1979 Chevrolet Corvette on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Is Buick's surprise Detroit concept a Camaro-sized coupe?

Tomorrow night marks the unofficial start of the 2016 Detroit Auto Show. Keep your eyes peeled for a number of reveals, including a surprise debut from Buick. Yes, Buick. And we think it's going to be something really hot. According to a report from Bloomberg, the Tri-Shield's secret car could be a Camaro-sized sport coupe concept. As Bloomberg explains, it'd certainly gel with the impression the company is trying to put out – that it's no longer a brand for those with one foot in the grave. Introducing a sports coupe, even as a concept, could certainly reinforce that message. And if it happens to make production – which is not a certainty, Bloomberg's secret source says – it could certainly help Buick drive its average buyer age down from 59. Bloomberg doesn't offer any speculation on Buick's new coupe, but we have no problem making educated guesses. Our most reliable conjecture is this: it will ride on General Motors' Alpha platform, which underpins both the Camaro and the Cadillac ATS. And with a certain twin-turbocharged V6 in the GM stable, we've got an idea of what kind of engine could be shown. That speculation will have to suffice for now. But don't worry, we'll have official details, live images, and video tomorrow when Buick unveils its new concept in Detroit's Eastern Market.

Recharge Wrap-up: Ford steals Best Green Brand spot from Toyota, EV buyer survey goes online

Chevrolet is one of the Top Global Green Brands of 2014, according to brand consultancy firm Interbrand. Chevy ranks number 32 on the list, which cover brands across a wide variety of segments. The report measures brand perception and brand performance, and the gap between the two is small for Chevrolet. "The company is not only actively demonstrating its environmental commitment," says Interbrand CEO Jez Frampton. "It's communicating those efforts in an authentic way that resonates with customers." Chevrolet cites its Spark EV, Volt and Cruze models as reason for its green cred. This is the first time Toyota didn't take the top spot. Being 32nd is good and all, but other automotive brands ranked much higher than the Bowtie. Ford, Toyota, Honda and Nissan took the top four spots in the report, respectively, with BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz all besting Chevrolet. The big takeaway here is that Ford topped the list. In the Top Global Green Brand list's four-year history, this is the first time Toyota didn't take the top spot. Ford was second on the list last year, and 15th in 2012. "Ford embodies everything the business of the future must be: efficient, visionary, flexible, adept at problem-solving, cooperative, and focused on creating shared value," Interbrand says on its website. "From unveiling a first-of-its-kind solar-powered vehicle, the C-MAX Solar Energi Concept, to partnering with peers across sectors to do the seemingly impossible - like creating bio-plastic out of tomato fiber with Heinz-Ford is showing us what's possible." It bears mentioning that Ford's most recent MPG adjustments came after the study was conducted. Ford is also making the news for its 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine earning International Engine of the Year for the third straight year. Awarded Best Engine Under 1.0 Liter, the turbocharged three-cylinder motor earned high praise from judges. "This year's competition was the fiercest yet, but the 1.0-liter EcoBoost continues to stand out for all the right reasons – great refinement, surprising flexibility and excellent efficiency," said International Engine of the Year co-chairman Dean Slavnich. "The 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine is one of the finest examples of powertrain engineering." The 123-horsepower engine powers the Fiesta 1.0-liter EcoBoost, and will be available in a version of the Ford Focus in the US later this year. See more about the award in the press release, below.

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.