1958 Chevrolet Biscayne on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar I-Pace vs. Tesla Model 3 and other EVs: How they compare on paper

The 200-mile club of electric vehicles is really growing. The most recent member is the Jaguar I-Pace, the company's first pure EV. It promises luxury, performance, style, and most important, good range. Nearly as recent is the Hyundai Kona EV, and while it doesn't promise luxury or performance like the Jaguar (it's also smaller), it does pack impressive range. With the introduction of both of these electric cars, we thought we would see how they compare against each other, and the other two big names in high-capacity electric cars: the Chevy Bolt EV and the Tesla Model 3. This isn't intended to be a direct, apples-to-apples comparison, as the four are quite different. If anything, they break into two groups: bigger and more luxurious, and smaller and less expensive. Then again, the number of vehicles with this electric range is small and comparisons to EV's with less range wouldn't be too kind to the other guys. If you want to learn more about these EVs, and compare them with other cars, be sure to check out our Car Finder and comparison tools. Horsepower and torque There is one clear winner here, and that's the Jaguar I-Pace. It packs a whopping 394 horsepower and 512 pound-feet of torque. That comes through a pair of electric motors (one at the front, another at the rear) that provide the Jag with all-wheel drive, the only one of these vehicles to offer it (at the moment). Altogether, it allows the I-Pace to have the best 0-60 mph time of 4.5 seconds. At the other end of the spectrum is the Hyundai Kona EV. It's front-drive, like the Bolt EV, and has effectively the same amount of horsepower as the Chevy at 201 horsepower, but its 0-60-mph time is almost a second slower. And the low-range version of the Kona, excluded because it doesn't go more than 200 miles between charges, is slower still. The Tesla Model 3 is the only vehicle with rear-wheel drive, and with a 0-60 mph of 5.1 seconds for the Long Range model, it is still very quick. Range and energy use Frequently, the all-consuming question with electric cars is, "How far can I go on a charge?" And to go the farthest, you need the long-range Tesla Model 3. It can go 310 miles. It has the added advantage of being able to use the network of Tesla Supercharger stations, though they are pay-per-use with the Model 3. Even the lower capacity Model 3, with just 220 miles of range, can use these stations.

2016 Chevy Camaro performance figures released

If you want to make a car faster, there are two sure-fire ways to get the job done – add power and/or reduce weight. Chevy has done both for the 2016 Camaro, putting as much as 455 horsepower into its muscle coupe and shaving a few hundred pounds from every trim. That range-topping power comes courtesy of a 6.2-liter V8 engine, and it's enough grunt to push an automatic-equipped Camaro SS to 60 miles per hour in just 4.0 seconds flat (4.3 seconds with a manual) and down the quarter mile in 12.3 seconds at 116 mph (12.5 at 115 for the stick). Not coincidentally, those acceleration specs, at least on paper, put the V8-powered Camaro SS just above the Mustang GT on the muscle-car pecking order. When the road gets twisty, Chevy claims the Camaro SS can generate as much as .97 g on the skidpad. And, thanks in part to its Goodyear Eagle F1 summer tires, the SS can stop from 60 in as little as 117 feet. We look forward to finding out how nimble the new Camaro feels when compared to its primary competitors. <p>Your browser does not support iframes.</p> Moving down one notch to the 335-hp 3.6-liter V6, properly equipped 2016 Camaro coupes can hit 60 in as few as 5.1 seconds and cover the quarter in 13.5 at 103. Perhaps even more intriguingly, the 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder and its 275 horsepower (the only configuration quicker with a manual transmission, incidentally) can propel the Camaro to 60 in 5.4 seconds and through the 'ol 1320 in 14 seconds flat. That's seriously quick, but buyers comparing the Camaro to the Mustang will find that the EcoBoost 2.3-liter is a bit more powerful (310 hp and 320 lb-ft) and quicker (5.1 seconds to 60). Chevy is making lots of noise about the efforts its engineers went through to shed weight from the 2016 Camaro, going so far as to shave down suspension bolts so that no thread went unthreaded. The weight-saving obsession pays off – base Camaro models are down 390 pounds while the SS model drops 223 pounds over the 2015. The 2016 Camaro SS boasts a power-to-weight ratio of 8.1 lbs per pony, a 14-percent improvement over the last-gen. Even though weight is down, chassis stiffness is said to be up by 28 percent over the fifth-gen Camaro coupe. Also of note: The Camaro is now lighter than the Mustang across the board when comparing like-to-like configuration levels. The 2016 Chevy Camaro starts at $26,695 (including $995 for destination).

GM won't pay owners of recalled cars for lost value

Kenneth Feinberg, the man in charge of the General Motors compensation fund dealing with the its widespread ignition switch woes, has issued an informal, two-letter response to the plaintiffs in more than 70 lawsuits seeking redress for lost resale value of their Cobalts: "No." The cases were recently combined into one, but Feinberg told The Detroit News that the fund will deal "only with death and physical injury claims," and that "perceived diminished value" will get no consideration.
ALG, the firm specializing in establishing residual values, determined that Cobalt owners had lost $300 compared to the segment competition and doesn't envision any long-term effects from the recall situation. Feinberg's statement comes in advance of public details on how the compensation fund will work and adheres to GM's long-held position on the matter. The company has already asked a judge to throw out such suits using the pre-bankruptcy defense, even as it stopped using that defense in cases of injury and death.
With plenty of potential gain from the GM suit, however, don't expect the plaintiffs to give up yet. When Toyota was sued for the same reason during the unintended acceleration debacle, it eventually settled the case for between $1 billion and $1.4 billion just to get it over with. Since the 85 law firms involved in the Toyota litigation took home more than $250 million of that total, we shouldn't expect the attorneys to give up on a GM payout, either.