Talk:Volvo C30

message: The car will not be based upon the European Ford Focus or the Mazda Mazda3. So i removed the line saying so. It will share platform with the focus and the mazda 3 thats a whole other thing. That platform was co developed by Ford, Volvo and Mazda. --Dahlis 18:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

message: I've scoured the web myself looking for an answer to this question, but as best as I can tell, as of today, the only public statement from Volvo is that they're working on it, and hope to show an operational prototype in late 2007.  I'll be like those guys camping on the sidewalk for the new Playstation when the hybrid C30 reaches the US market.
The technical hurdles for this car are probably similar to those facing the Chevy Volt, a car that GM says has a 90% chance of being in dealerships by 2010.  Toyota will still be using parallel hybrid technology (internal combustion engine directly drives the wheels) for the new Prius, due in 2009.  So GM (or Ford/Volvo) could actually leap-frog Toyota with a more advanced serial hybrid design (where the internal combustion engine just charges the batteries, and never drives the wheels).  The Volt or hybrid C30 could in theory never use any gasoline/diesel, for those driving less than about 40 miles / 60 km per day (most people).  That's pretty huge.
So with nothing more to go on than that, I'd guess 2010 to 2012 for a serial hybrid C30.  Volvo is so much cooler than Chevy, but if GM succeeds in 2010 where Ford and Toyota have thus far failed, I'll swallow my pride and become a Chevy owner in 2010.
Vjockin 22:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  C30 Hybrid Availability 

message: Under Hybrid, bottom most sentence, it says "Range, 100km". However, if one follows the citation (4), you will find information mentioning 60. If you follow citation (5), it says 100. This may need attention, since 60km (45mi) is more commonly found when doing a search on this subject. Regards. Tkemmere 20:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Range of Hybrid version 

message: could this car possibly be classified as a shooting brake ?
just asking Retroqqq (talk) 16:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hard to say.  The shooting-brake article lists the Volvo C30's predecessors as examples, although the rear of the C30 is more slanted like a hatchback.  But then, the New York Times article linked to in the article does give the C30 as an example.  The question is, do people consider it more of a wagon or a hatchback.  If the former, then you can call it a shooting brake.  I don't know if there's any size "rules" for it (such as length behind the side doors). --Vossanova o< 16:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Also, I myself tend to think of shooting brakes as variants of 2-door sports cars - the BMW M Coupe being a perfect example.  The C30 is not based on any other 2-door model. --Vossanova o< 16:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shooting Brake 

message: Several sources are talking about a 350hp awd model to come out in the next few years. worth a mention? Benshimshak (talk) 15:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: At this point, it's speculation - even if a bunch of reliable sources mention it, they're still speculating.  This article shouldn't be spreading rumors, just facts. --Vossanova o< 16:48, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AWD Variant 

message: Love it or loathe it, the rear-end of this car is one of its most distinguishing features, I'm surprised that a picture of it doesn't feature in this article. Oosh (talk) 12:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture of the rear-end 

message: The article doesn't seem to say the diesel versions aren't available in North America. They aren't available here, are they?... --98.246.156.76 (talk) 03:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Diesel version in North America?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Volvo C30. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070210152249/http://www.channel4.com:80/4car/rt/volvo/c30/1042/7 to http://www.channel4.com/4car/rt/volvo/c30/1042/7
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've begun article re-organizing and cleanup which has been badly needed.  The "Initial version" and "2010 update" sections should be merged, since they are not separate generations.  They don't need separate engine/transmission tables -- I've grouped them together but they should still be combined.  There is WAY too much emphasis on individual special editions and concepts in this article, as well as too many laundry lists of model features (WP:NOTCATALOG/WP:IINFO).  The grammar needs work (e.g. sections starting with "It is a..").  I know which editor was behind all this; he's done it with many other car articles.  But I've at least laid out a basic structure we can work off: 1. Pre-production, 2. Production, 3. Special editions (& post-production concepts), 4. The DRIVe version (another special edition, really, but has enough content to go in its own section), 5. Motorsports, 6. Marketing & sales, and 7. See also/refs/external links. --Vossanova o< 22:47, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: It’s still a current car in the Volvo rangeTalltim (talk) 11:40, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does the history only go up to 2013? I