2014 Chevrolet Traverse 1lt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.

GM sees 'strong year' in 2018, then gold in Chevy Silverado for 2019

DETROIT — General Motors said on Tuesday it expects earnings in 2018 to be largely flat compared with 2017, but that profits should pick up pace in 2019 as its revamped line of high-margin pickup trucks hits the U.S. market. The 2018 earnings outlook was above market expectations, sending GM shares up more than 3 percent in premarket trading. "GM had a very good 2017 as we continued to transform our company to be more focused, resilient and profitable," GM Chief Executive Mary Barra said in a statement. "We are positioned for another strong year in 2018 and an even better one in 2019." GM and its Detroit rivals, Ford and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, are bringing on new trucks at a time when overall U.S. new vehicle sales have been falling, but truck sales continue to grow as consumers abandon passenger cars in favor of pickups, SUVs and crossovers. GM on Saturday fired a new round in the battle for profits from one of the U.S. auto industry's most lucrative segments when it showed a new generation of its Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck at the Detroit auto show. The new Silverado, a highlight of the event, is the successor to GM's best-selling vehicle in North America. Sales of the current Silverado rose nearly 2 percent to 585,000 vehicles in 2017. In the coming months, the company will also reveal a revamped GMC Sierra pickup truck. U.S. new vehicle sales fell 2 percent in 2017 after hitting a record high in 2016, and are expected to drop further in 2018 as interest rates rise and more late-model used cars return to dealer lots to compete with new ones. GM said on Tuesday that while it retools a factory in Ft. Wayne, Indiana, to make the new pickup trucks, it will shift some production to an Oshawa, Ontario, plant in order to avoid missing sales in a hot market for the vehicles. The No. 1 U.S. automaker said it will record a $7 billion non-cash charge for its fourth-quarter 2017 earnings related to deferred tax assets. GM said it expects capital expenditure in 2018 of around $8.5 billion, about $1 billion of which will go toward funding self-driving car technology. Last week, the company said it is seeking U.S. government approval for a fully autonomous car — one without a steering wheel, brake pedal or accelerator pedal — to enter the automaker's first commercial ride-sharing fleet in 2019. GM said it expects 2017 earnings per share at the high end of its previously forecast range of $6 to $6.50.

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.