2004 Chevy Suburban Lt 4x4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM profit dips on truck changeover, but beats estimates

DETROIT — General Motors on Thursday reported a higher-than-expected quarterly profit despite a drop in production of high-margin pickup trucks, as it gears up for new models that are expected to boost profits next year. Like rivals Ford and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, GM is banking on highly-profitable Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra pickup trucks to lift profits, as consumers shift away from traditional passenger cars in favor of these larger, more comfortable trucks, SUVs and crossovers. During the first quarter, the process of changing over to GM's new pickups resulted in a drop in production of 47,000 units. GM Chief Financial Officer Chuck Stevens said the production drop had resulted in a drop in pre-tax profit of up to $800 million. Earlier this year, GM said its 2018 profits would be flat compared with 2017, but expected its all-new pickup trucks would boost margins starting in 2019. On Thursday, GM reiterated its full-year 2018 forecast for adjusted earnings in a range from $6.30 to $6.60 per share. The automaker said capital expenditures were more than $500 million higher in the quarter because of investments its new pickup trucks and a family of low-cost vehicles under development with Chinese partner SAIC Motor Corp. On Wednesday, rival Ford said it would stop investing in most traditional passenger sedans in North America. CFO Stevens told reporters on Thursday that GM has "already indicated that we will make significantly lower investments on a go-forward basis" in sedans. 2019 GMC Sierra View 21 Photos GM benefited from a lower effective tax rate in the quarter, but adjusted pre-tax margin fell to 7.2 percent from 9.5 percent a year earlier. Stevens said the company's profit margin should hit 10 percent or higher in the second quarter and for the full year. GM said material costs were $700 million higher in the first quarter, and it expects those costs to continue rising. The automaker said it would counter those increases with cost cutting measures. "It is a more difficult environment than it was three or four months ago," Stevens said when asked about rising commodity prices from potential steel and aluminum tariffs announced by the Trump administration. "But we are confident we can continue to offset that." The company reported quarterly net income of $1.05 billion or $1.43 per share, a drop of nearly 60 percent from $2.61 billion or $1.75 per share a year earlier. Analysts had on average expected earnings per share of $1.24.

Europeans ask Chevy to bring Volt back to Europe

A group of French fans is asking for a jolt of support from General Motors to get the 2016 Chevrolet Volt across the pond. The Association Amperistes et Amis des Vehicules Rechargeables is running a Change.org petition that currently has 383 signatures out of a goal of 500. While the attempt is admirable, it's probably going to take a lot more than several hundred people for the model to make a return to the continent after the poor showing of the Opel Ampera – first-gen Volt's European cousin. The group's major argument for bringing a version of the second-gen Volt to Europe is that consumers need "an intermediate choice between expensive or range-limited pure electric cars and plug-in hybrids with a miserable electric range." Furthermore, such a vehicle would prod the competition to produce similarly efficient electrified models. They also lavish praise on the abilities of the Ampera for its long EV driving range. The supporters aren't entirely kind to GM in the petition, though, and claim the company excluded the original car from marketing efforts there. The Ampera actually enjoyed a strong European launch with more orders than initially expected and briefly topped the best-sellers list among EVs there. It was even named 2012 European Car of the Year. Those halcyon days didn't last long, and by 2014 sales fell off to a trickle. The waning reception caused GM's decision not to introduce a version of the new 2016 Volt there or in Australia. Related Video:

IIHS: High numbers of drivers treat partially automated cars as fully self-driving

WASHINGTON — Drivers using advanced driver assistance systems like Tesla Autopilot or General Motors Super Cruise often treat their vehicles as fully self-driving despite warnings, a new study has found. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an industry funded group that prods automakers to make safer vehicles, said on Tuesday a survey found regular users of Super Cruise, Nissan/Infiniti ProPILOT Assist and Tesla Autopilot "said they were more likely to perform non-driving-related activities like eating or texting while using their partial automation systems than while driving unassisted." The IIHS study of 600 active users found 53% of Super Cruise, 42% of Autopilot and 12% of ProPILOT Assist owners "said that they were comfortable treating their vehicles as fully self-driving." About 40% of users of Autopilot and Super Cruise — two systems with lockout features for failing to pay attention — reported systems had at some point switched off while they were driving and would not reactivate. "The big-picture message here is that the early adopters of these systems still have a poor understanding of the technologyÂ’s limits," said IIHS President David Harkey. The study comes as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is scrutinizing Autopilot crashes. Since 2016, the NHTSA has opened 37 special investigations involving 18 deaths in crashes involving Tesla vehicles and where systems like Autopilot were suspected of use. Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. Tesla says Autopilot does not make vehicles autonomous and is intended for use with a fully attentive driver who is prepared to take over. GM, which in August said owners could use Super Cruise on 400,000 miles (643,740 km) of North American roads and plans to offer Super Cruise on 22 models by the end of 2023, did not immediately comment. IIHS said advertisements for Super Cruise focus on hands-free capabilities while Autopilot evokes the name used in passenger airplanes and "implies TeslaÂ’s system is more capable than it really is." IIHS in contrast noted ProPILOT Assist "suggests that itÂ’s an assistance feature, rather than a replacement for the driver." NHTSA and automakers say none of the systems make vehicles autonomous. Nissan said its name "is clearly communicating ProPILOT Assist as a system to aid the driver, and it requires hands-on operation.