2011 Chevrolet Traverse 1lt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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:

Chevy Volt replacement battery cost varies wildly, up to $34,000

There's a growing hubbub in the plug-in vehicle community over what looks like some ridiculously cheap replacement batteries for the Chevrolet Volt going up for sale. GM Parts Online, for example, is selling a replacement Volt battery with an MSRP of $2,994.64 but, with an online discount, the price comes down to $2,305.88. For the 16-kWh pack in the 2012 Volt, that comes to a very low $144.11 per kilowatt hour (kWH). But is it a real deal? How can it be, when a Chevy dealer may quote you a price of up to $34,000 to replace the pack? For a 16-kWh Volt pack, $2,305.88 comes to a very low $144.11 per kWh. But is it a real deal? Battery packs in alternative propulsion vehicles are usually priced by the kWh and, historically, they've been thought to be in the range of $500-per-kWh for OEM offerings. Since automakers are understandably secretive about their costs, we still don't know what the real number is today, but we do know it varies by automaker. Tesla, for example, has said it pays less than $200-per-kWH at the cell level but, of course, a constructed pack would be more. Whatever is going on, li-ion battery prices are trending downward. So, $144.11 certainly sounds great, but what's the story here? Kevin Kelly, manager of electrification technology communications for General Motors, reminded AutoblogGreen that GM Parts Online is not the official GM parts website and that, "the costs indicated on the site are not what we would charge our dealers or owners for a replacement battery. There would be no cost to the Volt owner if their battery needs replacement or repair while the battery is under the eight year/100,000 mile limited warranty coverage provided by Chevrolet." A single price tag also can't be accurate for everyone, Kelly said. "If the customer needs to have their battery repaired beyond the warranty, the cost to them would vary depending on what needs to be replaced or repaired (i.e. number of modules, which specific internal components need replacement, etc.)." he said. "So, it's hard for us to tell you exactly what the cost would be to the customer because it varies depending on what might need to be repaired/replaced. As a result, the core charge would vary." But, is the $2,300 price even accurate for anyone? Thanks to a reader comment, we see that this similar item on New GM Parts makes it look like the lithium-ion modules that Kelly mentioned – where a lot of the expensive bits are – are not included.

2019 Toyota Corolla vs. compact hatchbacks: How they compare

So you've read what we thought about the 2019 Toyota Corolla Hatchback. Oh, you didn't? Well, click to your left, we'll still be here. Just made some coffee, we're good for a while. Welcome back! Wasn't that riveting? The blue paint sure is bright, eh? Well, now you must be wondering how that new 2019 Corolla stacks up with all the other hatchbacks. And, despite long thinking that hatchbacks were doomed, there are actually quite a lot of them these days. So many, in fact, that we couldn't fit them all in our space-limited comparison chart. So, with apologies to the Hyundai Elantra GT, Kia Forte and the dead-man-walking Ford Focus, these were the cars we chose based on sales and competitiveness: the Honda Civic Hatchback, Mazda3 5-Door, Volkswagen Golf, Chevrolet Cruze and Subaru Impreza. We also included the outgoing Corolla iM for reference. If you think we've left something of interest out, you can always create your own comparison. Performance and fuel economy There is but one king here, and its name is Civic. While the sedan and coupe come with a naturally aspirated 2.0-liter 158-horsepower four-cylinder that's less potent than the Corolla's, the hatchback comes standard with the 1.5-liter turbo that aces the segment in terms of both acceleration and fuel economy. The Golf's acceleration should be comparable, but as you can see, it trails on fuel economy (still not bad, though). The new Corolla ends up being better than the rest with its new 168-hp four-cylinder paired to novel transmissions: a six-speed manual with rev-matched downshifting (!) and a CVT that mimics the actions of a 10-speed automatic. The Corolla does weigh more than everything else, though, so that could hamper its acceleration. Fuel economy data also wasn't announced, but Toyota indicated it would be a bit better than the old Corolla iM. Something akin to the 2.0-liter Mazda 3's numbers seems likely. As for the Mazda, its top two trim levels actually come standard with its bigger engine. In any event, despite its ample power, testing has often showed that the Civic is still the quicker car from 0 to 60 mph. And finally, let's not leave out the two on the end. The Subaru is the only car in the segment that offers all-wheel drive (the Focus RS and Golf R don't count), but is also the segment weakling now that the Corolla iM has been discontinued.