2010 Volvo Xc60 T6 Awd Automatic, Leather, Sunroof on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford, Volvo join Redwood in EV battery recycling push in California

Ford and Volvo will join battery recycling startup Redwood Materials in developing processes, starting in California, to collect end-of-life batteries from electric and hybrid vehicles and recover the materials for use in new batteries, the companies said Thursday. Redwood Materials, co-founded by former Tesla executive JB Straubel, formed an earlier partnership last fall with Ford to develop a “closed loop” or circular supply chain for electric vehicle (EV) batteries, from raw materials to recycling. On Thursday, Redwood Materials said it would work directly with dealers and dismantlers in California to identify and recover end-of-life battery packs. The materials in those packs will be recovered and recycled at Redwood Materials facilities in northern Nevada. U.S. automakers Ford and General Motors Co (GM) have said the battery recycling effort is crucial in efforts to develop a domestic supply chain to meet increasing EV demand. GM and battery partner LG Energy Solution last year announced a partnership with startup Li-Cycle to recycle battery scrap material from Ultium Cells, the GM-LG joint venture that is building battery plants in Ohio, Tennessee and Michigan. Redwood Materials has similar partnerships with battery makers Panasonic in Nevada and Envision AESC in Tennessee, as well as with Amazon. Ford and Amazon are among the investors in Redwood Materials. Reporting by Paul Lienert in Detroit; Editing by Mark Potter Green Ford Volvo Green Automakers Electric

2024 Volvo C40 and XC40 Recharge First Drive Review: Back to the RWD future

The 2024 Volvo XC40 Recharge and C40 EVs will be available with rear-wheel drive, replacing the front-wheel-drive version that has been the fraternal pairing’s single-motor base model. This is obviously newsworthy — why else would I be writing about it? But does it actually mean anything? After driving both of these vehicles around the lakes, seaside, perfectly-maintained highways, and cobblestoned urban streets proximate to the brandÂ’s headquarters in Gothenburg, Sweden, I can say that the answer is, not really. But thatÂ’s not really VolvoÂ’s fault. The last time Volvo sold a rear-wheel-drive vehicle in the United States was 1998 when the cushy, brick-like 960 was retired (officially S90 and V90 in their final year). Everything thereafter was front-wheel drive or at least on a front-drive-based platform, in no small part due to the additional all-weather traction and stability afforded by the additional weight of an internal combustion engine and transaxle over the drive wheels. In short, it was safer, and even as Volvo moved away from decades of arcane, rectilinear design, safety remained its raison dÂ’etre.   That hasnÂ’t changed, but according to Volvo, EVs have fundamentally changed vehicle dynamics, centers of gravity, and weight distribution to refute the front-drive argument. A Volvo spokesperson told me that this new one-motor layout in the XC/C40, driving the rear wheels, with contemporary advanced driver assistance systems, is better in inclement weather than a gas-engine/FWD combo. That explains why the switch to a standard rear-drive layout doesnÂ’t run afoul of VolvoÂ’s established ethos, but why make the switch in the first place? Whether it was the plan all along, or just an advancement of next-generation technology to prolong and extend the relevance of these vehicles, is not something Volvo would comment on. In any event, many of the base EVs that are in or near the XC/C40Â’s competitive set — the VW ID.4, the Kia EV6, the Hyundai Ioniq 5 — feature rear-wheel drive in their single-motor setup. It is notable that all of those cars were developed from the ground up as EVs and could be optimized for the aforementioned dynamics. The XC40 and C40 were built on a platform capable of accommodating gas-only, plug-in hybrid and full-electric powertrains.

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.