2004 Hummer H2 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2023 Hyundai Ioniq 5 Cupholder Mega Test: Will the Nalgene bottle fit?

I absolutely adore the Hyundai Ioniq 5, and so was excited to spend a week with it when the EV landed in my driveway. When I first drove the Ioniq 5 in San Diego, though, I hadn't packed my favorite style water bottle: the big 32-ounce Nalgene. Despite it being the best, its sheer size makes it less ideal when trying to pack light for a short trip. It also means it doesn't fit in most cars' cupholders, but, without the bottle on hand, I'd have to wait until this new opportunity with the Ioniq 5 to find out if it passes the Nalgene check. So, let's get to it. Starting at pole position — the front cupholders — we find ourselves unlucky so far. It's not even close to fitting. Not unusual, but our first option for convenient access to megahydration is denied. In most instances, our next best bet is the molded pockets in the front door panels. Here we have success. It's quite a tight fit, so while our drink won't be knocking or rolling around, it's not as easy as it could be to retrieve while driving, and I'll probably eventually wear out the little plastic tether connecting the lid to the bottle, as that's the easiest thing to grab without looking. Still, I'll give these door holders a pass. How about the folks sitting in back? Where can they stash their Nalgenes? No surprise about it not fitting in the center armrest cupholders after our inauspicious start with the fronts. The fact that it won't fit in the door panels is disappointing. C'est la vie. But one more thing ... you might have noticed another potential stash up front in the storage cubby below the center stack. The Nalgene fits in there just fine, but a little bit of extra room means the bottle will be knocking around. It's actually a decent spot, and more accessible than the doors.

General Motors could turn Hamtramck into its electric pickup, SUV hub

Electric off-roaders could revitalize the Detroit-Hamtramck factory that General Motors previously announced it will close. While official details remain shrouded in secrecy, analysts believe the plant will be re-tooled to manufacture at least three electric models due out during the early 2020s. The plant's scheduled closure was one of the grievances the United Auto Workers (UAW) union cited when it embarked on a 40-day strike in September 2019. General Motors agreed to keep it open without shedding much light on what it planned to build there. Analyst at LMC Automotive told the The Detroit News they believe an often-rumored electric SUV that will resurrect Hummer's name, image, or both will be one of the models assigned to the Hamtramck plant. Battery-powered variants of the GMC Sierra and the Cadillac Escalade will be made there, too, as will an enigmatic van. LMC Automotive's Jeff Schuster believes the van will come first; it could enter production as early as 2021. The Hummer — which might also be offered as a pickup — will follow before the end of 2022, while the Sierra and the Escalade will both arrive in 2023. We're taking this report with a grain of salt, though, because only one of the aforementioned models has been announced by General Motors. Rumors of a Hummer resurrection emerged in the summer of 2019, just a few weeks before we heard unverified reports of a battery-powered variant of the next-generation Escalade. General Motors confirmed plans to enter the burgeoning electric pickup truck segment, which Ford, Rivian, and Tesla also have their sights on, but it hasn't detailed how or when. The van is a mystery. General Motors refused to comment on the report. It previously announced it will keep Hamtramck open, and invest $3 billion to build electric vehicles there. The investment will create 2,225 jobs. Inaugurated in February 1985, the Hamtramck factory has churned out a diverse selection of models over the past 34 years, including Cadillac's Eldorado, Seville, and Allante, the Oldsmobile Toronado, the Buick Riviera, and more recently, gasoline-electric Chevrolet Volt. General Motors announced plans to close Hamtramck in 2018, but it quickly backpedaled and extended its lease on life until 2020 by keeping the Chevrolet Impala and the Cadillac CT6 around for a few additional months.

Why didn't GM recall fire-prone Hummers earlier?

As early as 2009, motorists reported fires in the Hummer H3. In a complaint filed that March with the regulatory agency in charge of vehicle safety, one motorist said they leaped into a smoldering vehicle and drove it away from gas pumps moments before it was engulfed in flames. Three months later, another motorist described how a fire spread from behind the glove box and consumed their H3. Dozens of car owners filed similar complaints with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the six years that followed, detailing car fires of varying severity that originated in the HVAC systems of their Hummer H3s. But General Motors didn't issue a recall for any of the affected cars until last week, prompting fresh questions about how the company treats safety concerns in the wake of an ignition-switch flaw that went unaddressed for years and, at latest count, is responsible for killing at least 124 motorists. In recall documents filed with NHTSA last week, GM initially said it knew of three fires associated with the defect. Within hours, the company said it knew of 42 fires associated with the problem and three injuries sustained by vehicle occupants. A company spokesperson attributed the inconsistency to a "misstated" number in the original documents and that the higher number comes from NHTSA complaints, reports to GM and TREAD data. Beyond that discrepancy, the documents show General Motors, which has touted a revitalized attitude toward safety concerns since the ignition-switch recalls, did nothing upon determining there was a problem with the H3s. Prompted by two complaints the company received in September 2014, General Motors says it launched an internal investigation related to melting blowers in the HVAC system on December 8, 2014. In that investigation, the company says it confirmed a problem existed, finding that "mismatched electrical conductivity could result in overheating and melting of the blower motor connector module." But even with that conclusion, the company opted to close its internal investigation on April 29, 2015, without taking any action. It wasn't until NHTSA officials met with GM representatives in a meeting on June 18, 2015, that General Motors was prompted to reconsider.