4x4 Drw Diesel Leather Ext Cab Long Bed Media 2011 Chevy Silverado 3500 Lt 21k on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

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.

General Motors and EVs: No stranger to firsts, but where's the leadership?

2015 is already shaping up to be the year of "affordable, 200-mile EV" concepts. Nissan and Tesla have each been talking about them for some time, the latter promising to unveil its Model 3 at the North American International Auto Show in January before balking when the time came. Instead, Chevrolet beat them all by unveiling the Bolt concept at the same event, followed shortly thereafter with suggestions of a 2016 launch – potentially offering the first nationwide EV with anything close to that range. It was the ballsiest EV-related move General Motors has made in a quarter century. But will it remain so? Exactly 25 years before the Bolt rolled up onto the turntable, then-Chairman Roger Smith unveiled GM's last ground-up EV concept, the even-more-unfortunately-named Impact, at the Los Angeles Auto Show in January 1990. A few months later, he surprised most of his colleagues by announcing its intended production in honor of Earth Day. It was the first modern foray into electric vehicles for the US by any automaker, one that was rewarded by the State of California with what is now known as the Zero Emissions Vehicle mandate. The program not only forced other automakers into competing with Roger's pet project, but inspired all of them to fight it like small children against bedtime. Some years later, the drivers themselves weighed in, with a biting documentary about that obstinance and the leadership it cost both GM and the country. Within months, GM was first back into the fray of plug-in vehicles. Many criticized the company for starting with a PHEV rather than jump straight back into EVs. The choice wasn't totally out of the blue – even EV1 was meant to be followed by a PHEV. And especially on the heels of Who Killed the Electric Car?, some skittishness was understandable: even a successful EV would invite a "we told you so" public reaction, underscoring their mistake in ending the EV1 program. If a new EV didn't do well, they'd be convicted in the public eye as serial killers. All while seeking a federal bailout. For all the flak, the resulting Chevy Volt was and is a better car than GM has ever gotten credit for. But the company seemed to grow weary of having to overcome its varied past, and while the current owners remain happy, much of the stakeholder and community engagement that so effectively built early goodwill and sales growth faded not long after launch. Marketing has been spotty in both consistency and effectiveness.