1968 Chevrolet Chevelle on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM trucks get hybrid versions, but you'll probably never see one

A few years ago, General Motors sold hybrid versions of its Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups. They weren't very good, using GM's old two-mode hybrid system that resulted in only negligible fuel economy gains. But GM's trying again, launching eAssist models of the 2016 Silverado and Sierra that are said to offer 2-mpg improvements in city, highway, and combined fuel economy ratings. Problem is, you probably won't be able to get one. Only 700 eAssist trucks will be made for the 2016 model year – 500 Silverados and 200 Sierras. When you consider that GM moved 824,683 examples of its light-duty pickups in 2015, this small run represents 0.08-percent of all Silverado/Sierra production, and GM says it "will monitor the market closely ... and adjust as appropriate moving forward." But that's not the only limitation. The eAssist trucks will only be sold through California dealers. For the Silverado, eAssist can only be optioned on the 1500 Crew Cab 1LT 2WD model, and for the Sierra, the fuel-saving technology is solely available on the 1500 SLT Crew Cab 2WD model with the SLT Premium Plus package. Granted, in terms of the Sierra, that means you get niceties like LED headlights and taillights, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, Bose premium audio, heated seats and steering wheel, lane keep assist, and more. In the trucks, eAssist combines a small electric motor and 0.45-kWh battery pack with the pickups' 5.3-liter V8. GM estimates total output of 355 horsepower and 383 pound-feet of torque – no more horsepower than the non-eAssist trucks, but three more pound-feet of torque. GM says the eAssist trucks can tow up to 9,400 pounds, and the battery only adds 100 pounds to the trucks' weight. The electric motor provides 13 hp and 44 lb-ft of torque for a boost of acceleration off the line, or during passing. It also allows the engine to run in four-cylinder mode for longer periods of time. eAssist uses regenerative braking to help power onboard electrical systems, and adds start/stop to the powertrain. Finally, the so-equipped trucks have a six-percent improvement in aerodynamics, thanks to a soft tonneau cover and active grille shutters in the front fascia. Great news is, the eAssist option is relatively inexpensive, only costing $500. But good luck getting your hands on one.

AWD turbodiesel Equinox, Terrain dropped for 2020

Citing low demand, General Motors is dropping the AWD diesel options off the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain roster. Chevrolet spokesman Kevin Kelly confirmed to CarsDirect that for 2020, the diesel versions of these SUVs will only be offered with front-wheel-drive. CarsDirect notes that with the AWD diesel Equinox and Terrain gone, the only AWD diesel option in this class is the Mazda CX-5 Skyactiv diesel, which is significantly more expensive: As the AWD diesel CX-5 is only available in a fully loaded Signature specification, the $42,045 price tag is almost $10k heftier than the cheapest comparable Equinox, the AWD 1.6-liter diesel LT which starts from $32,495. The 2019 GMC Terrain AWD SLE costs $34,795 in comparison, which works out to being around $7,200 cheaper than the Mazda. The higher trim levels for the Equinox and Terrain are Premier and SLT, respectively. Some reasoning behind the AWD diesel GM SUV's low uptake is their own price difference to base FWD gasoline models: you can get a 1.5-liter Equinox for less than §25,000 listed. While the 2.2-liter Mazda has plenty more power at 168 hp and 290 lb-ft, compared to 137hp and 240 lb-ft in the 1.6-liter GM SUVs, the Equinox and Terrain are notably more frugal – they are rated 32mpg combined, while the Mazda can manage 28 mpg. With better fuel economy and a significantly lower list price, the General Motors twins are at least more wallet-friendly when it comes to numbers, and as the vehicles will cease to be built in that configuration there's likely to be some cash on the hood on ones in stock. News Source: CarsDirectImage Credit: Chevrolet Chevrolet GM GMC confirmed gmc terrain chevrolet equinox

GM's Oshawa plant may close after Camaro production moves

Most of the time, when vehicle production is moved from one assembly plant to another, it spells bad news for the former. While General Motors won't go so far as to say its Oshawa, Ontario factory, which is losing the Chevrolet Camaro to the Lansing Grand River plant, is in trouble, analysts seem to think the factory's days are numbered. Forecasts for the facility are far from positive. The loss of the Camaro this year, combined with GM's targeted shutdown of a single-shift assembly line responsible for the fleet-only Chevy Impala Limited and the Equinox crossover is a bad enough omen. But with AutoForecast Solutions CEO Joe McCabe telling The Detroit News that the plant's other two products, the Cadillac XTS and Buick Regal, aren't likely to stick around beyond 2017, things look decidedly grim at Oshawa. "There is a fairly strong chance that the plant could close," Jeff Schuster, senior VP of forecasting for LMC Automotive, told The Detroit News. That doesn't mean that Unifor, Canada's auto union, and the Canadian government are going to let the factory die without a fight. And with the latter chipping in $10 billion as part of GM's 2009 bailout, you might think it has a degree of leverage in the situation. A meeting between the government and the Detroit Three at the 2015 North American International Auto Show revealed that Oshawa is already a topic of conversation. "We made it very clear that we would like to see an indication on the future of Oshawa sooner, in particular because the timing is very challenging for our supply chain to be able to adjust to potentially future orders or changes, but also to know that there are going to be future opportunities at Oshawa," Ontario's Minister of Economic, Development, Employment and Infrastructure Brad Duguid told The Detroit News. "Bottom line: It's time they made a longer-term commitment here," Unifor President Jerry Dias said, echoing Duguid's statements. It's unclear if this sort of strong talk will be enough to save 3,300-plus employees, although based on the analysts' forecasts, we doubt it.