I asked this of Volvo CS and got this reply

[Loskie]

QUESTION:
Message: Not about my current car but V40 Cross Country which I am considering. I think Volvo must be missing out on a huge market by not offering the diesel version as AWD/4x4. Is there a reason for this? If that is not an option then surely the CC model should be offered with all season tyres on 16" wheels or even 15". The obsession with oversized wheels and low profile tyres is daft in the UK on the potholed riddled roads does nothing for ride comfort, very little advantage for day to day handling and results in more punctures and expensive tyres to replace. Could trick traction control be added to the 2wd in a similar way to Peugeot and Fiat models. Because of the lack of awd in the V40 diesel I am swithering towards a 120 xdrive BMW. Could the V40cc be summed up as all show and no substance?

AND GOT THIS ANSWER:
Thank you for your email.

I've spoken to our Product Team and they confirm that the V40 Cross Country is not designed to be an XC40 or a small SUV. It is simply a different style for the V40, similar to an R-design offering a sporty look. It just so happens that the T5 powertrain in the V40 Cross Country is AWD however there are no plans to make AWD standard on the V40 Cross Country. This is simply an offering for customers who want something different from a style perspective than the standard model therefore we offer the R-design and Cross Country variants.

Concerning your query on wheels and tyres; wheels are designed around not only performance and functionality but also around the aesthetical properties. These properties are of course influenced by our customer feedback.

I will of course note your feedback and I appreciate the points you raise.

Kind regards


Ryan Atkinson

Customer Relations Consultant
Volvo Car UK Limited
Volvo Car Group - Western Europe

[Ninja59]

Question is do you need 4WD? I hate to be so blunt but in many regards I have found people just want it to somehow stupidly feel safer forgetting they have to lug (in majority it around the rest of the time) unless it is Haldex or Torsen (but even then you do have extra gubbins), ultimately nearly everything can be resolved simply by winter tyres (okay additional expense but it resolves it in that you split wear over two sets then).

I cannot see a point in a 120D x drive, inherently it is going to cost more to run and the ground clearance on such a car makes it pretty pointless off road. To my mind many of these small hatchbacks with 4WD conspire on peoples own misunderstanding that 4WD equals grip and traction. Ultimately yes it gets you traction but not grip.

In relation to Volvo, well the issue I think is two fold as the V40 and V40CC will be among the last of the Ford related products (and engines) as the engines get replaced with VEA based (which are still not AWD capable in any Volvo) and eventually a replacement for the V40 size chassis class.

Secondly, because in recent time if we exclude the XC series of cars the only AWD have been pretty much petrol engines, I don't think there has been the demand to justify an AWD model.

In relation to wheel sizes the smallest is a 16" because the amount of requirements from the EU about type approval mean cars got visually larger,we want more space, and therefore this means more weight, which equals bigger brakes and therefore bigger wheels (in this case meaning the minimum is a 16" wheel) + some desire for big wheels with small profiles. But then the BMW has the same issue on that.

[Loskie]

I dont need 4wd but would be helpful. I drive 20000m a year on mainly rural roads going around farms. Mud on roads, slurry, farm tracks all helped but also beneficial would be extra clearance and tyres that are not stupidly low profile.
When I bought my V50 my ideal car was an Octavia Scout. Didn't buy that as I found the seats uncomfy and aggrivated back pain.
I also do a lot of time keeping on rallies; again accessing rural locations.
My current V50 and previous front wheel drive mk1 1999 Octavia tdi have both coped. However the Octavia's sump clearance was poor, so I fitted a very heavy steel sumpguard. I fit winter tyres or all season tyres. The Octavia had been through many a rally stage including Keilder, Dalbeattie and Glengap.

So something with added ground clearance like the V40cc would do but why the fad for rubber band tyres. Even the reply from Volvo suggests style over substance but with the right wheel/tyre combo and some trick traction aids it would be more than adequate in 2wd.
Skoda Yeti or maybe new Octavia mk3 4x4 if comfy would also do.

[Ninja59]

I cannot think of one manufacturer that fits winter tyres as standard in the UK (nevermind all season) nearly all fit summer tyres even on the XC range and that goes for many manufacturers.

In many regards in recent past times people have simply not thought about matching the conditions they face at a certain time of year.

Fact is you won't get much extra ground clearance with the BMW going from 120D 2WD to 4WD. Additionally, it looses between 2-5 MPG, more to tax (so long as you fit the 16") £30 in comparison with £105 depending on exact tyre spec which could see it go to £105 as well. Although it is still £1.5K more than the 2WD. With Volvo the difference is even greater (although the RRP is less on the Volvo D3 manual going from V40 to V40CC).

Ultimately even with 2WD, the extra ground clearance, the Volvo V40 CC is the same on tax as the 2WD BMW (£30), less to buy, 5 cylinder (if you go for a D3), greater MPG (than the x drive) similar if based on the 2WD BMW variant, more than likely more comfortable on seats in the Volvo and then you can buy a set of winter tyres/all season (you would still need that on the BMW).

As I have said you still have the tyre and wheel size issue with the BMW that won't go away minimum on them is 16".

[Loskie]

Fiat and Peugeot will fit winter and all season tyres as a no cost option. Also offer so called "trick" traction aids. Not sure if they are good in practice but the theory sounds right.

As for BMW Xdrive yes I realise the tax is a bit more but that is not really an issue my V50 is £175 plus I get 45mpg.

But overall I think you may have missed my point in that currently the V40CC is all show and little substance for it. With a few tweaks(all season tyres/sensible size being one, 4wd or trick traction aids being another) then it could be made much better, more suited to the market I think Volvo are aiming for. Or maybe it's just for the "vanity" country market not the real world of vets, midwifes etc who work in the country but at 45 pence per mile claimable struggle to find a suitable car for their needs that can be covered by their expenses.

As an aside to this my 1999 octavia was top of the range had 15" and 195/65/15 tyres the most common tyre fitment at that time. Now my V50 16" 205/55/16 again the current most common fitment. The 15" were more than adequate as for the fad for 18 and 19" wheels it is nothing but show, ignorance and high tyre costs no real world benefit.

Never too sure why people get too hung up on tax. Spread over a year the cost is minimal.

[Ninja59]

I cannot find anywhere that states that, it is a eletro hydraulic on the Fiat (traction+).

In honesty I don't really think it is you stated you wanted enhanced ride height which it gives, frankly not many people are overly concerned about driven wheels, and get confused between the grip and traction points of 4WD without thinking about the rubber. Most of the market in relation to pumped up crossovers has been brought about by increased wanting of additional ride height for looking out, and perceived safety increases "by being higher up" a phrase I have heard over and over, ultimately that is the market of many crossovers or crossover esque vehicles (hence why Nissan sell loads of cumquats, jukes, land rover freelanders it goes on and on blah blah blah). Most people could not give a toss whether the vehicle was FWD or AWD (and as I have said many that have AWD confuse grip and traction). And to really put it simply I drive a RWD MX5 in some of the rubbish country roads (on 16" winter tyres) and it has it's moments no lies but ultimately it is still simply about respecting the conditions and driving accordingly.

As I said though you are still going to have to fit winter tyres to the BMW even with 4WD, so you make no saving in that respect (and something the same argument that could be used from the Fiat and Pug point if correct so it is not "just" Volvo in that issue for the vehicles considered). Another way to look at this was this excellent video, FWD on winter tyres was virtually there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfuE00qdhLA

And no one said you had to have 18 or 19, many people choose to have those 18 or 19 at additional cost, if you want 16's that is that, no one is going to force you down that route unfairly. But also you have to respect the facts above in relation to brake discs, owing to the weight and size of modern cars which on these is probably the 278 or 300 which will give easily enough clearance for 16's as the underlying car is still a V50/C30/C70/S40.

[Brodick]

I am at a loss as to why you seem so keen to show that the V40cc is just s case of style over substance...

especially considering that they do offer awd with the T5 model so if Volvo thought there was a big enough market for it they could easily fit awd to the rest of the range. It seems that at this time they do not feel it being financially viable. Of course Volvo are not the only ones making a high riding hatchback with a bit of body cladding here or there - seems there is a market for this
people like them any buy them for what they are.

If you think you need something with AWD and want a smallish car then you need to look elsewhere.

I would have said any car with a decent set of all weather/season tyres would cope with the driving conditions you mention

[lcnar01]

Regarding wheel size, Volvo do provide sensible steel 15" wheels, with wheel trims, in certain markets (Sweden for example) on the V40, as they did on the S40/V50. It would appear that it is a purely marketing decision by Volvo and I suspect that it is to do with promoting an upmarket image for the brand in the UK, with alloy wheels standard across all models.
As for the CC version, Volvo did hint at one stage that an XC40 model would appear at some stage, but it looks like the cosmetic V40CC is it!
I quite like the CC, but not the price premium!

[Bhowani 2]

As previously posted, there is a V40 AWD 1.6 diesel auto sold in Norway, so where there's a demand.........I have sat in it - see my previous posts - but as we haven't had any snow this winter I will keep on risking it with my socks on!

Bhowani
V60 T3

[Loskie]

Brodick for most wanting AWD the running costs of the T5 are likely to be prohibitive.
You seem very defensive of Volvo and their marketing decision on this, not sure why. They are going from providing practical, sensible cars to providing style over substance. However most other manufacturers follow this trend too. I guess they have tuned in to the wants of the materialistic, image obsessed consumer rather than those who want a car to meet every day needs.

In my humble opinion Volvo are missing a trick with this approach.