Volvo C40 vs Infiniti QX30

What's the difference?

The C40 becomes a compelling option in the electrified small SUV space, offering a premium look and feel, great range and tech inclusions at the price, as well as awesome on-road dynamics.

Its main downsides are the rear seat, which is compromised by its platform and design-led roofline, and the overwhelming power and added traction of the dual-motor makes the single motor less attractive on the value front.

Still, regardless of variant chosen, the C40 looks to offer a stand-out balance of price, range, and performance, against its traditional rivals and newcomers alike.

Even though it’s almost identical to the Q30, the QX30 manages to feel sufficiently different in suspension tune and cabin ambiance to be considered different.

It’s a disappointing oversight, though, by Infiniti to deny the base GT such basic safety fundamentals as a rear view camera (which Infiniti assures us is being worked on).

Volvo has become a brand with a distinctive and consistent design language which embodies the kind of beautiful minimalism normally associated with Scandinavian brands.

I have always liked how Volvo says more with less design elements, with only gentle touches of chrome or gloss black, and a lack of over-the-top sporty pieces avoiding the temptation to over-sell the sporty potential of the brand’s range.

The C40 takes the small SUV formula, well established by its XC40 relation, and gets a bit weird and experimental. It’s slightly lower and has a more coupe-styled rear, with a strongly raked rear window giving it a sportier and more aggressive look than the rest of Volvo’s SUV range.

The styling is sold by an angular spoiler piece running atop the boot, and the rear light clusters have gone all minimalist, constructed of individual pieces rather than a single transparent housing, and they give a nod to the C30 hatchback which this car is the spiritual successor to, by name and nature.

The interior offers up no surprises, sticking to the formula Volvo has established across all of its current models. An effortlessly premium space with, again, a minimalistic dash dominated by the portrait touchscreen, the C40’s premium nature is confirmed by its finely patterned inlays, simple chrome pieces, and abundance of soft-touch surfaces.

The big upright vent fittings with clever rhomboid patterns on their adjustment dials are always a highlight piece of modern Volvos, and the pattern work is continued on the central volume adjust dial and even on the little rotating pieces of the light and wiper stalks. Clever.

Even the software is paired back on the multimedia suite and digital dashboard, with easy to use shortcuts and simple menus which suit the car.

Volvo might turn off some buyers with the more unconventional shape of the C40. But for those looking for a more traditional SUV it also offers the XC40 in the same two variants, and the Polestar 2 caters to those not looking for an SUV at all.

The QX30 is one of the first projects to result from a technology partnership formed between the parent company of Mercedes-Benz and the Nissan-Renault Alliance.

In a sign of how worldly the car industry is becoming, the QX30 is built in Nissan’s Sunderland plant in the UK, using the German Mercedes-Benz A-Class platform and powertrains, all under Sino-French ownership via the Nissan-Renault Alliance.

On the outside, the design that first aired on the Q30 is pretty unique. It’s not a subtle car, with deep crease lines along its sides that, according to Infiniti, is an industry first in terms of manufacturing complexity.

When it comes to differences between the two vehicles, it’s minimal at best. There is a 35mm increase in height (30mm from taller springs and 5mm from roof rails), an extra 10mm in width, and extra trims affixed to the front and rear bumpers. Aside from the all-wheel-drive underpinnings, that is pretty much it for the exterior.

The same black plastic overfenders that are fitted to the Q30 are present on the QX30, with 18-inch rims on both the base model GT and the other variant, the Premium.

The dimensions of the QX30 are also an exact match for those on the Mercedes-Benz GLA, with the long front overhang acting as the main visual connection between the two cars.

The C40 is essentially a XC40 with a cropped down roofline, and there are some obvious downsides which this new shape brings.

The front seat throws no surprises, though, offering plenty of room for two adults with a welcome level of adjustability for the seat and wheel. The seats could be more comfortable, though, with a notable lack of padding in the base compared to some luxury (or even non-luxury) rivals. 

I’m a fan of the fabric trim which comes on both grades, bucking the trend of needing to have leather or leather-like trim for a car to feel ‘premium’.

The ample window space up front, including the massive glass roof helps the C40’s cabin feel spacious, but the view out the rear with its aggressive design is all but a very limited letterbox aspect, particularly if the rear seat headrests are in the upright position. 

While some controls are exclusively via touch interface, there is a physical volume dial, and shortcut buttons for the defogger functions. 

Temperature is controlled by touch, however, and the detail settings have some smaller toggle adjustments. Tricky to jab at when you’re on the move.

The digital dash is refreshingly simple, but minimally adjustable, with the choice of either a nifty navigation screen, a blank screen, or trip details being the only options.

Cabin storage is good but not stellar. There are bottle holders and big pockets in the doors, a set of two cupholders in the centre (beats the Polestar 2’s single cupholder), a small tray with a wireless charger under the multimedia screen, and a smallish console armrest box.

The rear seat is where the real problem exists. Unlike the XC40, the C40’s cropped roofline means my head was hard up against the roof (I’m 182cm tall). 

I did have decent knee room behind my own seating position, however the seat comfort in the back still isn’t as good as some rivals. 

The middle position is also compromised, thanks to the raised centre floor piece the C40’s platform needs to facilitate all-wheel drive in its combustion relations.

A bottle holder appears in each door pocket, and in a rare inclusion, there are heated outboard rear seats, adjustable air vents, and USB-C charging ports.

The boot has a quoted capacity of 413 litres with the rear seats up. The floor is comparatively high suggesting a smallish space when loaded with luggage cases, for instance. Stay tuned for a follow-up review so we can see how well it holds our three-piece demo set.

The floor itself has an adjustable, pop-up divider and multiple luggage hooks, making it quite versatile, and there is a cavity beneath which can hold your charging cables as well as the inflator kit in place of a spare wheel.

The QX30 is obviously very similar to the Q30 in many respects, but the interior is slightly different, with larger, less cosseting seats up front and slightly higher seats in the rear.

The cabin is also lighter in overall appearance, thanks to a paler colour palette.

There are plenty of neat inclusions, including a pair of USB ports, plenty of door storage, a space for six bottles and a sizable glove box.

A pair of cupholders resides up front, along with a pair in the fold-down armrest in the rear.

There is no particularly logical location for the storage of smartphones, though, and the lack of Apple CarPlay or Android Auto is down to Infiniti opting for its own phone connectivity suite.

A decent 430 litres of luggage space behind the rear seats is contrasted by a cramped rear area for all but the smallest of passengers, while sharply shaped rear door apertures making getting in and out a bit of an ask.

There are two ISOFIX baby seat points and a 12-volt socket in the rear, as well.

The QX30 will be offered in two variants; the base model GT at $48,900 plus on-road costs, while the Premium will cost $56,900.

Both come equipped with the same engine; a 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbocharged petrol engine that’s sourced from Mercedes-Benz and also used on the Q30 and Merc GLA.

Eighteen-inch rims are standard on both cars, while an electronic handbrake, 10-speaker Bose audio, 7.0-inch multimedia screen and a full set of LED lamps all round are fitted across both variants as well.

Unfortunately, the QX30 GT misses out on a reversing camera all together, a fate it shares with the Q30 GT. 

Infiniti Cars Australia told us that this was an oversight at the time the cars were being specced for Australia, particularly in light of the other technologies that the car would receive, like automatic emergency braking.

The company says it’s working hard to bring a reversing camera to the GT.

The top-spec Premium gets leather trim, a powered driver’s seat, and additional safety equipment like a 360-degree camera and radar cruise with brake assist.

The only optional extra on each car is metallic paint.

Great news here, the C40 can be chosen with two powerful layouts, either a front-wheel drive 170kW/330Nm set-up, or a dual-motor all-wheel drive arrangement, able to make use of nearly double the power at 300kW/660Nm. The dual-motor is capable of sprinting from 0-100km/h in just 4.7 seconds.

The front-drive is backed by a 69kWh battery allowing it a 434km range, while the dual motor ups the battery size to 78kWh to allow a 420km driving range.

Just the one engine is used across both cars; the 155kW/350Nm single-turbo 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine from the Q30 and A-Class.

It’s backed by a seven-speed transmission and wired into an all-wheel-drive system that is biased towards a front-drive configuration.

Sourced from Mercedes-Benz, up to 50 per cent of drive can be sent to the rear wheels, according to Infiniti.

Surprisingly, energy consumption is quite high for both C40 variants. The single motor is the more efficient of the two, consuming 16.8kWh/100km on the more lenient ADR testing schedule, while the dual motor officially consumes 22.2kWh/100km to the same standard. I saw around 23kWh/100km overall in my short test of the dual-motor variant.

Energy consumption could be better for both, as I have achieved more consistently impressive results particularly from Hyundai and Kia electric cars.

Where the C40 is more impressive though is its charging specs, which are exactly where they need to be for a car this size. On a rapid DC charger, the C40 can charge at a rate of 150kW meaning a 10 - 80 percent charge in 40 minutes for the dual motor, or 32 minutes for the single motor.

On the slower AC standard, the C40 charges at a rate of 11kW. Expect a 10 - 80 percent charge time of around five or six hours on this standard. 

The C40 uses a European-standard Type 2 CCS charging port, although it misses out on the handy two-way charging feature offered by some rivals.

Infiniti claims a combined fuel economy figure of 8.9L/100km for the 1576kg QX30 across both the variants; this is 0.5L thirstier than the Q30 version.

Our brief test yielded a dash figure of 11.2L/100km over 150km.

If you’ve driven any kind of XC40 or even a Polestar 2 before, the C40 will offer no surprises. It’s pretty much exactly the same from behind the wheel with a few subtle tweaks.

This is a very good thing. The C40 is quiet, easy to drive, and its electric motor and regen system offer a smooth single-pedal experience.

It is also alarmingly, overwhelmingly, rapid. While its massive set of batteries under the floor make it feel heavy off the line in stop-start traffic, sticking your boot into the accelerator will remove any doubt, particularly in the dual-motor variant, that this Volvo means business.

The dual-motor also has an incredible torque-vectoring system, making it extremely difficult to elicit so much as a squeak from its tyres. It also feels as though torque is distributed quite evenly between its two driven axles, making it feel neither prone to over- or understeer.

This has the effect of making the C40 feel somewhat indestructible in the corners, with absurd levels of grip. 

The same feeling is present in top-spec versions of the Polestar 2, only the feeling of ever-present weight is more noticeable in the higher-riding C40, which can make it unsettling to take corners at the kinds of speeds it is capable of.

The steering tune is interesting. Volvo offers two software-controlled modes, either heavy or standard, and the standard mode is heavy enough. 

Despite its electrical assistance, the wheel does continue to offer some organic feedback, making the C40 a pleasure to steer on countryside roads.

The ride is also surprisingly good, despite massive wheel options. I was impressed how easily the C40 handled most bumps and undulations, communicating little to the cabin. 

The ride can approach its limits with such big wheels and the weight of its batteries, generally these are communicated via unsettling thuds from underneath the car. Regular undulations at higher speeds also had the C40 bouncing around a little.

On the whole, though, the cabin is kept relatively insulated and serene, adding an element of total confidence, similar to that offered by Teslas, whilst offering better ride quality with a softer edge. At higher speed, at least on the 20-inch wheels, road noise does pick up, however.

In terms of electric driving, there is a single adjustable setting for regen. The car either offers a full single pedal mode with maximum regenerative braking to bring the car to a halt with the motor alone, or a ‘standard’ mode which tones the regen down and offers it blended in via the brake pedal. 

Single pedal mode is more efficient. I suggest you stick to it if you want to make the most of this car’s efficiency.

I was surprised to have so few complaints about the C40’s drive experience. This is a balanced and capable EV which is yet another example of how even vehicles which use combustion platforms are improved out of sight by full electrification.

Again, it would be easy to think that the QX30 would feel almost identical to its lower-riding sibling – but that would be incorrect. We criticised the Q30 for being a bit too buttoned down and unresponsive, but the QX30 feels more lively and involving, thanks to its unique spring and damper set-up.

Even though it’s 30mm higher than the Q, the QX doesn’t feel it at all, with a benign, pleasant ride with good body roll control and competent steering.

Our front-seat passenger complained of feeling a little ‘hemmed in’, which is a valid point. The sides of the car are very high, and the roofline is quite low, exacerbated by the steeply raked windscreen.

The 2.0-litre four-potter is smooth and punchy, and the gearbox well suited to it, but it’s lacking in aural character. Luckily the QX30 does a terrific job of suppressing noise before it gets into the cabin, then…

The QX30 gets seven airbags, auto emergency braking, forward collision warning and a pop-up bonnet as standard across the line.

The base GT does, however, miss out on a reversing camera.

The Premium model also offers a 360-degree camera, blind spot warning, radar cruise control and brake assist, traffic sign detection, reverse motion detection and lane departure warning.

The C40 is covered by Volvo’s five year and unlimited kilometre warranty, with a separate eight-year, 160,000km warranty for the battery. There is also eight years of roadside assistance attached.

It is pleasing to see the service intervals for the C40 are long, as they should be for an electric car with so few moving parts, set at two years or 30,000km. 

The first 24 month service is free of charge, and Volvo tells us service pricing after this period will average out to around $100 a year ($200 per visit).

The Q30 is offered with a four-year, 100,000km warranty, and servicing is suggested every 12 months or 25,000km.

Infiniti offers a fixed three-year service schedule, with the GT and the Premium both costing an average of $541 over the three services provided.