2013 Chev Silverado Lt Crew Cab 6.6l Duramax 4x4 Lift Tires Wheels 1-owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM posts $4 billion third-quarter profit thanks to trucks and SUVs

DETROIT — General Motors is posting huge third quarter numbers, pulling in $4 billion in profit over three months after losing money due to the virus outbreak. GM's adjusted earnings were $2.83 per share, easily outpacing Wall Street's per-share projections of $1.43, according to a survey by FactSet. Revenue of $35.5 billion also edged out most expectations. Shares jumped almost 6% before the opening bell Thursday. The company swung back from a $806 million loss in the second quarter, when it was restarting factories shuttered for safety during the early stages of the pandemic. The Detroit automaker joined most global automakers in reporting better-than-expected earnings from July through September as sales across the globe started to rebound from coronavirus lockdowns, especially in China. GM sales in China jumped 12% in the third quarter, with sales of its Buick and Cadillac brands both rising more than 25%. In the U.S., GMÂ’s most profitable market, sales fell 9.9% in the third quarter compared with a year ago, but were a dramatic improvement over the 34% drop in the second quarter. Sales improved sequentially each month, the automaker said, an encouraging trend. GMÂ’s profit was boosted by higher-priced pickup trucks and large SUVs, which have seen strong sales in the U.S. through the pandemic. It was the best quarter on record for GM's Chevrolet Blazer. Sales of the Cadillac XT6 spiked 45% in the U.S. over last year. Large pickups also sold well. GM also said it was pumping $2 billion into its Spring Hill, Tennessee manufacturing plant to push its transition to produce electric vehicles. Last week, crosstown rivals Fiat Chrysler and Ford reported strong third-quarter net income. FCA said it made $1.4 billion for the period, while Ford earned $2.39 billion. Related Video: Earnings/Financials Buick Cadillac Chevrolet GM GMC

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.

GM drops diesel engines for 2020 Chevy Equinox and GMC Terrain crossovers

GM is officially discontinuing the diesel engine in the Chevy Equinox and GMC Terrain for the 2020 model year. The 1.6-liter turbodiesel was always an oddball of an engine in the compact crossover segment, and now the experiment has come to an end. The Car Connection initially reported the news, and a GMC spokesperson, Stuart Fowle, confirmed it to us this morning.  “A huge majority of our Terrain customers have opted for one of our two gas engines," says Fowle. We canÂ’t say this eventuality comes as a massive surprise, as we saw news from couple of months ago that GM was dropping all-wheel drive from the diesel-powered cars for 2020. Low demand was cited as the reason for that cull, and itÂ’s the same for the little GM crossovers this time around, too. These vehicles were the only ones powered with a diesel engine in their class, but thatÂ’s going to be changing. Just as GM is going away from the diesel, Mazda is finally bringing its diesel to market in the CX-5. YouÂ’ll only be able to get that engine in the most expensive ($42,045) trim level, combined with all-wheel drive, though. The cheapest Equinox diesel starts at a comparably low $30,795. ThatÂ’s a $2,400 upcharge over the base 1.5-liter turbo four-cylinder, and the value is questionable. Mileage is better, but diesel fuel is more expensive. Towing capability didnÂ’t increase over the base engineÂ’s 1,500-pound capacity, but the extra torque around town was nice. As diesels go in the U.S., this one was rather rough and noisy, possibly contributing to some turning their noses up after a test drive. Perhaps another reason for its demise was that the much quicker 2.0-liter turbo Equinox was only $100 more than the diesel. This engine offered significantly better towing at 3,500 pounds, too. You can read all about what we thought of the diesel in our first drive review here, but the 2019 model year is the last one if you had it on your shortlist. This article has been updated to indicate the source.