2011 Chevrolet Malibu Lt Sedan 4-door 3.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

5 reasons why GM is cutting jobs, closing plants in a healthy economy

DETROIT — Even though unemployment is low, the economy is growing and U.S. auto sales are near historic highs, General Motors is cutting thousands of jobs in a major restructuring aimed at generating cash to spend on innovation. It's the new reality for automakers that are faced with the present cost of designing gas-powered cars and trucks that appeal to buyers now while at the same time preparing for a future world of electric and autonomous vehicles. GM announced Monday that it will cut as many as 14,000 workers in North America and put five plants up for possible closure as it abandons many of its car models and restructures to focus more on autonomous and electric vehicles. The reductions could amount to as much as 8 percent of GM's global workforce of 180,000 employees. The cuts mark GM's first major downsizing since shedding thousands of jobs in the Great Recession. The company also said it will stop operating two additional factories outside North America by the end of next year. The move to make GM get leaner before the next downturn likely will be followed by Ford Motor Co., which also has struggled to keep one foot in the present and another in an ambiguous future of new mobility. Ford has been slower to react, but says it will lay off an unspecified number of white-collar workers as it exits much of the car market in favor of trucks and SUVs, some of them powered by batteries. Here's a rundown of the reasons behind the cuts: Coding, not combustion CEO Mary Barra said as cars and trucks become more complex, GM will need more computer coders but fewer engineers who work on internal combustion engines. "The vehicle has become much more software-oriented" with millions of lines of code, she said. "We still need many technical resources in the company." Shedding sedans The restructuring also reflects changing North American auto markets as manufacturers continue to shift away from cars toward SUVs and trucks. In October, almost 65 percent of new vehicles sold in the U.S. were trucks or SUVs. That figure was about 50 percent cars just five years ago. GM is shedding cars largely because it doesn't make money on them, Citi analyst Itay Michaeli wrote in a note to investors. "We estimate sedans operate at a significant loss, hence the need for classic restructuring," he wrote. The reduction includes about 8,000 white-collar employees, or 15 percent of GM's North American white-collar workforce. Some will take buyouts while others will be laid off.

Our favorite mid-engine Corvette theories and rumors

The mid-engine Corvette! We just saw blurry photos through the foliage, and are hearts are all aflutter because it means that this car is real. And it's the most " never before" Corvette since 1984. Which leads us to all kinds of wacky theories and speculation. Everybody knows something or heard from a guy. None of those guys (or gals) from GM are talking to Autoblog, to be clear. But that won't stop us from stirring the pot. Let's go over a few point-by-point. The pushrod engine will be replaced by an overhead-cam V8 Car and Driver has repeatedly reported that an overhead-cam engine will come after the mid-engine Corvette's debut with an old-school pushrod. We've heard the same thing firsthand, albeit from a source with no connection to the development of the Corvette or powertrain. "At some point two valves can't pass future emissions regulations," said the guy we know. While the pushrod engine is compact, the design makes it difficult - if not impossible - for sophisticated variable valve timing (and lift) systems that control combustion with more precision. Hasty conclusion: The pushrod engine has a finite life in front of it. This one's a lock, it's a just a matter of when. Bowling Green's new paint shop is really the mid-engine assembly line Credit to Reddit for this one. Like we said, everybody knows a guy. But let's look deeper. The new paint facility costs $439 million dollars and adds 450,000 square feet, almost half the size of the existing plant. Plus GM announced another $290 million in upgrades at Bowling Green Assembly. That sure sounds like a lot of money, but you can actually spend that much on a paint booth. Porsche spent 500 million Euros (about $561 million dollars) to add the Macan assembly to its Leipzig, Germany plant in 2014. Chrysler shelled out $850 million for a paint shop in Sterling Heights, Michigan. GM spent $600 million for a new paint shop at the Fairfax (Kansas City) plant. Honda, on the other hand, is working on a thrifty $210 million project in Marysville, Ohio that includes a 300,000 square foot expansion, and the low-volume Acura NSX facility only cost $70 million. Hasty conclusion: The square footage and cost could easily mean a new assembly line instead of (or in addition to) a paint line. And if the NSX plant was really that cheap, GM could have hidden a similar sum in its existing announcements.

2021 BMW M3 and M4 vs all the high-powered sport sedans and coupes

Should you have a found a way to get past that schnoz, you've probably digested some of the basic specs for the all-new 2021 BMW M3 sedan and M4 coupe specs. They're plenty impressive. There's also, basically, two sets of them thanks to the regular and Competition versions that differ in engine output and transmission type.  But how do they compare to other ultra sport sedans and coupes? Well, we were wondering that too, so we fired up the Autoblog Comparison Spreadsheet Generator 5000 (aka me chained to my computer in a dark basement).  Sadly, there are surprisingly few competitors for the 2021 BMW M3. Rival sedans include the Mercedes-AMG C 63 and the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio, along with the Audi RS 5 Sportback sedan/coupe/hatchback thing. There's no more Lexus IS F, the Cadillac CT4 Blackwing has yet to arrive and Jaguar doesn't offer a spicy XE R.  Happily, there are more coupe rivals for the 2021 BMW M4, including the two-door versions of the AMG and Audi as well as the Lexus RC F. I also included the Ford Shelby GT350 and Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE. On paper, they align incredibly well. On the street and on a track, I can personally attest that these Americans are fully capable of keeping up and/or bettering the fancy-pants luxury brands (and let's not forget there are even more powerful, hardcore versions available). If they don't align in terms of price or prestige, whatever. OK, let's get to the spreadsheet. Let's start with the coupes and note that I didn't bother listing the dimensions for the M4 Competition and C 63 S as they are identical to their "lesser" siblings.  I won't bother burning words explaining what you can see on the chart. Instead, I'll point out a few things that stood out to me. First, BMW M comes awfully close to matching the output of AMG's twin-turbo V8 despite having two fewer cylinders. Similarly, Audi manages to better the 0-60 time of the M4 Competition and tie the C 63 S despite being WAY down on power. It's not like it weighs less. Magic? Second, and speaking of 0-60 times, remember the importance that transmission and drivetrain make with them. It's not just horsepower and torque. An automatic will be quicker and easier to launch than a manual, while all-wheel drive provides more instantaneous and beneficial grip.