1970 Chevrolet Blazer K5 Cst 4x4 Nice Dry Western High Desert Survivor Gmc Jimmy on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Leaked GM document shows GMC Sierra I6 diesel is more powerful than F-150's

GM told us earlier this year that the 2019 GMC Sierra would be getting a 3.0-liter I6 diesel option, but it never mentioned power or fuel economy figures. Hold the phone though, because a leaked GM Canada document just showed up online that lists out the details we've been waiting for. Originally published by TFL Truck, the 3.0-liter oil-burner supposedly makes 282 horsepower and 450 pound-feet of torque. For those who are counting, that's more than the Ford F-150's 250 horsepower and 440 pound-feet from its 3.0-liter diesel. It soundly bests the 240 horsepower and 420 pound-feet of torque from Ram's 3.0-liter diesel as well. Fuel economy is another story, though. The promotional material states that it will get 28 mpg on the highway, which is 2 mpg short of the F-150's 30 mpg — mind you, it's only capable of that magical 30 mpg figure in rear-wheel drive form. There's another caveat here, too; these are numbers for Canada, so they're not exactly finalized EPA figures. However, we wouldn't expect drastic differences between the two when the American numbers come out. The leaked documents also state the diesel Sierra will be capable of towing 7,800 pounds. That number seems remarkably low when compared to the F-150, which can tow up to 11,400 pounds with its diesel. Extra power and torque would have us assume that GM could get even better numbers than Ford, so we're going to hold our final judgment for official word. A 10-speed automatic will do the shifting on the diesel, just like on the 6.2-liter V8. Since the Chevy Silverado is also expected to get this engine, we can assume the figures would be almost, if not identical, to those we see here. We recently drove the 2019 Sierra and Silverado without the diesel engines, so go check those reviews out if you'd like to know more of our thoughts on the redesigned GM trucks. Related video:

GM to build outgoing Silverado and Sierra until late 2019

As it has done with previous generations, General Motors is keeping the outgoing versions of its 1500 pickups in production despite the arrival of the all-new 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and 2019 GMC Sierra. The production of the previous, K2 generation models will begin to be wound down gradually, according to Automotive News, starting with crew cabs "early next year," and double and regular cab models following during "the early second half of next year." The old model trucks will continue to be built into "late 2019" based on market demand, GM's spokesperson Kim Carpenter said. The Chevrolet will go by the name Silverado LD, with the GMC Sierra designation still to be announced. Some of the outgoing models are built by sharing the assembly work between two GM plants. Partially finished Silverado and Sierra double cab bodies are shipped from Fort Wayne, Ind., to Oshawa, Ont., where the trucks are completed, including receiving paint. This eases the workload in Fort Wayne, where production of the new T1 generation trucks started in July 2018. In January, the Silao plant in Mexico will take on the duties of building new generation regular cab and crew cab trucks. Carpenter also said that the "Oshawa shuttle," as the shared production is called, has been very successful. As a result, 60,000 more trucks will be built than what the original production forecast initially called for. GM's latest quarterly profits, disclosed last week to be $1 billion, have been far higher than expected and will result in full-year profits far higher than what had been predicted in light of steel tariffs. GM isn't the only truck maker taking a similar multi-generation approach for 2019. Both the outgoing and redesigned Ram 1500 are in production, with the previous generation being dubbed Ram 1500 Classic. Related Video:

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.