2014 Buick Lacrosse Leather on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM recalls 740,000 vehicles over daytime running light issue

General Motors is recalling over 740,000 vehicles due to a daytime running light issue that causes all of the affected cars to run afoul of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Vehicles affected by this recall are spread across many of GM’s brands. Models include the 2020-2023 Cadillac CT4 and CT5, 2021-2023 Buick Envision, 2022-2023 Cadillac Escalade and Escalade ESV, 2022-2023 Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Suburban, Tahoe and 2022-2023 GMC Sierra 1500, Yukon, and Yukon XL. GM says that the daytime running lights may remain on in these cars when the headlights are activated. This is a problem, because FMVSS rules require that the daytime running lights deactivate once the headlights turn on. If the DRLs remain on, GM says that could result in additional glare, thereby increasing the risk of an accident. The cause of this failure to deactivate the DRLs comes from body control module software that “under a combination of certain pre-conditions, could fail to deactivate the DRLs,” according to GM. Other GM vehicles were tested, but due to a difference in software or hardware, they remain unaffected. If this is reminding you of another recent GM recall, youÂ’d be right, as GM recalled another 340,000 vehicles for the same issue last month. After that original issue was found within GM, the company began looking into its other cars to determine if the population was larger than originally thought. GM found the additional vehicles included in todayÂ’s recall have the problem. The fix will either be via an over-the-air update or it will require you to bring the vehicle into a dealer for a software update, depending on which vehicle you have. Owner notification letters letting folks know what is necessary are currently scheduled to go out on January 23, 2023. Related video: Cadillac Escalade Infotainment Review

eBay Find Of The Day: 1946 Tucker Torpedo Prototype II hides a secret Riviera

The Tucker Torpedo is one of the great what-if stories of automotive history. Preston Tucker hoped to revolutionize the industry with a car unlike any other on the road at the time. However, due to a variety of problems, he only managed build 51 vehicles before closing shop. Over time, they have become highly sought-after; In 2012, one sold for $2.65 million at auction.
That brings us to this Tucker "replica" that you see above because it might be one of the ugliest monstrosities ever put together. However, we might extend some leniency to the creator, as the vehicle isn't actually trying to replicate the classic look of the 1948 Tucker Torpedo. Instead, it is attempting to reproduce an earlier prototype from 1946 that actually features that weird, trident nose. According to the seller, his uncle built the car as a labor of love and supposedly used actual plans from Tucker as inspiration.
Underneath all of the crazy changes is a 1971 Buick Riviera powered by a 455-cubic-inch (7.5-liter) Buick V8. Some of the replica's odder modifications include the front fenders that turn with the wheels and the fin running down the back. All three headlights work, but the one in the middle is only for the high beams. Oddly, the small hinged sections on the roof are meant to open to avoid hitting your head when getting in or out. Maybe the seller's uncle was a very tall guy?

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.