2013 Gmc Savana Cargo Van Majestic Conversion-7 Tv/dvds-reverse Camera-rwd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 GMC Terrain Denali Quick Spin

Here's a bewildering statistic – General Motors sold over 347,000 GMC Terrain and Chevrolet Equinox crossovers in 2014, making the Theta platform twins the best selling vehicles in their segment. GM sold more Equinox/Terrain crossovers than Honda did CR-Vs, Ford did Escapes, and Toyota did RAV4s. After a week behind the wheel of the 2016 Terrain Denali, we can't fathom why GMC's entry, which accounts for nearly a full third of GM's annual small CUV sales, has been so popular. An inefficient engine, cheap interior plastics, uncomfortable seats, a shortage of technology, and a high price left us questioning why anyone would order this Denali over a Titanium-trim Ford Escape, a Jeep Cherokee Limited, or a Hyundai Santa Fe Sport with the Unlimited Package. Driving Notes While looks are subjective, we'd posit that GMC didn't go far enough with its 2016 mid-cycle refresh. New accents on the front bumper, a tweaked grille surround, and LED running lights round out the changes up front, while the rear gets a slightly different bumper. GMC claims there's a new hood, although we challenge you to pick out the differences – here are the official galleries for the 2013 and 2016, if you'd like to try. GMC missed a tremendous opportunity here. New headlights, some restyled taillights, and tweaked mirrors would have given the impression of a more significant refresh. As it stands, these changes don't add up to much. GMC also claims it made changes in the cabin, adding a "revised instrument panel center stack." Aside from the missing CD slot, which has been replaced with an oddly shaped and not terribly useful shelf, it's hard to spot much of a difference. The Terrain Denali's cabin materials feel cheap. You'll be spending at least $35,000 to park one of these in your driveway, but aside from the leather-and-faux-wood steering wheel, no material feels worthy of that price tag inside. The lower dash plastics are hard and scratchy, the center stack feels hollow and creaks when pressed on, and the too-small shade over the seven-inch display feels flimsy. The upper dash is covered in a cheap-feeling, leather-like material that looks unchanged from when the Terrain Denali debuted back in model year 2013. These materials don't make sense in a vehicle that, as tested, exceeded $41,000. The most egregious thing about the refreshed Terrain is the lack of content.

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.

5 reasons why GM is cutting jobs, closing plants in a healthy economy

DETROIT — Even though unemployment is low, the economy is growing and U.S. auto sales are near historic highs, General Motors is cutting thousands of jobs in a major restructuring aimed at generating cash to spend on innovation. It's the new reality for automakers that are faced with the present cost of designing gas-powered cars and trucks that appeal to buyers now while at the same time preparing for a future world of electric and autonomous vehicles. GM announced Monday that it will cut as many as 14,000 workers in North America and put five plants up for possible closure as it abandons many of its car models and restructures to focus more on autonomous and electric vehicles. The reductions could amount to as much as 8 percent of GM's global workforce of 180,000 employees. The cuts mark GM's first major downsizing since shedding thousands of jobs in the Great Recession. The company also said it will stop operating two additional factories outside North America by the end of next year. The move to make GM get leaner before the next downturn likely will be followed by Ford Motor Co., which also has struggled to keep one foot in the present and another in an ambiguous future of new mobility. Ford has been slower to react, but says it will lay off an unspecified number of white-collar workers as it exits much of the car market in favor of trucks and SUVs, some of them powered by batteries. Here's a rundown of the reasons behind the cuts: Coding, not combustion CEO Mary Barra said as cars and trucks become more complex, GM will need more computer coders but fewer engineers who work on internal combustion engines. "The vehicle has become much more software-oriented" with millions of lines of code, she said. "We still need many technical resources in the company." Shedding sedans The restructuring also reflects changing North American auto markets as manufacturers continue to shift away from cars toward SUVs and trucks. In October, almost 65 percent of new vehicles sold in the U.S. were trucks or SUVs. That figure was about 50 percent cars just five years ago. GM is shedding cars largely because it doesn't make money on them, Citi analyst Itay Michaeli wrote in a note to investors. "We estimate sedans operate at a significant loss, hence the need for classic restructuring," he wrote. The reduction includes about 8,000 white-collar employees, or 15 percent of GM's North American white-collar workforce. Some will take buyouts while others will be laid off.