1960 El Camino Air Ride Lowered Rat Rod Patina Hot Rod V8 Airride Bagged on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 2003 Chevrolet Tracker

When General Motors created the Geo brand to sell vehicles designed and — in some cases — built by Japanese partners, the first four models were introduced for the 1989 model year: the Metro (Suzuki Cultus), Prizm (Toyota Sprinter), Spectrum (Isuzu Gemini) and Tracker (Suzuki Sidekick). Geo got the axe in 1997, with the Metro, Prizm and Tracker becoming Chevrolets. Of those, the Tracker survived the longest, with U.S.-market sales continuing into 2004. Here's an example of a very late Tracker, found in a North Carolina car graveyard recently. The 1989-1997 first-generation Trackers were based on the Suzuki Sidekick, while the 1998-2004 Trackers had the Suzuki Vitaras (not to be confused with the much grander Grand Vitaras) as their siblings. Production of these trucks for the South American market (as the Chevrolet Vitara) continued in Ecuador all the way through 2014. The Tracker name has also gone onto some versions of the Chevrolet Trax around the world. This one is a base four-door hard top/rear-wheel-drive model, which had an MSRP of $17,330. That's about $29,789 in 2024 dollars. You'll find one in every car. You'll see. The engine is a Suzuki 2.0-liter straight-four rated at 127 horsepower and 134 pound-feet. A five-speed manual was base equipment, but very few American vehicle shoppers wanted three pedals by the middle 2000s. This truck has the Aisin four-speed automatic. We like it loud. It appears that someone associated with this truck graduated from Julius L. Chambers High School last year. In the United States, the Tracker was replaced by the Saturn Vue. If Tracker can handle (unspecified Middle Eastern country), it can survive the jungle back home. Siempre contigo.

Want a V8 on the cheap? Buy a work truck

In case you didn't notice, V8 cars have gotten pretty expensive. If you want a modern muscle car like the Dodge Challenger R/T, Ford Mustang GT, or Chevy Camaro SS, you'll need between $34,000 and $38,000 for a stripped out example of one. The cheapest of those is the Challenger, and the priciest is the Camaro. These are also the cheapest V8 cars the companies offer. But if you absolutely have to have a V8 for less, there is an option, work trucks. As it turns out, all of the Big Three offer their most basic work trucks with V8s. And because they're so basic, they're pretty affordable, especially when sticking with the standard two-wheel drive. A Ram 1500 Tradesman with a V8 can be had for as little as $29,840, which is a little more than $4,000 less than a Challenger R/T. For a bit more at $30,275, you can have a Chevy Silverado W/T, almost $8,000 less than a Camaro SS. The most expensive is the V8 Ford F-150 starts at a starting price of $30,670, which is a bit over $5,000 less than the Mustang. Of course you'll be in an ultra bare bones vehicle with few comforts, and the price will go up if you add stuff, but we're bargain hunting here, and sacrifices are sometimes necessary. Besides, what you lose in comfort, you gain in loads of cargo space and towing (try to look at the bright side). Also, as a side note, all three trucks are available with optional electronic locking rear differentials. At the discounted price of these trucks, you still get a heaping helping of power. The most potent of the trio is the Ram 1500 Tradesman with 395 horsepower and 410 pound-feet of torque generated by a 5.7-liter V8. Compared with the Challenger R/T, the Ram is up by 20 horsepower and they're tied for torque. The value proposition is even more stark between the two vehicles when looking at the price per horsepower. Each pony in the Ram costs $75.54, while the Challenger charges you $90.91. The Challenger is also more expensive per horsepower than its close competitors. The F-150's 5.0-liter V8 is just barely behind the Ram with 395 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque. That's still more power than the Challenger, and it matches the torque of the 2017 Mustang GT. On the down side, it still would be down 20 horsepower on that same 2017 Mustang, and it's behind by 60 horsepower and 20 pound-feet on the new 2018 Mustang GT. The F-150 also just edges out the Mustang in the dollar per horsepower measure.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.