Chevy Avalanche Z71 28,409 Miles 1-owner, Bose Premium, Trailer Package on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Chevy Cruze is lighter, loaded [UPDATE]

UPDATE: Live photos and video of the reveal have been added at the end of the story. Chevrolet revealed the second-generation Cruze Wednesday, promising a larger, more efficient car that drives better than the sedan it replaces. We're particularly excited about the new turbocharged, 1.4-liter four-cylinder engine, which makes 153 horsepower, an upgrade from the outgoing 1.8-liter naturally aspirated engine's 138 hp. Torque climbs even more significantly, from 148 pound-feet to 177 in the new mill. Peak twist can be called up between 2,000 and 4,000 rpm, which should make performance easy to access. Combined with a lighter architecture that slashes the Cruze's curb weight by 250 pounds (although the actual curb weight hasn't been released), the new four-door can hit 60 miles per hour in a respectable eight seconds. That's not hot hatchback territory, but it should be more than suitable for the average consumer. That same consumer should also appreciate the new engine's economy. The Cruze now returns an even 40 miles per gallon on the highway and will cover 530 miles on a single tank, all the while running on plain old 87-octane fuel. There's also a diesel-powered Cruze model, although Chevy didn't release specific details, aside from saying that it will arrive in dealers in 2017, over a year after the gas-powered model's early 2016 on-sale date. Despite the 250-pound drop in weight, the new Cruze has grown significantly. Its wheelbase is now the longest in the segment, with 106.3 inches of sheetmetal between the front and rear axles compared to 105.7 in last year's model, while the sleek new body cuts the coefficient of drag to just 0.29. The overall length increases from 181 inches to 183.7, though the new model is nearly an inch lower overall. That's both good news and bad news for interior space. Rear legroom is up from 35.4 to 36.1, but headroom is down in both the front and backseats by over half an inch. Tech fans, meanwhile, will appreciate the new standard MyLink display. The seven-inch touchscreen is compatible with both Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, while an optional eight-inch display will be offered, as well. 4G LTE wi-fi, heated rear seats, a heated steering wheel, and wireless phone charging will also be offered as an optional extras. New safety features include blind-spot monitoring with cross-traffic alert, lane keeping assist, and forward collision warning.

What car should James Robertson buy to drive his famous 21-mile commute?

The Internet has been abuzz this week with the story of Detroit resident James Robertson, the 56-year-old factory worker who has walked some 21 miles to work for the last 10 years. The Detroit Free Press brought Robertson's story to the fore, helping an online fundraising campaign to generate more than $275,000 (as of this writing). The original goal was just $5,000, or about enough to replace the used Honda that died on Robertson back in 2005, and left him walking. So, newly flush with funds, what's the perfect car for Robertson to buy? Let's look at the specifics of his situation, and try to pick out the best options. Here's what we know: Robertson's commute is (famously) 21 miles; he lives in downtown Detroit (for now) and seems pretty humble, so something very flashy is probably out; former Honda aside, his ties to the city (and statements about being a Ford fan) seem to indicate a Detroit Three company product is best; he's a single guy with a girlfriend; he's got to deal with Michigan weather, and the sometimes fickle snow removal processes in The D. Here are some choices: Ford F-150 Robertson is on record as being a Taurus fan, and after a decade of walking I've no doubt that the big sedan would offer a cozy respite. Still, as a car guy and a student of the industry, I'd have a hard time recommending a sedan so clearly in need of replacement. Especially when The Blue Oval has such great stuff within the rest of its roster. The 2015 F-150 seems almost perfect for Robertson. Opting for either of the new EcoBoost V6 engines should help keep fuel bills in reasonable check, while healthy ride height and four-wheel drive will get him to work on time even during the snowiest of snow days. Better still, with a fat options sheet and car-like ride quality, Robertson can have just about every amenity he might want, in a package that won't disrespect his blue-collar roots. Chevrolet Colorado You guys saw this one coming, right? The smaller footprint of the midsize Chevy pickup, relative to some of the other options here, should be an advantage for urban parking and driving. And again, 4x4 is an option for the nasty weather, the running costs should stay pretty low and there aren't many tech/luxury features that can't be had in-cabin. I'd go ahead and splash out on the Crew Cab bodystyle, too, just in case Robertson feels like starting a carpool.

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.