2012 Chevrolet Camaro Ss Convertible 2-door 6.2l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM cutting back on powertrain warranty citing lack of interest

Generally, when a manufacturer offers a long, high-mileage warranty, it's a sign that it stands behind its products. On top of that, it's generally a selling point for consumers, who can rest easy knowing that any catastrophic failures will be picked up by the manufacturer. Considering those facts, it does seem rather strange that General Motors is slashing the mileage warranty on model year 2016 vehicles from Chevrolet and GMC. Instead of offering consumers a 100,000-mile warranty, GM will now only offer a powertrain warranty up to 60,000 miles. The five-year warranty period, though, remains unchanged. GM will also cut the number of free services being offered to Chevy and GMC owners, as well as Buick drivers, from four to two. "Through research, we have determined that when purchasing a new vehicle, included maintenance and warranty rank low on the list of reasons why consumers consider a particular brand over another," explained a memo sent to dealers by Chevrolet VP Brian Sweeney and his GMC counterpart, Duncan Aldred, and obtained by Automotive News. "As a result, we have benchmarked our competitors, reviewed our current offerings and have concluded the following modifications to align closely with our customers' needs and expectations." While the move might seem odd, Sweeney and Aldred are right – according to Automotive News, Ford, Honda and Toyota each offer a five-year, 60,000-mile powertrain warranty. As for what the money saved by trimming the powertrain warranty will go towards, a GM spokesperson simply told AN that the company will "reinvest the savings we will realize into other retail programs," some of which have been requested by consumers. What are your thoughts? Would a 40,000-mile reduction in a new vehicle's powertrain really turn you off from buying one? Even if it matched its competitors? Is GM better off spending its money elsewhere? Have your say in Comments. Featured Gallery 2016 Chevrolet Equinox View 10 Photos News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Chevrolet Chevrolet GM GMC Auto Repair Maintenance Ownership warranty

Motor Trend puts Chevy Camaro Z28 and Porsche 911 GT3 Head 2 Head

Motor Trend admits, "This is an unfair comparison." But that doesn't make it any less fun to watch when they pit a Camaro Z/28 against the Porsche 911 GT3. The former has a 7.0-liter V8 with 505 horsepower and 481 pound-feet of torque shifted through a six-speed manual. The latter has a 3.8-liter flat-six with 475 hp and 324 lb-ft shifted through a seven-speed dual-clutch transmission. Yet those are only the little disparities – the big disparities are mass and money: the Camaro weighs 3,882 pounds and costs $76,150 as-tested, the Porsche weighs 3,267 pounds and costs $145,785. But they're both about hardcore performance, so MT takes them out on the street, to the drag strip, to the parking lot for figure eights and a skidpad test, and finally to Big Willow for Randy Pobst to give his professional assessment. Remember when a lotta people spent a lotta time debating Pirates vs. Ninjas? This is like that, only it's the "haul-ass good-time car" vs. the "track surgeon." Enjoy the debate in the video.

GM recalling over 243,000 crossovers over possible seat belt defect

2010 Buick Enclave - Click above for high-res image gallery
The summer of 2010's recall hit parade continues unabated today, with General Motors having just announced that it is asking 243,403 owners of its 2009-2010 Lambda crossovers to bring their three-row haulers in for inspection. The culprit? Second-row seat belts in select Buick Enclave, Chevrolet Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Saturn Outlook CUVs have "failed to perform properly in a crash."
According to GM, a second-row seat-side trim piece is to blame, as it can impede the upward rotation of the buckle after the seat is folded flat. As a result, if the buckle makes contact with the seat frame, cosmetic damage can occur, potentially requiring additional force to operate the buckle properly. So far, no great shakes, but in the process of applying that additional force, the occupant may push the buckle cover down to the strap, potentially revealing and depressing the red release button. As a result of this, the belt may not latch, or in certain cases, it may actually appear to be latched when, in fact, it isn't.