1963 Chevrolet Nova Ii Wagon - Great Driver - Same Owner For 11 Years - Lqqk !!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Which of these five plug-ins should win the 2017 Green Car of the Year?

It's going to be a competitive race for the 2017 Green Car Of The Year. With a minivan in the running for the first time in ages, the five finalists announced by Green Car Journal today include five very different plug-in vehicles. As Ron Cogan, the editor and publisher of Green Car Journal, said in a statement, "electrification is now considered by most automakers an essential technology for current and future high-efficiency models." Let's check out the list: Toyota Prius Prime, the updated plug-in version of the world's best-selling hybrid. Chevy Bolt, GM's all-new entry into the long-range EV game. Chrysler Pacifica, a family hauler with the ability to go 30 miles on electric power. Kia Optima. The nomination is for the full line-up, but really the hybrid and plug-in hybrid models are the green stars here. BMW 330e iPerformance, one of the automaker's many new plug-in hybrids that bring battery power to models outside the i sub-brand. Green Car Journal will announce the winners at the Los Angeles Auto Show on November 17th, along with some, "other green transportation announcements," whatever that means. Last year, the winner was the 2016 Chevy Volt, the first model to snatch up two wins. Which do you think should win this year? Related Video: News Source: Green Car JournalImage Credit: REUTERS/Kevork Djansezian Green LA Auto Show BMW Chevrolet Chrysler Kia Toyota Chevy Bolt chrysler pacifica green car of the year toyota prius prime bmw 330e

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.

UAW rejects GM contract proposal but makes a counter offer

The United Auto Workers union said a new comprehensive offer made by General Motors Co late Monday to end a two-week-old strike was not acceptable and said it had made a new counterproposal. UAW vice president Terry Dittes said in a letter to members "there are many important issues that remain unresolved." The union is awaiting GM's next proposal. He said GM's offer came up short on many issues.  Dittes said GM made a "comprehensive proposal" at 9:40 p.m. Monday. "This proposal that the company provided to us on day 15 of the strike did not satisfy your contract demands or needs. There were many areas that came up short like health care, wages, temporary employees, skilled trades and job security to name a few." Dittes is the union's vice president for GM relations and the UAW's lead negotiator in these contract talks. "We have responded today with a counterproposal and are awaiting GM's next proposal to the union," he wrote. "Regardless of what is publicized in print or social media, etc., there are still many important issues that remain unresolved." The strike, in its third week, has cost GM more than $1 billion, according to J.P. Morgan analyst Ryan Brickman. He said the cost per day in potential profit is $82 million. However, another analysis, by East Lansing-based consultant Anderson Economic Group, put the losses at $25 million a day. And the effects of the strike are expanding. GM said Tuesday the strike has created a parts shortage that forced the automaker to halt production at its pickup and transmission plants in Silao, Mexico, temporarily laying off 6,000 workers. Silao is where GM builds its highly profitable four-door crew cab Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups. The strike has also forced GM to idle some Canadian workers, and many suppliers have been forced to halt operations. About 48,000 UAW members went on strike on Sept. 16 seeking higher pay, greater job security, a bigger share of the leading U.S. automaker’s profit and protection of their healthcare.