2005 Volvo Xc90 Awd Navi 7~pass Htd Sts Moonroof Woodgrain on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Cars with the worst resale value in 2022

Car values are all over the map right now. Used vehicles that were worth a small fortune earlier this year are now coming back to Earth, but the new vehicle supply remains tight. Prices are still elevated overall, but some models have seen more severe price drops. Depreciation strikes almost every model, supply constraint or not, though a few vehicles are leading the way. New research from analytics iSeeCars found that a handful of cars depreciated more than 50 percent over five years, with the BMW 7 Series dropping 56.9 percent and an average price cut of $61,923 over that time. The vehicles with the highest depreciation — or worst resale value — over five years: BMW 7 Series: -56.9% Maserati Ghibli: -56.3% Jaguar XF: -54% Infiniti QX80: -52.6% Cadillac Escalade ESV: 52.3% Mercedes-Benz S-Class: 51.9% Lincoln Navigator: -51.9% Audi A6: -51.5% Volvo S90: -51.4% Ford Expedition: -50.7% iSeeCarsÂ’ research showed that midsize trucks, sports cars, and fuel-efficient vehicles were slowest to depreciate over five years, while itÂ’s clear that luxury brands tend to lose value much faster. As iSeeCarsÂ’ Executive Analyst Karl Brauer explained, used buyers donÂ’t value high-end vehiclesÂ’ features as much as the first owners, so resale values tend to be softer. The tech and options that made the cars so expensive and appealing new donÂ’t add the same value on the used market. Read more: Cars with the best resale value Interestingly, electric vehicles also depreciated quite heavily, though they were just short of the abysmal numbers in luxury segments. The Nissan Leaf depreciated most among EVs, dropping by 49.1 percent. The average EV depreciation is 44.2 percent, with the Tesla Model S and Model X sliding in right under the bar at 43.7 and 38.8 percent, respectively. As iSeeCars notes, itÂ’s important to be vigilant when car shopping and not let your emotions win over reason. Shiny new luxury cars look great in the showroom, but you could end up taking a bath when you try selling them a few years later on. Related video: Audi BMW Cadillac Ford Infiniti Jaguar Lincoln Maserati Mercedes-Benz Volvo Car Buying Used Car Buying Ownership Resale Value depreciation

Volvo reapplies to trademark the term C60

Perusing the database at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, CarBuzz happened on a trademark application Volvo cars filed for the term C60. Submitted earlier this month, on December 14, the mark would cover "Vehicles and Products for locomotion by land, air or water." Sounds like a car to us. Knowing the way trademarks go — which means knowing we might never see them on a production vehicle — this could be Volvo hedging a very long bet. The easiest guess as to where C60 might fit in the lineup is as the crossover coupe version of the XC60 Recharge, following the mold of the XC40 Recharge and C40 Recharge (pictured). With the current, second-gen XC60 having arrived for the 2018 model year, we would think a C60 version waits until a heavy facelift or new generation to join the party, assuming it ever happens. What's not hypothetical is Volvo's long-term involvement with the C60 alphanumeric. Going deeper into the USPTO files, seems Volvo first applied to trademark C60 on September 5, 2001, the same day the automaker also applied to lock down C40. Volvo traded paperwork with the government agency until 2009, when the carmaker abandoned both C40 and C60 in March of that year. Oddly, two months before, in January 2009, Volvo had reapplied to trademark C40 and C60, then abandoned both again seven years later, in July 2016. Again, oddly, nine months before the second abandonment, Volvo had reapplied yet again to trademark both C40 and C60. That was in November 2015. The USPTO granted Volvo the rights to the mark at the end of 2016, and it remains valid. So Volvo's latest submission is the continuance of the mark it's owned for six years and been toying with for 21. Volvo Cars owns the XC40 and XC40 Recharge trademarks, as well as C40, but it doesn't own a C40 Recharge trademark, the latter being the name of the production model. It took 20 years from Volvo's first idea of the C40 for us to get a production version. We don't know what a potential C60 will be, but it shouldn't be too far away. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.