1979 Volvo 242 Only 54,000 Original Miles! Clean! Always Garaged! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Volvo sets high carbon price to assess sustainability of new projects

GLASGOW — Swedish automaker Volvo said on Wednesday it had set a price on carbon emissions from its operations of 1,000 Swedish crowns ($116.30) a tonne, part of attempts to ensure all future projects are sustainable. Announcing the move at global climate talks in Scotland as it joined an imitative to phase out fossil fuel cars and vans, the company said it had deliberately set a relatively high price to "future proof" itself. Negotiators at the COP26 talks are trying to finish rules to create an international carbon market. Put simply, it would allow some countries to pay others to cut emissions — with the aim of pushing much-needed cash into green projects around the world. Volvo said it was the first automaker to set such a price across its whole operations, as part of its aim to be a climate neutral company by 2040. The price is double the current cost of carbon in the European Union's carbon trading scheme. Going forward, every new car project would go through a "sustainability sense-check", with a carbon price assigned throughout the life of the vehicle, to ensure it would be profitable even under a much higher government-set price. “A global and fair price on CO2 is critical for the world to meet its climate ambitions, and we all need to do more,” Bjorn Annwall, chief financial officer, said in a statement. “We strongly believe progressive companies should take the lead by setting an internal carbon price. By evaluating future cars on their CO2-adjusted profitability, we expect to accelerate actions that will help us identify and reduce carbon emissions already today.” Also on Wednesday, Volvo signed up to the Glasgow Declaration on Zero Emission Cars and Vans, along with peers including Ford and General Motors, aiming to end production of internal combustion engines by 2040. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.