One Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Next Chevy Volt will be 2016 model and ride on new chassis

What do we know about the 2016 Chevy Volt? Well, for now, all we can do is try to put the puzzle together without the box. Thankfully, a new batch of pieces has arrived from a new report in Edmunds, which says that the 2016 model year will introduce the second generation of a car that hasn't been dramatically updated since it went on sale in 2010. The new Volt is getting an "evolutionary styling change" and will ride on a new front-drive platform that has been developed by General Motors. GM's Kevin Kelly told AutoblogGreen that he has "no comment on future products," but he did acknowledge that Chevrolet is working on a second-generation Volt, "but I can't say anything about timing." Everybody already knew that a next-gen Volt is coming, so that's not a surprise. What we don't know is any real concrete information on the car itself. The few tidbits of information we do have help define the outlines of the next version of Chevy's halo car, but they're not confirmed yet. For the record, they range from the eye-raising (a $10,000 price drop) to the logical (20 percent more electric range). We can't see the whole picture yet, but the pieces do point to the 2016 Volt, which would be released next year sometime, being a much bigger deal than the last update, when the Volt's range was increased by three electric miles thanks to a battery capacity increase of 16 kWh to 16.5.

Porsche wins the 2015 24 Hours of Le Mans

The question going into this year's 24 Hours of Le Mans was whether or not the Porsche 919 Hybrid would be able to combine its qualifying pace with race reliability. After battling neck-and-neck with Audi's R18 for most of the race, the answer is a resounding yes. Not only did Porsche drivers climb the first two spots on the podium, they did so without any major mishaps on track. This win is the first overall trophy for Porsche since 1998. Audi previously won the last five races, and 13 of the last 15. Corvette also returned to the winner's circle, with the No. 64 C7.R taking winning the GTE Pro division. The victory is the first class win for Corvette since 2011. KCMG won the LMP2 class in ninth overall. With 45 minutes to go the No. 98 Aston Martin crashed out of first place in GTE Amateur, giving the class win to SMP Racing's Ferrari and second place to the Patrick Dempsey Racing Porsche 911 RSR. For the full list of official results, click here. The GTE Pro class proved to be just as exciting as the P1 class, with a four-way battle for first after four hours into the race. For most of the race, the battle at the top went back and forth between the two German manufacturers. An tire puncture in the No. 7 Audi gave up the lead to Porsche, and moments later a crash forced the No. 8 into the garage. But a three-minute replacement of the front and rear bodywork kept the Audi in contention. As the race wore into the night, Porsche maintained a slightly faster pace than Audi. Nick Tandy took the lead on Lap 253 early Sunday morning, and car No. 19 never gave up the top position. The win is the first for all three drivers of the No. 19 – Nico Hulkenberg, Earl Bamber, and Nick Tandy. A lap behind in second was the No. 17 Porsche. The Audis fought reliability problems late in the race but still finished third with the No. 7 R18. The GTE Pro class proved to be just as exciting as the P1 class, with a four-way battle for first after four hours into the race. As the Aston Martin cars dropped away, the lone Corvette Racing entry took over, followed by a charging AF Corse team Ferrari 458 Italia. The Corvette and Ferrari continued to trade places in the final hours until gearbox trouble forced the No. 51 Ferrari out of contention. It was eventually passed by the other AF Corse car, No. 71. Nissan experienced all the pain of a first-year effort with its front-wheel-drive GT-R LM Nismo.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.