1986 Chevy K5 Blazer 4x4 Silverado Package Western Snow Plow Truck on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy might've pulled out of NASCAR if it weren't for new Gen 6 car

We've been on the fence with NASCAR for some time now. On one hand, it's some of the closest racing anywhere in motorsports, with actual passing and door-handle-to-door-handle action as a matter of course. But on the other, it's become template racing - a personality-driven sport more about the drivers than any sort of loyalty to a particular automaker. The Car Of Tomorrow format really rammed that message home, with a racecar's identity coming down to little more than headlamp stickers slapped on the nose. That's not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, but we've wondered for some time what's in it for the automakers, who pay big money to stay in a series that has had little increasingly little do with street car sales, let alone innovation.
Apparently General Motors was beginning to wonder the same thing. In a new ESPN report, Rick Hendrick, team owner of Hendrick Motorsports, suggests that GM would have seriously considered leaving NASCAR if it wasn't for the move away from the COT to the new Gen 6 racer. According to Hendrick, GM North America boss Mark Reuss spearheaded the charge away from the 2007 COT and toward a racecar with clearer automaker ties - cars like the new Chevrolet SS racer shown above. Learn more about the fight for a closer-to-production look in the ESPN story at the link.
Now, if we could just get more rear-wheel drive V8 coupes into showrooms....

Chevy Volt 'acceptable,' Nissan Leaf 'poor' in new IIHS safety tests

Ford C-Max Hybrid also scored "acceptable" rating. With US Nissan Leaf sales up almost 30 percent during the first half of the year, the only thing that might be able to stop the battery-electric vehicle is a good, stiff barrier. Unfortunately, thing's aren't always pretty when that happens in the real world, according to new tests from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Things with the Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-in are a little bit rosier, though. The two plug-in vehicles were part of a batch of a dozen vehicles that just went through the IIHS's "small overlap" test, in which the driver's side front corner of the vehicle is crashed into a rigid barrier at 40 miles per hour. Out of the dozen, only the Mini Cooper Countryman was given a "good" rating. Five vehicles, including the Volt and the Ford C-Max Hybrid, were rated "acceptable," two were "marginal" and two, including the Leaf, were "poor." Plug-in vehicles are unique in the crash-test context because of their relatively large battery sizes. In the Volt's case, the driver had a "low risk" of injury, said the IIHS. But the Leaf's crash substantially pushed back the instrument panel and steering column, creating a scenario where the driver was "likely" to sustain leg injuries. The batteries in both the Leaf and the Volt passed safety tests specifically targeted at things like thermo and electrical properties and overall integrity. "Nissan is proud of the Leaf's 'Good' rating in all other IIHS tests, a 4-star NCAP rating from NHTSA and its IIHS Top Safety Pick rating in all previous years since the car's release," the company said in an e-mail sent to AutoblogGreen. "As for the performance of the 2014 Leaf in the 'small overlap frontal test,' Nissan will continue to review these and other results from the IIHS 'small overlap frontal test' as we seek opportunities for improvement." Check out the IIHS's press release and small car crash-test video footage below. Range of ratings: Small car ratings run the gamut in challenging small overlap front test The Mini Cooper Countryman is the only small car to earn a good rating among the latest group of 12 cars subjected to the Institute's small overlap front crash test. Two electric models and a hybrid also are in the mix, with varied results. The electric-powered Chevrolet Volt (with a gasoline engine "range extender") earns an acceptable rating, while its battery-electric rival, the Nissan Leaf, earns a poor rating.

IIHS: High numbers of drivers treat partially automated cars as fully self-driving

WASHINGTON — Drivers using advanced driver assistance systems like Tesla Autopilot or General Motors Super Cruise often treat their vehicles as fully self-driving despite warnings, a new study has found. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an industry funded group that prods automakers to make safer vehicles, said on Tuesday a survey found regular users of Super Cruise, Nissan/Infiniti ProPILOT Assist and Tesla Autopilot "said they were more likely to perform non-driving-related activities like eating or texting while using their partial automation systems than while driving unassisted." The IIHS study of 600 active users found 53% of Super Cruise, 42% of Autopilot and 12% of ProPILOT Assist owners "said that they were comfortable treating their vehicles as fully self-driving." About 40% of users of Autopilot and Super Cruise — two systems with lockout features for failing to pay attention — reported systems had at some point switched off while they were driving and would not reactivate. "The big-picture message here is that the early adopters of these systems still have a poor understanding of the technologyÂ’s limits," said IIHS President David Harkey. The study comes as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is scrutinizing Autopilot crashes. Since 2016, the NHTSA has opened 37 special investigations involving 18 deaths in crashes involving Tesla vehicles and where systems like Autopilot were suspected of use. Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. Tesla says Autopilot does not make vehicles autonomous and is intended for use with a fully attentive driver who is prepared to take over. GM, which in August said owners could use Super Cruise on 400,000 miles (643,740 km) of North American roads and plans to offer Super Cruise on 22 models by the end of 2023, did not immediately comment. IIHS said advertisements for Super Cruise focus on hands-free capabilities while Autopilot evokes the name used in passenger airplanes and "implies TeslaÂ’s system is more capable than it really is." IIHS in contrast noted ProPILOT Assist "suggests that itÂ’s an assistance feature, rather than a replacement for the driver." NHTSA and automakers say none of the systems make vehicles autonomous. Nissan said its name "is clearly communicating ProPILOT Assist as a system to aid the driver, and it requires hands-on operation.