2013 Ltz Used 5.3l V8 16v Automatic 4wd Suv Onstar Bose on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf go nearly the same all-electric miles a year

Range anxiety? What range anxiety? The concept is a foreign one to those driving Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-ins, and as a result, that vehicle's all-electric driving miles are actually pretty close to that of the all-electric Nissan Leaf. Such were the findings of a study conducted by the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), which tracked about 8,700 cars during a three-year period, including a bunch of Volts, Leafs and Smart ED electric vehicles. In short, even though the Volt's all-electric range of about 38 miles is less than half that of the Leaf's, the Volts' collective all-electric driving was just six percent lower than the Leaf's (the next-generation Volt will be even more electro-generous, with a 50-mile range). The logic makes sense considering typical US driving habits, in which a vast majority of people commute less than 35 miles a day. Additionally, Volt drivers obviously have no fear of running out of electricity, so they were far more likely to max out on that range than some Leaf drivers. Overall, the average Leaf is driven about 15 percent less than the national average of about 11,300 miles a year for all vehicles, while Volts are driven about eight percent more. Of all those Volt miles, about 81 percent were in all-electric mode. Additionally, Volt drivers recharged about 1.5 times a day, while Leaf drivers recharged about once a day, and about 85 percent of that charging was at home. As for non-home charging, about 20 percent of the vehicles accounted for 75 percent of the station use, so folks are definitely creatures of habit. Check out the INL's 22-page report here for more interesting details. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2016 Chevrolet Volt: First Drive View 24 Photos Related Gallery 2016 Nissan Leaf View 30 Photos News Source: Idaho National Laboratory via Hybrid Cars Green Chevrolet Nissan Electric Hybrid extended-range plug-in

GM faces possible class action lawsuit over 8-speed transmission

General Motors has been hit with a class-action lawsuit from owners who allege the eight-speed automatic transmission found in several rear-wheel-drive Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC models between the 2015 and 2019 model years has a defect that causes the vehicles to hesitate and jerk when accelerating or slowing down. The lawsuit was posted to ClassAction.org and spotted by GM Authority. Problems with GM's Hydra-Matic 8L90 and 8L45 transmissions have been well-documented on Internet forums and via complaints filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, with many reporting damage to their vehicles. The lawsuit was first filed in December in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida but appears to have been transferred recently to New York. Autoblog sought comment from Theodore Leopold, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs. "These transmissions have a common defect," the complaint reads. "Drivers attempting to accelerate or decelerate their cars feel a hesitation, followed by a significant shake, shudder, jerk, clunk, or 'hard shift' when the vehicle's automatic transmission changes gears." The problem also occurs when the vehicles accelerate in a single gear, without shifting, the plaintiffs allege. "Drivers have reported that the shift is sometimes so violent, they feel as though they have been hit by another vehicle." The problem is believed to center on the transmission, torque converter or both. The complaint says it causes undue friction, causing hydraulic systems and gears to function improperly and sometimes leaves metal shavings throughout the transmission, leading to costly repairs and replacement of parts or the entire transmission. It says GM has known about the problems since shortly after it introduced the transmissions, and has issued 13 technical service bulletins, none of which have resolved the problem. GM declined to comment on the lawsuit. The plaintiffs say GM should have warned consumers about the issues and covered repairs under each vehicle's three-year/36,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty. They're seeking statewide classes in at least six states: California, Florida, Illinois, New York, Oklahoma and Texas.

CA Chevy dealer allegedly adds $50K 'market value adjustment' to 2015 Z06

It seems to happen with every eagerly anticipated new car – dealerships, recognizing that crushing demand far outstrips the initial limited supply of a new model, inflate the price via a so-called "market value adjustment." We've seen it in the past with a number of new models, and now it's happening again with one of the Detroit 3's hottest vehicles. A dealership in Roseville, CA, outside of Sacramento, has allegedly attached a staggering $49,995 market value adjustment to a 2015 Corvette Z06. We say allegedly because, despite the evidence uncovered by BoostAddict, John L. Sullivan Chevy's online inventory listing doesn't display the price premium of the Z06 in question, a (normally) $93,965 model with the top-end 3LZ trim. It's unclear if either of the dealer's other Z06s, both 3LZs, one of which is in transit, will receive similar price adjustments. Now, legally, Sullivan Chevy isn't doing anything wrong here. Dealerships are under no obligation to observe a manufacturer's suggested retail price, a point General Motors' spokesperson Ryndee Carney pointed out to Autoblog via email. "For the Corvette Z06, Chevrolet has established a Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price we feel is right for the market. Actual transaction prices, however, are the province of the dealer," Carney said, adding that a dealer zone manager will be discussing the price hike with the dealership. While we also reached out to the dealership over both the market value adjustment and the price of the Z06 as it appears on the company's website, we've yet to hear back as of this writing. Should they reply to our inquiries, we'll be sure to update you. Until then, we'd like to hear what you think about this case. Is Sullivan Chevy simply pricing the cars as high as it thinks the market can bear, or is this a cash grab for an hotly anticipated product? Have your say in Comments.