50th Anniversary 5.7l V8 Manual Convertible Gray Black One Owner Local Trade on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM applies for LT5, LTX trademarks... are new small block variants coming?

Recently discovered General Motors trademark applications for LT4, LT5, LT88 and LTX have observers wondering what kind of high-performance offerings could be on their way. A new LT4 would mark a return of the engine designation first used on the Corvette Grand Sport, SLP Pontiac Firehawk and SLP Chevrolet Camaro SS from 1996 and 1997. Supposition at Corvette Forum - which provided advance intel on the C7 like these leaked images - believes a new LT4 could go into the high-performance trim of the next-gen, 2015 Camaro that would be more powerful than the 580-horsepower Camaro ZL1.
Seeing an LT5 again would also be déjà vu - in its former life it was a 5.7-liter V8 for the C4 Corvette ZR-1 from 1990-1994 designed by Lotus, producing from 370 hp to 405 hp. A mix of rumor and hope is that the new LT5 will be a supercharged evolution of the 6.2-liter LT1 (pictured) placed in the new C7 Corvette, and that it will go into the C7 version of the ZR1 pumping out something like 700 hp.
The LTX trademark is, as with that last letter, a complete mystery. If the "X" isn't a generic way to denote the whole LT family, it's wondered if it LTX could refer to a crate motor offering like the LSX.

GM recalls nearly 1 million vehicles for airbag defect

WASHINGTON — General Motors said on Friday it will recall nearly 1 million sport utility vehicles in the United States because the driver's airbag inflator may explode during deployment. The recall covers 994,763 Buick Enclave, Chevrolet Traverse, and GMC Acadia vehicles from the 2014 through 2017 model years with modules produced by ARC Automotive Inc. Dealers will replace the driver's airbag module. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said a driver in Michigan of a 2017 Chevrolet Traverse was in a crash in which the front-driver airbag inflator ruptured during deployment causing facial injuries. An April 25 inspection confirmed that the front driver airbag inflator ruptured in the vehicle. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) demanded the recall of 67 million air bag inflators because it believes there is a safety defect, but auto supplier ARC Automotive Inc rejected the U.S. regulator's request, documents released on Friday show. The auto safety agency said the inflators pose an unreasonable risk of death or injury. Even as ruptures mount, "ARC has not made a defect determination that would require a recall of this population," NHTSA said in its demand letter to the Tennessee-based company. "Air bag inflators that project metal fragments into vehicle occupants, rather than properly inflating the attached air bag, create an unreasonable risk of death and injury." GM said it was still investigating the issue with the assistance of a third-party engineering firm. "GM is taking this expanded field action out of an abundance of caution and with the safety of our customers as our highest priority," the Detroit automaker said. GM said it was aware of two prior ruptures of ARC-manufactured airbag inflators in 2015 Chevrolet Traverse vehicles, and GM conducted two earlier small recalls of about 3,000 ARC inflators. All three rupture events in Chevrolet Traverse vehicles involved the same inflator variant. ARC noted in a letter made public Friday that no root cause for those ruptures has been identified by ARC or GM. ARC said it was assessing the scope of GMÂ’s recall.  Government/Legal Recalls Buick Chevrolet GMC Safety Crossover SUV

Cruze Diesel Road Trip reveals the good and bad, but no ugly

Most of us have strong opinions on diesel-powered cars based on our perceptions of and experience with them. I used to thoroughly dislike oil burners for their noise, smoke and lackluster performance, and the fact that they ran on greasy, smelly stuff that was more expensive than gasoline, could be hard to find and was nasty to get on your hands when refueling. Those negatives, for me, trumped diesel's major positives of big torque for strong acceleration and better fuel economy. Are any of those knocks on diesel still valid today? I'm not talking semis, which continue to annoy me when their operators for some reason almost never shut them down. At any busy truck stop, the air seems always filled with the sound – and sometimes smell – of dozens of big-rig diesels idling endlessly and mindlessly. Or diesel heavy-duty pickups. Those muscular workhorses are far more refined than they once were and burn much less fuel than their gasoline counterparts. But good luck arriving home late at night, or departing early morning, without waking your housemates and neighbors with their clattery racket. No, I'm talking diesel-powered passenger cars, which account for more than half the market in Europe (diesel fuel is cheaper there) yet still barely bump the sales charts in North America. Diesel fuel remains more expensive here, too few stations carry it, and too many Americans remember when diesel cars were noisy, smelly slugs. Also, US emissions requirements make them substantially more expensive to certify, and therefore to buy. But put aside (if you can) higher vehicle purchase and fuel prices, and today's diesel cars can be delightful to drive while delivering much better fuel efficiency than gas-powered versions. So far in the US, all except Chevrolet's compact Cruze Diesel come from German brands, and all are amazingly quiet, visually clean (no smoke) and can be torquey-fun to drive. When a GM Powertrain engineering team set out to modify a tried-and-true GM of Europe turbodiesel four for North American Chevy Cruze compacts, says assistant chief engineer Mike Siegrist, it had a clear target in mind: the Volkswagen Jetta TDI 2.0-liter diesel. And they'll tell you that they beat it in nearly every way. "I believe we have a superior product," he says. "It's powerful, efficient and clean, and it will change perceptions of what a diesel car can be." The 2.0L Cruze turbodiesel pumps out 151 SAE certified horses and 264 pound-feet of torque (at just 2,000 rpm) vs.