logo
Automakers Still Need to Crash Test Cars Despite Advances in AI

Automakers Still Need to Crash Test Cars Despite Advances in AI

Newsweek22-07-2025
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Peering out a window at Torslanda Works, one of Volvo's largest production facilities in Sweden, reveals a side lot filled with crashed cars. The automaker still conducts physical crash tests of vehicles despite artificial intelligence making it possible to conduct repeated tests under a wide variety of factors in rapid succession.
Volvo's not alone. Almost every automaker crash tests its cars, even as sustainability has come into focus and technology has advanced. And they do it at various stages of development, ahead of the model coming to market and before the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) or Euro NCAP get their hands on it.
"While virtual crash testing has come a long way, physical crash tests remain a crucial complement. It allows us to directly evaluate how the car's hardware performs in real-world scenarios. Even as our virtual models continue to improve, physical testing is needed to validate and refine them to ensure accuracy," Lotta Jakobsson, senior technical specialist for injury prevention at Volvo Cars, told Newsweek.
At the automaker's crash testing facility in Torslanda, a Volvo spokesperson told the audience, "To evolve car safety isn't a wish. We bring that bold ambition into action, and we prove we reach there by relentless and rigorous testing in this crash lab. But as technology evolves, of course, so do we."
Volvo EX90 three-vehicle crash test.
Volvo EX90 three-vehicle crash test.
Volvo Cars
Today, Volvo utilizes data from a car's sensors in real time and computer simulations that include human body models (crash test dummies). They also reconstruct and analyze accidents that occur with their models, bringing some of them back to Volvo's labs to study in detail the effects of physics on sheet metal, electronics and high-strength steel.
"When everyone else starts talking about collecting data on the road while the cars have been doing exactly that for more than 50 years, and most importantly, we have been analyzing that data and applying the knowledge and insight we gain into our product development to continue improve safety in every generation of all the cars," the spokesperson said.
Volvo conducts 200-250 crash tests annually. A new model on a new platform, the spokesperson said, is crashed around 130-140 times alone. That's physically. Virtually, Volvo conducts more than 80,0000 crashes annually on around 80 different vehicles. "We run multiple tests on the same car. You have to consider all different speeds, different sizes of occupants, and so forth. So it's quite a wide matrix," he said.
In May, Volvo initiated the first public three-car crash test in front of an assembled crowd at the company's Stars Safety Center facility in Torslanda. The three Volvo EX90 electric SUVs performed "within tolerances," a spokesperson said. While one vehicle was parked horizontally, another hit its driver's side cabin at speed. In quick succession, another EX90 was propelled toward the parked SUV, and utilizing its accident avoidance technology, it was able to come to a last-second stop, barely kissing the bumper of the vehicle ahead.
Last year, Mercedes-Benz celebrated the world's first frontal offset crash between two electric vehicles. The parameters of the crash were different than the crash Volvo conducted. It demonstrated the effects of an EQA and an EQS SUV colliding head-on with a 50 percent overlap while each traveled at 56 kilometers per hour.
"Crash test simulations are an integral part of our vehicle development. We conduct around 15,000 simulations per model series and 150 real crash tests before the development is completed," Prof. Dr. Paul Dick, director of vehicle safety at Mercedes-Benz Cars & Vans, told Newsweek.
"Even though our simulations and calculations are excellent and can predict the outcome of a crash test quite precisely, we still have to validate the results in hardware. This is not only due to legal requirements, but also enables us to ensure that complex protection systems, such as the deactivation of high-voltage components, the protection of the passenger cell and the battery housing, also provide protection in extreme situations. In doing so, we go beyond legal requirements and those of the rating agencies... Our goal is clear when we develop a new vehicle: We always aim to build the safest vehicle in its class – that is our Mercedes-Benz Engineering Excellence."
Two electric Mercedes-Benz vehicles are crash tested.
Two electric Mercedes-Benz vehicles are crash tested.
Mercedes-Benz
Nissan's Safety Advancement Lab is part of a $40 million facility that was built in 2021 to expand the company's research and development operations in North America. Each year, the lab's engineers put around 400 vehicles through physical crash tests.
"Most crash test modes are able to be conducted in a digital environment using computer-aided engineering (CAE). CAE is conducted to help develop and refine the design of systems and components before a vehicle model is physically built. Once prototype or pre-production vehicles are built then physical crash testing is conducted. There is an overall high level of correlation between the digital CAE models and physical tests but there are certain limitations to CAE that make the physical testing valuable and key to an overall assessment," Mike Bristol, Nissan's director of engineering safety, design and performance, told Newsweek.
Three Nissan SUVs, Murano, Pathfinder and Armada, earned the Top Safety Pick+ rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety this year. That is IIHS's highest mark.
Those models protect drivers and passengers in the real world with Nissan's Safety Shield 360 suite of six safety-centric advanced driver-assistance features. Those features require validation long before they reach customers.
Crash test dummies at Nissan's Safety Advancement Lab in North America.
Crash test dummies at Nissan's Safety Advancement Lab in North America.
Nissan
"Individual components and systems are designed and tested to meet individual criteria but ultimately they have to work together as a whole vehicle level assembly to perform in full vehicle crash tests. These crash tests give us the final validation to confirm our vehicles are providing protection for our customers when they need it most," Bristol said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Cadillac Vistiq vs. Volvo EX90 Tested: Three-Row Electric SUVs Compared
Cadillac Vistiq vs. Volvo EX90 Tested: Three-Row Electric SUVs Compared

Car and Driver

time6 hours ago

  • Car and Driver

Cadillac Vistiq vs. Volvo EX90 Tested: Three-Row Electric SUVs Compared

Three-row SUVs have been one of the lagging segments in the switch to EVs, but that's starting to change as new entrants join the field. The Cadillac Vistiq and the Volvo EX90 are both recent additions, entering at the pricey end of the spectrum. Vistiq starting prices range from $79,090 to $98,190 across four trim levels. The EX90 spans $81,290 to $90,640, and it too has a four-model lineup. Our representative Vistiq was the Sport, which starts just $500 above the base Luxury trim and came in at $82,215 with options. Our EX90 was the Twin Motor Performance Ultra with an as-tested price of $94,640. This content is imported from Third party. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site. view exterior photos Marc Urbano | Car and Driver Exterior and Interior Neither EV's exterior styling breaks significant new ground for its maker. Instead, they fit right in with the familial look. Unless you're looking at the EX90 from the front, where you find a body-colored fascia where the grille typically would be, the vehicle is a virtual doppelgänger for the gas-powered XC90, which has seen only minor styling tweaks in its decade on the market. The Vistiq doesn't have a gas-engine counterpart in the Cadillac lineup, but it has a lot of Escalade vibes—it's only if you see it next to Cadillac's range topper (whether in standard or battery-electric IQ form) that you realize the 'Slade is a full order of magnitude larger. view interior Photos Andi Hedrick | Car and Driver view interior Photos Andi Hedrick | Car and Driver These two SUVs may be priced similarly, but the serving sizes are not quite the same. Both fall broadly into the mid-size realm, but Cadillac dishes out a three-row with a bigger, American-size footprint, while Volvo hews to a more Euro scale. The Caddy sits astride a 4.3-inch-longer wheelbase and stretches 7.3 inches longer overall. It's also more than two inches taller and wider. view exterior photos Andi Hedrick | Car and Driver Volvo leans harder than ever into the Scandinavian modern aesthetic with the EX90's interior and bolsters the design with well-considered materials that have a quality look and feel. This is a great place to sit. But then Volvo torpedoes the functionality by going with an EV-cliché ultraminimalist driver interface. Nearly all switchgear is contained within the touchscreen, including the climate controls and the positioning of the side mirrors and steering wheel. If you dare look at the screen for more than a second or two—as you must—you get a beeping admonishment to keep your eyes on the road. Fortunately, that nagging can be switched off. The Cadillac's interior is nicely styled, and while its materials look pleasant, they don't push the envelope in the way the Volvo does. The Vistiq requires lots of interaction with its touchscreen, but there's also a rotary controller, physical switches for the mirrors, and four window switches rather than just two. Both cars have a glass roof, but Cadillac provides an actual shade, so the interior doesn't bake in the sun (that's not much of a consideration in Sweden, perhaps). Overall, the Volvo interior is prettier and has more interesting materials, but the Cadillac's is roomier and easier to live with. view exterior photos Marc Urbano | Car and Driver Cadillac Vistiq Cadillac Vistiq Sport HIGHS: Blazingly quick, accomplished suspension tuning, superior value. LOWS: Longer braking distance, lower skidpad grip, slower max charging rate. VERDICT: Who needs an Escalade? We loved the Volvo's natty-looking woven-cloth seats, but the EX90's narrow front chairs were less comfortable than the Cadillac's. The EX90's second row is accommodating if not overly huge, and the seats tilt and slide for access to the third row. That third row, however, is miserly in its space for feet, knees, and legs. Second-row passengers will have to scoot their seats forward if you're going to get anyone bigger than a middle-schooler in the way back. view interior Photos Marc Urbano | Car and Driver view interior Photos Marc Urbano | Car and Driver The Vistiq's greater size is immediately apparent when you slide behind the wheel. The large front seats are more comfortable than the Volvo's narrow chairs. The Caddy feels wider and roomier both up front and in the second row, and passenger-volume measurements bear that out. Even here, however, the third row disappoints, lacking legroom, kneeroom, and footroom unless the second row slides forward halfway, although it's not as cramped as in the EX90. The bigger car also had the edge in cargo space, with the Vistiq offering 15 cubic feet behind the third-row seat to the EX90's 13, and a max of 80 cubic feet with all rear seats folded, beating the EX90's 71 cubes. view exterior photos Marc Urbano | Car and Driver Powertrain and Performance The EX90 came brandishing its higher-zoot powertrain with 510 horsepower and 671 pound-feet of torque (versus the 402-hp base unit). All Vistiq models have the same output: 615 horsepower and 649 pound-feet, available in the Velocity Max drive mode. The Caddy's higher pony count translated to quicker acceleration, with a rather absurd 3.6-second 60-mph time, a half-second ahead of the Volvo. And yet, unlike some high-horsepower EVs, the Vistiq doesn't give the impression of frenetic acceleration, and its measured accelerator response may be preferable in a vehicle that often carries a load of passengers. Volvo EX90 Twin Motor Performance Ultra HIGHS: Art-house interior, impressive athleticism, speedy charging. LOWS: All-touchscreen interface, stingy third row, slim-fit driver's seat. VERDICT: The three-row Volvo, gone electric. Both cleared the all-important 300-mile EPA range bogey, with the Cadillac adding five miles for good measure (although higher-trim Vistiqs are 300 even). And in our 75-mph real-world highway range test, both cars managed a 250-mile result. Unsurprisingly, their battery sizes are nearly the same at 107 kWh for the Swede and 102 kWh for the American. view exterior photos Andi Hedrick | Car and Driver The Cadillac has a 400-volt architecture, and its peak DC fast-charging rate is a claimed 190 kilowatts, which is slower than the Volvo's 250 kilowatts. For AC charging, Volvo provides an 11.0-kW onboard charger, while at Cadillac, buyers can upgrade the standard 11.5-kW charger to a 19.2-kW unit. Like other GM EVs, the Vistiq allows the driver to hold the left paddle for one-time max regen without switching modes. The EX90 offers auto regen, no regen, or one-pedal mode, with the driver using the touchscreen to choose. view exterior photos Andi Hedrick | Car and Driver Driving Experience Neither EV is hindered by its three-ton-plus curb weight—a distressingly typical metric—and both of these EVs acquit themselves well in the ride and handling department. Our sample Volvo boasted more sophisticated suspension hardware than the Cadillac, with dual-chamber air springs (included with the Ultra spec) and adaptive dampers. It rides well and stays nice and flat around corners, with the selectable Performance all-wheel-drive mode imparting a feeling of athleticism. Some drivers found the controls touchy, however. The Cadillac has a real sense of substance from behind the wheel. The chassis is very well tuned and features standard adaptive dampers, although air springs are reserved for the Premium Luxury and Platinum trims. Yet even without them, the Vistiq exhibits good body control and appropriate steering effort—not overly sporty but nicely buttoned down. The ride in the default Tour mode is great but somewhat less so in Sport. view interior Photos Marc Urbano | Car and Driver Cadillac Vistiq view interior Photos Andi Hedrick | Car and Driver Volvo EX90 Both EVs are quiet, but the Volvo puts a bit more cotton in your ears, as we measured 66 decibels at 70 mph versus 67 for the Cadillac. And the Winner Is . . . These two EVs were closely matched. The Cadillac eked out a victory, but in many categories, the two entrants' scoring was right on top of each other. So were the results in the all-important range test, reflecting their near-identical EPA figures. Despite being a lower-spec trim level, the Vistiq packs more features and amenities, and its lower price was also an advantage. The Cadillac also had a more usable third-row seat, quicker acceleration, and less-annoying controls. The Volvo's wins were in chassis performance (with its superior grip and shorter stopping distances), interior design and materials, quietness, and ride quality. Either SUV is an accomplished and upscale family hauler for those ready to take the EV plunge. Michael Simari | Car and Driver Want to see these vehicles' specs side-by-side? Check out the Cadillac Vistiq & Volvo EX90 on our new compare tool. Compare Cars Specifications Specifications 2026 Cadillac Vistiq Sport Vehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 4-door wagon PRICE Base/As Tested: $79,590/$82,215 Options: Radiant Red Tintcoat paint, $1225; 6-passenger seating with second-row captain's chairs, $800; black roof, $600 POWERTRAIN Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC Combined Power: 615 hp Combined Torque: 649 lb-ft Battery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 102 kWh Peak Charge Rate, AC/DC: 11.5/190 kW Transmissions, F/R: direct-drive CHASSIS Suspension, F/R: multilink/multilink Brakes, F/R: 13.5-in vented disc/13.6-in vented disc Tires: Goodyear Eagle Sport All-Season 285/45R-21 113H M+S TPC Spec 3194MS DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 121.8 in Length: 205.6 in Width: 79.8 in Height: 71.0 in Passenger Volume, F/M/R: 62/54/35 ft3 Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 80/43/15 ft3 Curb Weight: 6226 lb C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 3.6 sec 100 mph: 9.1 sec 1/4-Mile: 12.1 sec @ 114 mph 130 mph: 16.8 sec Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec. Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 3.8 sec Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 1.8 sec Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 2.3 sec Top Speed (gov ltd): 132 mph Braking, 70–0 mph: 176 ft Braking, 100–0 mph: 362 ft Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g Interior Sound Idle: 29 dBA/1 sone Full Throttle: 72 dBA 70-mph Cruising: 67 dBA/21 sone C/D FUEL ECONOMY AND CHARGING Observed: 75 MPGe 75-mph Highway Range: 250 mi EPA FUEL ECONOMY Combined/City/Highway: 86/93/78 MPGe Range: 305 mi -- 2025 Volvo EX90 Twin Motor Performance Ultra Vehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 7-passenger, 4-door wagon PRICE Base/As Tested: $90,640/$94,640 Options: Bowers & Wilkins premium audio system, $3200; 22-inch 5-spoke Aero wheels, $800 POWERTRAIN Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 241 hp, 310 lb-ft Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 268 hp, 361 lb-ft Combined Power: 510 hp Combined Torque: 671 lb-ft Battery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 107 kWh Peak Charge Rate, AC/DC: 11.0/250 kW Transmissions, F/R: direct-drive CHASSIS Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilink Brakes, F/R: 15.8-in vented disc/15.4-in vented disc Tires: Pirelli Scorpion MS F: 265/40R-22 106H M+S VOL R: HL295/35R-22 111H M+S VOL DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 117.5 in Length: 198.3 in Width: 77.3 in Height: 68.8 in Passenger Volume, F/M/R: 58/51/21 ft3 Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 74/36/14 ft3 Front Trunk Volume: 2 ft3 Curb Weight: 6083 lb C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 4.1 sec 100 mph: 11.2 sec 1/4-Mile: 12.9 sec @ 106 mph Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec. Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.3 sec Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.5 sec Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.2 sec Top Speed (gov ltd): 116 mph Braking, 70–0 mph: 167 ft Braking, 100–0 mph: 346 ft Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.86 g Interior Sound Idle: 29 dBA/1 sone Full Throttle: 69 dBA 70-mph Cruising: 66 dBA/20 sone C/D FUEL ECONOMY AND CHARGING Observed: 70 MPGe 75-mph Highway Range: 250 mi Average DC Fast-Charge Rate, 10–90%: 127 kW DC Fast-Charge Time, 10–90%: 43 min EPA FUEL ECONOMY Combined/City/Highway: 81/83/78 MPGe Range: 300 mi C/D TESTING EXPLAINED Reviewed by Joe Lorio Deputy Editor, Reviews and Features Joe Lorio has been obsessed with cars since his Matchbox days, and he got his first subscription to Car and Driver at age 11. Joe started his career at Automobile Magazine under David E. Davis Jr., and his work has also appeared on websites including Amazon Autos, Autoblog, AutoTrader, Hagerty, Hemmings, KBB, and TrueCar. This content is imported from Third party. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Tested: The 2025 Volvo EX30 Performance Copies Tesla's Worst Habit
Tested: The 2025 Volvo EX30 Performance Copies Tesla's Worst Habit

Motor Trend

time7 hours ago

  • Motor Trend

Tested: The 2025 Volvo EX30 Performance Copies Tesla's Worst Habit

Pros Wicked quick acceleration Fun to drive Funky, stylish interior Cons Where's the $36K version? Dismal range and unremarkable charging Too small for most American car buyers Tesla's influence shows up everywhere in the 2025 Volvo EX30. You see it in the speedometer relegated to a corner of the infotainment touchscreen. You see it in the gear selector stalk that doubles as the cruise control switchgear. And you see it in the credit-card-style key that's meant to be a backup to using your phone for unlocking and starting the vehicle. All of this is cost-saving minimalism cleverly passed off as modernism, an art that Tesla—and now Volvo—has nearly perfected in its pursuit of making attainable (and profitable) EVs. The Volvo EX30 fails to deliver its promised affordability and range, costing nearly $10K more and achieving only average range in MotorTrend tests. Despite its performance and design, it's a niche luxury EV rather than the mainstream, budget-friendly option initially promised. This summary was generated by AI using content from this MotorTrend article. Read Next Of all the parallels between the EX30 and a Tesla, the strongest similarity is one that no automaker should imitate: the mile-wide gap between what the automaker originally promised and the car it eventually delivered. Just two years ago, Volvo introduced the EX30 as the cheap and cheerful cure for too-expensive EVs with a $36,245 starting price and 275 miles of range. Yet the only EX30 you can buy in the U.S. right now and for the foreseeable future costs nearly $10,000 more than that and landed well short of 200 miles in MotorTrend's Road-Trip Range test. Volvo set out to build the $35K EV that Tesla has long teased and appears to have come to the same conclusion: It can't be done. (Chevy has proven otherwise.) Trading Value for Performance It's a shame that the launch turned into a bait and switch because the $46,195 Volvo EX30 Twin Motor Performance is awesome in its own right. Imagine an electric Volkswagen GTI with 422 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque, and you'll have a pretty good idea of what it's like to drive. Presented with a gap in traffic or an empty roundabout, the EX30 rockets through with an exuberance that matches its Moss Yellow paint. It is not, however, a rowdy little hooligan of a hatchback as the specs suggest. Exercising characteristic restraint, Volvo delivers all that oomph as a shove rather than a gut punch. The EX30 launches with the faintest scrape of spinning tires, and power builds linearly over the first 20 or so mph. Hitting 60 mph in 3.2 seconds has never felt so civilized. When the EX30 zips past the quarter-mile mark in 11.8 seconds, it does so up against the 112-mph speed limiter that Volvo rolled out across its lineup five years ago in the name of safety. Similarly, the EX30 steers and turns and tackles bumps capably without ever feeling overtly aggressive. Its 110-foot stop from 60 mph and 0.87 g of cornering grip are decent for a 4,190-pound vehicle on all-season tires but hardly the makings of a four-door sports car. For a Volvo, that's perfect. The EX30 Twin Motor Performance is fun to hustle and pleasant to commute in, making it a great daily driver. How to Make a Cheap Car Feel Expensive The danger of buying the expensive version of a cheap car is that so much of a car is designed and engineered for the lowest-priced model. That's the story of the Ford Maverick. At $33,000, it feels like a value. In a $43,000 model, you can't ignore the flashing and exposed edges on many of the injection-molded plastic parts. Like the Maverick, the EX30 uses texture and color to turn cheap interior materials into eye candy. Unlike Ford, Volvo has engineered the fit and finish so that those materials also look and—where it matters—feel expensive. The sense of quality is furthered by the cabin's thoughtful and innovative design. The glove box drops from the center of the dash to give the front passenger more kneeroom. Instead of a conventional center console, a bin slides out from below the fixed center armrest with a clever, independently sliding top plate that allows you to allocate the space for cupholders or catchall storage. As noted at the beginning of this story, it's not hard to find where Volvo has cut cost from the bill of materials. Look at how simple the climate vents are. The front doors have been stripped of nearly all electronics, with the driver and passenger sharing two window switches in the center console to control all four windows. The front speakers all live in a soundbar running across the top of the dash, which unfortunately takes a toll on the audio system's sound quality. What would have been easily justified trade-offs in a $36,245 EX30 are tougher to swallow at our test car's $48,395 sticker price, but the cabin is ultimately an industrial design masterpiece. Funky and original, the EX30 feels like the spiritual successor of the quirky 2008–2013 Volvo C30. The EX30's petite size reinforces the connection with that decade-old Volvo. The four-door EX30 measures about an inch shorter than the two-door C30 (and 5 inches shorter than the Toyota Corolla hatchback). As a result, the rear seats are only functional if your kids have the anatomy of a Squishmallow and emptying a full Costco cart into the EX30's 12.4-cubic-foot cargo hold will test your Tetris skills. The most consequential cost-cutting measure naturally shows up in what's the most expensive part of any EV, the battery. The EX30's lithium-ion pack stores 64.0 kWh of electricity, less than the late (but soon-to-be-resurrected) Chevrolet Bolt EV. Officially, the Volvo EX30 Twin Motor Performance is rated for a reasonable 253 miles on a full charge. At a steady 70 mph in the real world, though, we achieved an impractical 180 miles. That 29 percent gap between the window sticker and our measurement (which admittedly only looks at 95 percent of a full charge) makes the EX30 one of the worst performers in the MotorTrend Road-Trip Range test. Its fast-charging performance is similarly underwhelming. Power peaks at 153 kW and quickly tapers off, delivering enough juice in 15 minutes to cover just 87 miles at 70 mph. Given the EX30's size, limited range, and mediocre charging, there are far better options at this price point—pretty much any EV at this price point—for anyone planning on road-tripping their electric vehicle. Getting Techy Tesla's influence is palpable in the nearly button-free dashboard. The EX30 runs nearly all its major controls through a scaled-down version of the Android Automotive–based infotainment system found in the larger EX90. Thankfully the EX30 hasn't been plagued by the litany of software quality complaints owners have logged against Volvo's new flagship EV, and our reviewers took to the user interface quickly. We like that you can download apps such as Spotify and Waze directly to the 12.3-inch touchscreen and that it offers the familiar comfort of Apple CarPlay and Android Auto for those who aren't ready for such newfangled ideas. The EX30 comes in two versions, the standard Plus trim and the $1,700 Ultra upgrade that adds a 360-degree camera system, automated parking, ambient cabin lighting, a cabin air filter, LED headlights, and Pilot Assist, Volvo's conservative take on Tesla's Full Self-Driving. It can center the EX30 in its lane, slow or accelerate with traffic, and even guide the vehicle through a lane change, but all of this requires the driver to keep their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road. We appreciate a cautious, safety-first approach, but the value of Pilot Assist seems marginal compared to Ford's BlueCruise or GM's Super Cruise. Given its limited capabilities, we'd be inclined to pass on the Ultra trim to try to keep the price in check. A Lesson Learned? The Volvo EX30 Twin Motor Performance's straight-line speed, polished driving dynamics, and fetching design tug at our emotions, but it's hard not to feel jilted once you climb out of the driver's seat and look at the vehicle in the larger context. Volvo originally pitched the EX30 as a value play that would get more Americans into EVs. Instead, we got a tiny hot rod of a luxury car for a niche buyer. For now, the work of pushing EVs into the mainstream will have to be carried out by larger, cheaper, longer-range alternatives such as the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5, Kia EV6, Ford Mustang Mach-E, and Chevy Equinox EV. Should Volvo someday figure out how to bring the entry, single-motor EX30 to America (specs for which are included on the U.S. media site), we hope it's learned an important lesson: Wait until you're shipping the cars to the U.S. to announce the price.

Many Countries – Including Canada –Top U.S. In Road Safety, Study Says
Many Countries – Including Canada –Top U.S. In Road Safety, Study Says

Forbes

time2 days ago

  • Forbes

Many Countries – Including Canada –Top U.S. In Road Safety, Study Says

The United States is an outlier when it comes to keeping people safe on the roads. Among 29 high-income countries, it has the highest per person crash fatality rate — more than twice the average of the other 28. Canada, which ranks 14th among the 28 countries, has stronger road safety policies overall than the U.S., where deaths in traffic crashes have been generally inching up since 2011 after a long period of decline, while in Canada they have continued to fall. Those are the highlights of new research released on Thursday by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety(IIHS), a nonprofit financed by the insurance industry. 'The U.S. could learn a lot from our northern neighbor,' David Harkey, president of the Insurance Institute, said in a statement. 'Our countries are culturally very similar, so there is reason to believe that many policies that work there could help the U.S. get back on the right track when it comes to road safety.' Traffic deaths rose 33% between 2011 and 2021 nationwide, and in Canada, deaths declined 18% over a similar period. Stronger distracted driving and seat belt laws, as well as more widespread use of speed safety cameras are among the policies that have helped Canada save lives and reduce serious injuries. The study, 'A comparison of recent crash fatality trends in Canada and the United States: Why do they differ?,' conducted by the Insurance Institute and Canada's Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF), explored fatality trends and differences in policies between the two countries. Many other countries have been more proactive with their safety policies in recent decades, particularly when it comes to factors like speed and alcohol, including Canada, whose per person fatality rate is less than half that of the U.S. Embracing the Vision Zero or Safe System approach to road safety and design, according to the researchers, is considered a major factor for the progress. The initiative takes human error into account and was first put into effect in Sweden in the 1990s. The goal is to eliminate all road deaths and serious injuries by creating multiple layers of protection, so if one fails, the others will create a safety net to lessen the impact of a crash. Improvements are designed to result in: safer people, safer roads, safer vehicles, safer speeds and better post-crash care. Canada's advances occurred even though its population, number of licensed drivers and miles driven all increased at a greater pace than in the U.S. during this time period, according to the report. Interestingly, crash types that were linked with the biggest fatality increases in the U.S. were the same types that went down by large percentages in Canada. Both pedestrian and cyclist fatalities rose 64% in the U.S., but fell 17% in Canada, for example, and deaths involving large trucks increased 54% in the U.S. and decreased 24% in Canada. Crash deaths involving young drivers fell by slightly more than 50% in Canada, but increased by 17% in the U.S. And deaths involving alcohol impairment and speed rose in the U.S. and went down in Canada. Many U.S. states have strong laws on seat belts and distracted driving and laws allowing speed safety cameras, but in Canada, laws in those areas were more widespread, covering a larger share of the country's population than in the U.S. during the study period, researchers said. Differences in laws around impaired driving were among the factors not included in the analysis, but may have also contributed to the diverging trends. For example, in most U.S. states, there are no penalties for most drivers if they are stopped with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) between 0.05% and 0.08%. In contrast, the study noted, 'all Canadian provinces except Quebec impose administrative penalties at low-BACs. In addition, Canadian police can demand a roadside breath test from any driver without suspicion of impairment as is required in the U.S.' Refusing a test, the report noted, is a criminal offense in Canada. Harkey, the Insurance Institute's president, will host a live conversation about what the U.S. can learn from Canada on Thursday, July 31, at 11:30 a.m. ET. on YouTube. The full recording will be available afterward. For more information and to read the full report, click here and here.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store