2010 Buick Enclave Cxl 1 Owner Awd Skyscape Roofs Lthr Nav More! Nice Automatic on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dear America, you don't need as much power as you think

I recently won a 0-20-mph drag race against a Chevrolet Volt. A day later I smoked a Tesla Model 3. “Um OK,” youÂ’re thinking, “that canÂ’t be that hard.” Well, except that the vehicle I was piloting featured a hybrid powertrain of a Bosch electric motor and 40-year-old human legs. ThatÂ’s right, I out accelerated automobiles on a bicycle. On another occasion, I found myself driving behind my wife in her 2023 Kia Niro EV. The specs say it accelerates from zero to 60 mph in 7.8 seconds, a time thatÂ’s six-tenths off the pace of KiaÂ’s rear-motor-only EV6, a vehicle IÂ’ve repeatedly read being described as “slow.” The Niro, therefore, must be extra-slow. And yet, as she turned left onto a highway onramp, she rocketed forward leaving me in a Mercedes-AMG C43 and every other car in the left turn lane in the distance. I share these anecdotes not to boast about my cycling ability, nor my wife having a lead foot. No no. IÂ’m crap and she really doesnÂ’t. Instead, I want to point out that most drivers accelerate very slowly. The notion of “bigger is better” will forever be engrained in the American psyche, but when it comes to horsepower largesse, todayÂ’s cars hilariously exceed both the expectations and driving habits of most drivers. Most car buyers just donÂ’t have a frame of reference when it comes to equating 0-60 times, output figures and the actual feeling of acceleration.   Eat my dust, Mr Volt! Now, we in the automotive-reviewing media absolutely share some of this blame. We like accelerating quickly and cars that accelerate quicker are bound to reap more positive reviews. At the very least, weÂ’re obligated to point out when a carÂ’s acceleration is slower than a certain competitor's or the segmentÂ’s average. However, just because Car A is slower than Car B doesnÂ’t make Car A slow. It makes it slower. For example, the dual-motor EV6 may be 2 full seconds quicker from 0-60 than the rear-motor model ­– a relatively massive difference – but barring a back-to-back drive or a wealth of comparative knowledge, itÂ’s laughable to think that the average driver could possibly deem the rear-motor version “slow.” Because it isnÂ’t. The near-universal use of turbocharging, the popularity of all-wheel-drive and increased proliferation of electric motors has resulted in this rapid drop in 0-60 times thatÂ’s outpacing customer expectations and driving habits.

GM announces 6 recalls covering nearly 720k cars

General Motors has announced yet another sprawling recall campaign, with six separate elements covering 717,950 vehicles on US roads. At this point in 2014, it's starting to seem like there are more days with a GM recall than without. Perhaps most troubling about this latest volley, though, is that every vehicle is from the past few years, indicating that GM's quality woes may not be limited to pre-bankruptcy vehicles.
The largest element of this latest campaign covers 414,333 units, and includes the 2011 to 2012 Chevrolet Camaro, 2010 to 2012 Chevy Equinox, GMC Terrain and Cadillac SRX and the 2011 to 2012 Buick Regal and LaCrosse. Only vehicles with powered, height-adjustable seats are covered. In these particular cars and crossovers, the bolt that secures the height adjuster actuator may loosen of its own accord and in some cases fall out completely. If this happens, the seats will be able to move both up and down. GM claims the vehicles are safe to drive, provided drivers don't vertically adjust their seats. This particular issue has caused one crash and three injuries.
The largest element of this latest campaign covers 414,333 units, including the Chevrolet Camaro and Equinox, GMC Terrain, Cadillac SRX and the Buick Regal and LaCrosse.

Junkyard Gem: 1984 Buick Skyhawk Custom Sedan

Many laughed in 1982 when GM's Cadillac Division began selling the Cimarron, essentially a luxed-up Chevy Cavalier, at about twice the Cavalier's price. One rung below Cadillac on GM's Ladder of Success, the Buick Division got its own version of the Cavalier at the same time: the Skyhawk. Nobody laughed at the 1982-1989 Skyhawk's respectable sales figures. We saw an '85 Skyhawk coupe in a California boneyard last winter, and now here's an example of the sedan version in Colorado. This was the second generation of the Buick Skyhawk name, the first being applied to a Buick-ized version of the Chevrolet Monza during the 1975-1980 model years. That Skyhawk was available solely as a sleek two-door hatchback. This generation of Skyhawk could be purchased in coupe, sedan, hatchback (1986-1987 only) and wagon (1983-1989 only) form, with the coupe proving to be the most popular. For the 1984 model year, the base Skyhawk engine was the 2.0-liter pushrod four-cylinder from the Cavalier, rated at 86 horsepower and 110 pound-feet. If you opted for a five-speed manual or three-speed automatic transmission instead of the base four-on-the-floor manual, you could spend an extra 50 bucks (about 149 bucks in 2023 money) to get this higher-revving, Opel-designed/Brazilian-made 1.8-liter SOHC four-banger with 84 horsepower and 102 pound-feet. A turbocharged version of this engine with 150 horses was available on the Skyhawk T-Type. Buick was proud of both the overhead cam and the electronic fuel injection in this car, applying these badges to brag a bit. You'd have thought that a buyer sacrificing torque for a better-breathing engine would have selected a manual transmission, but such was not the case with this car. The three-speed TH125 slushbox cost $395, or about $1,179 after inflation. The cheapest '84 Skyhawk trim level was the Custom. The MSRP on this car was $7,345 ($21,922 now) before options. Its Chevy Cavalier sibling started at $6,214 ($18,546 today), while its Pontiac 2000 Sunbird and Olds Firenza counterparts were $6,791 and $7,293, respectively ($20,268 and $21,766 in 2023 dollars). Meanwhile, the King of J-Bodies, the Cadillac Cimarron, listed at $12,605 ($37,620 today) in 1984. That $7,345 sticker price didn't include plenty of features we now take for granted in new cars. If you wanted air conditioning in your new Skyhawk, as nearly every Buick buyer in 1984 did, the cost was $630 ($1,880 after inflation).