[BuzzyBud]

I found the attached report to be interesting. Seems many EV automobile reviewers express concern regarding the C40 price. I guess most things in life are relative. Relative to cross-shopping alternatives, maybe the C40 price is reasonable?

Price Comparison: Volvo C40 Recharge vs. Polestar 2, Audi Q4 E-Tron, Tesla Model Y - Techzle

 

[arijaycomet]

These forums seem to have a fairly diverse group of members, with quite a few EU/UK location. But more recently I recall seeing a post from AUS/NZ where the prices there for the Polestar far exceed that of the equivalent Volvo XC40 Recharge. It was odd/interesting to me, but I suspect built in Belgium vs China made some sort of tax/tariff issue? Again outside my depth here just spectating.

What I can say is this... the Tesla Model Y with the upgraded wheels (no FSD) would be $60,990 according to their web site right now. This is basically within +/- $1,000 of what the current ultimate XC40 pricing seems to be. So again a fully loaded XC40 P8 would be tit-for-tat the same as the Model Y. So I'd say good pricing, the only shortcoming there is obviously range, charging network.

Same goes for the Polestar 2 .. again at least in the USA. Pricing there would be +/- $1k of the $60k mark if you get a fully loaded AWD (less the PP-- my Polestar 2 has the PerfPack and that made it just shy of $65k but I don't think most owners would opt for that, or are willing to pay that premium for it being sportier anyhow). Still, within 10% even if you add the PP.

Looks like a Q4 eTron Q50 with S-Line & 20" wheels, here in the USA, is $60,440 -- again these cars couldn't be closer in pricing if they tried. There are def some features some cars get, that others do not. But these premium SUVs are all hitting the mark right around $60k fully loaded. So it may really come down to which vehicle lacks a feature you want, or if you prioritize range or charging network, or are more brand loyal to one over the other. I think they're all close enough to really make sense, at least here in the states.

 

[BuzzyBud]

These forums seem to have a fairly diverse group of members, with quite a few EU/UK location. But more recently I recall seeing a post from AUS/NZ where the prices there for the Polestar far exceed that of the equivalent Volvo XC40 Recharge. It was odd/interesting to me, but I suspect built in Belgium vs China made some sort of tax/tariff issue? Again outside my depth here just spectating.

What I can say is this... the Tesla Model Y with the upgraded wheels (no FSD) would be $60,990 according to their web site right now. This is basically within +/- $1,000 of what the current ultimate XC40 pricing seems to be. So again a fully loaded XC40 P8 would be tit-for-tat the same as the Model Y. So I'd say good pricing, the only shortcoming there is obviously range, charging network.

Same goes for the Polestar 2 .. again at least in the USA. Pricing there would be +/- $1k of the $60k mark if you get a fully loaded AWD (less the PP-- my Polestar 2 has the PerfPack and that made it just shy of $65k but I don't think most owners would opt for that, or are willing to pay that premium for it being sportier anyhow). Still, within 10% even if you add the PP.

Looks like a Q4 eTron Q50 with S-Line & 20" wheels, here in the USA, is $60,440 -- again these cars couldn't be closer in pricing if they tried. There are def some features some cars get, that others do not. But these premium SUVs are all hitting the mark right around $60k fully loaded. So it may really come down to which vehicle lacks a feature you want, or if you prioritize range or charging network, or are more brand loyal to one over the other. I think they're all close enough to really make sense, at least here in the states.

When I take delivery of my C40, it will be my first EV. I am enjoying the journey toward EV ownership and will admit to being puzzled by all the focus on range. For me, the AAOS technology is a major selling point for Volvo and Polestar and would justify any price premium over range. I look forward to the day when the C40 will facilitate my goal of achieving an extended work environment via the integration of Google apps.

 

[arijaycomet]

@BuzzyBud -- people get overly hung up on the range, but the reality is that for most people this is all just in their head. You are right to say it is puzzling. Very few people are doing over 150+ miles in a single day, but for the few who do, range can be a limiting factor. For probably 90% of the population the C40/XC40 range is more than ample. I had a Mini Cooper SE electric with ~115 miles of range, and easily did over 1,000 miles of driving per month, DC fast charging very rarely. Even on a heavy day of driving I was below 100 miles travelled.

 

[A2_]

The range doesn't even seem that bad tbh. Compare it to, for example, the Ford Mach-E premium eAWD. The Mach-E has a 70 kWh battery, and gets 211 miles of range. The Mach-E is $51k MSRP, and you're buying a Ford vs a Volvo. The GT (maybe a better comparison based on power?) claims 270 mi, but it's got a 91 kWh battery. Some rough math says that if the C40 had a 91 kWh battery it'd be getting closer to 260 mi EPA, and now when you add the panoramic sunroof and pilot assist you're spending $64k MSRP on your Ford. 🤷🏻‍♂️ The math adds up for me. The C40 is a good value for its class.

Plus I think it looks better than the competition

 

[arijaycomet]

Just like comparing MPGs in a gas car, the best metric to compare would be how many kWh per 100 miles (though I personally prefer miles per kWh since that is more like miles per gallon) --- but forget that soap box LOL

Comparing these 4x above, you can easily see how the Tesla uses FAR less energy per 100 miles, with the Ford being pretty on-par with our beloved Volvo-based vehicles. Obviously range is a factor also of battery size... but again, adding more battery might add more range, but add more weighs, and hence, loses efficiency. (one of the reasons I love the Mini Cooper SE is that they went for a small battery, to keep the car light/fun to drive; the trade off is half the range of a Bolt, but more than twice the fun!)

 

[arijaycomet]

... by the way I'm using 2021 vehicles where the 2022s aren't yet listed on the FuelEconomy EPA government web site, so that is why some cars are '21 and others are '22-- I am using the latest model year possible. Here are two others worth comparing; the VW/Audi chassis that shares. Both of those vehicles are similar in each other, and about 8% more efficient than our Volvo. In the case of the Audi, similar specs and pricing. The VW is not as posh (though it does offer massaging seats which is cool). Cheers!

 

[BuzzyBud]

View attachment 1962

... by the way I'm using 2021 vehicles where the 2022s aren't yet listed on the FuelEconomy EPA government web site, so that is why some cars are '21 and others are '22-- I am using the latest model year possible. Here are two others worth comparing; the VW/Audi chassis that shares. Both of those vehicles are similar in each other, and about 8% more efficient than our Volvo. In the case of the Audi, similar specs and pricing. The VW is not as posh (though it does offer massaging seats which is cool). Cheers!

I will admit, the range figures for me do not represent my primary focus. However, I do see value in understanding what may be contributing to the variation. We know vehicle weight and aerodynamics can contribute to efficiency. The battery design can also play a roll. Over time a deep dive analysis might be fascinating.

I like to focus on battery safety, charging speed, and preconditioning the battery. I sense the Volvo engineers may improve vehicle efficiency as they continue to tinker with software systems. If they do make improvements, the Swedish culture of not bragging about your accomplishments may result in our Forum members being the only ones with a deep understanding of what has been accomplished via OTA updates. 😉

 

[Rousie13]

View attachment 1962

... by the way I'm using 2021 vehicles where the 2022s aren't yet listed on the FuelEconomy EPA government web site, so that is why some cars are '21 and others are '22-- I am using the latest model year possible. Here are two others worth comparing; the VW/Audi chassis that shares. Both of those vehicles are similar in each other, and about 8% more efficient than our Volvo. In the case of the Audi, similar specs and pricing. The VW is not as posh (though it does offer massaging seats which is cool). Cheers!

The massaging seats were great and I loved that feature.

One point is that the Q4 and ID.4 have 295hp for the AWD versions, so much less power than the Volvo.

 

[Greg S]

These forums seem to have a fairly diverse group of members, with quite a few EU/UK location. But more recently I recall seeing a post from AUS/NZ where the prices there for the Polestar far exceed that of the equivalent Volvo XC40 Recharge. It was odd/interesting to me, but I suspect built in Belgium vs China made some sort of tax/tariff issue? Again outside my depth here just spectating.

What I can say is this... the Tesla Model Y with the upgraded wheels (no FSD) would be $60,990 according to their web site right now. This is basically within +/- $1,000 of what the current ultimate XC40 pricing seems to be. So again a fully loaded XC40 P8 would be tit-for-tat the same as the Model Y. So I'd say good pricing, the only shortcoming there is obviously range, charging network.

Same goes for the Polestar 2 .. again at least in the USA. Pricing there would be +/- $1k of the $60k mark if you get a fully loaded AWD (less the PP-- my Polestar 2 has the PerfPack and that made it just shy of $65k but I don't think most owners would opt for that, or are willing to pay that premium for it being sportier anyhow). Still, within 10% even if you add the PP.

Looks like a Q4 eTron Q50 with S-Line & 20" wheels, here in the USA, is $60,440 -- again these cars couldn't be closer in pricing if they tried. There are def some features some cars get, that others do not. But these premium SUVs are all hitting the mark right around $60k fully loaded. So it may really come down to which vehicle lacks a feature you want, or if you prioritize range or charging network, or are more brand loyal to one over the other. I think they're all close enough to really make sense, at least here in the states.

It may have been my post you saw re: Australian pricing. Both the Polestar 2 and the XC40 we receive here are made in the same plant in China. The XC40 on the road is about $15-20K cheaper than a comparable Polestar 2 (with leather.) Performance pack is another $6K on top of that IIRC. Not sure why the P2 is so much more expensive, but I suspect it’s because the Volvo is specced here with every option as “standard” including premium paint colour of your choice for the $76,990 sticker price (includes 10% GST). With the P2 they have gone with a base price plus options, and those option packs are pricey...Polestar 2 price is $69,900 for long range dual motor, plus $5000 pilot pack, $6000 plus pack, $1400 20-inch wheels, $1400 premium paint, $6000 leather ventilated seats, $1450 charge cable...so that makes the P2 $91,950 (includes 10% GST). It has a fixed glass sunroof with no shade (XC40 has opening roof with shade) and the P2 also has ventilated leather seats (XC40 just has non-ventilated leather seats)...On the road with “stamp duty” and “luxury car tax” (only on the P2 as the Volvo sneaks in under the LCT limit) the P2 is $99,500...plus the $1450 charge cable so it’s going to be $101,000. The Volvo is $82,000 on the road...$19,000AUD more for the Polestar 2 comparably equipped!!

 

[arijaycomet]

It may have been my post you saw re: Australian pricing. Both the Polestar 2 and the XC40 we receive here are made in the same plant in China. (…Snip….)) The Volvo is $82,000 on the road...$19,000AUD more for the Polestar 2 comparably equipped!!

WOW! That is pretty crazy.

As an owner who is lucky enough to have both, I don’t see the Polestar being worthy of a 23% price hike. Again with literally EVERY option on both car, the delta here was ~$65k vs $61k … or about 7% more for the Polestar. IMO that makes sense as it came with performance tires, fancy suspension and brakes, and a slightly better performance and efficiency (range) benefit. I think that makes sense. But in your case, the Polestar doesn’t really seem like it is going to sell well, not at those prices!

 

[Markus E]

View attachment 1962

... by the way I'm using 2021 vehicles where the 2022s aren't yet listed on the FuelEconomy EPA government web site, so that is why some cars are '21 and others are '22-- I am using the latest model year possible. Here are two others worth comparing; the VW/Audi chassis that shares. Both of those vehicles are similar in each other, and about 8% more efficient than our Volvo. In the case of the Audi, similar specs and pricing. The VW is not as posh (though it does offer massaging seats which is cool). Cheers!

I think the charging speed is almost more important than range. With our new 1.7 software the XC40 is faster or equal compared to those cars, and it preheats the battery if we have a fast charger in the navigation.

 

[Greg S]

WOW! That is pretty crazy.

As an owner who is lucky enough to have both, I don’t see the Polestar being worthy of a 23% price hike. Again with literally EVERY option on both car, the delta here was ~$65k vs $61k … or about 7% more for the Polestar. IMO that makes sense as it came with performance tires, fancy suspension and brakes, and a slightly better performance and efficiency (range) benefit. I think that makes sense. But in your case, the Polestar doesn’t really seem like it is going to sell well, not at those prices!

Yeah, crazy for sure. The P2 Performance Pack (“fancy brakes”, orange seatbelts and Ohlins dampers) adds $8000...so you’d be looking at $110,000AUD on the road at least for that. Edit: incidentally before the XC40 prices were announced in AUS I assumed it would be about $100k. I was pleasantly surprised when it came it at $82K on the road so that’s why we ended up with it instead of a Tesla Model 3. Very happy with that decision!