1996 Impala Ss on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Is the skill of rev matching being lost to computers?

If the ability to drive a vehicle equipped with a manual gearbox is becoming a lost art, then the skill of being able to match revs on downshifts is the stuff they would teach at the automotive equivalent of the Shaolin Temple. The usefulness of rev matching in street driving is limited most of the time – aside from sounding cool and impressing your friends. But out on a race track or the occasional fast, windy road, its benefits are abundantly clear. While in motion, the engine speed and wheel speed of a vehicle with a manual transmission are kept in sync when the clutch is engaged (i.e. when the clutch pedal is not being pressed down). However, when changing gear, that mechanical link is severed briefly, and the synchronization between the motor and wheels is broken. When upshifting during acceleration, this isn't much of an issue, as there's typically not a huge disparity between engine speed and wheel speed as a car accelerates. Rev-matching downshifts is the stuff they would teach at the automotive equivalent of the Shaolin Temple. But when slowing down and downshifting – as you might do when approaching a corner at a high rate of speed – that gap of time caused by the disengagement of the clutch from the engine causes the revs to drop. Without bringing up the revs somehow to help the engine speed match the wheel speed in the gear you're about to use, you'll typically get a sudden jolt when re-engaging the clutch as physics brings everything back into sync. That jolt can be a big problem when you're moving along swiftly, causing instability or even a loss of traction, particularly in rear-wheel-drive cars. So the point of rev matching is to blip the throttle simultaneously as you downshift gears in order to bring the engine speed to a closer match with the wheel speed before you re-engage the clutch in that lower gear, in turn providing a much smoother downshift. When braking is thrown in, you get heel-toe downshifting, which involves some dexterity to use all three pedals at the same time with just two feet – clutch in, slow the car while revving, clutch out. However, even if you're aware of heel-toe technique and the basic elements of how to perform a rev match, perfecting it to the point of making it useful can be difficult.

What we know, and think we know, about the 2016 Chevy Volt

With the next-gen Chevy Volt due to make an appearance at the Detroit Auto Show early next year, bits and pieces about the new car are making their way into the press. Perhaps most importantly, the new Volt is going to have better "fuel economy and efficiency," according to GM executive vice president Mark Reuss. The current Volt gets 98 MPGe and 37 miles per gallon on premium fuel. It also has a 38-mile electric-only range. We don't know how GM will improve the efficiency or to what degree, but the logical options include making the car lighter, giving it better aerodynamics and/or improving the powertrain. To that end, one of the big things we don't know for sure includes information on the new gas-powered engine. Forbes says it will be a downsized 1.0-liter, three-cylinder mill instead of the 1.4-liter, four-cylinder used in the current model, which could certainly help the car be more efficient. The new Volt is also going to have more technology, which shouldn't surprise anyone. GM is now openly talking about how it will change the way it markets the Volt, shifting away from the mass-market mentality to focus on the regions where the car is already popular. "There's a Northeast and West Coast market for Volt, and there's nothing wrong with that," Chevy chief marketing officer Tim Mahoney told Forbes. There are rumors that the new Volt will have seating for five by adding a seat in the back. This is something a lot of current Volt owners would love, but we've heard nothing official hinting that this would be the case. We expect the battery to be the new 17.1-kWh version, or maybe even have a capacity increase, so GM would have to seriously repackage the pack to eliminate the ridge that runs from between the front seats and then back to the rear two seats. If you've heard anything official, do let us know.

GM’s Charlie Wilson was right: Stronger regulations can help U.S. automakers

Charlie Wilson had been the president and CEO of General Motors before being nominated to become secretary of defense by Dwight Eisenhower. During his Senate confirmation hearings, he controversially said, "For years I thought what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa." And he was right. While car companies aren't necessarily the most progressive when it comes to things that might have the slightest possibility of political blowback, General Motors should be credited for doing something absolutely forthright in this regard with its announcement that it wants the federal U.S. government not to squash the California Air Resources Board's emissions requirements but to actually create a 50-state "National Zero Emissions Vehicle" program that, in the words of Mark Reuss, executive vice president and president, Global Product Group and Cadillac, "will drive the scale and infrastructure investments needed to allow the U.S. to lead the way to a zero emission future." Filing comments to the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks is one thing. But a graphic the company developed for this announcement — shown above — is something else entirely, something that is absolutely credible, creative and clever. There is a photo of a Chevrolet Bolt EV driving along a highway, which seems to be in Marin County (based on the blurred San Francisco skyline in the background). Text on the photo states: "It's Time for American Leadership in Zero Emissions Vehicles." It seems to say, in effect, "If we want to make America great again, then we're going to do it by leading in technology, not by retreating behind weakened regulations." General Motors understands that the auto market is globally competitive, and if U.S.-based companies are going to be in the game, then they'd better be able to out-innovate the companies based elsewhere, where emissions and economy standards are not being weakened. What's good for our country ... Related Video: