Smoke Free Pre-owned Clean Excellent Condition Certified Low Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Chevy Volt ads strike frustrating, yet familiar, chord

Sometimes, it's hard to let go. In the six years that GM has been advertising and selling the Chevy Volt, one dominant message is that the car is an EV without any range anxiety. On the one hand, this is a positive thing: our car does something that other electric vehicles don't. Of course, there's another, more reasonable take on the message that EVs only equal limited range: don't promote this viewpoint if you ever plan on selling a pure EV. But, of course, this is exactly what GM is doing with a new ad for the 2016 Chevy Volt. Called Elevator, the spot (watch it above) compares driving an all-electric car with riding in an elevator getting stuck. Your Nissan Leaf might run out of electricity, the ad says, and that would be as uncomfortable as being trapped between floors. The main problem, of course, is that Chevy also offers the Spark EV and is getting ready to sell the Bolt EV. Does the company think that everyone will forget these anti-EV commercials when it come time to shop for a Bolt? Even worse, does GM think we've forgotten the Anthem ad for the Volt back in 2010? Apparently, so. Elevator isn't the only ad for the 2016 Volt that GM debuted today. The other, called Time Capsule (below), takes a swipe at the Toyota Prius. Trouble is, there are two easy ways to dismiss this ad as well. First, and most obviously, if GM is against using old technology, then why does it continue to shove a 100-year-old fossil fuel engine into almost every car it builds? Second, attacking the Prius for using 15-year-old tech – when said tech is still able to mop the floor with any hybrid from GM in the fuel economy race - is more like an admission of defeat than anything to be proud of. "Hey look, the Prius uses technology from the '90s," GM says. To which the observant viewer will ask, "Well, then why can't you build a 50-mile-per-gallon hybrid, GM?" It's also worth noting that Chevy has been on a misguided advertising streak as of late. We bashed their ads that suggested its Silverado is better than the F-150 because it uses steel instead of aluminum, too, especially since those commercials used shark cages and stupid superhero costumes in an attempt to make a point. Chevy, stop assuming we're all idiots. Please. Now, the 2016 Volt is a great car and I know that GM can make a darn good Volt ad (like this one), so seeing the company shoot solid fuel-efficient technologies in the back (again and again) is just frustrating.

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:    

GM recalls 8,500 Chevrolet Malibu models for rear suspension glitch

According to a letter from General Motors to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, flaws in the build process of the 2013 Chevrolet Malibu have led to the recall of 8,519 cars. Units built between December 6, 2011 and January 15, 2013 may have been assembled with rear suspension cradles that had insufficient torque applied to certain bolts. That out-of-spec assembly could lead to issues ranging from slight noises to a loss of vehicle control.
The problem was first noticed in December of last year by a GM test fleet driver and eventually tracked back to the improperly torqued bolts on the suspension cradle assembled through July 2012 by a supplier located not too far from the Malibu's Detroit/Hamtramck Assembly Plant. Since an official NHTSA recall notice has not been issued yet, it isn't clear whether or not Detroit-built Malibus were the only ones affected (the 2013 Malibu is also built at GM's Fairfax Assembly Plant in Kansas City, Kansas). Dealers will fix the problem by inspecting vehicles for proper torque specs, retightening if not within specs and, in some cases, perform a rear-wheel alignment.