on the vine.

      Volvos have terrible depreciation/resale: well, yes, because they have a limited customer/enthusiast base and don't demand a premium in the used market given their fairly stagnant designs and tech pre-SPA. You can buy a $20K Corolla brand new with more tech than a $35K 2017 S60, which for a lot of utilitarian drivers is all that matters.

      Not enough dealer coverage: well, yes, because likely the current network doesn't move enough inventory in the US to warrant more, and I'm not even sure their production line could keep up with more if what they say about XC90 short supply is true. We will see what happens when the new 60-series US plant is at full swing.

      Not a true "sports sedan": well, yes, because it's not worth blowing the bank on a performance model that will sell a few hundred of they're lucky (Polestar S/V60 aside, but dealers are even having to discount those to move them) when you are just trying to tread water.

      As a brand they are in a very tricky place (quirky and lovable, yet unattainable either because of dealer proximity, pricing, general awareness,etc) but I think are finally on the right track to finding their identity. They are milking the quiet understated Scandinavian luxury lately which I think is the correct move (aligns well with current minimalist/midcentury design trends in general)- just need to maybe add a bit more of the safety culture back into advertising as others have said, and be a bit more aggressive in how much they advertise. I do my part to sing their praises and we get nothing but compliments on our S60 (and even our 'ancient' XC90 at times). Changes won't happen overnight but I like to think the snowball effect will happen eventually. Also having a new 40-series as an entry level model will be a HUGE boost - bear in mind it's been several years since we've had that option in the US.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      Current Fleet: 2007 XC90 V8 Sport (Titanium Gray); 2016 S60 T5 Drive-E Premium Polestar (Black Stone, Sport Pkg, Convenience Pkg, BLIS, Tech Pkg)
      Previously Owned: 2005 S60 2.5T AWD (Ice White)

    18. #16
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jul 2014
      Location
      Bend, Or
      Posts
      169
      Frankly Volvo will never be Top 10 brand in the US. Measured by Sales. For me that's OK. I don't want to drive something that is all over the parking lots. I want people to look at my car and say...ooohhh, what is that? Ahh, Volvo. That's a safe car.

      volvo could improve the tech though. it's out of date at the sale time. By the time you put 10 or 12 years on it I feel like I'm driving a Model T

      As far as depreciation i don't care. My V70 went 300k and my XC90 is over 300k. Holding my breath on the V60 and the new(ish) engine. Buy new and hold on a long time. Depreciation doesn't matter at that point
      Sold: 98 V70 2.5T 289k Miles
      Current: 05 XC90 2.5T 300k Miles & counting
      Future: 2017 V60 Platinum Mussel Blue OSD

    19. #17
      Quote Originally Posted by Scrapr View Post
      Frankly Volvo will never be Top 10 brand in the US. Measured by Sales. For me that's OK. I don't want to drive something that is all over the parking lots. I want people to look at my car and say...ooohhh, what is that? Ahh, Volvo. That's a safe car.

      volvo could improve the tech though. it's out of date at the sale time. By the time you put 10 or 12 years on it I feel like I'm driving a Model T

      As far as depreciation i don't care. My V70 went 300k and my XC90 is over 300k. Holding my breath on the V60 and the new(ish) engine. Buy new and hold on a long time. Depreciation doesn't matter at that point
      1. Being unique and a standout is fine depending upon the circumstance. Volvo being a "standout" because few wish to drive isn't a selling point.
      2. Depreciation is major concern. If you buy a Volvo new, you might as well throw out 1/3rd of that within 1 Yr! Hondas, Toyota, and Especially Suburaru hold their value.
      3. Depreciation, plus few adopters, translate to high maintenance and repair costs. Parts become a commodity where the high cost is passed onto the consumer.
      4. Tech... Dear God.. Volvo Engineers are Just Boneheaded here... Volvo has poor and outdated tech compared to other manufacturers.

      I love Volvo. I want Safety, Comfort, and Style. Volvo met those demands. Tech and High cost of ownership were a concern. Tech being one of my pet peeves.

      For me, it wasn't a deterrent. Many consumers don't share our sentiments.

    20. #18
      To everyone complaining about how boring Volvo's are and how crappy wind noise is and how other brands have better dealers, tell them to check out this thread :

      Best reason to own a Volvo

      Other makers have been found making cars to pass a test when IIHS decided to perform the small overlap test on the passenger side vs the drivers side. Volvo makes cars to save lives first and foremost.

      When will it be your turn to have a bad day? I certainly hope its not in anything other than a Volvo.
      Last edited by johnee; 03-11-2017 at 08:29 PM.
      -
      - XC60 T5 Drive-E MY-2015.5 Savile Grey Platinum w/ BLIS, Blond/Black Sport seats, Heated front. OSD -

    21. #19
      There's no reason a car can't be safe AND have an extra 50 pounds of sound deadening and some better weatherstripping. I drive this car 100 miles every day and the level of ambient noise is really high, so I have 2-3 hours every day to be annoyed by that, along with an AM radio with no reception and a nav that feels like it was made a decade ago. It's a car that's *this* close to being really pleasant to drive, and yet I'm not sure I would buy another one. Safety is important, but so is having a car that is nice to drive when you aren't crashing. In any case, if Volvo wishes to be competitive, Volvo can't assume it can sell cars on safety alone, as its competitors are getting not only better from a refinement standpoint, but also from a safety standpoint as everyone strives to meet the same increasingly stringent safety standards. I'd be willing to bet that a few years from now, nearly every auto maker will be close to making cars and trucks that are just as safe as Volvos, so Volvo better be able to keep up in other areas once it no longer has a monopoly on safety.
      Last edited by Bunnspeed; 03-11-2017 at 09:08 PM.
      2011 S60 T6 with Polestar tune
      13.1 at 101 mph

      Current mods: KW V3 coilovers, DO88 fmic, Ferrita downpipe, Powerflex "race" torque mount inserts, more to come...

    22. #20
      Quote Originally Posted by johnee View Post
      To everyone complaining about how boring Volvo's are and how crappy wind noise is and how other brands have better dealers, tell them to check out this thread :

      Best reason to own a Volvo

      Other makers have been found making cars to pass a test when IIHS decided to perform the small overlap test on the passenger side vs the drivers side. Volvo makes cars to save lives first and foremost.

      When will it be your turn to have a bad day? I certainly hope its not in anything other than a Volvo.
      Oh, I'm not complaining. I'm pointing out why Volvo has less of a footprint than the brand deserves...After my v40 was hit at 65-100MPH by an Suv without loss of life or serious injury, I got an S60 to replace out the vehicle. Safe is right...

      But Volvo fails to Market what so ever, let alone safety. I have never seen an advertisement for Volvo on television. Have you?

    23. #21
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2013
      Location
      Cherry Hill NJ
      Posts
      128
      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      Oh, I'm not complaining. I'm pointing out why Volvo has less of a footprint than the brand deserves...After my v40 was hit at 65-100MPH by an Suv without loss of life or serious injury, I got an S60 to replace out the vehicle. Safe is right...

      But Volvo fails to Market what so ever, let alone safety. I have never seen an advertisement for Volvo on television. Have you?
      In the Philadelphia market, they've been playing the heck out of this commercial, as well as the XC90 "wedding" commercials.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBt_niVG4sM
      Ti (Ty) - 2013 S60 R-Design
      Gunnar - 2013 C30 T5 - bought new and traded in
      Thor - 2004 XC70 (225k and going strong!)

      Yeah, I guess I'm a Volvo guy... ;-)

    24. #22
      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      2. Depreciation is major concern. If you buy a Volvo new, you might as well throw out 1/3rd of that within 1 Yr! Hondas, Toyota, and Especially Suburaru hold their value.
      You've brought up depreciation and CPO in about 87000 threads. Hey, everyone, did you know myvolvos60 bought a CPO Volvo for what he felt was a sweet deal and feels buying new is dumb? But no, part of the reasons Volvo's sell so cheap used / CPO is they sell so cheap new. You keep comparing MSRP to used, ignoring the crazy deals available on new Volvo's (my new Volvo was as good a deal as yours (plat v60, MSRP ~$48k, bought for low $30s)). When I was shopping last year, deals *advertised* for $10k+ off all over california, with it being very easy to get bigger discounts (a couple dealerships jumped to $12-15k off on in stock inventory on simply Iinquiring if larger discounts were available).


      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      3. Depreciation, plus few adopters, translate to high maintenance and repair costs. Parts become a commodity where the high cost is passed onto the consumer.
      Say what?

      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      4. Tech... Dear God.. Volvo Engineers are Just Boneheaded here... Volvo has poor and outdated tech compared to other manufacturers.
      Much good tech in our old platform cars (all the safety tech). Infotainment sucks, but that's not the same as generally bad tech, and part of the problem with buying most old platforms. And the new platform cars have good infotainment.

    25. #23
      Quote Originally Posted by passleft View Post
      In the Philadelphia market, they've been playing the heck out of this commercial, as well as the XC90 "wedding" commercials.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBt_niVG4sM
      I stand corrected. Volvo must selectively market themselves, as no commercials are played here. Volvo still suffers from lack of exposure!

    26. #24
      Quote Originally Posted by poundsand View Post
      You've brought up depreciation and CPO in about 87000 threads. Hey, everyone, did you know myvolvos60 bought a CPO Volvo for what he felt was a sweet deal and feels buying new is dumb? But no, part of the reasons Volvo's sell so cheap used / CPO is they sell so cheap new. You keep comparing MSRP to used, ignoring the crazy deals available on new Volvo's (my new Volvo was as good a deal as yours (plat v60, MSRP ~$48k, bought for low $30s)). When I was shopping last year, deals *advertised* for $10k+ off all over california, with it being very easy to get bigger discounts (a couple dealerships jumped to $12-15k off on in stock inventory on simply Iinquiring if larger discounts were available).




      Say what?



      Much good tech in our old platform cars (all the safety tech). Infotainment sucks, but that's not the same as generally bad tech, and part of the problem with buying most old platforms. And the new platform cars have good infotainment.

      A. (my new Volvo was as good a deal as yours (plat v60, MSRP ~$48k, bought for low $30s)). I think you got a better deal! How much was your car? AWD or FWD?

      Mine isn't a platinum. It's merely an 2015.5 FWD S60 with BLIS / Convenience / Heated Front seats. CPO + 7 year / 100,000 Factory Service Maintenance ran all and all $31,900 Tax, Title, Licensing + $600 to ship to me.

      If you got a NEW V60 Platinum (AWD or FWD?) for the same price. I'd say your deal wins hands down. I missed out on the Climate Package as the car I wanted Sold an hour before I made the decision. I literally was on the phone and it had sold. I also wanted a Platinum but they WOULDN'T budge on price.

      Far as AWD / FWD. I would have gone AWD if I'd considered it in the beginning. I always drove FWD so never gave it second thought til I joined here. Then I began to think AWD was probably a smarter pick than my FWD. Still happy with it though!


      3. Depreciation, plus few adopters, translate to high maintenance and repair costs. Parts become a commodity where the high cost is passed onto the consumer.

      Exactly what I said. Toyotas, Hondas, etc have a large customer base. Parts are readily available and are mass produced in high volume. Volvo has a far smaller customer base, making parts more expensive and less mass produced.

      Much good tech in our old platform cars (all the safety tech). Infotainment sucks, but that's not the same as generally bad tech, and part of the problem with buying most old platforms. And the new platform cars have good infotainment.

      Safety Tech is good. Again, Wish I had the Platinum for the Adaptive Cruise Control + Tech Package. Infotainment + Navigation Software Sucks. That's Volvo's only real Failure Point.

    27. #25
      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      A. (my new Volvo was as good a deal as yours (plat v60, MSRP ~$48k, bought for low $30s)). I think you got a better deal! How much was your car? AWD or FWD?

      Mine isn't a platinum. It's merely an 2015.5 FWD S60 with BLIS / Convenience / Heated Front seats. CPO + 7 year / 100,000 Factory Service Maintenance ran all and all $31,900 Tax, Title, Licensing + $600 to ship to me.

      If you got a NEW V60 Platinum (AWD or FWD?) for the same price. I'd say your deal wins hands down. I missed out on the Climate Package as the car I wanted Sold an hour before I made the decision. I literally was on the phone and it had sold. I also wanted a Platinum but they WOULDN'T budge on price.
      New v60 plat with (don't remember what was included in a plat and what wasn't) tech, convenience, comfort, blis w/ park pilot assist, climate, and sports packages. Not sure there was anything else. :-D MSRP of ~$48k, advertised online at $10k off, they offered $12k off over email, and another $2k off for basically coming in and saying "hi," and we ended up at $32.8k +ttl after much negotiation. No trade, $80 doc fee (iirc, whatever Cali limit is), though they tried to add a surprise $700 for LoJack at financing (which didn't fly). This was mid year last year (July?) when there were a whole lot of Volvo incentives ($6k? Plus $1k sport package incentive in socal which seemed to be unadvertised) going on, plenty of 16s on the lot, and 17s not too far behind.

      See why I think claims of depreciation based on MSRP vs selling price is misleading? But poundsand, you say, not everyone is going to get that price. True enough, but trucar (which is just a referral service now so anyone should be able to do better) was around $10k off for this area last year.


      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      3. Depreciation, plus few adopters, translate to high maintenance and repair costs. Parts become a commodity where the high cost is passed onto the consumer.

      Exactly what I said. Toyotas, Hondas, etc have a large customer base. Parts are readily available and are mass produced in high volume. Volvo has a far smaller customer base, making parts more expensive and less mass produced.
      Ok, so how does that support the claim that *depreciation* leads to high parts cost?

    28. #26
      Junior Member Denton's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2006
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      819
      Bunnspeed, the 2011 S60s had a few rough edges, some of which is sound deadening or the lack of it. The facelifted cars are exceptionally quiet.

      I traded a 2015 GTI S 6MT for the 2016 S60 T5 R-D and regret not a minute. The Volvo is more refined in every aspect, as it should be.
      2016 Passion Red/Off-black S60 T5 R-Design
      2006 Ice White/Oak XC70
      1996 Polar White/Charcoal 854R
      Former: 1996 Bright Red 855R, 2003 Silver V70 T5, 2012 Black Sapphire C30 T5 R-Design 6MT P*

    29. #27
      Quote Originally Posted by Denton View Post
      Bunnspeed, the 2011 S60s had a few rough edges, some of which is sound deadening or the lack of it. The facelifted cars are exceptionally quiet.

      I traded a 2015 GTI S 6MT for the 2016 S60 T5 R-D and regret not a minute. The Volvo is more refined in every aspect, as it should be.
      Good to know, and I figured as much: that the older ones had NVH areas which the newer models (or at least the Drive-E V60 models) addressed. I wish there was an easy way to compare a diagram of sound deadening parts and locations for 2011 models with that of a new model so I could start ordering any panels, pads, weatherstrips etc. to try to add those factory bits that mine may be lacking. Even a small reduction in NVH would make me much happier with my car, and make my grueling commutes less draining. Do you know offhand where some of those changes occurred?
      2011 S60 T6 with Polestar tune
      13.1 at 101 mph

      Current mods: KW V3 coilovers, DO88 fmic, Ferrita downpipe, Powerflex "race" torque mount inserts, more to come...

    30. #28
      Junior Member Denton's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2006
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      819
      Quote Originally Posted by Bunnspeed View Post
      Good to know, and I figured as much: that the older ones had NVH areas which the newer models (or at least the Drive-E V60 models) addressed. I wish there was an easy way to compare a diagram of sound deadening parts and locations for 2011 models with that of a new model so I could start ordering any panels, pads, weatherstrips etc. to try to add those factory bits that mine may be lacking. Even a small reduction in NVH would make me much happier with my car, and make my grueling commutes less draining. Do you know offhand where some of those changes occurred?
      One is the black foam blocks now on the fender seam near the strut tower and hood arm. Cars with camera BLIS have more noise at the mirror.

      Otherwise I would assume there is a difference under the carpet?
      2016 Passion Red/Off-black S60 T5 R-Design
      2006 Ice White/Oak XC70
      1996 Polar White/Charcoal 854R
      Former: 1996 Bright Red 855R, 2003 Silver V70 T5, 2012 Black Sapphire C30 T5 R-Design 6MT P*

    31. #29
      Junior Member Mjoelnir's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2013
      Location
      Switzerland
      Posts
      227
      Sorry for being a bit off-topic. But here in Europe, Lexus is not really on par with Audi, BMW, Jaguar and Mercedes. Well, the products are, but Lexus is simply not what you would think first. And neither what you would think second. It's a shame actually because the cars must be really good... A reason might be that there aren't really a lot of options, for example there are no wagons, no Diesels (as far as I recall), a small choice of engines in general, and not as many options as the competition has.

      What is that "superb dealer experience" (that Almaz mentioned) in the USA about? I would really like to learn what makes Lexus so special in the US and why...
      2010 V60 2.0T | 2016 V60 CC T5 AWD

    32. #30
      Things are going to change when the new SPA 60 series hits the market. I'm already thinking of trading in my SPA XC90 in on one.
      16 XC90 T6 Inscription
      12 VW Eos Executive
      04 Land Rover Discovery

    33. #31
      Senior Member
      Join Date
      Dec 2003
      Location
      NoCal
      Posts
      16,033
      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      I stand corrected. Volvo must selectively market themselves, as no commercials are played here. Volvo still suffers from lack of exposure!
      You may live in a market Volvo doesn't choose to market in, or you watch TV shows and Volvo doesn't buy time to market to those viewers. You may need to watch better TV...
      2004 XC90 2.5T AWD (OSD purchase - June)(for towing/camping and backroad journeys)(100,000 miles); 2008 C30 T5 (MT) OSD purchase (December)(mine); 2004 Porsche Boxster (used)(hers); 2007 Prius (handed down)

    34. #32
      Senior Member
      Join Date
      Dec 2003
      Location
      NoCal
      Posts
      16,033
      How can you have high market share in U.S.A. when (a) you don't sell trucks, and (b) you have, essentially, 5 cars that you sell. Does any other carmaker offer so few choices? (Maybe that's all you need to offer if you only plan to be 1-4% of the market.)

      I am not saying this as a criticism. I don't care about market share, and Volvo makes everything I have needed when I needed to buy a car.

      ps IMO, ALL car-buying is "image"-based. 100% of it. Even when you buy a car for your kid. Even when you buy a Volvo. Even when you Honda, the most anti-image company. It's still image. My f-in-law refuses to buy anything but Honda, because he says "Cars are an appliance, and I don't want to be seen driving an 'image'." Er....that's IMAGE. Not wanting to drive an image is still "image." (wants to be seen as practical)

      I've driven Cadillacs. I liked the ELR (but more $$ than it was worth) and the others I've tried, but I just can't buy one. I don't wanna be the Cadillac-guy. Some of my friends would make fun of me. Yes, I am weak. None of my friends make fun of my Volvos.

      It's all image, even when we convince ourselves that "it's safety" or "it's the engineering"

      I'm not saying any of us would buy a piece of junk. It still has to meet our parameters, but all cars are pretty good, these days. None of them fall apart like the old days.
      2004 XC90 2.5T AWD (OSD purchase - June)(for towing/camping and backroad journeys)(100,000 miles); 2008 C30 T5 (MT) OSD purchase (December)(mine); 2004 Porsche Boxster (used)(hers); 2007 Prius (handed down)

    35. #33
      Quote Originally Posted by poundsand View Post
      New v60 plat with (don't remember what was included in a plat and what wasn't) tech, convenience, comfort, blis w/ park pilot assist, climate, and sports packages. Not sure there was anything else. :-D MSRP of ~$48k, advertised online at $10k off, they offered $12k off over email, and another $2k off for basically coming in and saying "hi," and we ended up at $32.8k +ttl after much negotiation. No trade, $80 doc fee (iirc, whatever Cali limit is), though they tried to add a surprise $700 for LoJack at financing (which didn't fly). This was mid year last year (July?) when there were a whole lot of Volvo incentives ($6k? Plus $1k sport package incentive in socal which seemed to be unadvertised) going on, plenty of 16s on the lot, and 17s not too far behind.

      See why I think claims of depreciation based on MSRP vs selling price is misleading? But poundsand, you say, not everyone is going to get that price. True enough, but trucar (which is just a referral service now so anyone should be able to do better) was around $10k off for this area last year.




      Ok, so how does that support the claim that *depreciation* leads to high parts cost?
      A. How much did Tax, Title and Licensing Run you? So was $32,800 before TTL or After Tax, Title, Licensing?
      B. Is your V60 FWD or AWD?
      C. I want to steal your car... Jesus I would have KILLED for the Park Assist Pilot. And I'd loved to have the sport package. I couldn't hold out. My car was in a wreck and I needed to find a car. About 3 or 4 months after I purchased (Bought end of May 2016), there was a HUGE GLUT of cars for sale....Sigh

      D. You WIN HANDS DOWN. Dear god, the car was listed at $48,000 and you walked out with $32,800 (Before or After TTL?). If that $32,800 included TTL, I want you as my wing man next time I buy a car! Even if the TTL ran another $3,000, you got a STEAL of a DEAL.

      E. I realize MSRP is an "artificial number". Dealers can list a car for X amount, which doesn't mean it's the car's true selling point. My car had an MSRP of $40,725. I paid $28,800 before TTL. $31,900 there after. If not for having the 7 year / 100,000 Factory Service Maintenance Plan + Wear and the 7 Year CPO included in final selling price, I would be crying about now....

      That's my only saving grace after reading your post, reassuring me I didn't get bamboozled.

      And I concede. Incentives, hold backs, etc can drive a car's price down significantly. It's all about waiting for the right time to buy. What you have to realize is that a lower selling price ($32,800 on a ~$48,000 car) does drive down the resell if people pay far below "sticker"

      Far as parts.. Volvo's have a small foot print and market share. So parts come at a premium in the US.

    36. #34
      Quote Originally Posted by adp View Post
      You may live in a market Volvo doesn't choose to market in, or you watch TV shows and Volvo doesn't buy time to market to those viewers. You may need to watch better TV...
      There are 4 Volvo Dealerships within a 90 mile radius. So if that isn't a target audience, then I'm left wondering what Volvo defines as their "core demographic"?

    37. #35
      Quote Originally Posted by adp View Post
      How can you have high market share in U.S.A. when (a) you don't sell trucks, and (b) you have, essentially, 5 cars that you sell. Does any other carmaker offer so few choices? (Maybe that's all you need to offer if you only plan to be 1-4% of the market.)

      I am not saying this as a criticism. I don't care about market share, and Volvo makes everything I have needed when I needed to buy a car.

      ps IMO, ALL car-buying is "image"-based. 100% of it. Even when you buy a car for your kid. Even when you buy a Volvo. Even when you Honda, the most anti-image company. It's still image. My f-in-law refuses to buy anything but Honda, because he says "Cars are an appliance, and I don't want to be seen driving an 'image'." Er....that's IMAGE. Not wanting to drive an image is still "image." (wants to be seen as practical)

      I've driven Cadillacs. I liked the ELR (but more $$ than it was worth) and the others I've tried, but I just can't buy one. I don't wanna be the Cadillac-guy. Some of my friends would make fun of me. Yes, I am weak. None of my friends make fun of my Volvos.

      It's all image, even when we convince ourselves that "it's safety" or "it's the engineering"

      I'm not saying any of us would buy a piece of junk. It still has to meet our parameters, but all cars are pretty good, these days. None of them fall apart like the old days.
      I think "Volvos" are still a niche. But when I tell people I drive a "new volvo" heads kind of turn. It's not a car that is seen on a regular basis. Sure, I see some XC90s, XC70s, 850s, etc around town. But if you pulled 100 cars off the road, I bet you'd only grab a handful.

      I consider a Volvo to be a safe, comfort, and refined driving experience. Infotainment aside (a sore spot for Volvo), I love hopping into my car.

    38. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast