2012 Volvo C70 Hardtop Convertible Navigation Low Miles Black on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Car subscription services: A slow, expensive start — but the potential is huge

Americans are used to paying for subscriptions — to magazines and cable television, for instance — but experience shows they'll cancel when the price of admission gets too high, or there are more tempting alternatives. Cord cutters ditched nearly 1.5 million pay-TV subscriptions in 2017, according to a survey by Leichtman Research Group. Cable TV started out cheap with basic offerings, and then got expensive. The auto industry's subscription offerings are new, but they're starting out costly, and not price-competitive with traditional leasing. The upside is that they take the hassle out of car ownership for busy people by letting the service take care of maintenance, insurance, licensing and taxes. And they give consumers choice, often allowing relatively painless switches between different cars in the automakers' lineup. Subscription services also point the way toward an ownership-free auto experience, and offer an easy transition to a potential world where ride- and car-sharing will be dominant. Subscriptions are here to stay, but consumers may take a while to "get" them. Lincoln's subscription service for lightly used 2015 to 2017 models, offered through the Ford-owned Canvas beginning this year, got off to a slow start. Many early subscribers canceled. Last month, Cadillac announced it would " temporarily pause" its $1,800-per-month Book subscription service for "adjustments" as of December 1. According to the Wall Street Journal, "Snags with the back-end technology used to support the service made some customer-service functions tedious and time-consuming, adding costs for the company." The challenge for automakers is to come up with a strategy that offers consumers a compelling, affordable option to regular ownership, and one that can also make a profit. I think they'll find that sweet spot, but they're not there yet. Jack Nerad, former executive editorial director at Kelley Blue Book and author of " The Complete Idiot's Guide to Buying or Leasing a Car," points out that "A lot of people expected that subscriptions would be very valuable for people who wanted inexpensive transportation, but the reality is quite the opposite. Subscriptions are offering more choices for the wealthy.

Lotus' new position: Much improved, if Volvo's experience is a guide

Out today is the news that Geely Holding will acquire controlling interest in British sports car maker Lotus Cars. While some 20 years ago the Chinese acquisition of a British automaker might have inspired grumbling from aggrieved Brits (and the handful of Lotus enthusiasts), the world has moved on. And so – thankfully – can Lotus. To suggest Lotus' business history has been checkered is to broaden the definition of "checkered." With its beginnings in the early '50s as a maker of component cars for competition, Lotus founder Colin Chapman – in a manner not unlike his postwar contemporary, Enzo Ferrari – was always hustling, living a hand-to-mouth existence in the production of road cars to support a racing program. Regrettably, Chapman never found a Fiat, as Ferrari did toward the end of the 1960s. Lotus had Ford in its corner for racing and as a resource for powertrains, and later benefited from the corporate support of both GM and Toyota for relatively short periods. Lotus Cars, however, never enjoyed the corporate buy-in that would have allowed Chapman to race and let someone else build the cars. Regardless of what Consumer Reports or Kelley Blue Book might have thought (if they had ...) about those early Lotus cars, a great many are now regarded as classics. My first knowledge of a production Lotus was when Tom McCahill, the 'dean' of automotive journalists in the US, tested an early Elan for Mechanix Illustrated. While we're still not sure, some 50 years later, how McCahill's XXL frame fit into the tiny roadster, he had nothing but praise for the Elan's athletic chassis and now-timeless design. In today's Lotus portfolio, the Elise and Exige continue that light, athletic tradition, while the larger Evora seems to strike wide – literally and figuratively – of the "less is more" ideal. With the Toyota-powered Evora, more is more. But in an eco-sensitive era demanding more of the original Chapman mantra – add lightness – there's little reason that Lotus can't regain relevance if given the financial resources. Geely's acquisition of Volvo, the fruits of which appear regularly not only in the news but on the streets, suggests the Chinese investment will provide strategic vision (along with money) while allowing Lotus talent to do what it does best: Create an exciting product. And while at various periods in its history the product has been worthy, Lotus in the US has been ill-served by a flailing dealer network.

Volvo EX30 endures a side impact crash test with an EX90

Before Volvo launched the EX90, the Swedish automaker — already known as a pioneer in safety — repeatedly stressed how much work it had done to raise the bar for safety in its new electric SUV. Almost every new release included lines like, "The standard safety in the Volvo EX90 is also higher than any Volvo car before it," and "The Volvo EX90 has an invisible shield of safety enabled by our latest sensing technology, inside and outside." But these focused on the car's electronic suite of sensors and cameras watching everything from the road ahead and behind to the driver's state of fatigue. The company did the same during the launch of the EX30, writing that its new compact electric vehicle protects all occupants "through state-of-the-art restraint technology, as well as top-notch structural design that fulfills our ambitious in-house safety requirements — designed to prepare our cars for various real-world scenarios." To prove a point about the safety of the EX30, Volvo's in-house crash-test lab performed a side impact test, running its largest car, the EX90, into the side of its smallest, the EX30.  We don't get to see any interior view of the EX30 during the test or afterward. In an Automotive News Europe video about the crash and the results, Lotta Jakobsson from the Volvo Cars Safety Center says the data showed that the two "small-sized females" sitting on the struck side "were well protected" in the crash, with minimal infliction of injury. The physical design of both cars helps make this happen. The EX30 was designed to disperse all of its forces around the structure of the car for "balanced interaction" during an event. That's pretty standard stuff. On the EX90, a piece of the lower front structure juts ahead of the vehicle's primary safety structure. As ANE Managing Editor Doug Bolduc puts it, that lower structure is "specifically designed to help it absorb a lot of the power of a crash with a smaller vehicle ... that is to not only provide protection to the passengers of the EX90 but also to provide protection to the passengers of the EX30." The result is "less damage than you might have expected from the larger car onto the smaller car."  Check out the vid and for Jakobsson's take on how current trends in structural, passive, and active safety won't rid the world of crashes, but they are reducing injuries while at the same time making crashes less common.