4.3l V-6 Engine Low Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM's labor deal with UAW union on verge of ratification

Nov 15 (Reuters) - General Motors' tentative labor deal with the United Auto Workers (UAW) union closed in on ratification as the votes were counted on Wednesday. Following the approval earlier in the day by more than 60% of union members at the Detroit automaker's large Arlington, Texas, assembly plant, additional votes in favor have the deal close to clinching majority approval. The number of union locals, most of which are smaller, still to report vote totals is not large. After several large assembly plants voted against the deal earlier on Wednesday, some media had reported the deal was heading toward failure. But Arlington's support, followed by strong voting in favor by smaller warehouse and parts facilities, has put the deal on the brink of approval. This would mark the first ratification of a deal, which runs through April 2028, with one of the Detroit Three automakers. Ford and Stellantis voting is still under way, and workers at both companies were favoring ratification by comfortable margins. The UAW's GM vote tracking site currently shows approval of the contract leading by a 54% to 46% margin with almost 32,000 workers having cast votes out of about 46,000 UAW-represented GM workers. The Arlington plant, with about 5,000 UAW members, has the most of any GM plant. Voting officially ends on Thursday at 4 p.m. EST, although most votes will be cast on Wednesday. The UAW went on strike for more than six weeks against the Detroit Three, seeking better wages, working conditions and cost-of-living adjustments. All three companies agreed to tentative agreements about two weeks ago. Workers at other GM assembly plants voted against the deal, including 60% of workers at its Fort Wayne, Indiana, truck plant, 53% at its Wentzville, Missouri, plant, 58% of workers at GM's Lansing Grand River plant and 61% of workers at the Lansing Delta Township plant. Seven of GM's 11 assembly plants rejected the deal. In addition to Arlington, workers at plants in Detroit, Fairfax, Kansas; and Lake Orion, Michigan; approved the agreement. Only nine facilities are still listed without vote totals on the UAW vote tracker, including GM's Lockport, New York, components plant with about 1,200 members. Those voting in favor of the agreement have a lead of almost 2,500 and many of the facilities still to come include workers who stand to receive large pay increases upon ratification.

Junkyard Gem: 1985 Chevrolet Sprint

For in the 1985 model year, General Motors began selling Chevrolet-badged Suzuki Cultus hatchbacks in California. Sales of the cheap three-cylinder econobox in the rest of North America followed soon after (with the Canadian version known as the Pontiac Firefly), and did pretty well considering the crash in gasoline prices during the middle 1980s. Starting in 1988, the facelifted Sprint became the Geo (and, later on, Chevrolet) Metro. Here's one of the very first Cultuses sold on our shores, found in a San Francisco Bay Area car graveyard. Amazingly, the primitive rear-wheel-drive Chevrolet Chevette remained available all the way through 1987, competing with the thriftier front-wheel-drive Sprint in the same showrooms. For 1988, Pontiac started selling a rebadged Daewoo LeMans, so the Sprint/Metro never lacked for intra-corporate competition. Inside, you'll find the same stuff most mid-1980s Japanese econoboxes got: tough cloth upholstery and long-wearing hard plastics. Suzuki quality in 1985 wasn't quite up to Honda or Toyota levels, but you weren't paying Honda or Toyota prices for the Sprint. MSRP on this car started at $4,949, or about $12,000 in 2020 dollars. The cheapest possible 1985 Chevette cost $5,340, while a new no-frills Ford Escort would set you back $5,620. Subaru, however, could have put you in a punitively unappointed base-model Leone hatchback for just 40 bucks more than the Sprint that year. I think I'd have sprung the extra for a $5,348 Toyota Tercel, a $5,195 Mazda GLC, or— best cheap-commuter deal of all that year— the $5,399 Honda Civic 1300 hatchback. I was 19 years old and driving a Competition Orange 1968 Mercury Cyclone that year, and I recall feeling pity for Chevy Sprint drivers, new-car smell or not. Still, these weren't bad cars for the price, though a Sprint with an automatic transmission was a real character-builder. Got three cylinders and uses 'em all! 48 horsepower from this hemi-headed SOHC 1-liter. The Turbo Sprint — yes, such a car existed — had a howling 70 horsepower. The hood-latch release is a rectangular button that resembles a badge. 1985 Chevy Sprint Commercial The highest-mileage, lowest-priced car you can buy. 1985 holden barina commercial The Australian-market version was the Holden Barina, and the TV ads featured the Road Runner. 1983 SUZUKI CULTUS Ad In its homeland, this car got screaming guitars and a drive through New York City for its TV commercials.

GM under fire from safety advocates over braking problem caused by recall fix

Safety experts are lambasting General Motors over what they say is the automaker’s slow notification of owners of certain 2019 sedans and trucks that a recall fix could cause power braking to fail and increase the risk of a crash, the Detroit Free Press reports.  GMÂ’s original recall in December targeted about 550,000 Cadillac CT6 sedans and Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 pickups, all from the 2019 model year, over potentially defective electronic stability control and antilock brakes. In that case, GM said the errors would not show up as a diagnostic warning on the instrument cluster. But after GM had done recall work on 162,000 vehicles, about 1,700 owner have complained that their power brakes didnÂ’t work after they had the recall done and then used the OnStar app to start their vehicle. GM then issued a supplemental fix for customers whoÂ’d already had their vehicles serviced. In this case, a diagnostic warning should illuminate saying either “Service Brake Assist” or “Service ECS,” which GM says is a signal that a customer should not drive the vehicle and instead call their dealer, which will tow the vehicle and have it repaired. Safety advocates say the automaker hasnÂ’t gone far enough to protect customers. “The fact that you could potentially start a vehicle and not have brakes is a pretty risky proposition,” Sean Kane, president of the Safety Research and Strategies, which works on auto issues for plaintiffs and governmental organizations, told the Freep. “The fact that they wouldnÂ’t notify owners (sooner) is pretty stunning.” GM told the Freep it was required to notify the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and file paperwork before it notified customers about the original recall, which was made Dec. 12. It then had to investigate and resolve the problem created by its original recall fix before alerting customers. GMÂ’s call center and dealers are contacting the remaining 900 customers who havenÂ’t yet had the update made to the original recall repair. GM also hired a vendor to send recall letters to the 550,000 customers affected by the original recall notifying them about the update. There are no known injuries or deaths related to the problem. Read the Freep story here.