2008 Volvo C30 S review
11 Jun, 2008
10 Comments 
2008 Volvo C30 S 2.4i review & road test
Model Tested:
- 2008 Volvo C30 S 2.4i
Options:
- None fitted
Recommended Retail Price:
- $35,950
Styling, smoothness, engine performs well
Bland steering, bland brakes, bland interior
CarAdvice Rating: 
(3.5/5)
- Photographs and review by Karl Peskett
My wife was driving behind me the other day. I happened to be behind the wheel of this Volvo C30 S at the time. She rang me on my mobile to tell me something. As I picked up the phone and put it on speaker (naturally), I didn’t even get a hello.
The first thing she said to me was, “You know, your bum looks big in that.”
And that pretty much sums up the styling of this car. You see, Volvo has paid homage to one of its classics, the 1800ES. Not that that’s a bad thing. In its heyday, the 1800ES, along with the P1800 coupe, was a masterpiece of design. It was certainly different.
The slanted rear glass panel, the concave waistline; The 1800ES was a nice piece of metalwork. And to my eyes at least, the C30 is also a fine looking automobile.
So yes, it’s very bum oriented, but I reckon that’s a good thing. It certainly gets everyone talking anyway. And people talking and pointing is better than apathy – Volvo has to score points for polarising the people.
Location: Home / Behind the Wheel, Car Reviews, Volvo / ...
Print it:
-
June 11th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Love the c30, my favourite hot hatch. would def go the T5 tho
Vote:June 11th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Love the styling of this thing. The base model was always a puzzling item. The diesel has pull and the T5 has grunt, the base model is the definite orphan.
One thing I have never liked is the textured black plastic trim. Always seems to fade to gray.
Vote:June 11th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Wrong engine in this one…def need CRD or the T5.
Vote:June 11th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Of course it’s the worst engine of them, it’s the cheapest and the only naturally aspirated one
Vote:June 11th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Not really a fan of the rear, myself.
Vote:June 11th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
I saw the T5 reviewed on Fifth Gear today. They said it was quite good. The guy that reviewed it said that this car proves centre consoles can be practical and not boring, and that its a premium drive not a sporty one. So its not really in the hot hatch segment having little less power than the Focus XR5, which shares the same engine.
Vote:June 11th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
hmm.. quite a heavy car for its size, no wonder it sips 9.0L/100km.. not bad but still.. can’t quite figure out why Volvos are always so heavy.
Vote:June 11th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
How can you say the interior is bland. Take a look at Volvos from 3+ years back then you will appreciate the ultimate in bland – or better yet a SAAB.
Vote:June 12th, 2008 at 10:06 am
I own a red S40 with this 2.4 five pot, and the engine is great. It has more power and torque than any rival (base engines in the Audi A3/A4 or BMW 120i or 320i), and the extra cylinder makes the difference. 125KW is huge for a ‘base’ powerplant. It’s far from the ‘poverty’ engine it’s portrayed as here.
Vote:June 12th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
also it’s a……………….bland Volvo.
Vote: