We Finance! 2012 Lt W/1lt Used Certified 3l V6 24v Automatic Fwd Suv Onstar on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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:    

Why the Corvette's Performance Data Recorder can be illegal in some states

The Performance Data Recorder with Valet Mode available on the 2015 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray seems like a fantastic tool for many owners. Whether they are taking 720p video while lapping the track in their new 'Vette, or just want to protect their purchase from inconsiderate joyriders, the system offers a lot of functionality in one package. However, one of the PDR's features might get buyers in trouble with the law, and it has nothing to do with recording some illicit high-speed driving on a favorite back road. The problem hinges on the various state laws concerning a person's right to privacy.
According to a letter posted by Jalopnik, Chevy dealers are asking 2015 Corvette owners not to use the Valet Mode portion of the PDR because it records audio in the cabin, in addition to performance specs. That's a problem because privacy laws vary from state to state with some requiring just one side's consent to tape sound and others requiring all parties to agree. According Jalopnik, 15 states mandate everyone's permission beforehand, but it's not clear whether these numbers are up to date. (Actually, the report varies, saying 13 states in some places and 15 in a list.)
According to the letter, Chevy is already working on a software update for the near future to rectify the issue. It's possible that simply adding a warning to drivers and the ability to turn off the audio recording function in Valet Mode might solve the problem. Obviously, this doesn't preclude Corvette drivers from using the performance aspect of the PDR, and owners are free tape lap after lap at the track.

GM does not have to turn over its ignition switch documents

In June the lawyer representing plaintiffs suing General Motors over faulty ignition switches accused GM and its firm King & Spalding of working together to cover up the malfunction. Bob Hilliard said that certain communication between GM and King & Spalding from 2010 to 2013, mainly focused on three Chevrolet Cobalt crashes, would reveal that they conspired in "burying what they knew" concerning the defect, and furthermore that the law firm broke rules of professional conduct once it found out about "ongoing fraudulent concealment" at GM. Hilliard filed a motion in a Manhattan court to force GM and King to hand over the memos, which were protected by attorney-client privilege. Hilliard said that the alleged ongoing fraud should trump attorney-client privilege, a GM spokesman said at the time that the issues in question had already been discussed previously, and that plantiffs already had much of the communication Hilliard's motion sought. US District Judge Jesse Furman ruled in favor of GM and King, refusing to order the release of the communication. In spite of finding probable cause that GM was engaging in a crime or fraud by not revealing the ignition switch defect, Furman did not find cause to believe that GM and King's discussions at the time were centered around continuing that potential crime or fraud. Saying also that plantiffs already had many of the disputed documents, attorney-client privilege should hold sway over the remainder. The class action case goes to trial in January 2016.