2009 Lt1 Large Sport Utility Suv Premium Onstar Traction on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Fingers point to dragged-out NHTSA investigation after second death by ARC airbag inflator

Safety advocates have increased criticism of the federal government's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration after an exploding airbag inflator that's been under investigation for more than six years killed a second person.  On Wednesday, NHTSA posted recall documents filed by General Motors that revealed the second death, the driver of a 2015 Chevrolet Traverse SUV with an inflator made by Tennessee company ARC blew apart, spewing shrapnel. No details were given about where and when the death occurred. NHTSA has said that ARC Automotive of Knoxville has manufactured about 8 million inflators used nationwide in vehicles made by General Motors, Fiat Chrysler (now Stellantis), Kia and Hyundai. “NHTSA should have been all over this along time ago,” said Rosemary Shahan, president of California-based Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety. “There's just no denying that itÂ’s a (safety) defect.” NHTSA, the agency charged with with keeping America's automobiles and roads safe, began investigating ARC inflators in July of 2015 after two people were injured by flying shrapnel. The investigation became more urgent in 2016, when a Canadian woman driving an older Hyundai Elantra was killed by metal airbag fragments. Public records show only a little progress on the probe. In April, the agency posted a memo in saying it was reviewing volumes of information it received from ARC. Safety advocates such as Shahan say that the dragged-out investigation is an example of the deadly consequences that can result from an understaffed and underfunded agency. The second death should not have happened, Shahan said, and vehicles with faulty ARC inflators should have been recalled faster. The agency, Shahan said, is “grossly underfunded," but it still should have sought recalls of the ARC inflators. She said historically NHTSA has taken little action during Republican administrations but has ramped up safety efforts when Democrats control the White House. Messages were left Wednesday by the Associated Press seeking comment from NHTSA and ARC. At this time, relatively few vehicles are effected. The GM recall covers only 550 Chevy Traverse SUVs from the 2013 through 2017 model years, as well as Buick Enclave SUVs from 2008 through 2017. The automaker said in a statement that the faulty front driver's airbag inflators were either installed at the factory or in replacement airbag modules.

2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray priced from $51,995*

After months of speculation, Chevrolet has finally revealed the official starting price of the 2014 Corvette Stingray. The base MSRP for the 450-horsepower Stingray Coupe will be $51,995, while the Stingray Convertible will go for $56,995 (*both prices include a $995 destination fee). This means that the price increase from 2013 to 2014 is just $1,400 for the coupe and $2,395 for the convertible - pretty modest increases considering the upgrade in specifications. Of course, neither price accounts for the sort of dealer markup that might grace early C7 window stickers, especially since less than a third of all Chevrolet dealers will be allocated Corvette models to sell at the car's launch.
Now, these prices are for the base car, so if you're wondering how much a fully loaded Stingray will run, Chevy has given us a good indication of that as well. The coupe we saw on display at the Detroit Auto Show (shown above), for example, would run $73,360 including options such as the $2,800 Z51 Performance Package, $2,495 competition sport seats and the $1,795 Magnetic Ride Control option - just to name a few. Stepping up to the 3LT trim level that brings a full leather interior will run an extra $8,005 over the base price.
While $20,000 in options may seem like a lot, this "as-tested" price still has the C7 competitively priced against rival coupes like the Porsche 911 and Nissan GT-R. Speaking of price comparisons, Chevrolet also points out that the C7 Stingray Z51 costs $2,200 less than the C6 Grand Sport while delivering better acceleration (0-60 mph in less than four seconds) and improved track performance (including more than 1 g in cornering).

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.