2002 Chevrolet S10 4x4 Pickup Truck + 78k Miles + 6' Bed + Liner + No Reserve! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Next-generation GMC Canyon, Chevy Colorado spied together

With the debut of the next-generation GMC Canyon coming in a couple of months (in off-road-ready AT4 guise no less), it's no surprise that both it and the Chevy Colorado are out testing without the heavy coverings of early prototypes. One of our spy photographers caught examples of both trucks with close-fitting vinyl wraps. This gives us a great opportunity to see each pickup more clearly, but also to compare and contrast the designs. From the front, the GMC features a narrower, but seemingly taller grille. At the top are slender lamps. They seem to be daytime running lights, though, and below them are much larger units that will function as the actual headlights. The prototype shown seems to be one of the AT4 variants, based on the lack of a lower air dam and the opened up corners of each bumper. Small fog lights show up in the lower bumper, too. As for the Chevy, its grille is wider, and it blends into the headlights. The lights are at the top of the grille, and they seem to incorporate the actual headlights, not just running lamps. The grille mesh has some interesting detailing, and there are auxiliary lights below the main headlights. This one seems to be a more mainstream Colorado model since it still has a front air dam, possibly a Z71 model, considering the chunky tires. Not surprisingly, the two trucks are very similar from the sides and the rear. They have cabins that look lower, longer and more squared-off than the current models. The fenders look more punched out and aggressive, too. The main differentiator between the Chevy and GMC are the wheel openings. The GMC has sharp corners and the Chevy has more rounded ones, as is the case with the full-size trucks. As previously mentioned, the GMC Canyon AT4 will be revealed this summer, so likely in just a month or two. The Colorado will likely be revealed this summer, too. It's expected that it will use the turbocharged 2.7-liter four-cylinder shared with the Silverado. Naturally, it will be available with two- and four-wheel drive and a variety of trim levels including the AT4 and ZR2 off-road versions. Related video:

Why an independent rear suspension for GM's new, full-sized SUVs wasn't easy

A Motor Trend report last month laid out how Cadillac's 4.2-lier twin-turbo Blackwing V8 could be an orphan due to cost concerns in the GM empire. Last-minute chassis changes to Cadillac's new sedans and XT6 crossover led to engine bays that couldn't fit the Blackwing. On the SUV side, according to the report, the new independent rear suspension for big people haulers cost so much to implement that GM ruled out reworking the Escalade to accept the Blackwing. At least one commenter rightly asked how could a suspension swallow that much money. A new piece in Motor Trend has the answer. The excellent Alissa Priddle spoke to Tim Herrick, GM's executive chief engineer for full-size trucks, about why the clean-sheet IRS cost "multimillions of dollars."  First, GM would need to build a new body shop at the Arlington, Texas plant that assembles the automaker's big SUVs to stamp the numerous wholly new parts and panels accommodating an IRS. Then GM would need to design and pay for a new assembly process. On top of those up-front costs, there was the incremental cost of the four-link IRS components being more expensive than those in the trucks' former leaf-sprung solid axles. Herrick endured so many rejections for so long that he remembers the date and time when he got approval for the new unit. He said it came down to a meeting where he told a higher-up, "I'll make you a deal: If we get to the reveal, or if we launch this and you think this was a dumb idea, I'll hand you my badge and let you walk me out." Head to Motor Trend to read the full story. Based on Herrick being on stage to help present the new SUVs to the press, and on our First Ride in the new Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban at GM's Milford Proving Grounds, it appears this will have a happy ending for all involved. Furthermore, since Herrick worked on the T1 platform that supports the big SUVs as well as the light- and heavy-duty pickups, he understood the demands on the commercial side, too. That could be why when Roadshow asked Tim Asoklis, chief engineer of the Tahoe and Suburban, if the new IRS could endure life in the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra, Asoklis answered, "Oh, absolutely." Related Video:    

Driving Granatelli's turbine-powered 1978 Chevy Corvette [w/video]

With its curvy snout and feminine haunches, the third-gen Chevrolet Corvette looks like a dreamy – if dated – exemplar of Sports Car Fantasy 101 when viewed through modern eyes. This particular specimen circa '78, clad in silver and black paint with red pinstripes, appears to be a well-preserved example from the era. Apart from its low-profile Pirellis, slightly raised and slotted hood, spacious stance and a certain hand-painted descriptor alongside its crossed flag logos, you'd never guess there's a Space-Age propulsion unit powering this Coke bottle-bodied ride. Climb inside, and you're presented with aircraft gauges and big, colorful square buttons in the center panel. It takes a push of the "Ignitor" button, a tap of the starter button, and a slide of a T-handle for this nearly 40-year-old sports car to start sounding like Gulfstream G650 ready for takeoff. Yep, you're sitting in an 880-horsepower, turbine-powered Corvette, the only one of its kind in the world. Welcome to the whoosh. What The...? Built by Vince Granatelli, son of Indy 500 guru Andy Granatelli, this curious Corvette came into being by cramming a Pratt & Whitney ST6N-74 gas turbine engine into the donor car's lengthy front end. The same type of Jet A-burning mill powered Granatelli Senior's STP-sponsored racecar at the 1967 Indianapolis 500, where it famously led most of the 198 of 200 laps until a $6 transmission bearing failed, knocking it out of the race. The idea of turbine power usurping internal combustion was so threatening that Indy's governing body restricted turbine performance into obsolescence thereafter. A turbine-powered Corvette sounds excessive because it is. But there are also things about this 880-horsepower, 1,161-pound-feet monster that might surprise you. While it smacks of futurist exoticism and cost a then-dizzying $37,000 in 1967, the Canadian-built powerplant uses 80 percent fewer parts than an internal combustion V8 and will run on virtually anything combustible – whiskey, diesel, even Chanel No. 5. Though it's triple the length of a V8, the Pratt & Whitney beast weighs only 285 pounds. It's also one hell of a robust workhorse, typically serving as an auxiliary power unit for commercial aircraft or a generator in oil fields, where it can run for tens of thousands of consecutive hours before needing an overhaul. To adapt the Chevrolet for jet duty, the nose section was gutted and a sub-frame was built to compensate for the loosey-goosey front end.