Chevrolet Other Pickups Military Truck on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Chevy Volt powertrain technical details

The last time General Motors launched a Chevy Volt, it was operating without really knowing how people would use the plug-in hybrid. Sure, it had experience with the EV1, but the Volt was a new kind of car, and you can see in the archives just how much time GM spent explaining this fresh, new powertrain to potential customers. Then, once the vehicle was released, the company collected voluntary data from a large number of owners to learn about their driving and charging habits. The company also asked them what they wanted most in the new version. There's got to be an algorithm buried somewhere in GM headquarters that was used to take all of the numbers GM collected and spat out the headline figures for the 2016 Volt: 50 miles of EV range and 41 miles per gallon. Another important number – price – is something GM isn't talking about yet (expect it in April or May), but the company is sharing some powertrain details about the upcoming car. At a preview lunch in Detroit last week for the SAE 2015 Hybrid & Electric Vehicles Technologies Symposium that's happening now in California, GM engineers Peter Savagian (who is presenting a paper on the new inverter used in the updated Volt) and Tim Grewe (talking about the entire second-generation powertrain) sat down with AutoblogGreen to tell us about the Volt's all-new propulsion system: The overall gist is that the new Voltec 5ET50 drive unit is lighter, smaller and more powerful thanks to a redesigned two-motor traction drive. As previously reported, the new engine is a 1.5-liter DOHC four-cylinder that offers 101-horsepower (at 5,600 RPM). Grewe said it's "great for range extension." The electric motor side of the powertrain offers 149 motoring horsepower from a two-motor, continuously variable transaxle. Initially, the new engine will be made in Mexico. GM will move production to Flint, MI during the first year it makes the 2016 Volt. The battery is slightly bigger in the new Volt – 18.4 kWh compared to 16.5 in the current-gen – and will have less range variation in the cold. GM is also using more of the overall capacity in the pack in the 2016 Volt than in previous versions, but is not saying how much more. GM is not ready to publish acceleration times just yet, but the 2016 Volt has improved numbers, especially when going from 30-60 miles per hour. Most everything on the new powertrain has become more efficient compared to the first-gen Volt.

Chevrolet considering midsize crossover to slot between Traverse and Equinox

Crossovers are the new hotness, and automakers are looking to cash in by offering a size and shape for every customer. With Chevrolet's debut of the new 2018 Traverse in Detroit, which grew ever so slightly compared to the first-generation model, there is now a midsize-crossover-sized hole between the three-row Traverse and the compact Equinox. When asked about that obvious space, a Chevrolet spokesperson told us the company is looking into the possibility of expanding its crossover lineup. It should be a relatively simple thing to do, since all it would take is reskinning and rechristening the GMC Acadia with a bow tie, and we all know how much GM loves platform sharing. Although they're now different sizes, the new Acadia and Traverse still use the same platform; the Acadia is now on a short-wheelbase version of the C1XX while the Traverse uses long-wheelbase C1XX parts. A short-wheelbase Chevy built on the C1XX likely would be differentiated visually from both the Acadia and the larger Traverse. It may seem like flooding the lineup with more and more models would cannibalize sales of existing ones, but Chevrolet said it would rather have customers stay within the brand rather than going to another automaker. There have been whispers that some form of the Blazer name (possibly TrailBlazer) may make a return on a midsizer, but if it does don't expect an old-school body-on-frame SUV like the old one. In the end, if Chevy builds it, customers will come. Related Video:

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.