4dr Sdn Lt W/1lt Chevrolet Malibu Lt Low Miles Sedan Automatic Gasoline Engine, on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Chevrolet Camaro: Everything we know so far [UPDATE]

UPDATE: We fully expect the floodgates to open as facts and photos leak throughout the day. Watch this space for more information as it breaks, including these leaked photos, and some new powertrain speculation. Chevrolet has made a grand production of teasing the all-new, sixth-generation Camaro. That slow trickle will become a deluge this weekend, when the 2016 model hits the stage on Detroit's Belle Isle as part of an all-day Camaro-palooza. Considering you're likely to hear plenty about the next-gen muscle car in the next couple days, we figured now is the perfect time to sort out all the facts and rumors we've heard about the next-generation coupe that's coming this weekend. Here's everything we know about Camaro Six. What Will It Look Like? Arguably the easiest Camaro question to answer after all the teasers and spy shots, General Motors' design team favored evolving the current car's retro design language while retaining the same basic shape. The long hood will carry on, joined by an even shorter, wing-topped rear deck, giving the 2016 an almost fastback-like look. The greenhouse is still slim, but lateral visibility may improve slightly owing to the larger quarter windows. We can only hope. The rear end looks to have been rounded, while Chevy's own teaser shows off larger, more prominent taillight housings than the simple rectangular lights on today's car. Expect quad-tipped exhausts to be offered on at least one version of the Camaro. Judging by the single teaser of the car's profile, the rear haunches will be larger and more chiseled. The muscular aluminum hood and its accompanying power bulge are more heavily styled than on today's car, although it looks largely similar in terms of size. It sits atop an even slimmer upper grille that's barely big enough for Chevy's Bowtie logo, with most of the visual mass moving to the gaping lower grille. One of the more tantalizing rumors surrounding the new Camaro focuses on its roof. As evidenced in a rather bizarre round of spy photos, it almost looks like Chevy is considering a removable panel, a la Corvette Stingray. T-tops are also a distinct (and more probable, we hope) possibility. The new shape will result in a more aerodynamic car, and Chevy claims the 2016 Camaro spent 350 hours in the wind tunnel. Overall lift has apparently been cut by 30 percent, thanks partially to a new, smooth underbody panel. Chevrolet has been far less forthcoming with information on the new Camaro's cabin.

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.

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.