2014 Chevrolet Equinox 1lt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Leaked GM document shows GMC Sierra I6 diesel is more powerful than F-150's

GM told us earlier this year that the 2019 GMC Sierra would be getting a 3.0-liter I6 diesel option, but it never mentioned power or fuel economy figures. Hold the phone though, because a leaked GM Canada document just showed up online that lists out the details we've been waiting for. Originally published by TFL Truck, the 3.0-liter oil-burner supposedly makes 282 horsepower and 450 pound-feet of torque. For those who are counting, that's more than the Ford F-150's 250 horsepower and 440 pound-feet from its 3.0-liter diesel. It soundly bests the 240 horsepower and 420 pound-feet of torque from Ram's 3.0-liter diesel as well. Fuel economy is another story, though. The promotional material states that it will get 28 mpg on the highway, which is 2 mpg short of the F-150's 30 mpg — mind you, it's only capable of that magical 30 mpg figure in rear-wheel drive form. There's another caveat here, too; these are numbers for Canada, so they're not exactly finalized EPA figures. However, we wouldn't expect drastic differences between the two when the American numbers come out. The leaked documents also state the diesel Sierra will be capable of towing 7,800 pounds. That number seems remarkably low when compared to the F-150, which can tow up to 11,400 pounds with its diesel. Extra power and torque would have us assume that GM could get even better numbers than Ford, so we're going to hold our final judgment for official word. A 10-speed automatic will do the shifting on the diesel, just like on the 6.2-liter V8. Since the Chevy Silverado is also expected to get this engine, we can assume the figures would be almost, if not identical, to those we see here. We recently drove the 2019 Sierra and Silverado without the diesel engines, so go check those reviews out if you'd like to know more of our thoughts on the redesigned GM trucks. Related video:

Ford GT dominates Le Mans qualifying, gets slapped with performance adjustment

Fifty years after Bruce McLaren and Chris Amon drove the Ford GT40 to victory at the 24 Hours of Le Mans, Ford is poised for a historic return to the Circuit de la Sarthe. The new Ford GT took the top two qualifying positions in the LMGTE Pro class, and four of the top five. Ferrari's 488 filled in the rest of the spots in the top seven, the first two from AF Corse. In other words, we're primed for a reboot of the classic Ford-Ferrari feud at this year's race. Or not, as the ACO, which organizes the 24 Hours of Le Mans, announced sweeping pre-race Balance of Performance (BOP) adjustments this morning that make this year's GT class anybody's race. In LMP1, last year's overall winner Porsche locked up the top two spots with the 919 Hybrid and will lead the entire field at race start. Toyota's two-car factory effort followed with qualifying times 1.004 and 2.170 seconds behind the pole lap. Audi rounds out the manufacturer-backed LMP1 class in fifth and sixth. Full qualifying results can be found here. The storyline for the GT cars is perfect - some say too perfect. Ford's class-leading times came after BOP adjustment to the Corvette Racing C7.R before qualifying. BOP is intended to level the playing field in the class by adjusting power, ballast, and fuel capacity. (Check out this explainer video for more, or even just if you love French accents.) But the process is riddled with unknowns and ripe for accusations of sandbagging. That is, if the Ford cars were intentionally slow in practice they could hope for BOP adjustment to improve their race chances. On the Corvette side, last year's GTE Pro winner went from the top of the field to the bottom, barely improving from practice to qualifying. If you think Le Mans is as rigged at the NBA Playoffs, well, it's not that simple. Because if Ford and Ferrari held back until qualifying - the eighth-place Porsche 911 RSR is three-and-a-half seconds off the class pole time - it was a pretty dumb strategy. This morning, the ACO tried to put things back in order by limiting the boost in the Ford GT's twin-turbo V6 and adding 11 pounds of ballast. Ferrari was also given extra weight but allowed more fuel capacity. The Corvette and Aston Martin teams were both given breaks on their air restrictors, which will allow their engines to make more power. Both Ford and Porsche also received extra fuel capacity.

GM reintroduces Tripower name in the worst way possible

The story of General Motors' use of the Tripower moniker begins way back in 1957, when Semon E. "Bunkie" Knudsen, then General Manager of GM's Pontiac division, directed his engineers to inject more performance into his brand's line of V8-powered automobiles. Fuel injection was an option, but hot rodders flocked instead to Tri-Power (marketed way back when with a hyphen), which grafted a trio of two-barrel Rochester carburetors onto a single intake manifold. A legend was born. And that legend was born of performance. At idle and when full power wasn't required, Pontiac's Tri-Power system used just the middle carburetor, which helped make the setup easier to tune. Depending on the year and model, either a vacuum system or a mechanical linkage opened up the two outer carbs, thereby switching from two barrels to six, and allowing the engine to take in more fuel and air. And it was an easy marketing win – six barrels is better than four barrels, right? Because performance! So, when news filtered in that GM has resurrected the Tripower name, those of us who grew up attending classic car shows and wrenching on old Pontiacs did a double-take. And then we all collectively sighed. Turns out that today's Tripower refers to a trio of fuel-saving measures that include cylinder deactivation, active thermal management, and intake valve lift control, according to Automotive News. And, at least for now, it applies to GM's line of fullsize trucks powered by a 2.7-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine. We're all for saving fuel whenever possible. And we have zero say in how any automaker chooses to market its products and technologies. But, we'll offer our two cents anyway: Relaunching a storied name from the past is fine. Relaunching a storied name from the past while completely overlooking the reasons the name got famous in the first place is only going to irritate the people who remember the name in the first place. Couldn't they just call this new technology package something else? Related Video: News Source: Automotive NewsImage Credit: Getty Green Marketing/Advertising Chevrolet GM Pontiac Automotive History Truck chevrolet silverado