9,690 Actual Mile Award Winning Gs400 V8 4 Speed 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.

Why Mazda did so well and Volvo so poorly in Consumer Reports survey

The poor performances of Tesla and all three domestic automakers got the headlines in Consumer Reports magazine's latest reliability survey, but there were other results that caught our interest. Tiny Mazda notched the biggest gain among the 29 brands included in this year's list, leap-frogging nine spots to No. 3. Buick, which was in the top 10 last year, fell 11 spots to No. 19, the biggest decline of any brand. And then there's Volvo, a brand often vaunted for its quality and reliability, dropping six spots to dead last. What gives? For starters, all three brands benefited or suffered in large part due to their relatively small portfolio of vehicles. So when raves or complaints rolled in for even one particular model, as was often the case, it weighed heavily on the entire brand. That's especially true when it involves a relatively high-volume, hot-selling model such as the Buick Enclave (more on that in a moment). Mazda fared as well as it did despite the CX-3 losing Consumer Reports' influential "recommended" status due to problems with its climate system, including leaks from the condenser and refrigerant unit that triggered a service bulletin from the automaker in late 2016. Deputy auto editor Jon Linkov said that scratch didn't hurt the overall brand, since the CX-9 crossover and MX-5 Miata both jumped up to replace it on CR's list of newly recommended vehicles, thanks to several back fixes Mazda made to both models. For Buick, the redesigned Enclave SUV earned a "Much Worse Than Average" rating after owners reported problems with the new nine-speed automatic transmission it shares with the Chevrolet Traverse as well as some issues with the climate system. There were issues with rough shifting, plus complaints about the torque converter that necessitated fixes to the computer or outright replacement. "Again, similar stuff that we saw with the Traverse: both first-year vehicles, similar powertrains," LInkov said. He said all-new vehicles or redesigns typically fare poorly in CR's reliability survey due to issues that are hard to suss out before vehicles go into everyday use by consumers. The top-selling Encore and Envision fared well, Linkov said, but were outdone by the Enclave's problematic transmission components. The Enclave was Buick's second best-selling model through September at 35,227 units. Then there is Volvo, about which there is one word to sum up its woes: infotainment.

5 reasons why GM is cutting jobs, closing plants in a healthy economy

DETROIT — Even though unemployment is low, the economy is growing and U.S. auto sales are near historic highs, General Motors is cutting thousands of jobs in a major restructuring aimed at generating cash to spend on innovation. It's the new reality for automakers that are faced with the present cost of designing gas-powered cars and trucks that appeal to buyers now while at the same time preparing for a future world of electric and autonomous vehicles. GM announced Monday that it will cut as many as 14,000 workers in North America and put five plants up for possible closure as it abandons many of its car models and restructures to focus more on autonomous and electric vehicles. The reductions could amount to as much as 8 percent of GM's global workforce of 180,000 employees. The cuts mark GM's first major downsizing since shedding thousands of jobs in the Great Recession. The company also said it will stop operating two additional factories outside North America by the end of next year. The move to make GM get leaner before the next downturn likely will be followed by Ford Motor Co., which also has struggled to keep one foot in the present and another in an ambiguous future of new mobility. Ford has been slower to react, but says it will lay off an unspecified number of white-collar workers as it exits much of the car market in favor of trucks and SUVs, some of them powered by batteries. Here's a rundown of the reasons behind the cuts: Coding, not combustion CEO Mary Barra said as cars and trucks become more complex, GM will need more computer coders but fewer engineers who work on internal combustion engines. "The vehicle has become much more software-oriented" with millions of lines of code, she said. "We still need many technical resources in the company." Shedding sedans The restructuring also reflects changing North American auto markets as manufacturers continue to shift away from cars toward SUVs and trucks. In October, almost 65 percent of new vehicles sold in the U.S. were trucks or SUVs. That figure was about 50 percent cars just five years ago. GM is shedding cars largely because it doesn't make money on them, Citi analyst Itay Michaeli wrote in a note to investors. "We estimate sedans operate at a significant loss, hence the need for classic restructuring," he wrote. The reduction includes about 8,000 white-collar employees, or 15 percent of GM's North American white-collar workforce. Some will take buyouts while others will be laid off.