1968 Chevrolet Corvette on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy says not to look at the 2019 Silverado's fuel economy rating

The 2019 Chevy Silverado is hitting dealerships soon, and one of the most notable changes for the new full-size pickup is the addition of a 2.7-liter turbocharged inline-four. The engine replaces the naturally-aspirated 4.3-liter V6 in volume consumer models like the Silverado LT and promises more power, less weight and — most importantly — better fuel economy. The thing is, the gains in efficiency haven't been as dramatic as some might have hoped, especially when stacked up against competitors from Ford and Ram. As Automotive News reports, GM's response is a little murky. First, let's talk numbers. We're pulling all figures from FuelEconomy.gov, the official U.S. government source for fuel ratings. Fuel economy numbers on trucks vary greatly based on a number of factors. Bed and cab configuration play a part, but so does a four-wheel-drive system. You also have to factor in tires, transmissions, rear-axle gearing, hybrid systems and cylinder deactivation. Things like that can make the difference between best- and worst-in-class. The EPA's website doesn't give enough information a lot of the time, so there's really no easy way to compare apples-to-apples. First, take a look at the ratings for the 2019 Silverado. A 2.7-liter model with two-wheel drive is rated 20 city, 23 highway and 21 combined. That's both better and worse than a two-wheel drive 2018 Silverado with the 4.3-liter V6 (18 city, 24 highway and 20 combined). The updated 2019 Silverado with a 4.3-liter V6 has yet to be rated. With less weight and a smaller engine, many hoped Chevy would make bigger gains. It's unusual to see any decrease in a fuel economy metric these days. GM says that it's not done tuning the new 2.7-liter engine, so fuel economy could theoretically increase. Expanding further, a V8-powered 2019 Silverado (17 city, 24 highway and 19 combined) actually gets better highway fuel economy than a turbocharged four-cylinder powered truck in certain configurations, even if the latter has a better overall average. But that's only with two-wheel drive, the 8-speed transmission and cylinder deactivation. A Silverado with the 5.3-liter V8 and a 6-speed automatic is rated at 15 city, 22 highway and 17 combined. The biggest issue with the Silverado 2.7-liter doesn't come from within GM itself but from Ford and Ram. GM cites the Ford F-150 with the 3.3-liter V6 and the Ram 1500 with the 3.6-liter V6 as the closest competitors to its new 2.7-liter inline-four.

Trucks and tidbits from GM's earnings report

General Motors announced this morning that 2018 was a good year for it financially, thanks in large part to the company's performance in North America, which was predicated, according to the company, on "strong pricing, surging crossover sales, successful execution of the company's full-size truck launch, growth of GM Financial earnings, and disciplined cost control." GM reported full-year income of $8.1 billion and EBIT-adjusted income of $11.8 billion. Crossover sales in 2018 were 1,034,808, an increase of 7 percent compared to 2017 deliveries. Throw in the body-on-frame SUVs and the ute number is a total 1,295,700. But let's face it: It is the trucks that really matter. The Chevy Silverado and Colorado, the GMC Sierra and Canyon. Altogether, GM sold 973,463 pickups in the U.S. in 2018. Although Ford gets bragging rights for F-Series sales, GM gets to point out that it has a greater aggregate number. An important factor regarding the trucks and the reported income is that during the last quarter, more than 90 percent of the new 2019 trucks were crew cabs (which have a higher sticker), and at GMC more than 70 percent were Denali and AT4 models (which have even higher stickers). According to reporting by Bloomberg, GM's pickup trucks combine for $65 billion in annual revenue. Clearly when the 2018 sales of the Silverado — 585,581— dwarf the combined sales of both Buick (206,863) and Cadillac combined (154,702), pickups are what matter to the overall health of the company in a way that it is difficult to otherwise achieve. The "disciplined cost control" is something that is very much in the public eye right now, as the company is taking out thousands of its workers, and there is still the "unallocated" plant situation and other plants that will remain under capacity. The numbers in GM's earnings report probably made Unifor members' heads explode in consternation, coming fresh off their Super Bowl ad: " GM, you may have forgotten our generosity, but we'll never forget your greed." But there are a couple of curiosities in the full GM earnings release. One is that so far as its autonomous efforts go, it mentions only that (1) in the first quarter of 2018 Cruise introduced a production-ready autonomous vehicle, and (2) Cruise attracted $5 billion in external capital from SoftBank and Honda. Not a whole lot of love for autonomy. Good thing they have the trucks to fund the program, to say nothing of the external capital.

Why an independent rear suspension for GM's new, full-sized SUVs wasn't easy

A Motor Trend report last month laid out how Cadillac's 4.2-lier twin-turbo Blackwing V8 could be an orphan due to cost concerns in the GM empire. Last-minute chassis changes to Cadillac's new sedans and XT6 crossover led to engine bays that couldn't fit the Blackwing. On the SUV side, according to the report, the new independent rear suspension for big people haulers cost so much to implement that GM ruled out reworking the Escalade to accept the Blackwing. At least one commenter rightly asked how could a suspension swallow that much money. A new piece in Motor Trend has the answer. The excellent Alissa Priddle spoke to Tim Herrick, GM's executive chief engineer for full-size trucks, about why the clean-sheet IRS cost "multimillions of dollars."  First, GM would need to build a new body shop at the Arlington, Texas plant that assembles the automaker's big SUVs to stamp the numerous wholly new parts and panels accommodating an IRS. Then GM would need to design and pay for a new assembly process. On top of those up-front costs, there was the incremental cost of the four-link IRS components being more expensive than those in the trucks' former leaf-sprung solid axles. Herrick endured so many rejections for so long that he remembers the date and time when he got approval for the new unit. He said it came down to a meeting where he told a higher-up, "I'll make you a deal: If we get to the reveal, or if we launch this and you think this was a dumb idea, I'll hand you my badge and let you walk me out." Head to Motor Trend to read the full story. Based on Herrick being on stage to help present the new SUVs to the press, and on our First Ride in the new Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban at GM's Milford Proving Grounds, it appears this will have a happy ending for all involved. Furthermore, since Herrick worked on the T1 platform that supports the big SUVs as well as the light- and heavy-duty pickups, he understood the demands on the commercial side, too. That could be why when Roadshow asked Tim Asoklis, chief engineer of the Tahoe and Suburban, if the new IRS could endure life in the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra, Asoklis answered, "Oh, absolutely." Related Video: