Chevrolet Astro Astro on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy Bolt officially keeping name, says marketing boss

There might be just a little confusion at first, but the Bolt name is sticking around. After conducting two consumer studies into the name, Chevrolet isn't worried about the similarity of the monikers for the upcoming EV and existing Volt plug-in hybrid. In fact, the brand thinks the resemblance might be for the best. "The decision is made. The name won't be changed." Chevy head of marketing Tim Mahoney said to The Detroit Free Press. The research shows that the compatibility between the two names actually works quite well. With the Volt well established, people apparently already connect the Bolt to the Bowtie, which is just what a brand wants. Both studies indicated the ""same result, it did well," according to Mahoney. Just a few months ago, the future of the Bolt's name wasn't so clear. GM North America President Alan Batey said the company knew there might be confusion, and it was still mulling its options. The Bolt could be a breakthrough in the EV market with a 200-mile range and a possible price of around $30,000 after incentives. Production is set for the Orion Assembly plant in Michigan following a $200 million upgrade there, and the model could be in dealers as soon as 2017. That's just in time to take on the Tesla Model 3 with its claimed $35,000 price and similar driving distance as the Chevy. Related Video:

GM says EVs are the future — but trucks are going to take it there

In the PowerPoint deck for the General Motors Capital Markets Day presentation, one of the more disturbing things comes early on, during GM President Mark Reuss' initial remarks, in an area where he is discussing the company's overall strength in trucks. The point being made is that GM has a truck for all and sundry. And there it is, a phrase on a slide that should send chills up the spines of those who still pine for the old Bob Seger "Like a Rock" Silverado ads: "Little bit country. Little bit rock 'n' roll." That's right. Donny and Marie. Somehow the Denis Leary snark in the F-150 ads is all the more appealing. The Capital Markets Day presentation was chock full of observations about electrification and automation (Reuss and CEO Mary Barra both noted that the corporation's vision is one of "Zero Crashes. Zero Emissions. Zero Congestion." Dan Ammann talked about the progress being made at Cruise Automation; Reuss rolled out the plan for an array of electrified vehicles, with a luxury EV and a compact SUV being the "Centroid Entries" for the modular bases of many others). But it is worth noting that there is no getting away from the power of pickups in the U.S. market, as that was the central topic in Chief Financial Officer Dhivya Suryadevara's comments, with "Truck Franchise" being flanked by "Key Financial Priorities" and "Financial Outlook." Clearly, to gloss the old phrase, the truck segment is where the money is. Suryadevra enumerated how the truck segment is significantly different than other types of light vehicles. Among her points: GM, Ford and FCA have more than 90% of market share. The truck parc has been growing and aging over the past 10 years. Customers are fiercely loyal to the segment—as in 70% of truck buyers are truck buyers. A good number of the vehicles are for commercial use (40 percent). Trucks are "less prone to. . .mobility disruption." Trucks offer high margins. Translaton: The segment is one that they're solidly positioned in. There are lots of old trucks on the road that will need to be replaced by new ones. Perhaps buyers may switch from a Sierra to a Canyon, but it will be a truck. If your livelihood depends on that type of vehicle, even if gas prices go up or the economy begins to go south, you're going to stick with it. Most of the country isn't San Francisco, so trucks will continue to be essential. And, well, they're profitable in the extreme.

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.