Chevrolet Venture on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Least reliable cars and trucks of 2022

Related: Most reliable cars and trucks of 2022   Every year, Consumer Reports ranks new cars based on their predicted reliability. We often see Toyota, Lexus, and a few other automakers near the top. But on the other side of the coin, the list of least reliable vehicles sometimes contains surprises.   The organization surveys its members to determine the vehicles that exhibited the most problems over the prior year. Owners are asked about creaks and rattles, the durability of parts and trim, and mechanical issues. Consumer Reports assigns a weight to each problem and then uses them to create a score, with 100 being the best. Some familiar names appear on the list of least reliable vehicles (in order with the lowest predicted reliability score at the top), but there are a few eyebrow-raising models, followed by CR's score: Ford F-150 Hybrid: 4 Hyundai Kona Electric: 5 Lincoln Aviator: 8 Nissan Sentra: 9 Ford Explorer: 16 Chevrolet Bolt: 17 Chevrolet Silverado 1500/GMC Sierra 1500: 19 Jeep Gladiator: 21 Mercedes-Benz GLE: 23 Jeep Wrangler: 24 Consumer Reports noted that sedans are the most reliable vehicle category and found that trucks are far lower on the list. That said, the survey showed that trucks from American brands tended to have better reliability scores, so it’s surprising to see GMÂ’s big two and the Ford F-150 on the list. Part of their problematic ownership experience could be due to the fact that all three trucks have received recent updates, and the Ford was completely redesigned for 2022. New tech, fresh drivetrain components, and other improvements can upset the balance of reliability and make newer models look less dependable than their older counterparts. Related video: Green Chevrolet Ford GMC Hyundai Jeep Lincoln Mercedes-Benz Nissan Car Buying Truck Crossover Hatchback SUV Electric Hybrid Sedan Consumer Reports reliability

The U-2 spy plane needs high-performance cars to help land

Typically, aircraft deploy their landing gear from three main points. Most military aircraft, for example, deploy two gears at the back and one forward, like a tricycle. Some civilian aircraft flip the layout, with two in front and one in back - tail-draggers. The U-2 Dragon Lady is wildly different than any of these. With a 103-foot wingspan but a body that's just 63-feet long, the layout of the U-2 makes a traditional landing setup infeasible. Instead, the U-2 utilizes a pair of wheels, one up front and one in back. With such a bizarre layout, landings are so tough that since the U-2's earliest flights at Area 51, the US Air Force has used high-performance chase cars to guide the pilot down safely. The landing process isn't over there, though. As this video from Sploid shows, balancing out the aircraft to fit the detachable "pogos" – think training wheels for spy planes – is a comical procedure requiring a number of airman using their full body weight to even out the U-2. This video also recaps some of the great vehicles that have served as chase vehicles for this legendary spy plane. They include Chevrolet El Caminos, and the Fox-body Ford Mustangs so favored by the California Highway Patrol. For the last several years, the USAF has utilized products from General Motors, using fourth-generation Chevy Camaros, before switching over to the Pontiac GTO and most recently, the awesome Pontiac G8. It's fair to say that if you're a gearhead in the Air Force, this is the job you want. Check out the video, embedded up top. News Source: Sploid via YouTubeImage Credit: Sploid Chevrolet Ford GM Pontiac Military Performance Videos

General Motors and EVs: No stranger to firsts, but where's the leadership?

2015 is already shaping up to be the year of "affordable, 200-mile EV" concepts. Nissan and Tesla have each been talking about them for some time, the latter promising to unveil its Model 3 at the North American International Auto Show in January before balking when the time came. Instead, Chevrolet beat them all by unveiling the Bolt concept at the same event, followed shortly thereafter with suggestions of a 2016 launch – potentially offering the first nationwide EV with anything close to that range. It was the ballsiest EV-related move General Motors has made in a quarter century. But will it remain so? Exactly 25 years before the Bolt rolled up onto the turntable, then-Chairman Roger Smith unveiled GM's last ground-up EV concept, the even-more-unfortunately-named Impact, at the Los Angeles Auto Show in January 1990. A few months later, he surprised most of his colleagues by announcing its intended production in honor of Earth Day. It was the first modern foray into electric vehicles for the US by any automaker, one that was rewarded by the State of California with what is now known as the Zero Emissions Vehicle mandate. The program not only forced other automakers into competing with Roger's pet project, but inspired all of them to fight it like small children against bedtime. Some years later, the drivers themselves weighed in, with a biting documentary about that obstinance and the leadership it cost both GM and the country. Within months, GM was first back into the fray of plug-in vehicles. Many criticized the company for starting with a PHEV rather than jump straight back into EVs. The choice wasn't totally out of the blue – even EV1 was meant to be followed by a PHEV. And especially on the heels of Who Killed the Electric Car?, some skittishness was understandable: even a successful EV would invite a "we told you so" public reaction, underscoring their mistake in ending the EV1 program. If a new EV didn't do well, they'd be convicted in the public eye as serial killers. All while seeking a federal bailout. For all the flak, the resulting Chevy Volt was and is a better car than GM has ever gotten credit for. But the company seemed to grow weary of having to overcome its varied past, and while the current owners remain happy, much of the stakeholder and community engagement that so effectively built early goodwill and sales growth faded not long after launch. Marketing has been spotty in both consistency and effectiveness.