Crew Cab 4x2 Has Super-low Mileage And Is In Excellent Condition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM recalls select Tahoes, Yukons, Escalades for rear driveshaft issue

GM is recalling a number of its full-size SUVs due to an issue with the rear driveshaft assembly that could ultimately result in driveshaft failure. The actual number of total vehicles involved in the recall is small at just 1,789, but it’s spread out across the entire 2021 model year full-size GM vehicle lineup. That means a small number of every model is being recalled, including the Chevrolet Tahoe, Suburban, GMC Yukon, Yukon XL and the Cadillac Escalade and Escalade ESV. GM traced the issue back to certain driveshaft assemblies with ball bearings that were not properly heat treated. If theyÂ’re not properly heat treated, GM says that the balls may deform over time, causing noise and vibration. Continue to drive in this condition, and GM says the affected joint in the driveshaft assembly could seize, causing loss of drive power. However, the problem wonÂ’t present itself all at once, as GM says there will be a gradual increase of noises and vibrations before total failure. For those few owners with affected vehicles, GM says that it will replace the left and right rear driveshaft assemblies with properly-built units. Per usual with recalls, this will be done at your local dealership at no cost to the owner. If you have one of the recalled SUVs, expect to be notified mid-March. Related video:

Which of these high-powered pickup classics would you choose?

High-performance pickups would appear to be having a moment on the auction site Bring a Trailer, with two tempting examples up for auction right now: a 1971 Ford Ranchero GT and a 1991 GMC Syclone. These trucks are a generation apart, but they each represent the peak muscle truck of their time. The Ranchero, of course, was Ford's car-based pickup, and Ford took advantage of its Torino roots by offering the same ultra-high-performance 429 Cobra Jet V8 in the Ranchero as it did in the Torino-branded coupes and convertibles. The 429 V8 in this truck is said to be numbers-matching, and it looks the business topped with an air scoop poking through the hood. It's paired with a three-speed automatic and a limited slip differential, reportedly one of only 82 1971-model Rancheros with this powertrain combo. As a Ranchero GT, this example sports hidden headlights, and the dual sport mirrors and vinyl top further establish its kinship with its passenger-car siblings. A set of factory Magnum 500 wheels and a respray in the original red add to the muscle-truck vibe. Two decades later, car-based pickups were dead, so when GMC decided to revive the muscle-truck genre it did so with the mid-size Sonoma. The resulting Syclone put a more modern spin on the fast-pickup idea (and on the spelling of "cyclone"). This hi-po hauler uses a 4.3-liter V6 topped with a Mitsubishi turbocharger that helped it make 280 horsepower. It's mated to a floor-shifted four-speed automatic and a Borg-Warner all-wheel-drive system with a 35/65 torque split. The Syclone was a one-year-only model, of which just under 3,000 were built. All were black with matching cloth seats with red accents. The only other '71 Ranchero to appear on BaT was a non-original GT with a 351ci V8 that was a no-sale at $7,900. This Ranchero is already nearly double that figure. Of the four previously Syclones that have crossed BaT's virtual auction block, two have sold, for $36,000 and $50,000, but both had lower miles than this truck. At this writing, these two trucks are neck-and-neck, both in the mid teens with both auctions set to end April 23. Which powerhouse pickup makes you want to put your money down? Featured Gallery Ford Ranchero and GMC Syclone Ford GMC Truck Classics

2019 GMC Sierra Denali Drivers' Notes Review | Half measures

Associate Editor Reese Counts: This truck feels a full generation behind the competition. It's a half measure that feels more like a mid-cycle refresh than a whole new truck. There are a few high points: the 6.2-liter V8 is great (if thirsty) and the bed is wider than anything else in the class. The tailgate, too, is nifty, though some might write it off as a novelty. I also dig the tech, particularly the infotainment system and heads-up display. Ram might brag about its giant touchscreen, but I think I actually prefer the GMC's user interface. The rest can be summed up with a series of shoulder shrugs. The Sierra finally looks different than a Silverado, but I wouldn't call it handsome. The interior is spacious, but I'd knock the design and materials in a $45,000 truck, much less one approaching $70,000. It's not Toyota Tundra levels of terrible, it's just plain, cheap, and not nearly as space efficient as the Ram. It feels like GM's not even trying to move the needle with this truck. The more time I spend behind the wheel, the less I like it. Assistant Editor Zac Palmer: I got to spend a lot of seat time in this 2019 GMC Sierra Denali, and I came away generally unenthused by GM's most luxurious truck. We harp a lot about how expensive pickup trucks are these days, and this one's near $70,000 price tag is just the same. When you step inside a similarly-specced Ram, it feels like it's worth its price. When I step out of a Silverado and into a more expensive Sierra, I want to feel like it's money well spent. This Sierra Denali does not. Beyond the leather seats and a few small pieces of wood trim, it's hard, black plastic galore. What makes it all the more frustrating is that GM has most of the tech and features it needs (solid infotainment, 360-degree camera, wireless phone charging and the rear camera mirror is genuinely awesome). The presentation just comes off as dated from the start. It's a shame, because I have a strange affinity for how this truck looks from the curb. The sharp angles, brash styling and "tough truck" attitude is appealing to me. I like stomping on the gas and letting the 6.2-liter torque monster under the hood loose. But man do you pay the price for using that engine. Over a few hundred miles of driving I ended at a dismal 15 mpg reading on the trip computer — the saddest part of this was knowing these were mostly highway miles.