• 16
In the automotive industry, dropping below the 100 g/km CO2 emissions benchmark is no easy task. Aside from a few vehicles like the TwinAir two-cylinder Fiat 500 and the 1.0-liter Hyundai i10, seldom do we see gasoline- or diesel-powered autos venture into the rarified ranks of the sub-100 g/km CO2 club. Now, Volvo aims to change that with the introduction of two more models powered by the company's Euro 5-compliant 1.6-liter diesel mill.

The Volvo C30, already available in 99 g/km CO2 trim, will be joined by the S40 and V50, rounding out the company's trio of sub-100 g/km CO2 vehicles. The 1.6-liter diesel, when fitted between the fenders of either the S40 or V50 equipped with a six-speed manual gearbox and start/stop functionality, emits just 99 g/km CO2, which corresponds with an equally amazing fuel efficiency rating of 61.9 miles per gallon (U.S.). Now, here's the bad part; as you may have already guessed, that 1.6-liter diesel engine is not scheduled for the U.S. Hit the jump to discover more about Volvo's ultra-clean lineup of diesel-powered compacts.

[Source: Volvo]

PRESS RELEASE

Volvo S40 and V50 - now also with CO2 emissions of 99 g/km


The environmentally conscientious Volvo customer can now buy a Volvo S40 or V50 with CO2 emissions as low as 99 g/km - corresponding to fuel consumption of 3.8 l/100 km.

This means the Volvo C30, which was already previously available in a 99 gram variant, is now being joined in the sub-one hundred club by another two models.

"We've cut another five grams compared with the previous version. This means that both the S40 and the V50 are at the very top of their respective segments in terms of fuel economy," says Magnus Jonsson, Senior Vice President Product Development at Volvo Cars.

Volvo's DRIVe badge is attached to those models that deliver the best environmental performance in their respective size classes. In addition to the Volvo C30, S40 and V50 there are currently another two models with CO2 emissions below 120 g/km: the Volvo V70 (119 g) and Volvo S80 (119 g). In early 2011, these will be joined by the Volvo S60 (under 115 g) and Volvo V60 (under 119 g).

Successful hunt for increased efficiency

"Developments have proceeded swiftly since we presented our first three 119 gram models in Paris in autumn 2008. The fact that we will soon have seven models below 120 g/km, three with emissions below one hundred grams, shows that few of our competitors can beat us in the drive towards increasingly eco-efficient cars," says Magnus Jonsson.

The Volvo C30, S40 and V50 DRIVe are the first three models with the upgraded 1.6-litre diesel engine to meet the Euro 5 exhaust emission regulations being implemented in January 2011. The further-developed engine combined with a six-speed manual gearbox and start/stop function have made it possible for Volvo's engine experts to cut CO2 emissions from 104 g/km to 99 g/km.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 16 Comments
      • 4 Months Ago
      I'm so tired of that crap.

      Perhaps, as part of an energy Independence package - we should allow engines which meet european emissions standards to be sold within the US for a period of 10 years or so - as long as it provides some high level of efficiecy.
      Further - give a tax break to sellers on monies made on vehicles over a certain level of efficiency.
      It is not like EU standars are dirty - just different from ours.
      In those 10 years we should work toward a common efficiency standard to reduce cost for manufacturers across the board.
        • 4 Months Ago
        @why not,
        I thought for trucks the diesel standards in the US were no better than European standards?
        http://wasteage.com/Trucks_And_Bodies/waste_smoother_road/

        I suppose they prevented emissions from cars and light trucks, but it sounds to me that the standards were heavily influenced by what the US manufacturers were comfortable producing.
        • 4 Months Ago
        I agree. If there is any regulatory impediment to bringing these cars here it should be relaxed. I would say that for any car approved by whatever needs to happen, any higher efficiency version is also approved assuming it meets emissions. I guess safety is another issue - but seems like the main difference here is engine, not weight. it's the same car.


        @why not

        Regarding cost, we see this a lot. I don't really understand the point. If you are saying that one version of the car gets 31 mpg and another gets 55 mpg but that version costs more to make, which I don't really see why it would, but say it does, well charge more for it. Volvo has Turbo as an option and charges for it. Sunroofs as an option and charges for it. Nav etc etc. All these BS options that don't matter somehow are presented to the consumer as options.

        The issue is whether people will pay more for a car with less power that gets excellent mpg. It's question of the market. Personally I think they would. People are more interested in how a car looks and the interior than power. Power matters for sure but if a car has decent power and gets amazing mpg, they might accept that tradeoff if it is attractive in other ways. Like the c30 looks cool.
        • 4 Months Ago
        EU standards are dirtier than ours. For Diesel they are significantly dirtier than ours.

        In the area where I live, the air is dirty enough without relaxing auto standards and making it worse.

        The problem here isn't emissions standards anyway, it's that raising the mpg costs money and makes the car perform less well. In the US, with the low price of fuel people have been resistant to the idea of paying more to get less performance. If this changes (VW has already gone down this road and the new Fiesta tries to sell us this idea, and the Cruze Eco will too) then we'll see a lot more of these vehicles even without relaxing emissions.
        • 4 Months Ago
        The standards were designed to fit the big 3, to keep out efficient diesels so that they could continue to sell relatively unsophisticated engines, which of course is more profitable to them.
        • 4 Months Ago
        Actually, Euro 5 is MORE restrictive than T2B5 with respect to CO and PM, about the same wrt NMHC, and less restrictive wrt NOx. Of course, the test cycles are not identical, but a CARB study showed that the overall differences in the emissions are trivial.

        The Euro 5 (and Euro 6) also has a particle number limit (6x10**11 /km), currently only for diesel vehicles. A PN limit for gasoline vehicles is supposed to be set shortly. According to CARB, if the PN limit is set the same for gassers as it currently is for diesels, gas vehicles will require particle filters to meet the standard.
      • 4 Months Ago
      It's a shame this clean diesel engine won't make it to the US. :(
      • 4 Years Ago
      To get below 100g/km with an engine that size is pretty amazing. There are a few non-hybrids that can do it, but as far as I know they all have much smaller engines.
        • 4 Months Ago
        Small engine in a bigger car does affect performance (for a moment I thought @levine96629 was serious about "0-60 under 5 sec"!) , but let the buyer decide. It's unfortunate in the USA you can't choose anything below 2 liters and not even that in an executive car. Who are all these Americans wanting the biggest engine in the biggest car for their money?

        A review of last year's Volvo C30 1.6l DRIVe found:
        ACCELERATION 0-62mph: 10.7sec
        TOP SPEED 118mph
        and these Volvos weigh a little bit more, supposedly only an extra 75 kg.
      • 4 Months Ago
      You know the argument that letting more high efficiency turbo-diesel cars here is going to pollute more is getting a little old. The whole idea is to get a large market shift to be more efficient to replace the large trucks and suv's that currently pollute as much as 5 X more than this Volvo. This IS the one time where we need to compare apples to oranges especially if switching to apples reduces fuel demand by up to, in this case, 4 X the mpg's and up to 5 X less emissions than oranges. But, because there will always be a need for the oranges start making them more efficient too.

      One other thing to think about regarding this car, if a standard VW diesel at 105hp and 151 torque can make a car pass with ease I am sure this little Volvo engine could do better. And as far as the 10.71 sec. 0-60 goes diesels aren't dragsters but, they can hold their own when it comes to passing.
      • 4 Months Ago
      +1 on introducing more diesel wagons.
      • 4 Years Ago
      This should have been for sale US, 3 years ago.
      I've given up on Volvo.
      I'm going with hybrids, and enjoying the torque.
        • 4 Months Ago
        Volvo seems to be way too preoccupied with polishing it's "performance" image to bring something like this to the US market. I wish they would realize not everyone in the US wants a luxury sedan with a large engine. I'm growing tired of Volvo's attitude. My car will most likely be something from a different manufacturer.
        • 4 Months Ago
        Introducting the first 100mpg, 5 liter quad turbo diesel, sub 100gm/km, 0-60 under 5 sec, 10 speed auto, all affordable under 15k. Unfortunately, the car won't be available in the US.
      • 4 Months Ago
      Volvo is too busy trying to push its intrusive, clumsy, and gremlin-riddled 'city-safe' and pedestrian impact technologies to introduce something that would expand this niche in the US marketplace.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Well, of course. A diesel station wagon could NEVER make it in the US. Just ask VW. [/sarcasm]
    • Load More Comments