2002 Volvo V70 X/c Wagon 4-door 2.4l Needs Work Mechanics Special on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Volvo P1800-based gasser is UK's entry in the Hot Wheels Legends Tour

Hot Wheels has spent the past few months touring the United States in search of the next custom car it will add to its catalog of 1/64-scale diecast models. It's not stopping there: It also headed to the United Kingdom to add a bit of international flair to the competition, and it selected a Volvo P1800 that has been heavily modified into a gasser as the winner that will move on to the semifinal round. Owner Lee Johnstone explained he built his P1800 — which he nicknamed "Ain't no Saint" — starting with a bare shell that had been stripped and that was too far gone to properly restore. Volvo's 1960s four-cylinder engines are famously tunable, but Johnstone looked across the pond for an engine suitable to make his dream car a reality. He chose a 454-cubic-inch V8 sourced from the Chevrolet parts bin and supercharged to develop about 600 horsepower. Ain't no Saint reportedly runs a 10.01-second quarter mile at 133 mph. Johnstone regularly races the P1800 with his three daughters. He consequently named his team Johnstone & Daughters (JD) Racing. "This is a beautiful example of a gasser — a drag racer with street car form. Often with dragsters, the chassis is so important that the body gets overlooked, but this example is fabulous with great attention to detail," explained former Jaguar design director Ian Callum, who was one of the judges that selected the P1800 as the United Kingdom's finalist. "It completely hits the Hot Wheels brief." Hot Wheels has already released several gassers, including one based on a 1955 Chevrolet Bel Air. Time will tell if Johnstone's P1800 will become the next addition to the series. Its next stop is the global semifinal round scheduled for November 4, 2021, where it will compete against some of the previous winners. There are two semifinal rounds taking place before the grand finale planned for November 13.

Volvo XC40 Recharge Luggage Test: How much fits in the cargo area?

Note: This post has been updated because, well, I goofed a bit. Turns out it can probably hold just a wee bit more than I originally thought. Oh, and I added a bit about the frunk. The Volvo XC40 Recharge is the all-electric version of Volvo's subcompact SUV that is also available in gas-only versions. According to the uniquely extensive cargo dimensions Volvo shares for its vehicles, every XC40 regardless of power source has the same 20.4 cubic-feet of cargo space as measured from the floor to the headliner with the front seat "limited by vertical plane tangential to the rear side of the second seatback." Like I said, uniquely extensive. There is 16 cubic-feet when measured to the top of the seatback, which is probably more applicable to my luggage tests, but other car companies don't provide those measurements, and if they do, they don't actually indicate as such — and make it seem like their SUVs are smaller and less competitive than they actually are.  One such example is Mercedes-Benz and the GLB/EQB, which is one of the XC40's chief competitors. Its specs say it has 24.0 cubic-feet of cargo space (almost certainly the top-of-the-seatback measurement), but it definitely has more than that since it can hold roughly the same amount of stuff inside its boxy cargo area as a Subaru Outback. In other words, the XC40 is very unlikely to be getting best-in-segment status here. But who knows, let's see! This is a pretty hatchbacky space, so still not looking good for the XC40 toppling the GLB/EQB. It does look pretty similar to the Q4 E-Tron, so let's bring that into the equation.  As you can see, the XC40 has a large, hatchback-style cargo cover. That means I'll have to test with and without that cover.  As with every Luggage Test, 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). So yeah, I neglected to take a shot of the bags with the cargo cover attached. Sorry. Nevertheless, as you can kinda see here, I could fit the four biggest bags with the cargo cover being propped up by them. This would be worse than the Q4 E-Tron, which could fit all but the fancy bag.