Volvo had a promotional tour with that car nearly a year ago; my wife and I were invited to it. They set up an auto-x course in Shea Stadium and let us flog the cars for a coupla hot laps. It was great.

Long story short, the car is not in the same league chassis-wise as the other two. The wagon would be a great car for my wife. But (and a huge "but"), what isn't immediately clear is that this is primarily a front-wheel-drive car (despite being called AWD). If you take off normally, the rear wheels put no power to the ground. Kind of the opposite of my 996TT, which puts 95% to the rears on an easy launch.

As a result, it was nose-heavy and plowed at 9/10s pace. The "4-C" chassis system did a great job of helping overcome those attributes, but they were still there. For me, if a car is AWD, it had better have the engine mounted longitudinally (think crankshaft down the length of the car), like a RWD car, instead of transverse, like an FWD car. I also prefer a rear bias to the torque transfer (think drift!). This is the main reason I'll buy a CTS-V instead of a "pocket rocket" like an Evo VIII or WRX STi.