2005 Chevrolet Tahoe Police Interceptor In Virginia on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM: Without LG Chem, we couldn't build Bolt EV [UPDATE]

It's absolutely no surprise that General Motors has a thing for LG Corp. The Detroit automaker and the Korean parts supplier have been working in public on electric vehicles ever since it was announced that LG Chem would supply the battery cells for the Chevy Volt in 2009. LG Chem was even named GM's 2010 Supplier of the Year. But, yesterday, the connection between the two companies was strengthened with the announcement that LG Electronics would be supplying a number of components for the upcoming Chevy Bolt electric vehicle. The Bolt is expected to be able to go about 200 miles and will carry a price tag of about $30,000 (after incentives) when it arrives in 2017 or so. LG's new components can be found almost everywhere in the Bolt. They include the battery pack and the battery heater, a new motor, the power inverter module, the electric climate control system compressor, the on-board charger, high-power distribution module, the accessory power module, and power line communication module. Oh, and then there are LG Electronics' advanced display technologies like the new instrument cluster and a new infotainment cluster. LG Electronics also supplies parts for the 4G LTE OnStar system, just like it does in other new Chevys. If that all sounds like a lot of components to you, you're right. Mark Reuss, GM executive vice president of global product development, purchasing and supply chain, said that without the expanded relationship with LG, GM would not be able to bring the Bolt to market (insert old ironic quote link here). "I think GM was lacking that [electrification knowledge] in a very complete way for many years, I'll just be frank about that," Reuss said. "I also think that on an electrified basis, this requires a long-term commitment and trust that sometimes is violated on a more short-term, regular, traditional basis. I think we have found something completely different with LG and I think that has become a widely talked about and duplicated want from our purchasing and corporate standpoint with our supply base." The "this" that Reuss is talking about here is the OEM-supplier relationship, something has evolved with the LG-GM situation. Previously, the automaker-supplier relationship used to be more like a dictator telling underlings what he needed, Reuss said, and that was a bad idea. "Today's competitive landscape requires a different approach, especially in electrified vehicles," he said.

Chevrolet Malibu gets across-the-board price cuts, hopes to dig out of slump

To say that things aren't going well for the newly redesigned 2013 Chevrolet Malibu is a pretty sizable understatement. Reports have been swirling about the Malibu getting an emergency design refresh, less than a year after its introduction, as well as having its production at the Fairfax Assembly Plant halted twice already this year for excessive inventory. Now, Motor Trend is reporting that the midsize sedan will be receiving price drops across the board ranging from $300 on a number of models up to $770 on the 1LT trim; offsetting some of MSRP drop, though, the destination charge has increased from $760 to $810.
Without destination, the entry-level Malibu LS now starts at $21,995, which is still about $300 more than a Honda Accord and about $300 less than the segment's top-selling Toyota Camry. This new pricing also drops the price of the Eco, 2LT and 3LT trims by $300. The LTZ trim has dropped by $415, meaning that the Malibu's top dog now starts at just under $30,000, excluding destination.
Here are the new starting prices for all eight of the Malibu trim levels compared to the previous prices for the 2013 model year (including destination):

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.