1999 Chevrolet Express 1500 Base Standard Cargo Van Plumbing Service Truck on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Chevrolet Colorado Diesel First Drive [w/video]

The first thing you notice inside the diesel Chevy Colorado is that it's quiet. Almost too quiet. A lot has been done to quell noise and vibration with this new powertrain, and it shows – or rather, doesn't. There's some characteristic diesel clatter at idle, but even then it's distant and practically disappears as you start moving down the road. At full throttle, when the engine is at its noisiest, the sound isn't particularly diesel-like, just a pleasant intake breath. The accompanying smoothness is almost eerie. When we ask where all the noise went, Chevy's engineers, marketing guys, and PR reps all explain that this refinement is what Americans want. We're still not sure. This is a truck, after all, and the diesel pickup customer is different from the guy buying a diesel Cruze for his highway commute. Chevy contends that they're also not the same as the buyer of a Silverado HD. Although this 2.8-liter Duramax four-cylinder has been in service elsewhere around the globe, its first US application is in the Colorado and its GMC Canyon twin. The engine puts out 181 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque, and it does so unobtrusively as a result of a lot of modifications for our market. To keep normal diesel sensations out of the cabin, the intake and oil pan both get acoustic treatments. A new, thicker material is used for firewall sound deadening. Redesigned balance shafts have tighter tolerances to increase smoothness. The diesel powertrain is smoother than the Colorado's gasoline V6. One of the more interesting and certainly unexpected vibration-reduction changes is a special torque converter from German supplier LuK equipped with a centrifugal pendulum absorber. This pendulum spreads from the center of the torque converter as engine speed increases and is tuned to absorb the four-cylinder's second-order vibrations, not just those in a narrow frequency band. It does an admirable job, especially considering the engine's biggish, 0.7-liter cylinders, which lead to bigger vibrations. The result is a powertrain that's smoother than GM's (not particularly smooth) corporate V6, which is available in the standard Colorado. It's quieter than a Cruze diesel and even out-softens some gas direct-injection engines on the market. Paradoxically, it may be the most refined of all of the Colorados. No vibration comes through the steering wheel, pedals, floorboards, or even the rearview mirror. But you can tell it's a diesel when you hit the throttle.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.

Our favorite mid-engine Corvette theories and rumors

The mid-engine Corvette! We just saw blurry photos through the foliage, and are hearts are all aflutter because it means that this car is real. And it's the most " never before" Corvette since 1984. Which leads us to all kinds of wacky theories and speculation. Everybody knows something or heard from a guy. None of those guys (or gals) from GM are talking to Autoblog, to be clear. But that won't stop us from stirring the pot. Let's go over a few point-by-point. The pushrod engine will be replaced by an overhead-cam V8 Car and Driver has repeatedly reported that an overhead-cam engine will come after the mid-engine Corvette's debut with an old-school pushrod. We've heard the same thing firsthand, albeit from a source with no connection to the development of the Corvette or powertrain. "At some point two valves can't pass future emissions regulations," said the guy we know. While the pushrod engine is compact, the design makes it difficult - if not impossible - for sophisticated variable valve timing (and lift) systems that control combustion with more precision. Hasty conclusion: The pushrod engine has a finite life in front of it. This one's a lock, it's a just a matter of when. Bowling Green's new paint shop is really the mid-engine assembly line Credit to Reddit for this one. Like we said, everybody knows a guy. But let's look deeper. The new paint facility costs $439 million dollars and adds 450,000 square feet, almost half the size of the existing plant. Plus GM announced another $290 million in upgrades at Bowling Green Assembly. That sure sounds like a lot of money, but you can actually spend that much on a paint booth. Porsche spent 500 million Euros (about $561 million dollars) to add the Macan assembly to its Leipzig, Germany plant in 2014. Chrysler shelled out $850 million for a paint shop in Sterling Heights, Michigan. GM spent $600 million for a new paint shop at the Fairfax (Kansas City) plant. Honda, on the other hand, is working on a thrifty $210 million project in Marysville, Ohio that includes a 300,000 square foot expansion, and the low-volume Acura NSX facility only cost $70 million. Hasty conclusion: The square footage and cost could easily mean a new assembly line instead of (or in addition to) a paint line. And if the NSX plant was really that cheap, GM could have hidden a similar sum in its existing announcements.