2007 Volvo Xc90 3.2 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1984 Volvo 760 Turbo

When it came time for Volvo to replace the aging 200 Series (which debuted in 1974 but looked nearly identical to the mid-1960s-design 140 it was based on), the result was the 700 Series. This car first hit Volvo showrooms in 1982, and the initial models were all upscale 760 sedans with the same PRV V6 engine that powered the DeLorean DMC-12. The cheaper four-cylinder 740 appeared in North America for the 1984 model year, which didn't stop Volvo from selling a 760 with a turbocharged four-banger in the same showrooms. That's what we've got for today's Junkyard Gem, a first-model year Volvo 760 Turbo in a Colorado self-service yard. As it turned out, the 740/760/780 not only didn't replace the 240/260, it didn't even outlast it. 240 sales continued all the way through 1993, while the 760/780 and 740 got the axe in 1990 and 1992, respectively (to be fair, the later 900 Series was based on the 700 Series and was available new here until the very last 1998 S90s and V90s were sold). During the 1984 model year, American Volvo shoppers could choose between a new 240 Turbo (in two-door, four-door, and wagon forms) or the 760 sedan with their choice of oil- or gasoline-burning turbocharged engines. Yes, the 1980s truly were The Turbo Decade. For 1985, a turbocharged version of the 740 sedan was added to the lineup, though that was also the final year here for the 240 Turbo. This engine is a 2.3-liter "red block" four-cylinder, rated at 160 horsepower when new. That was two fewer horsepower than the more angrily boosted 2.2 in the 240 Turbo that year. The 740/760 scaled in at just a few more pounds than the 240, though it seemed bigger at a glance. Supposedly you could get a U.S.-market 760 Turbo with a four-speed manual transmission, but every example I've ever seen had the four-speed automatic. This one racked up just a bit over 200,000 miles during its life. Not bad, though I've found a 740 Turbo wagon that got close to 500,000 miles before ending up in the junkyard. The interior looks decent enough for its age, though I suspect these cloth seats replaced the original leather ones after the cowhide fell apart beneath the High Plains sun. It's hard to get more 1980s than a graphic equalizer/sound effector.  This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Zero to 55 in 7 seconds flat!

Volvo Polestar reveals new V8 Supercars engine

Volvo may be better known for turbo fives and inline fours, but in 2005 it launched the XC90 with a new eight-cylinder engine built for it by Yamaha. Fast forward to this past June when Volvo announced its intention to enter Australia's V8 Supercars series, where it would compete with the likes of Ford, Holden, Nissan and Mercedes-AMG. This is the engine with which it intends to do so.
Revealed this weekend at the Sydney 500, this competition-spec powerplant is based on the same B8444S that powered the XC90 and S80 (not to mention the Noble M600), but tuned for racing duty to be shoehorned into the new S60 touring car. The 60-degree aluminum block has been bored out from 4.4 liters to 5.0, its compression ratio boosted to 10:1, modified to run on E85 bio-ethanol and its redline increased to 7500 rpm. Volvo also promises a unique engine note from its new racers.
While Volvo and its racing partner Polestar haven't released official output numbers, regulations call for outputs between 620 and 650 horsepower - in any event, a whole lot more than the 311 hp it produces in stock form. (Noble managed to squeeze that much out of the same block, but that required twin turbochargers while this unit remains naturally aspirated.) Scope out the details in the press release below and the photos from the reveal in the gallery above.

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.