1996 Corvette on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM Recalls 218,000 Chevy Aveo Models Over Fire-Prone Lighting

The recall train keeps on rolling for General Motors. Hot on the heels of its recent 2.4 million-vehicle recall of various models, it's now calling in 218,000 Chevrolet Aveo units from the 2004-2008 model years because they could catch fire. The problem concerns the daytime running light module in the instrument panel. It could overheat, melt and cause a fire. According to GM spokesperson Alan Adler, "We are aware of some fires," and the company "is still investigating." Adler wouldn't comment about how many fires were reported or when the automaker was first aware of this issue because of the ongoing analysis. However, he said the issue has not caused any injuries or fatalities. GM also doesn't have a fix for the problem with the DRL module yet. The company says in its recall statement to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that the remedy "is still under development." Adler wasn't sure when it would be ready, but he said Aveo owners would receive notification in the mail "relatively soon." They will receive a second letter later to schedule the repair. In a separate letter about the Aveo's problem to NHTSA (viewable here as a PDF), GM said its Executive Field Action Decision Committee decided to conduct the recall on May 16. Scroll down for the recall report. RECALL Subject : Daytime Running Light Module Overheating Report Receipt Date: MAY 19, 2014 NHTSA Campaign Number: 14V261000 Component(s): Potential Number of Units Affected: 218,000 Manufacturer: General Motors LLC SUMMARY: General Motors is recalling certain model year 2004-2008 Chevrolet Aveo vehicles equipped with daytime running lights (DRL). In the affected vehicles, there may be heat generated within the DRL module located in the center console in the instrument panel, which could melt the DRL module. CONSEQUENCE: If the DRL module melts due to the heat generation, it could cause a vehicle fire. REMEDY: The remedy for this recall campaign is still under development. The manufacturer has not yet provided a notification schedule. Owners may contact General Motors customer service at 1-800-222-1020 (Chevrolet). General Motors recall number for this campaign is 14236. NOTES: Owners may also contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), or go to www.safercar.gov.

GM won't pay owners of recalled cars for lost value

Kenneth Feinberg, the man in charge of the General Motors compensation fund dealing with the its widespread ignition switch woes, has issued an informal, two-letter response to the plaintiffs in more than 70 lawsuits seeking redress for lost resale value of their Cobalts: "No." The cases were recently combined into one, but Feinberg told The Detroit News that the fund will deal "only with death and physical injury claims," and that "perceived diminished value" will get no consideration.
ALG, the firm specializing in establishing residual values, determined that Cobalt owners had lost $300 compared to the segment competition and doesn't envision any long-term effects from the recall situation. Feinberg's statement comes in advance of public details on how the compensation fund will work and adheres to GM's long-held position on the matter. The company has already asked a judge to throw out such suits using the pre-bankruptcy defense, even as it stopped using that defense in cases of injury and death.
With plenty of potential gain from the GM suit, however, don't expect the plaintiffs to give up yet. When Toyota was sued for the same reason during the unintended acceleration debacle, it eventually settled the case for between $1 billion and $1.4 billion just to get it over with. Since the 85 law firms involved in the Toyota litigation took home more than $250 million of that total, we shouldn't expect the attorneys to give up on a GM payout, either.

Ram 1500 bests new F-150 in MT pickup shootout

Ford's 2015 Ford F-150 is a technological tour-de-force, what with its aluminum-intensive construction and its powerful and efficient new 2.7-liter EcoBoost engine option. But now that it's hit the market, it's time to get down to brass tacks and find out how just the latest F-150 actually stands up to its rivals in the hyper-competitive fullsize segment. Motor Trend is among the first to round up the Ford (in Lariat 2.7-liter 4X4 guise here) and put it up against the Ram 1500 Outdoorsman EcoDiesel 4x4 and 5.3-liter-equipped Silverado 1500 LTZ Z71 to find out how Dearborn's new-think truck measures up. The test put the trio through over 1,000 miles of tough driving in California and Arizona in a variety of conditions from just cruising around unladen to hauling a trailer. MT found all three trucks to be competent, but the most praise got heaped on the Ram and the Ford, with the Chevrolet falling a step behind its competitors in many tests. Among the Ford's most-liked features was its 2.7-liter, twin-turbo V6 that helped make the F-150 easily the quickest of the group, with some editors saying the engine felt about the same whether driving around with cargo in the bed or not. There was some minor turbo lag during acceleration while trailering, but that issue affected the Ram, too. The Ram's powertrain was lauded, as well. The EcoDiesel was torquey around town, and the 1500's combination of an eight-speed automatic and air suspension was judged to be the best of the lot. It was the most difficult to get into the bed, though. The Ram also won the fuel economy award by netting 20-miles-per-gallon city and 28-mpg highway in the test to beat its Environmental Protection Agency ratings of 19/27. The Ford's EcoBoost managed 17/22, one mpg off each from the EPA numbers, and using a lot of throttle really depleted its efficiency. As MT notes, however, it would take time for the diesel's mileage savings to pay off at the pump for these two trucks. In the end, the Ram just barely eked out the win, with the title partially earned because of "the Ford's unknown maintenance and aluminum repair costs," according to MT. Go check out the full comparison to read all of the details, then let us know what you think in Comments.