2008 Chevy 3500 Hd Duramax Dually 4x4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Chevy Equinox brings its revised face to Chicago

It's vital these days for automakers to keep up with the Jones' when in the crossover market. The segment is just too popular among buyers to let a vehicle waste away, and Chevrolet is giving the 2016 Equinox a slight refresh at the Chicago Auto Show to hopefully keep people interested. In reality, though, the CUV isn't too much different beyond a tweaked face and some interior improvements. The exterior now boasts a revised front fascia with a chrome-accented grille and projector beam headlights, and at the rear there are new taillights. Top -evel models get LED running lights, as well. Inside, the Equinox features a standard seven-inch touchscreen infotainment system with a backup cam, and for added safety, the CUV is now available with rear cross traffic and blade zone alert on some trims. Beyond these updates, the powertrains carry over entirely from before with the choice between a 2.4-liter four-cylinder and a 3.6-liter V6. These refreshed 2016 models go on sale this fall. Related Video:

Chevy Trax engineer says GMC version possible

The Buick Encore is doing so well and its platform-mate the Chevrolet Trax has such good reviewer vibes going for it already, that a GMC version hasn't been ruled out. During the recent press launch, Automotive News asked lead engineer Al Manzor if the Trax could wear a GMC-branded suit, to which Manzor replied, "I think that is certainly possible." That's a long way from telling us anything about the probability of a GMC version of the Trax, and a legion of questions would need to be answered before it could happen. How would a GMC version be priced to leave room for the $26,465 GMC Terrain but not eat into sales of the $20,995 Trax or the $24,035 Encore? Or would that matter? Could it primarily be considered to encourage a new faction of The Yukon Set at the compact end, GMC buyers being famously committed to the marque? And of course, would there be a Denali version? It'll probably be a long while before we have any kind of answers, but if you want to see it happen, the door to your campaign of persuasion is at least ajar.

GM’s Charlie Wilson was right: Stronger regulations can help U.S. automakers

Charlie Wilson had been the president and CEO of General Motors before being nominated to become secretary of defense by Dwight Eisenhower. During his Senate confirmation hearings, he controversially said, "For years I thought what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa." And he was right. While car companies aren't necessarily the most progressive when it comes to things that might have the slightest possibility of political blowback, General Motors should be credited for doing something absolutely forthright in this regard with its announcement that it wants the federal U.S. government not to squash the California Air Resources Board's emissions requirements but to actually create a 50-state "National Zero Emissions Vehicle" program that, in the words of Mark Reuss, executive vice president and president, Global Product Group and Cadillac, "will drive the scale and infrastructure investments needed to allow the U.S. to lead the way to a zero emission future." Filing comments to the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks is one thing. But a graphic the company developed for this announcement — shown above — is something else entirely, something that is absolutely credible, creative and clever. There is a photo of a Chevrolet Bolt EV driving along a highway, which seems to be in Marin County (based on the blurred San Francisco skyline in the background). Text on the photo states: "It's Time for American Leadership in Zero Emissions Vehicles." It seems to say, in effect, "If we want to make America great again, then we're going to do it by leading in technology, not by retreating behind weakened regulations." General Motors understands that the auto market is globally competitive, and if U.S.-based companies are going to be in the game, then they'd better be able to out-innovate the companies based elsewhere, where emissions and economy standards are not being weakened. What's good for our country ... Related Video: