2012 Chevy Silverado 3500 Crew Diesel Dually 4x4 7k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy Volt replacement battery cost varies wildly, up to $34,000

There's a growing hubbub in the plug-in vehicle community over what looks like some ridiculously cheap replacement batteries for the Chevrolet Volt going up for sale. GM Parts Online, for example, is selling a replacement Volt battery with an MSRP of $2,994.64 but, with an online discount, the price comes down to $2,305.88. For the 16-kWh pack in the 2012 Volt, that comes to a very low $144.11 per kilowatt hour (kWH). But is it a real deal? How can it be, when a Chevy dealer may quote you a price of up to $34,000 to replace the pack? For a 16-kWh Volt pack, $2,305.88 comes to a very low $144.11 per kWh. But is it a real deal? Battery packs in alternative propulsion vehicles are usually priced by the kWh and, historically, they've been thought to be in the range of $500-per-kWh for OEM offerings. Since automakers are understandably secretive about their costs, we still don't know what the real number is today, but we do know it varies by automaker. Tesla, for example, has said it pays less than $200-per-kWH at the cell level but, of course, a constructed pack would be more. Whatever is going on, li-ion battery prices are trending downward. So, $144.11 certainly sounds great, but what's the story here? Kevin Kelly, manager of electrification technology communications for General Motors, reminded AutoblogGreen that GM Parts Online is not the official GM parts website and that, "the costs indicated on the site are not what we would charge our dealers or owners for a replacement battery. There would be no cost to the Volt owner if their battery needs replacement or repair while the battery is under the eight year/100,000 mile limited warranty coverage provided by Chevrolet." A single price tag also can't be accurate for everyone, Kelly said. "If the customer needs to have their battery repaired beyond the warranty, the cost to them would vary depending on what needs to be replaced or repaired (i.e. number of modules, which specific internal components need replacement, etc.)." he said. "So, it's hard for us to tell you exactly what the cost would be to the customer because it varies depending on what might need to be repaired/replaced. As a result, the core charge would vary." But, is the $2,300 price even accurate for anyone? Thanks to a reader comment, we see that this similar item on New GM Parts makes it look like the lithium-ion modules that Kelly mentioned – where a lot of the expensive bits are – are not included.

2020 Ford Explorer vs 3-row crossover rivals: How they compare on paper

The 2020 Ford Explorer has finally landed, and if history serves as an indicator, it should be bigger than sliced bread. And people sure love themselves some sliced bread. This new Explorer may look familiar on the outside, but beneath the skin is a radically new rear-drive platform related to the Ford Mustang (as opposed to a front-drive platform related to the Ford Taurus and a Volvo from the 1990s). Turbocharged four- and six-cylinder engines now exclusively rest under its hood, which as you'll see below, both better anything its competitors offer. Ah, but if you're curious to know how the new 2020 Explorer compares to its various three-row family crossover rivals, take a look at the chart below where we stack it up against the 2019 Chevrolet Traverse, 2019 Honda Pilot, 2020 Hyundai Palisade, 2019 Subaru Ascent and 2019 Toyota Highlander. There are others of course (Mazda CX-9, Dodge Durango, GMC Acadia, VW Atlas), but we only had so much room on the chart, and these were the newest and/or most likely to be cross-shopped with the new Explorer. Engine specs and towing Although the Traverse's V6 just nips it on horsepower, the 2020 Explorer's base 2.3-liter "EcoBoost" turbocharged four-cylinder engine smokes it on torque. Therefore, "best-in-class" power seems like a fair claim from Ford. That there's also a 365-horsepower turbo V6 available, plus a hybrid and even-more powerful ST model on the way shows that Ford isn't kidding around under the hood. Curb weight also seems competitive for the segment. In terms of drivetrain, the Explorer is the only member of this particular group to come standard with rear-wheel drive (2.3-liter only). The Durango is the only other three-row, non-luxury crossover to do so. This is significant for two reasons: First, you could potentially do a power slide in an Explorer. Second, and more important, those in the Snowbelt will have to opt for all-wheel drive (it comes standard with the 3.0-liter). By contrast, a set of winter tires will probably do the job just fine if you want to save some money and gas by sticking with its rivals' standard front-wheel drive. Well, except for the Subaru Ascent — that's standard with AWD. In terms of towing, the Explorer takes the cake with as much as 5,300 pounds for the four-cylinder and 5,600 pounds for the V6. Everything else tops out at 5,000, though again, the Durango is capable of besting them all thanks to its Hemi V8 engine option.

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.