2007 Volvo Xc90 V8 Sport Utility 4-door 4.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lotus could be sold to Chinese automaker Geely

Two things are constant throughout the history of Lotus Cars: amazing vehicles, and financial struggles. Frequent changes in both ownership and leadership have left the company's future up in the air. And while the new management has improved quality and set a new product plan in place, its seems that Lotus could have a new parent company soon. Despite comments to the contrary, Chinese automaker Geely is rumored to be interested in acquiring Lotus Cars. The British automaker has been owned by Proton since 1996, but after Proton was sold to DRB-Hicom in 2012 investors suggested selling off Lotus. The Star Online reports that PSA in France is rumored to be looking at purchasing Proton cars from DRB-Hicom. In turn, Geely, the parent company of Volvo, is interested in purchasing Lotus from Proton. The report states that Geely has no interest in mass-market vehicles from Proton, while crossover-focus PSA, owner of Peugeot and Citroen, has no interest in a sports car manufacturer like Lotus. China has been encouraging its native automakers to purchase and acquire technology it lacks. Buying Lotus looks like it would benefit both companies. Lotus needs an influx of cash while Geely, looking to compete further on the global stage, would gain a great deal of technical and engineering knowledge from Lotus. Geely's stewardship of Volvo has been mostly hands-off, while giving the Swedish company enough money to invest in new platforms and technologies. If the same were to happen to Lotus, Colin Chapman's company could have its best years ahead of it. Related Video: News Source: The Star Online via Car BuzzImage Credit: Getty Rumormill Lotus Volvo Citroen Peugeot Lightweight Vehicles Performance Supercars Geely

Hyundai Sonata PHEV may be a game (and mind) changer

If you really, really want to consume volts instead of fuel on your way to work, school or shopping, you currently have just three options: pure EV, hydrogen fuel cell, or plug-in hybrid EV. Much as we love them, we all know the disadvantages of BEVs: high prices due to high battery cost (even though subsidized by their makers), limited range and long recharges. Yes, I know: six-figure (giant-battery) Teslas can deliver a couple hundred miles and Supercharge to ~80 percent in 10 minutes. But few of us can afford one of those, Tesla's high-voltage chargers are hardly as plentiful as gas stations, and even 10 minutes is a meaningful chunk out of a busy day. Also, good luck finding a Tesla dealership to fix whatever goes wrong (other than downloadable software updates) when it inevitably does. There still aren't any. Even more expensive, still rare as honest politicians, and much more challenging to refuel are FCEVs. You can lease one from Honda or Hyundai, and maybe soon Toyota, provided you live in Southern California and have ample disposable income. But you'd best limit your driving to within 100 miles or so of the small (but growing) number of hydrogen fueling stations in that state if you don't want to complete your trip on the back of a flatbed. That leaves PHEVs as the only reasonably affordable, practical choice. Yes, you can operate a conventional parallel hybrid in EV mode...for a mile or so at creep-along speeds. But if your mission is getting to work, school or the mall (and maybe back) most days without burning any fuel – while basking in the security of having a range-extender in reserve when you need it – your choices are extended-range EVs. That means the Chevrolet Volt, Cadillac ELR or a BMW i3 with the optional range-extender engine, and plug-in parallel hybrids. Regular readers know that, except for their high prices, I'm partial to EREVs. They are series hybrids whose small, fuel-efficient engines don't even start (except in certain rare, extreme conditions) until their batteries are spent. That means you can drive 30-40 (Volt, ELR) or 70-80 miles (i3) without consuming a drop of fuel. And until now, I've been fairly skeptical of plug-in versions of conventional parallel hybrids. Why?

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.