2009 Chevrolet Corvette on 2040-cars

Auto blog

1983 Motorweek showdown pits Porsche 928S vs. Chevy Camaro Z28

Last month, Motor Trend threw the Camaro Z/28 and Porsche 911 GT3 into the bear pit and let them fight it out. Way back in 1983, MotorWeek had the same idea, comparing the Camaro Z/28 to the Porsche 928S. At the time, the Camaro was America's best selling sports coupe, the 928S was Porsche's top-of-the-line model that also had the highest top speed of any car sold here. And the price differential was even more stark then: $13,600 for the Camaro, $45,000 for the Porsche. That put the Z/28's cast-iron, 5.0-liter V8 with 190 horsepower and 240 pound-feet of torque against the all-aluminum 4.7-liter V8 with 234 hp and 263 lb-ft in the 928S. Even with that and the Camaro being 14 inches longer than the Porsche, the American was a surprising 40 pounds lighter than the German. The show took them to Summit Point Raceway in West Virginia to see how close a relative performance bargain could hang with a the German GT. Both had five-speed manual transmissions, but the high-speed corners and tight sections of Summit Point would test other handling variables, including the "bone-rattling" Camaro's solid rear axle and disc and drum brake setup vis-a-vis the four-wheel disc brakes and independent suspension on the "firm-but-smooth" Porsche. Paradoxically, the larger disparity 22 years ago resulted in a closer result. Check out the video to see how the Summit was won. News Source: MotorWeek via YouTube Chevrolet Porsche Coupe Luxury Performance Classics Videos chevy camaro z28 porsche 928 retro review

2016 Chevy Volt will have more EV range, bigger battery

Meet the new Volt, not the same as the old Volt. That appears to be the story when General Motors introduces the 2016 Chevy Volt at the Detroit Auto Show in January. Today we're getting some more details on the guts of the new plug-in hybrid, and it turns out they're going to be much improved from the current Volt, which first went on sale at the end of 2010. Sure, the first-gen Volt did get some improvements along the way (a slightly larger battery pack, lane departure warnings) but the new Volt – which will go on sale in the second half of 2015 – marks the first time GM has been able to return to the drawing board and really make the improvements that its customers want. That's how Larry Nitz, GM's executive director of vehicle electrification explained it to AutoblogGreen today when explaining the all-new Voltec extended range electric vehicle (EREV) powertrain. "In the Gen 2 is we gave the engine a little more power, a little more torque, a little more displacement, more capability." – Larry Nitz Nitz said that the new Volt will be better in almost every sense: a bigger battery, longer EV-only range, 20 percent better acceleration in the low speed range and higher overall efficiency. This is due, in part, to the Volt's two motors being able to both act as generators and power the car. As we noted this morning, the 2016 Volt will use a larger, 1.5-liter four-cylinder engine, a version of which is already used in the Chinese-market Cruze. Nitz said that this has a number of benefits, including more power and quieter operation. "Some people would say, why did you make [the first-gen engine] so big. I would say, why did you make it so small?" he said. "It works good, our customers love it, but the reality is that if you go a little bit off and use the car a little harder, you can get the engine to need to operate at a higher speed. In an EV, that's quite noticeable. So, what we did in the Gen 2 is we gave the engine a little more power, a little more torque, a little more displacement, more capability and what it has marginally enabled is not only is it more efficient but it's also quieter." Nitz wouldn't talk about how the new powertrain might affect the two other products that use the Volt's underpinnings – the Cadillac ELR and the Opel Ampera – but if you've got a quieter option, we assume that's something ELR drivers would enjoy. But that's a story for another day.

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.