Malaysian Volvo S40 updated with 2.0 liter engine and Powershift twin clutch transmission!
Volvo has updated the specifications for the Volvo S40 here in Malaysia. The 2.4 liter engine has been replaced by a 2.0 liter unit which is essentially the Duratec unit found in the Ford Focus and the Mazda 3 here in Malaysia. It makes 145 PS at 6,000rpm and 185Nm of torque at 4,500rpm.
But what’s most interesting is the fact that the engine is now mated to a Ford Powershift transmission, which is basically a 6-speed twin clutch transmission. This makes it the first locally assembled (CKD) twin clutch car in the country. Powershift is a development of Getrag Ford Transmissions GmbH, a 50:50 Ford and Getrag JV.
Like VW’s DSG, there are two versions of the Powershift transmission out there – one with wet clutches and another with dry clutches. The unit installed in the S40 is the wet clutch version. Generally dry clutch versions like Volkswagen’s 7-speed DSG (the 6-speed used a wet clutch) are more efficient and lighter because an oil bath is not necessary, Ford/Volvo says wet versions have reduced wear and tear and thus last longer. Ford will use its dry clutch version on smaller cars like the Fiesta.
A twin-clutch transmission basically means the gearbox works like a manual transmission but it has two clutches, one for the odd gears and one for the even gears. While the odd clutch is in 3rd gear and is currently the active gear selected, the even clutch pre-selects 4th gear, so that when the time comes to shift, the switchover is much faster and smoother – an almost continuous flow of power.
0 to 100km/h with manual transmission takes about 9.5 seconds in a 2.0 liter Volvo S40 which is really quite far from blazing. The Powershift model is rated at 9.8 seconds, just fractions of a second slower than a true blue manual. As for fuel consumption, the car is rated for 11.3 liter per 100km in the city, 6.4 liters per 100km on the highway, and 8.1 liters per 100km on combined usage.
Other than the engine change, this new S40 specification also adds dual xenon headlamps and the Blind-Spot Info System that notifies the driver (with a blinking light) of objects in the car’s blindspot zone, which personally I feel is a little too sensitive.
The new Volvo S40 2.0 Powershift retails for RM169,950.00 OTR without insurance, which just happens to be the exact same figure as the 2.4 liter model. But what you’re paying for the Powershift is actually just slightly more than the 2.4 by a couple of hundreds of ringgit. This is because the OTR without insurance price includes road tax, and the 2.0 model naturally has cheaper road tax at RM379.50 as opposed to the 2.4 liter model’s RM815.
Look after the jump for a PDF brochure and pricelist of the new car.
October 15, 2009 @ 9:27 pm
good for road tax BUT still feel no power
October 15, 2009 @ 9:33 pm
Volvo always made great car with smooth engine and top of the class safety.But depriciation of 2nd hand value made it hard for Volvo to “live” in Malaysia.I finds Volvo very nice.Especially XC60.Why is the depriciation value of Volvo is so terrible??Anybody care to tell me??
October 15, 2009 @ 9:41 pm
Compared to the German, I feel that their brand presence is not that strong
October 15, 2009 @ 9:43 pm
i want T5 not 2.0
October 15, 2009 @ 9:46 pm
Volvo safety features is the best but their design is not outstanding as others
October 15, 2009 @ 9:50 pm
Ariff said,
October 15, 2009 @ 9:33 pm
Volvo always made great car with smooth engine and top of the class safety.But depriciation of 2nd hand value made it hard for Volvo to “live” in Malaysia.I finds Volvo very nice.Especially XC60.Why is the depriciation value of Volvo is so terrible??Anybody care to tell me??
—————————————————————
not in demand i guess…
October 15, 2009 @ 9:52 pm
despite all, i feel this is better buy that camry. too common.
depreciation is only an issue if you intend to sell withnin the next 5 years or so.
and depreciation because its a “cold” brand, compared to japs.
October 15, 2009 @ 10:14 pm
Still prefer volvo 2.4
I think this move is nothing more than a cost cutting strategy
October 15, 2009 @ 10:52 pm
good to price it lower with lower cc. the mental issue was the psychological mountain that the 2.4 was.
October 15, 2009 @ 10:53 pm
Hahaha…Volvo going backwards….wonder who would buy this crap.
October 15, 2009 @ 10:58 pm
I think they should keep the 2.4L engine… As at the price list, i can get honda accord, camry 2.4L…
If the 2.0L engine is a low pressure turbo engine, i might snatch it with the DSG gearbox…
October 15, 2009 @ 11:02 pm
volvo cut cost but make more money from 2.4 to 2.0 dont even reduce the price, is too much even for a very safe car but dull interior
October 15, 2009 @ 11:13 pm
i think so Volvo 2nd hand price will go up. Cos lately their cars r darn freaking good looking. Dono about de driving experience, but de looks sure kills.
October 15, 2009 @ 11:28 pm
Volvo is for gentlemen who enjoy simplistic design. Even the cheapest S40 will overkill a Camry in the terms of safety and technology.
Volvo for live
October 15, 2009 @ 11:40 pm
that would be Volvo for life
October 16, 2009 @ 12:59 am
good move but i think many of us will miss the 5 cylinders. nice car!
October 16, 2009 @ 1:26 am
volvo is as good as words.
nothing more.
it costs a local car to fix the gearbox.
October 16, 2009 @ 7:21 am
Power VS Tech & safety.
Who would win i wonder.
Lol i cracked a joke.
Not-in-demand selling point for the fail.
October 16, 2009 @ 7:43 am
they’re phasing out the s40 last time i heard. this is probably stock clearance?
October 16, 2009 @ 7:56 am
alamak!!! why downgrade engine but upgrade transmission?
but anyway, S40 is really a GOOD car
October 16, 2009 @ 8:24 am
S40 is not a big car. So the complain is “why 2.4 engine for such a small car?’. This 2.0 engine is more acceptable, but I was expecting the price to go down. The tranmission just kill what ever saving from downsizing the engine. Do the people who buy Volvo really looking for twin clutch gear box? Why not a 6 speed auto? Perhao Volvo want to place their car a premium over the Japanese model like Civic, Lancer etc.
October 16, 2009 @ 8:34 am
when i saw Paul’s headline on the 2.0 liter S40 launched, 2 things were in my mind immediately:
i) either the price is lowered by couple of thousand to boost sales and make Volvo S40 more affordable and entry level; or
ii) the 2.0 liter is a low pressure turbo (LPT) version (historically Volvo and turbo engine is almost synonymous… look at their T5 legacy)
only then i got to realise, it is more about business and profit decisions rather than offering something different with quality to the people as the price remain the same (or slightly higher) and the engine is the same one in the Ford Focus which is far far cheaper at RM112k and also with better handling & ride on top of that…
October 16, 2009 @ 9:20 am
Had a S40 2.4L. Had so much problems, both mechanical and electrical, with the car. Luckily was still under warrant. Sold off after 3 years, could not take the stress and fear of the car breaking down without notice. Depreciated 60 % of the original retail price!!!!!
October 16, 2009 @ 9:26 am
in this challenging economic climate, volvo chooses to do such a consumer unfriendly decision. wonder what their strategy is? to be able to sell so few cars that they can propose exiting the the malaysian market???
as it is, they are not exactly best sellers, and this would only make their cars even rarer in the future.
October 16, 2009 @ 9:34 am
Look at their track record, Volvo never has the customer in mind. They started selling the S40 at RM190 +, then it went down to RM180+ (due to the changes in tax), and then it went down to RM169 +. Existing owners will literally see their car depreciate right before their eyes. And judging from their track record, this is the final push to clear their S40s, before the big SALE for the car begins.
October 16, 2009 @ 9:35 am
volvo s40 is for those who afford to buy camry/accord/mazda 6 but want for continental rides. and its quite reasonable compared to alfa/skoda/french cars. -from my point of view
October 16, 2009 @ 10:06 am
I dont think S40 compete with Accord/Camry. It is in different class. The previous S40 share the platform with Waja and the current version share the same platform with Madza 6 & Ford Focus. So, it is basicly compete with Mazda 6, Focus, Civic & Altis.
So, does the high price justifiable? Yes, it offer a lot more goodies than the competitor, but will the target market buy it?
October 16, 2009 @ 10:31 am
My friend used to hava an S60, driven for a few years, no complaint, really powerful, good NVH, very comfortable, maintenance cost was not as high as he expected (compared to Bimmer & Merc). He was pretty happy with that car. But he was killed by this car’s 2nd hand value! All car dealers he approached, none gave him a price on par with Bimmer & Merc.
I noticed the Volvo Showroom + Service Center at PJ Jalan 222 had been shutdown (looks like it). Does Volvo have financial problem?
October 16, 2009 @ 10:56 am
why not T5 with powershift twin clutch????? this should be more performance…
or why not D5 with powershift twin clutch??? this should be more economic to drive
October 16, 2009 @ 11:02 am
Sometimes i wonder what is in the sales mgrs or decision maker’s mind. S40 2.0L with that price to put in the market. I wonder if they can sell 1 unit to normal person (not corporate spending).
That price you are competing against Camry2.4, Accord 2.4. The 2 Japanese car makers selling 2.0L will be very happy that this launch since it definitely making the customer has less choice in 2.0L sector. Even a 407 2.0L has a better competitive price.
It should be priced against the Civic/Altis @ RM100K-120K, then it would be success without a doubt.
October 16, 2009 @ 11:13 am
MADBOY said,
October 16, 2009 @ 10:06 am
I dont think S40 compete with Accord/Camry. It is in different class. The previous S40 share the platform with Waja and the current version share the same platform with Madza 6 & Ford Focus. So, it is basicly compete with Mazda 6, Focus, Civic & Altis.
So, does the high price justifiable? Yes, it offer a lot more goodies than the competitor, but will the target market buy it?
——————————————–
S40 share same platform with Mazda 3. Duratec engine is build by Mazda
October 16, 2009 @ 11:18 am
Why is volvo powershift twin clutch 0-100km/h performance is slower than manual shifting?
Isn’t twin clutch is about faster shifting and reduce loss of power? eg: VW equipped with DSG shift faster than manual…
October 16, 2009 @ 11:44 am
Someone please sack the product planning guys at Volvo Car Malaysia. Powershift is good but quite pointless when matched to the 2.0 NA engine found in the Focus and the 3.
If it was retailed at RM140k, then it would have made some sense.
October 16, 2009 @ 11:52 am
kanghui
Volvo opened their brand new 3S centre @ Glenmarie
& pls don’t make baseless statements.
October 16, 2009 @ 12:05 pm
If people can snub the batch and sacrifice a little bit in terms of interior quality & some features, get the Ford Focus instead, saves you RM40k-50k…. you’ll certainly get better value for money… better ride & handling than the S40 too… just don’t expect too much of a premium feel/quality for what you pay for the Ford…
October 16, 2009 @ 12:14 pm
What ? Engine smaller, but price still the same ?? WTF !!
October 16, 2009 @ 12:19 pm
oh, btw….
i’d be the first to get the Ford Focus 2.0S (Hatchback) if & when they offer it with the Powershift dual-clutch gearbox….. especially if Auto Connexion can sell it around RM120-125k range…. that will be better than getting a Golf GTi at RM210k…. i know the Golf is more powerful (200+hp) with better badge kudos, but then again how fast can you go on Malaysian or public roads anyway… the Focus should be as good to drive if not better… some more, just enjoy the fun of driving (not speeding)…
imagine a Focus 2.0S with 6-speed Powershift….. hmmmm *droolling*
any Sime Auto Connexion people here? Are you guys/gals listening?
Get rid of the 4-speed auto on the hatchback ppllllllzzzzzzzzzz…
it’s sucking all 145hp from whatever the 2.0 Duratec can produce hence the Focus (especially the 2.0S) is not capable to show or appeal to its sportier target market laaa…. since you guy cannot offer the Focus ST (or RS!!!) (2.4 turbo) since it will be too pricey to sell in M’sia, then give us your second best choice sooner rather than later….
October 16, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
I wonder does it still handles like a cruise ship
October 16, 2009 @ 2:50 pm
Sorry Stockholm, it was just a question and I didn’t know that they already opened a 3S center at Glenmarie. Was the new S40 2.0l launched there?
October 16, 2009 @ 2:56 pm
davv said,
October 16, 2009 @ 11:13 am
MADBOY said,
October 16, 2009 @ 10:06 am
I dont think S40 compete with Accord/Camry. It is in different class. The previous S40 share the platform with Waja and the current version share the same platform with Madza 6 & Ford Focus. So, it is basicly compete with Mazda 6, Focus, Civic & Altis.
So, does the high price justifiable? Yes, it offer a lot more goodies than the competitor, but will the target market buy it?
——————————————–
S40 share same platform with Mazda 3. Duratec engine is build by Mazda
————————-
Thanks. the mind said 3, but the hand typed 6
October 16, 2009 @ 3:10 pm
From time to time it shows how volvo transformed from a ‘military tank’ to elegant driving machine.
Good old cubic volvo design. Owh, with 6 inches rubber bumper!
October 16, 2009 @ 3:44 pm
We should be happy that they kept the price for the 2.0 S40. when it was launched in singapore 5 months ago, volvo singapore increased its price by sgd 6000. Thats rm 14000 to u and me. Actually i was surprised that they kept the price the same.
Anyway merc and bmw malaysia should learn this tactic and send us a car competing with the s40. In singapore there is a c180 with a 1.6L engine and a 318i with a downgraded 2.0L engine that is priced simmilar to the s40 there.
October 16, 2009 @ 4:22 pm
alamak said,
October 16, 2009 @ 11:18 am
Why is volvo powershift twin clutch 0-100km/h performance is slower than manual shifting?
Isn’t twin clutch is about faster shifting and reduce loss of power? eg: VW equipped with DSG shift faster than manual…
——————————————–
The gear is more for fual saving than performance in this case.
Anyway, mere mortal like us will never be able to get the manual 0-100 figure. The got the figure by using pro driver.
However, it is easy for us to get the twin cluch 0-100 figure as it is basicly auto. Just press your foot and ..well that it. Most likely you will get or at least near the 0-100 figure stated.
October 16, 2009 @ 4:43 pm
Buy a “Ford” but pay for a “Volvo”. LOL!
On the bright side, you’ll never have to worry about being carjacked.
October 16, 2009 @ 6:05 pm
Does this mean the current gen 2.0 liter Petrol Focus could also get a Powershift transmission?
Currently Ford only offers the Powershift transmission on 2.0 liter “diesel” TDCi models.
October 16, 2009 @ 11:06 pm
170k is expensive for 2.0L regardless if its 6 speed auto. The cost for the new transmission neglieable compared to that rubbish duratec engine. How can the price of a new transmission be the same as downgrading to a 2.0L engine.
October 16, 2009 @ 11:10 pm
In UK they have 1.6 S40. But diesel.
October 17, 2009 @ 12:01 am
actually volvo cars are not bad… but some how i wont give it further thought until they fix the tail lamp design, rear seats head room, anyway i heard the FC is quite good and safety is no question! (most doctors drive volvo)
October 17, 2009 @ 2:14 am
old showroom in Jalan 222 already moved to Glenmarie…it proves that Volvo is growing strong in Malaysia.
Volvo Malaysia also pay fewer attention to individual customer…but they are targeting those MNCs (serve as company car)…. If you guys don’t believe, go to these companies car park and you will find many Volvo cars are parking there!
October 17, 2009 @ 1:45 pm
yea…way to go…11% reduction in fuel consumption with a 6 speed but also a 15% reduction in engine power. Thats not efficient.
October 17, 2009 @ 8:51 pm
@ Davv
“S40 share same platform with Mazda 3. Duratec engine is build by Mazda”
The Duratec is built by Ford. Difference is, Mazda has variable Valve intake while the Focus does not – for 2.0.
The S40 and Mazda 3 shares the same Focus platform. They built Focus first and then move the platform to be used by Mazda and Volvo.
I love everything about my Ford Focus except the transmission… sigh…
October 18, 2009 @ 6:02 pm
Ichan : the heck u talking about not efficient? U just said it’s more economical, it’s only natural something has to give in, which is power. Last time, Honda City i-dsi has very low power rating, but nobody complains about that, people only keep praising its good f/c.
October 18, 2009 @ 6:16 pm
hauliancar : Funny that when it comes to bashing proton, safety or the lack of it, is always a favourite point. Then Msians will lament how they’re denied the rights for a safe car in order to protect proton, and becuz of that, it’s the end of the world… or is it?
It doesn’t seem to be the case for me, cuz if Msians really, really prioritise safety over all else, Volvo would’ve been the best-seller. What’s even funnier, Msians can even complain about design. Wow, so msians shouldn’t invest in their safety, simply because Volvo made their rear lights look so ugly? hmm……
October 18, 2009 @ 9:12 pm
for that price no dual zone air cond?
October 19, 2009 @ 10:43 am
Good one Tokmoh! I totally agree with you. Some of us gives really wierd comments… maybe just for the sake of giving em.
why no T5? only small market wants em.. no point bringin them in.
why 2.0… suits our tax scheme.
design not good? these people must be still living in the 240 n 740s era. or that they are the types who dont like Ikea designs because they look different.
I often see car owners placing reflector stickers on at the corners of their rear lamps to imitate the volvo rear light design. I bet, if a merc comes out with a similar design people will say its cool.
However I agree that the Volvo service here is not so good in particular Fed Auto. Really-really expensive spareparts and repairs… forget the gearbox, a driveshaft can get you a bike. If Volvo wants to succeed, theyd have to bring down there ego and lower the sparepart prices. It is the major factor why people are scared to go Volvo, and for the lhigh depereciation rate…
October 31, 2009 @ 1:53 am
who said there is no dual zone aircond in the new s40 2.0? read carefully bro!!!
October 31, 2009 @ 2:01 am
1.BLIS (blindspot information system)
2. Keyless entry
3. DSTC (dynamic stability & traction control)
4. Dual xenon light
5. 6 speed trnsmission
we are so lucky that volvo doesnt increase the price with these extra features!!!
October 31, 2009 @ 12:41 pm
orang yang bercakap tu takde duit….opah aku pun tak bising beli!!!!
October 31, 2009 @ 12:58 pm
I went to glenmarie showroom…talk to sales person and test drive the s40 powershift 2.0….and after test drive i feel the power is better and suitable for 2.0 engine….to thumps up….i suggest to all of you go to test drive and feel the car before you talk cock…..and the 3S showroom got a nice environment and i have a very good experience with the sales person….
* where u can get standard features at the volvo cars plus these five features at the price RM169,950.00? open your mind, open your eyes…dont talk rubbish…use your brain….
November 7, 2009 @ 3:06 pm
two thumps up?
November 18, 2009 @ 12:12 am
It will be better if those Volvo guys would just market the S40 T5 instead! For the price of 170k with the underpower car- I rather get the S80 T6!!
November 21, 2009 @ 1:16 am
where got s80 T6 in malaysia???