2010 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Ext Cab Shortbed V8 Automatic 4x4 Nice No Reserve! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM pauses 3.0-liter turbodiesel production due to a supplier shortage

General Motors confirmed it has temporarily stopped taking orders for trucks and SUVs equipped with the 3.0-liter Duramax turbodiesel six-cylinder engine. It blamed the last-minute pause on a supplier-related shortage. Website TFL Truck first reported the news, and a representative from General Motors quickly confirmed it. The spokesperson explained the issue is due to a "temporary part shortage" and added that production will resume "as soon as possible," meaning the Duramax engine (which is called LM2 internally) is not going away permanently. Additional details are not available, so we don't know if the issue is related to the ongoing chip shortage. Rather than delay deliveries and create a backlog, General Motors is reportedly asking its dealers to encourage buyers who want a turbodiesel engine to instead select either the 5.3-liter V8 or the 6.2-liter V8, depending on the model selected. Both are gasoline-powered units. There's no word yet on when Duramax production will resume. The shortage affects several models, including Chevrolet's Tahoe, Suburban, and Silverado 1500 and GMC's variants of these trucks. Cadillac's Escalade is temporarily diesel-less as well. Heavy Duty variants of the Silverado and the Sierra are not affected because they're powered by a different Duramax engine with eight cylinders. Motorists seeking a full-size SUV powered by an efficient turbodiesel engine are temporarily out of options because the Tahoe/Yukon and the Suburban/Yukon XL had the segment to themselves. The Duramax was surprisingly popular, too: in May 2021, GM Authority reported that the turbodiesel straight-six represented 8% of Suburban sales and 6% of Tahoe sales. Installed in a rear-wheel-drive Tahoe, the engine returns 21 mpg in the city, 28 mpg on the highway, and 24 mpg in a combined cycle, figures that make the body-on-frame behemoth more efficient than the unibody, front-wheel-drive Chevrolet Blazer that's 20 inches shorter and approximately 1,700 pounds lighter. Related video: 2021 Chevrolet Tahoe 3.0L Duramax engine

Chevy confirms 2016 Camaro will have wheels, brakes

Good news, everyone! Chevrolet has issued yet another round of teaser images and information about the sixth-generation Camaro, set to debut in Detroit on May 16. This time around, Chevy's teaser images confirm that the new car will not only have wheels and tires (Goodyear Eagle F1s, no less), but brakes as well. On top of that, we now know that the new Camaro will be 28-percent stiffer than the outgoing model. "The more rigid body structure allowed the engineers to more precisely calibrate the steering and suspension systems because they didn't have to compensate for chassis flex. The lighter structure also enabled the size and mass of elements such as the wheels, tires and brakes to be scaled accordingly," GM said in a press release, which you can read below. We've already learned that the new coupe will be 200 pounds lighter than its predecessor, has a bunch of unique parts, and according to GM's Mark Reuss, will outperform the Ford Mustang in every way. Now, it's only a matter of time before we see the sixth-gen Camaro, but surely not before Chevy issues even more teasers and information. Related Video: 2016 Camaro is Stronger, Lighter and More Responsive Computer aided engineering contributes to 28 percent greater structural stiffness DETROIT – The engineering team spent 9 million hours of computational time honing the driving experience of the all-new 2016 Chevrolet Camaro before the first prototype turned a wheel. The structural modeling led to the Gen 6 Camaro being 28 percent stiffer than the current model. "The modeling abilities of computer aided engineering are advancing at incredible rates," said Jim Karlavage, Camaro program engineering manager. "Today, we can accurately model opportunities to add torsional strength without adding unnecessary mass. The result is a lighter, stiffer structure that benefits every aspect of the driving experience." The more rigid body structure allowed the engineers to more precisely calibrate the steering and suspension systems because they didn't have to compensate for chassis flex. The lighter structure also enabled the size and mass of elements such as the wheels, tires and brakes to be scaled accordingly. "The structural weight savings are compounded by opportunities to reduce un-sprung weight," said Karlavage.

General Motors and EVs: No stranger to firsts, but where's the leadership?

2015 is already shaping up to be the year of "affordable, 200-mile EV" concepts. Nissan and Tesla have each been talking about them for some time, the latter promising to unveil its Model 3 at the North American International Auto Show in January before balking when the time came. Instead, Chevrolet beat them all by unveiling the Bolt concept at the same event, followed shortly thereafter with suggestions of a 2016 launch – potentially offering the first nationwide EV with anything close to that range. It was the ballsiest EV-related move General Motors has made in a quarter century. But will it remain so? Exactly 25 years before the Bolt rolled up onto the turntable, then-Chairman Roger Smith unveiled GM's last ground-up EV concept, the even-more-unfortunately-named Impact, at the Los Angeles Auto Show in January 1990. A few months later, he surprised most of his colleagues by announcing its intended production in honor of Earth Day. It was the first modern foray into electric vehicles for the US by any automaker, one that was rewarded by the State of California with what is now known as the Zero Emissions Vehicle mandate. The program not only forced other automakers into competing with Roger's pet project, but inspired all of them to fight it like small children against bedtime. Some years later, the drivers themselves weighed in, with a biting documentary about that obstinance and the leadership it cost both GM and the country. Within months, GM was first back into the fray of plug-in vehicles. Many criticized the company for starting with a PHEV rather than jump straight back into EVs. The choice wasn't totally out of the blue – even EV1 was meant to be followed by a PHEV. And especially on the heels of Who Killed the Electric Car?, some skittishness was understandable: even a successful EV would invite a "we told you so" public reaction, underscoring their mistake in ending the EV1 program. If a new EV didn't do well, they'd be convicted in the public eye as serial killers. All while seeking a federal bailout. For all the flak, the resulting Chevy Volt was and is a better car than GM has ever gotten credit for. But the company seemed to grow weary of having to overcome its varied past, and while the current owners remain happy, much of the stakeholder and community engagement that so effectively built early goodwill and sales growth faded not long after launch. Marketing has been spotty in both consistency and effectiveness.