05 Sierra Sle 4wd 4x4 Z71 Crew Cab Bed Cover Updated Wheels We Finance Texas on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GMC Syclone spools up a storm on Jay Leno's Garage

A storm was brewing on American roads in the early 1990s. That's when Detroit's automakers were producing some of the hottest performance trucks ever devised – models like the Ford Lightning, GMC Typhoon, and its flyweight pickup sibling, the GMC Syclone. Jay Leno just happens to have one of the latter in his garage, and took it out to showcase in this latest video segment. The Syclone was an exercise in absurdity, and could not only trounce any other pickup on the road, it could outrun anything else GM made and just about anything else on the road – beating Ferraris and Porsches off the line. In a pickup, for crying out loud. The kicker is that its engine wasn't such a monster, either: under the hood sat a 4.3-liter turbocharged V6 pumping out what would seem by today's standards to be an adequate 280 horsepower and 350 pound-feet of torque. Even the smaller of the EcoBoost V6s available in today's Ford F-150 produces more than that. But in a lightweight, compact pickup, those figures were enough to propel the Syclone to 60 in 4.3 seconds and run the quarter-mile in 13.6 seconds. Long before the dune-jumping Ford F-150 SVT Raptor or even the Viper-powered Dodge Ram SRT-10, GM made fewer than 3,000 Syclones based on the compact Sonoma (sister to the Chevy S-10) and another 4,700 of the Typhoon, which was mechanically similar but more practical (albeit heavier) wagon bodywork from the Jimmy. But as Jay aptly points out, the Syclone was the one you wanted. Scope it out in the ten-minute video clip above.

2013 GMC Acadia Denali

Refreshed, Not Refreshing
I'm probably ill-suited to accurately and fairly take the full measure of a vehicle like the 2013 GMC Acadia Denali. This is a machine conjured around the express notion of corralling and then herding a brood of rafter-swinging hatchlings to and fro in relative comfort, and with no such passel of wee Bowmans to call my own, it's difficult to give this rig a fair shake. While I can certainly weigh cargo capacity, legroom and fuel economy stats with the best of them, I'd be lying to your face if I said the word "crossover" didn't urge some uncontrollable Pavlovian recoil from the murky recesses of my frame. To put it simply, I just can't stand the damn things.
As a rule, the segment is built on a bed of compromise. Manufacturers love nothing more than to spin up a tired yarn about the virtues of this particular neck of the market. We're told the crossbreeds deliver all the ride quality, driving dynamics and fuel economy of a car married with the seating position, capability and interior volume of the SUV set. That all sounds as swell as a sunset, but as the 2013 Acadia Denali so artfully illustrates, the advertising on the box is rarely congruous with the prize inside. Even with an imaginary squad of younglings at my heels, the refreshed luxury crossover doesn't quite manage to scratch the promised itches.

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.