Silver, Grand Sport, 6.2l V8, Low Miles, Onstar, Gps, Black Leather on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Chevy Silverado HD vs. 2019 Ram, Ford heavy duty trucks: How they compare on paper

Last year was all about the latest in light-duty full-size pickup trucks, so this year, Ram, Ford and Chevy are launching the heavy-duty variants. The first out of the gate is the redesigned 2019 Ram 2500 and 3500 HD, and Ram dropped all the pertinent specs with the reveal. Chevy followed with the new Silverado HD in Chicago, and Ford revealed updates to the Super Duty at the same show. Ford hasn't released details on output, payload capacity, towing capacity or pricing for the updated Super Duty. As such, we'll be comparing the current Super Duty with the all-new Silverado HD and Ram HD. Both Chevy and Ram have revealed full specs for each of their respective trucks, leaving out only pricing, which we've estimated based on the outgoing models. You can see the raw details in the chart below, followed by extra information and analysis. Some things to keep in mind: These specifications cover all versions of the Ram HD, Silverado HD and Super Duty, such as 2500 and 3500 models, and all the way up to F-450. Specifications can vary widely based on engine, drivetrain, cab and bed configurations, so be sure to take a close look at the specific model you're interested in when you get particularly serious about buying. And of course, be sure to check out our car comparison tool if you'd like to look at other trucks on the market. Engines and drivetrains All three of these trucks offer gasoline and diesel engines, but only the Ram has two versions of the diesel. Starting with gas engines, Ram's 6.4-liter V8 has the power advantage with 25 more horsepower than the next-most-potent Super Duty, but the new Silverado HD's 6.6-liter V8 takes the torque crown at 464 pound-feet, nearly 35 more than the other two gas engines. The Ram is also the only one to pair an eight-speed automatic with the gas engine, whereas the Ford and Chevy make do with a six-speed. With diesel engines, horsepower is a weak point for the Ram. The Ram's entry-level turbo 6.7-liter inline-six is the weakest, as the only one with under 900 pound-feet of torque and under 400 horsepower. Even the high-output version only makes 400 horsepower, while the Chevy makes 445 and the Ford 450. But the tables turn with torque, as the Ram makes a best-in-class 1,000 pound-feet followed by the Ford's 935 and the Chevy's 910. Both the Ram and the current Super Duty diesels each get a six-speed automatic, but the new Silverado HD's diesel gets a 10-speed unit.

GM issues stop-sale for 3 SUVs over incorrect MPG rating

This week, GM sent a memo to Chevy, GMC, and Buick dealers to tell them to stop selling three SUVS. The 2016 Chevy Traverse, the GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave all have EPA window stickers that show higher fuel economy ratings than the vehicles actually have. Unlike other recent – and very public – fuel economy ratings problems from VW and Mitsubishi, it doesn't seem like GM did anything wrong with the testing for these vehicles, it just misprinted the labels. New labels are being printed and should arrive at dealerships this weekend and early next week. After that, the SUVs will be able to be sold and delivered again. The official fuel economy rating for the three SUVs are all the same. The correct numbers for the all-wheel drive versions are 17 miles per gallon combined, 15 city, and 22 highway. The stickers say the SUVs get 17/24/19. The front-wheel driver models were also incorrectly labeled, and the total number of affected vehicles is 59,823. In the memo, GM said the problem was caused by an "inadvertent error," Automotive News says. GM is working with the EPA to solve the issue. We have asked GM for a comment on the mistake and will update this post if we hear back. Related Gallery 2013 GMC Acadia View 16 Photos News Source: Automotive News – sub. req. Government/Legal Green Buick Chevrolet GM GMC Fuel Efficiency mpg gmc acadia chevy traverse

GM's Oshawa plant may close after Camaro production moves

Most of the time, when vehicle production is moved from one assembly plant to another, it spells bad news for the former. While General Motors won't go so far as to say its Oshawa, Ontario factory, which is losing the Chevrolet Camaro to the Lansing Grand River plant, is in trouble, analysts seem to think the factory's days are numbered. Forecasts for the facility are far from positive. The loss of the Camaro this year, combined with GM's targeted shutdown of a single-shift assembly line responsible for the fleet-only Chevy Impala Limited and the Equinox crossover is a bad enough omen. But with AutoForecast Solutions CEO Joe McCabe telling The Detroit News that the plant's other two products, the Cadillac XTS and Buick Regal, aren't likely to stick around beyond 2017, things look decidedly grim at Oshawa. "There is a fairly strong chance that the plant could close," Jeff Schuster, senior VP of forecasting for LMC Automotive, told The Detroit News. That doesn't mean that Unifor, Canada's auto union, and the Canadian government are going to let the factory die without a fight. And with the latter chipping in $10 billion as part of GM's 2009 bailout, you might think it has a degree of leverage in the situation. A meeting between the government and the Detroit Three at the 2015 North American International Auto Show revealed that Oshawa is already a topic of conversation. "We made it very clear that we would like to see an indication on the future of Oshawa sooner, in particular because the timing is very challenging for our supply chain to be able to adjust to potentially future orders or changes, but also to know that there are going to be future opportunities at Oshawa," Ontario's Minister of Economic, Development, Employment and Infrastructure Brad Duguid told The Detroit News. "Bottom line: It's time they made a longer-term commitment here," Unifor President Jerry Dias said, echoing Duguid's statements. It's unclear if this sort of strong talk will be enough to save 3,300-plus employees, although based on the analysts' forecasts, we doubt it.