1999 Volvo S70 Awd Sedan 4-door 2.4l - 1 Owner Car -volvo Maintained on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Volvo XC40 and C40 electrics get new motors, more horsepower, longer range

Late last year came reports of improved versions of the Volvo XC40 Recharge and C40 Recharge for Europe. Configurators over the Atlantic showed there wouldn't just be new rear-wheel-drive models, but more battery, more range, and faster charging. The Swedes have finally published the official list of updates, the tweaks even better than the reportage and websites showed. First, the rumors are true, Volvo is back in the rear-driver game after 25 years on the sidelines. The automaker took the previous e-motors off the front axle, putting its in-house-developed, more powerful, and more efficient e-motor on the rear axle. This first use of the new e-motors bumps output from 228 horsepower to 235 horsepower in the RWD trims when combined with the 60-kWh standard range battery. That, plus cooling improvements for the pack, means the XC40 Recharge's range jumps from 425 kilometers on the WLTP cycle to 460 km (285 miles), the C40 Recharge's range going from 438 km to 476 km (296 miles). Plugged into a charger capable of at least 130 kW, refilling from 10% to 80% takes about 34 minutes.  We specified "standard range battery" because another new treat is a second RWD trim: Volvo will plug its 82-kWh battery into the powertrain for those willing to pay. But wait, there's more: The big pack powers an even juicier e-motor making 248 hp. The added gumption boosts range in the XC40 Recharge to 515 km (320 miles), in the C40 Recharge to 533 km (331 miles). And again, improved cooling permits uprated charging speed of 200 kW, cutting the run from 10% to 80% SOC to approximately 28 minutes. Dual-motor variants make the change to asymmetric output as revealed before, giving up two 201-hp e-motors for a new 156-hp motor on the front axle and that in-house 248 hp motor on the rear. In conjunction with better cooling, the XC40 Recharge Twin Motor climbs to 500 km (311 miles) of range on a charge, a 62-km hike, the C40 Recharge Twin Motor to 507 km (315 miles), a 56-km enhancement.  Marginal gains also come from a set of more aerodynamic 19-inch wheels.  The updated twin-motor siblings are expected to enter production in May, the single-motor versions in the fall. We only get the Twin Motor models here. If our variants reflected the same range extensions as in Europe, the 14% rise for the XC40 Recharge would give our car a 255-mile range, the C40 a 12% boost to 254 miles of range.

2019 BMW X7 vs luxury SUV rivals: Comparing specs and photos

Today we get our first-ever look at the first-ever 2019 BMW X7 crossover. We've actually already had our first-ever drive in an X7 Prototype. And so, we thought it appropriate to follow that up today with the first-ever X7 comparison of specs between BMW's first-ever three-row crossover with legitimate room for seven and its many high-dollar competitors. On paper, the 2019 X7 definitely seems to most closely align with the Mercedes-Benz GLS-Class. Their similar dimensions, interior space, engine choices and price would certainly imply where BMW placed the target when developing X7. We used those same elements to determine three-row vehicles likely to be cross-shopped or that should be cross-shopped. These include the Audi Q7, Land Rover Discovery, Volvo XC90 and Lincoln Navigator. Yes, the latter is a truck-based SUV as opposed to a crossover, but tell that to all the people lining out the door at the local Lincoln emporium. They do not care, and neither shall we. We also included the 2019 BMW X5, which was completely redesigned for this year and therefore not the first-ever. That makes it less appealing? Either way, lining the new X5 up with the SUV that leapfrogs it atop BMW's SUV hierarchy should provide a good idea of just how much more you get by going up a model number. Engines and model lineup Again, the X7 aligns closest with the GLS, offering a base six-cylinder in its xDrive40i model and an upgrade turbo V8 in the xDrive50i. The Mercedes engines have greater output, but the GLS still accelerates slower than the BMW. As the 2019 X5 offers the exact same engines, we would also expect the X7's fuel economy to be superior to the GLS once its estimates are announced. It should be noted, though, that the GLS offers a high-powered AMG model whereas we anticipate the X7 to offer a plug-in hybrid model comparable to the X5 upcoming xDrive45e model. The other luxury SUVs diverge in their engine choices and model lineup. The Audi Q7 offers a base turbocharged four-cylinder, as does the Volvo XC90 in its T5 model, which we left out of the above chart entirely for space reasons. That the Q7 3.0 TFSI supercharged V6 gets the same fuel economy estimates as the four-cylinder is proof positive that engine is purely around for its lower base price.

IIHS updates overlap test: 2 SUVs get good marks, 9 fare poorly

Vehicles in crashes keep occupants safe by deforming around the cabin in a way that maintains cabin integrity. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's moderate overlap test, introduced in 1995, has been a huge contributor to improved safety for front-row passengers in a crash. IIHS President David Harkey said, "Thanks to automakers’ improvements, drivers in most vehicles are nearly 50% less likely to be killed in a frontal crash today than they were 25 years ago." In the 'unintentional side effects' column, crash safety has gotten worse for passengers in the back seats. When carmakers reengineered the front crash structure to protect the driver, more crash forces got distributed throughout the rear. IIHS research claims rear passengers have a 46% greater risk of fatal injury than front-row passengers, but back-seaters haven't benefited from the same upgrades in safety as the front row. The IIHS updated its moderate overlap test to address the issue, putting 15 vehicles through the new regime. Two earned good ratings — the 2023 Ford Escape and the 2021-2023 Volvo XC40 — one was acceptable, three were marginal and nine were rated poor. Every one of the crossovers sampled got good marks for all passengers in the original test. That test sees 40% of vehicle's width on the driver's side impacting an aluminum honeycomb barrier at 40 miles per hour. The updated test puts a crash dummy representing small woman or 12-year-old child in the seat behind the driver, the dummy's sensors and grease paint measuring the effectiveness of the restraints and the forces a human body would need to endure. To achieve a good rating, the "measurements must not exceed limits indicating excessive risk of injury to the head, neck, chest, abdomen or thigh." An institute engineer said, "In real-world crashes, chest injuries are the most common serious rear-seat injuries for adults." The sensors and video evidence showed back seat dummies in the Escape and XC40 endured minimal risk of injuries from excessive crash forces, from submarining under the seat belt, or from unwanted interaction with the side curtain airbag.   The Toyota RAV4 scored acceptable. The second-row dummy also endured minimal risk of injury to the chest and lower extremities. However, the lap belt slipped upward in a way that could increase abdominal injuries, and after the dummy's head dipped during crash impact, the head came back up between the rear curtain airbag and rear window.