2011 Volvo C30 T5 Damaged Salvage Crashed Wrecked Fixer Repairable Wont Last! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Embrace one-pedal driving in EVs and PHEVs

I just came back from a trip out to California, where I was able to drive the new 2022 Volvo XC60 Recharge in its new extended-range form (you’ll find that review on Autoblog tomorrow). One of the newly-added headline features for this plug-in hybrid SUV is true one-pedal driving. This is one-pedal driving in a PHEV, not a full battery electric vehicle, and as of now, one-pedal driving in PHEVs is exceedingly rare. Other plug-ins may offer levels of braking regeneration, but one-pedal driving is typically a feature reserved for full EVs. Adding the feature to the Volvo is a huge boost to the driving experience for me, and I sincerely hope we see it in even more PHEVs soon. In case youÂ’re new to the one-pedal driving game, hereÂ’s a quick explainer. ItÂ’s called “one-pedal” because most of the time, youÂ’re only using one pedal to accelerate and decelerate. Press in to accelerate; let off evenly and gently to decelerate via regenerative braking. The trick at the end is in slowing down the final few mph and bringing the car to a stop smoothly, which typically requires some practice and time spent figuring out how best to modulate the throttle pedal. Once youÂ’re stopped in a car with one-pedal driving, it should hold itself in place when you have your foot off the throttle, allowing you to relax your legs at lights. Applying pressure to the brake pedal would be unnecessary so long as traffic doesnÂ’t necessitate quicker deceleration than what the car is capable of via letting off on the throttle. The point, of all of the above, is that one-pedal driving in an EV or PHEV simply makes driving easier. Once you learn the car, not having to swap back and forth between the throttle and brake pedals makes stop-and-go traffic (or any kind of driving) a lot more relaxing to manage. The point of this story is to call out the lack of this feature in some EVs and nearly all PHEVs. Some of you may have already hit the comments to voice your disdain for one-pedal driving, but do note, while IÂ’m advocating for the feature to be present in all EVs, IÂ’m not advocating for it to be a required always-on feature. In fact, you should be able to turn it off and on at your whimsy. Many car manufacturers already offer one-pedal driving in their EVs, but companies like VW, Audi, Porsche and to a certain extent, Mercedes, do not. This is slightly irritating, mostly because those companies make some of the most desirable EVs on the market today.

Volvo V90 Cross Country vs V60 Cross Country Luggage Test | Comparing cargo areas

While the Audi A6 Allroad and Mercedes E 450 All-Terrain have disappointed us with their poseur levels of capability and questionable value, that is not the case with the other midsize luxury off-roadish wagon: the 2021 Volvo V90 Cross Country. It has genuinely useful extra ground clearance and a lower, more sensible price. But what about that other element of wagon goodness, utility?  Although I have not luggage-tested the Allroad or All-Terrain, Road Test Editor Zac Palmer effectively did so using different luggage and different A6/E-Class wagon variants. Our results are therefore only vaguely comparable. My guess is the Mercedes would win the day and the V90 would top the Audi, but again, that's just a guess. I have, however, luggage-tested Volvo's smaller off-roadish wagon, the V60 Cross Country. Surprisingly, the difference between Cross Countries isn't that great.  According to Volvo's wonderfully detailed cargo specifications that indicate what exactly they measured (hint hint, every other car company), the V90 Cross Country (above left) has 25.5 cubic-feet of space behind the back seat from floor to roof. The V60 Cross Country (right) has 23.2 cubic feet. That's not much of a difference.  However, Volvo also provides the cargo area length from the seat base to the liftgate. That's a bigger difference on paper: 45.4 inches for the V90 and 40.7 inches for the V60. That would play out once I brought the luggage into the equation.  Before we get to the bags, though, take one more look at the above comparison photo. Check out the different D pillars and specifically how much more upright the V60's are. That's my guess as to why the V90 cargo area manages to be so much longer, yet has only a minor volume difference.  Same bags, same formation, different Volvo wagons. You clearly see here that there's more length available in the V90. Five inches more? I don't know about that, but you nevertheless DO get more space.  As with every luggage test I do, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D).

Junkyard Gem: 1997 Volvo V90

Volvo's "Brick Era" of squared-off rear-wheel-drive machines lasted from the debut of the 144 in 1966 all the way through the 900 Series cars of the 1990s, with the wildly successful 240 being the most iconic of the breed on our shores. The final chapter of the Swedish Brick saga came in the 1997 and 1998 model years, when the 960 sedan and wagon were rebadged as the S90 and V90, respectively. Here's one of those cars, a refrigerator-colored (and refrigerator-shaped) V90 wagon that got forcibly retired after a crash in Northern California. Volvo revived the V90 name in 2016, and you can buy a new V90 right now if you so choose. Today's Junkyard Gem, however, is the culmination of four decades of improvement to the original 140 design (itself based on much of the Amazon's chassis features and sharing plenty of components with the 1940s-era PV Series cars), while the current V90 comes straight out of the 21st century. I've been going out of my way to document just about every discarded 140 and 240 wagon I find, with some 740s and 940s mixed in. Many Volvo longroof owners still maintain a fanatical devotion to the rear-wheel-drive bricks, and I've found some of these cars in junkyards with impressively high final odometer readings. The fuel-efficiency and interior-space limitations of the old-timey brick design kept 960 sales lower than those of their predecessors, though, and I haven't met any 960 owners who share the level of devotion that 145 and 245 owners lavish on their cars. This car just squeaked past 150,000 miles during its 24 years on the road. The body and interior look to have been in very nice condition, showing that meticulous owners took good care of this car throughout its life, but then it got T-boned on the right side. This sort of damage isn't worth fixing on a quarter-century-old European wagon, and so here it sits. This engine compartment looks very similar to that of the old 240, though this modern 3.0-liter, DOHC straight-six and its 181 horses runs counter to the super-sensible spirit of most of those 1970s Goteborg bricks. The 960 was far more plush than its ancestors, and priced accordingly. In 1997, this car's list price started at $35,850 (about $60,660 in 2021 dollars). By comparison, a new 1975 245 wagon had an MSRP of $5,795 (about $29,940 today).