7-days *no Reserve* '11 Volt Nav Leather Back Up Warranty 1-owner Best Deal on 2040-cars

Auto blog

CA Chevy dealer allegedly adds $50K 'market value adjustment' to 2015 Z06

It seems to happen with every eagerly anticipated new car – dealerships, recognizing that crushing demand far outstrips the initial limited supply of a new model, inflate the price via a so-called "market value adjustment." We've seen it in the past with a number of new models, and now it's happening again with one of the Detroit 3's hottest vehicles. A dealership in Roseville, CA, outside of Sacramento, has allegedly attached a staggering $49,995 market value adjustment to a 2015 Corvette Z06. We say allegedly because, despite the evidence uncovered by BoostAddict, John L. Sullivan Chevy's online inventory listing doesn't display the price premium of the Z06 in question, a (normally) $93,965 model with the top-end 3LZ trim. It's unclear if either of the dealer's other Z06s, both 3LZs, one of which is in transit, will receive similar price adjustments. Now, legally, Sullivan Chevy isn't doing anything wrong here. Dealerships are under no obligation to observe a manufacturer's suggested retail price, a point General Motors' spokesperson Ryndee Carney pointed out to Autoblog via email. "For the Corvette Z06, Chevrolet has established a Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price we feel is right for the market. Actual transaction prices, however, are the province of the dealer," Carney said, adding that a dealer zone manager will be discussing the price hike with the dealership. While we also reached out to the dealership over both the market value adjustment and the price of the Z06 as it appears on the company's website, we've yet to hear back as of this writing. Should they reply to our inquiries, we'll be sure to update you. Until then, we'd like to hear what you think about this case. Is Sullivan Chevy simply pricing the cars as high as it thinks the market can bear, or is this a cash grab for an hotly anticipated product? Have your say in Comments.

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.

GM finds steering flaw, decides it doesn't warrant a recall

Guess what? General Motors is back in the spotlight for not recalling something. This time, though, not only does the company have an argument against a recall campaign, but its position is supported by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. According to The New York Times, over 50 owners of GM vehicles have reported instances of stuck or seized steering after driving long distances without moving the wheel. One owner complained to NHTSA that the "locked" steering of their 2013 Buick Verano caused a collision with a concrete barrier in a construction zone. Along with the 2013 to 2014 model year Verano sedans, Chevrolet Cruze and Malibu sedans are also affected. Considering the popularity of those models, GM needs to have a reason for not issuing a recall, right? "Based on a very low rate of occurrence – ranging from less than one half to less than two incidents per thousand vehicles – and the fact that the condition is remedied when the wheel is turned, GM determined this was not a safety issue," spokesman Alan Adler told The Times. The company has, however, issued a technical service bulletin for owners that complain of the problem. The fix is nothing more than a software update that is covered for 10 years or 150,000 miles from new. NHTSA cited GM's actions, along with descriptions of the problems from customers, in its decision not to issue a recall, with spokeswoman Catherine Howden saying, "the symptoms described would be a brief, perceptible change in steering feel that has little to no effect on the driver's ability to safely steer the vehicle." "When terms like 'notchy,' 'stick,' 'slip' or 'feel' are used, it does not indicate a meaningful increase in steering effort," Howden told The Times via email. What do you think? Is GM in the wrong here? Should there be a recall, or is the issue so limited as to not warrant one? Have your say in Comments. Featured Gallery 2013 Buick Verano Turbo: Review View 20 Photos Related Gallery 2014 Chevrolet Malibu: First Drive View 36 Photos Related Gallery 2014 Chevrolet Cruze Turbo Diesel: Quick Spin View 14 Photos News Source: The New York TimesImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Steven J. Ewing, Seyth Miersma / AOL Government/Legal Recalls Buick Chevrolet GM Safety Sedan buick verano