1971 Buick Skylark Base Coupe 2-door 5.7l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Buick's big boxy crossover design sketch looks surprisingly good

The current Buick lineup is fairly bland, consisting solely of amorphous crossovers in small, medium, and large. Fortunately, the brand is showing signs of life at the General Motors design studio with new products like the Envista, and where designers have envisioned (no pun intended) a large, boxy vehicle that looks like a Kia EV9 competitor. The unnamed premium crossover was penned by designer Geoffrey Richmond and has a well-defined profile with a traditional SUV's squarish greenhouse. It could portend the next-generation Enclave, which shares a similar fishhook headlight design. However, the illustration's front end is a lot more cohesive, with foglamp housings that meet at the outer edges of the headlights.  The front end has sort of the Tesla EV duckbill thing going on, but a wide lower intake indicates that there could be an engine under the hood. In any case, this is just an ideation so there may not even be a platform to put this body on yet. That would be a shame, as the Enclave has been out since 2018 and could use a makeover. The V6-powered crossover was supposed to reposition the brand, and we found it quiet and surprisingly comfortable in our review. However, that hasn't been enough to catch on with trendsetters — Enclaves are rarer than Bentleys here in L.A. The "bar of soap" crossover trend is over. Nowadays, for better or worse, buyers want aggressive, rugged looking crossovers even if they're just going on a Target run. A bold design like the one Richmond painted might change the Enclave's fortunes. And maybe they can bring back the portholes. Related video: 2024 Buick Encore GX Nalgene water bottle test

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study

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.