1955 Chevy Belair 4dr New 400 W/400 Horses on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM drops diesel engines for 2020 Chevy Equinox and GMC Terrain crossovers

GM is officially discontinuing the diesel engine in the Chevy Equinox and GMC Terrain for the 2020 model year. The 1.6-liter turbodiesel was always an oddball of an engine in the compact crossover segment, and now the experiment has come to an end. The Car Connection initially reported the news, and a GMC spokesperson, Stuart Fowle, confirmed it to us this morning.  “A huge majority of our Terrain customers have opted for one of our two gas engines," says Fowle. We canÂ’t say this eventuality comes as a massive surprise, as we saw news from couple of months ago that GM was dropping all-wheel drive from the diesel-powered cars for 2020. Low demand was cited as the reason for that cull, and itÂ’s the same for the little GM crossovers this time around, too. These vehicles were the only ones powered with a diesel engine in their class, but thatÂ’s going to be changing. Just as GM is going away from the diesel, Mazda is finally bringing its diesel to market in the CX-5. YouÂ’ll only be able to get that engine in the most expensive ($42,045) trim level, combined with all-wheel drive, though. The cheapest Equinox diesel starts at a comparably low $30,795. ThatÂ’s a $2,400 upcharge over the base 1.5-liter turbo four-cylinder, and the value is questionable. Mileage is better, but diesel fuel is more expensive. Towing capability didnÂ’t increase over the base engineÂ’s 1,500-pound capacity, but the extra torque around town was nice. As diesels go in the U.S., this one was rather rough and noisy, possibly contributing to some turning their noses up after a test drive. Perhaps another reason for its demise was that the much quicker 2.0-liter turbo Equinox was only $100 more than the diesel. This engine offered significantly better towing at 3,500 pounds, too. You can read all about what we thought of the diesel in our first drive review here, but the 2019 model year is the last one if you had it on your shortlist. This article has been updated to indicate the source.

Jaguar I-Pace vs. Tesla Model 3 and other EVs: How they compare on paper

The 200-mile club of electric vehicles is really growing. The most recent member is the Jaguar I-Pace, the company's first pure EV. It promises luxury, performance, style, and most important, good range. Nearly as recent is the Hyundai Kona EV, and while it doesn't promise luxury or performance like the Jaguar (it's also smaller), it does pack impressive range. With the introduction of both of these electric cars, we thought we would see how they compare against each other, and the other two big names in high-capacity electric cars: the Chevy Bolt EV and the Tesla Model 3. This isn't intended to be a direct, apples-to-apples comparison, as the four are quite different. If anything, they break into two groups: bigger and more luxurious, and smaller and less expensive. Then again, the number of vehicles with this electric range is small and comparisons to EV's with less range wouldn't be too kind to the other guys. If you want to learn more about these EVs, and compare them with other cars, be sure to check out our Car Finder and comparison tools. Horsepower and torque There is one clear winner here, and that's the Jaguar I-Pace. It packs a whopping 394 horsepower and 512 pound-feet of torque. That comes through a pair of electric motors (one at the front, another at the rear) that provide the Jag with all-wheel drive, the only one of these vehicles to offer it (at the moment). Altogether, it allows the I-Pace to have the best 0-60 mph time of 4.5 seconds. At the other end of the spectrum is the Hyundai Kona EV. It's front-drive, like the Bolt EV, and has effectively the same amount of horsepower as the Chevy at 201 horsepower, but its 0-60-mph time is almost a second slower. And the low-range version of the Kona, excluded because it doesn't go more than 200 miles between charges, is slower still. The Tesla Model 3 is the only vehicle with rear-wheel drive, and with a 0-60 mph of 5.1 seconds for the Long Range model, it is still very quick. Range and energy use Frequently, the all-consuming question with electric cars is, "How far can I go on a charge?" And to go the farthest, you need the long-range Tesla Model 3. It can go 310 miles. It has the added advantage of being able to use the network of Tesla Supercharger stations, though they are pay-per-use with the Model 3. Even the lower capacity Model 3, with just 220 miles of range, can use these stations.

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.