cars

10 Biggest News Stories of the Month: Volvo C40 Recharge Can’t Generate Interest Like Mazda CX-50

10 Biggest News Stories of the Month: Volvo C40 Recharge Can’t Generate Interest Like Mazda CX-50 If you’re thinking of the all-electric version of the luxury compact SUV—but find yourself thinking, “Julie, if it had narrower headroom, weaker visibility, and less cargo space, I would have picked this baby up in a heartbeat,” then it really should be In your curious alley. In one of the most popular articles on Cars.com published last month, reviewer Aaron Bragman presents these key nuances of the all-new “coupe” version of the electric SUV and challenges the notion that anyone would opt for the cramp. themselves cramp their style.

10 Biggest News Stories of the Month: Volvo C40 Recharge Can’t Generate Interest Like Mazda CX-50

Braggmann acknowledges that the exterior design of the new C40 Recharge is attractive and that the driving dynamics focused on comfort and ride quality to some extent make up for its other shortcomings. But the above-mentioned compromises on comfort and visibility, uninspiring—and in some cases, unusable—onboard, and an EPA-estimated driving range of 226 miles on a full charge all combine to make one wonder…just, Why? Especially since one can pay much less for a non-luxury equivalent like OR while enjoying longer range and faster charging times.

“Volvo has made some extraordinary decisions regarding the C40 Recharge, and not all of them add up to the coveted package,” concludes Bragman in his review. “Ultimately, this car will be for drivers who are attracted to its style and able to overlook the shortcomings of its design and performance.”

For our full review of the Volvo C40 2022 Recharge, follow the link below to article #10 from last month.

Climbing much higher in this month’s countdown than the C40 can manage is Cars.com reviewer Brian Normel’s exhaustive critique — the all-new compact SUV is making its way into Mazda’s lineup as a more off-road-ready alternative. Normel praises the CX-50 for its more aggressive exterior aesthetics, surprisingly generous cargo space, responsive steering, and the ability to use mirroring and smartphone functions via the touchscreen while the vehicle is in motion. However, what drew criticism was the less user-friendly touchscreen, the rough ride when equipped with 20-inch wheels, an unappealing engine soundtrack, and the need for premium gas for top performance. Overall, the review concluded that the CX-50 looks a lot like the CX-5, and very little like a superior off-road vehicle, for a solid recommendation.

For our full review of the 2023 Mazda CX-50, follow the link below to article #3 on Cars.com last month.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button