Group 1 - The National Market Supervision Administration of China announced a recall of certain Volvo vehicles produced by Zhejiang Haoqing Automobile Manufacturing Co., Daqing Volvo Automobile Manufacturing Co., and Volvo Automobile Sales (Shanghai) Co. [1] - The recall includes 3,378 units of the domestic plug-in hybrid XC60, 1 unit of the domestic pure electric C40, and 1 unit of the domestic pure electric XC40 from Zhejiang Haoqing [1] - Daqing Volvo's recall involves 1,520 units of the domestic plug-in hybrid S90 and 4 units of the domestic plug-in hybrid S60 [1] - The recall also includes 764 units of the imported plug-in hybrid XC90 from Volvo Automobile Sales (Shanghai) [1] Group 2 - The vehicles are recalled due to a software deviation in the brake control module, which may lead to loss of braking function under specific driving conditions, posing a safety risk [2] - The companies will authorize Volvo dealers to provide free software upgrades for the recalled vehicles to eliminate the safety hazard [2]

Group 1 - Volvo has initiated a recall of certain domestic and imported vehicles due to a software deviation in the brake control module, which may lead to loss of braking function under specific driving conditions [1][2] - The recall includes a total of 5,883 vehicles, comprising 3,378 domestic plug-in hybrid XC60s, 1 domestic pure electric C40, 1 domestic pure electric XC40, 1,520 domestic plug-in hybrid S90s, 4 domestic plug-in hybrid S60s, and 764 imported plug-in hybrid XC90s [1][2] - The affected vehicles may lose braking capability when in "B" drive mode for plug-in hybrids or in "single pedal driving" mode for pure electric vehicles, if they are allowed to coast downhill for more than 1 minute and 30 seconds without applying the brake [2] Group 2 - Volvo will provide free software upgrades for the brake control module through authorized dealers to eliminate the safety risk associated with the affected vehicles [2]

Core Insights - The article highlights the significant discrepancies between the advertised and actual range of electric vehicles (EVs), emphasizing that various factors such as temperature, tire condition, and driving speed can affect performance [4][6][10] - Consumer Reports (CR) conducted tests showing that over half of the 30 EVs tested had lower highway range than their EPA estimates, with some models falling short by as much as 50 miles (approximately 80 kilometers) [10][12] - The article calls for a modernization of the EPA's testing standards to provide more accurate and practical information for consumers regarding EV range [17] Testing Methodology - CR performed highway range tests by driving fully charged vehicles at a constant speed of 70 mph (approximately 112 km/h) until the battery was depleted [7][9] - The tests revealed that many vehicles could still travel additional miles even after the range indicator showed zero [9][10] - The testing conditions were controlled to ensure optimal performance, including temperature regulation and tire pressure adjustments [22][21] Findings from Tests - Among the tested vehicles, 18 models (60%) did not meet their EPA estimated range, with the Ford F-150 Lightning showing a 50-mile (approximately 80 kilometers) shortfall [12][16] - Some models exceeded their EPA estimates, such as the BMW iX, which achieved a range of 370 miles (approximately 595 kilometers) compared to an EPA estimate of 309 miles (approximately 497 kilometers) [14] - The Mercedes EQS 580 was noted as the top performer, achieving 380 miles (approximately 611 kilometers) on the highway, slightly exceeding its EPA estimate [14] Charging and Performance Evaluation - CR's evaluation also included assessments of charging speed and convenience, focusing on both AC slow charging and DC fast charging capabilities [24][26] - The ease of use of charging interfaces and the availability of navigation features to locate charging stations were also considered important factors in the overall assessment [25][26] - The article emphasizes that the charging experience is critical for consumers, as they may interact with charging interfaces more frequently than with traditional fuel pumps [26]