1967 Chevy C10 Turbo Lsx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

How GM engineers are using diaper 'snow' to keep you warm

Testing how snow affects General Motors' vehicles isn't really a problem right now for the company's engineers, but in the dog days of summer the process isn't exactly easy. The only real option is for them to book time at the automaker's climatic wind tunnel. However, a flash of brilliance from an engineer allows snow to be simulated regardless of the temperature outside, and the discovery is all because of his daughter's wet diaper. The realization came to GM Thermal Systems engineer Nicholas Jahn while he was swimming with his daughter and noticed how her diaper ballooned in size in the water. He found out the substance that makes this possible is called sodium polyacrylate. When the material gets wet it grows and forms fluffy flakes that are a close imitation of snow. Best of all, the stuff can be prepared easily any time of the year, and it's reusable. The engineering team uses the material to test the effectiveness of the heating systems of GM's vehicles. They spread the sodium polyacrylate over the inlets at the base of the windshield to obstruct the airflow and then crank the heater. After some time, they can see how much is being sucked into the system and design more efficient systems in the future. See how the process works in the video above and read about the diaper discovery in GM's press release below. Diapers Change Chevy Cruze Winter Warm-up Time GM validation engineer uses diaper material "snow" to reduce frigid drives 2015-01-06 DETROIT – An item commonly found on an infant's changing table is helping General Motors' engineers simulate snow year round, ensuring heating systems in cars like the 2015 Chevrolet Cruze can quickly and efficiently warm its interior. Packed snow can prevent air from entering the inlet panel at the bottom of the windshield, obstructing the flow of air into the heating system and reducing the amount of air it can push out. This can lead to less efficient warming of the car's interior and windshield defrosting. "The last thing anyone wants to do when it's freezing cold out is scrape their windshield," said Nicholas Jahn, GM Vehicle Thermal Systems engineer. "The testing we perform on the Chevrolet Cruze with the diaper material allows us to maximize the car's heating capabilities." Ironically, Jahn stumbled upon his diaper-based testing method in the middle of summer. During a swim with his daughter, he noticed her diaper multiplied in size when it came into contact with water.

Meet the Greenest and Meanest vehicles of 2016

If you've been keeping track, you won't be surprised with the number one entry in this year's list of greenest cars from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). In fact, the top three spots on the 2016 list are all the same as they were in 2015. After that, things get interesting. For one thing, this is the first Greenest list that doesn't have any purely internal combustion engine powertrain on it. Hybrids, yes, but if you want to be one of the top 12 greenest cars this year, you'd better have some sort of electric angle. ACEEE says that the conventional, gas-powered Smart Fortwo and Chevrolet Spark just missed the cut. In a statement, ACEEE lead vehicle analyst Shruti Vaidyanathan said, "The 2016 scores are in, and plug-in electric vehicles are outpacing all other vehicle offerings in terms of environmental friendliness." Like last year, one of the noticeable vehicles missing from the green list is the Tesla Model S. One reason? ACEEE takes curb weight into account (lighter is better), and the Model S is a heavy beast. The ACEEE doesn't just look at the clean side of the ledger. It also puts out a "meanest" list. These are the vehicles that pollute the most, not only from their tailpipes, but also any pollution created during the entire manufacturing process, from mining the raw materials to the energy used to produce the vehicle at the factory. The entire list, from greenest to meanest, is done using a "cradle to grave" analysis. You can see how the ACEEE determines its rankings here, explore the entire greenest cars site here, or click through our galleries to see which vehicles are extra green (above) or extra mean (below) this year. 12: Mercedes-Benz GL550 4MATIC View 12 Photos More Electric Cars than Ever on Greenest Vehicles List Electric Vehicles Nab 9 out of Top 12 Spots in ACEEE's Environmental Vehicle Rankings Washington, DC: Despite a tumultuous year for the automotive industry, manufacturers have continued to offer exciting technology options for a growing vehicle market. Today at greenercars.org, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) released its 19th annual comprehensive environmental ratings for vehicles. The following vehicles comprise the Greenest List for 2016: Greenest Score 1. Mercedes-Benz Smart ForTwo Electric Drive Convertible / Coupe 63 2. Chevrolet Spark EV 63 3. Fiat 500E 62 4. Toyota Prius Eco 61 5. Volkswagen E-Golf 61 6. Nissan Leaf S / Leaf SV 61 7. Kia Soul Electric 59 8.

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.