Chevrolet Astro Van on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Did the Chevy Corvette Z06 break 7 minutes at the Ring? Not likely

"Just because it's on the internet doesn't make it true." That's rule number one, two and arguably, three, of surfing the world wide web. In today's example of this rule, we have the following. The website HorsepowerKings is claiming that a 2015 Chevrolet Corvette Z06, with the eight-speed automatic and Z07 package, managed to lap the Nurburgring Nordschleife in under seven minutes. To put that in perspective, that super-quick time would put the 650-horsepower, $97,000 (the price of a 2LZ with the Z07/8AT combo) Z06 a mere two seconds slower around the world's most challenging race track than the $929,000, 887-horsepower Porsche 918 Spyder Weissach. It's about eight seconds quicker than Nissan's own test of the GT-R Nismo Track Pack and 13 seconds faster than a Dodge Viper ACR. Unfortunately, Chevy says there isn't anything to it. We reached out to the Bowtie's Monte Doran, who confirmed that HK's claims are "not accurate." "Any one – a manufacturer, a journalist, a guy standing on the fence of the Ring – can claim a lap time. As such, we think the in-car video is essential to proving a time is real and credible, and Chevrolet will not release a lap until we have a video to substantiate the claim," Doran told Autoblog. "Chevrolet accumulated nearly 1,000 miles of testing on the Nurburgring with the Z06. During that time, we only had two opportunities to run a lap on video – and both were rained out. If we get a lap on video, we will post an official time." Doran finished by referencing the "only official lap time" for the Z06 – a 2:41 around the Virginia International Raceway. Frankly, we aren't terribly surprised by Chevy's position. One would imagine if the Z06 were matching million-dollar hypercars around the 'Ring, the company would literally be screaming about it from Renaissance Center's rooftop. As this is quite the opposite of that, though, we're betting that the real Z06 lap time - while still likely very, very fast – won't be quite quick enough to frighten the brightest and best of today's hypercars.

May 2016: FCA wins, Ford and GM stumble on weak car volumes

The May 2016 sales numbers are in, and it looks as though FCA is getting some vindication for boldly cancelling two slow-selling car models. Meanwhile, Ford saw overall sales dip and GM's May volume took a big dive versus the same month in 2015. While Marchionne's decision to axe the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Dart has drawn criticism as being short-sighted, it's working for FCA so far. Although the Dart and 200 aren't out of production yet and no capacity has been shifted to crossover or trucks, May's numbers show that the emphasis on Jeep and Ram models makes sense right now. FCA's US sales rose 1 percent last month compared to May 2015, putting the year-to-date total at 955,186 vehicles, an increase of 6 percent compared to the same period last year. Standouts included the Jeep Renegade, Compass, and Patriot, and the Fiat 500X. Ram pickup sales were down 3 percent. And your fun fact is that Alfa Romeo sales were up precisely 10 percent, for a total of 44 4Cs sold versus 40 in the same month last year. At FoMoCo, the Ford brand took a hit to the tune of 6.4 percent from May 2015 to 2016, registering 226,190 sales last month. Lincoln showed improvement on its modest numbers, going from 9,174 to 9,807, a 6.9 percent increase. Overall, Ford was down 5.9 percent for the month to 235,997; despite the slump, year-to-date total Ford sales are up 4.2 percent to 1,112,939. Strong sellers included Escape, Expedition, F-Series, and Transit - big stuff. Most small and/or efficient models (Fiesta, Focus, Fusion, C-Max) saw sales slides. Fusion sales were also down, likely due to effects of model changeover to the freshened 2017 model. Ford has promised four new crossovers and SUVs by 2020 and if things keep trending this way the company will be able to sell them, but things could change in the next four years. GM saw the worst of it for domestic brands. Retail and fleet sales were down for each of the four divisions, with the May 2016 total dropping 18 percent to 240,450 vehicles. GM's year-to-date sales are down 5.0 percent in 2016 to 1,183,705. Both the Sierra and Silverado were down significantly, and the majority of Chevy, Buick, GMC, and Cadillac nameplates saw sales decreases, with both small cars and larger utilities included. Not even big stuff could help GM this month, it seems. We'll have more on the rest of the industry's May sales as those figures trickle in.

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.