1999 Chevrolet S10 350 Tbi V8 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Technology of the Year Finalist: 2016 Chevy Volt

The 2016 Chevy Volt is in all ways an improvement over the Volts that came before. It's got a new powertrain, a new look, and new (and better) fuel economy figures. What's not to like? For the second generation, GM used the last few years of automotive battery improvements and customer data to deliver a car that took what people liked about the first Volt and offered up more of that. This means a longer all-electric range (from 38 miles to 53) and better gas-burning fuel economy (37 miles per gallon up to 42 mpg – oh, and you're not required to use premium any more, either). All of this for less money than the outgoing 2015 Volts. Chevy's new plug-in hybrid will start at $33,995, which is not only lower than the 2015's MSRP of $34,170 but it's also just a few hundred dollars higher than the average new car price in the US. In other words, the new Volt (and many other plug-in vehicles) is not out of the price range for most car shoppers. The interior has been updated as well, losing some of the oh-so-futuristic touch-sensitive center stack in favor of more realistic tactile buttons. This along makes the new Volt better than the first generation, but when it's wrapped up in the new exterior design, it just feels more appropriate for a car that's not trying to be from the future. Instead, the new 2016 Chevy Volt wants to be the best plug-in car for right now.

2015 Chevrolet SS Review [w/video]

The Chevrolet SS is one of the best cars no one's buying. It's a Bowtie-badged version of the Australian Holden Commodore with a 6.2-liter LS3 V8 under the hood. It's got a six-speed manual transmission, General Motors' sophisticated Magnetic Ride Control suspension, and rear-wheel drive. It's a fullsize sedan that comes with every possible amenity you could want. And it's less than $50,000. Chevrolet sold 2,479 SS sedans in 2014. That means it was outsold by every other vehicle the automaker offers, even the police fleet-only Caprice. (I'm only talking about cars that were on sale for the full 2014 calendar year, of course.) The aforementioned manual transmission and MRC suspension were added for 2015, but it's not clear if that's helping. The SS is down 7.7 percent through June of this year, compared to 2014's numbers. But hey, at least it's finally outselling the Caprice. What a damn shame. Granted, GM only planned to sell a few thousand of these each year, but as enthusiasts, this a car we should be gobbling up. It's the closest we'll get to a four-door Corvette, and with the 2015 model year updates, that statement is more true than ever. People often mistook the SS for a Malibu. "Is that a rental car?" Yikes. Aside from the manual gearbox and magnetorheological suspension, the SS is largely unchanged through its year and a half of sales. But that's no bad thing – we were thoroughly impressed with the SS when we first tested it at the end of 2013. Outside, the SS looks the same, which is a bummer. It is not an attractive car, and the chrome brightwork on the side vents and wheels doesn't help. That said, the sedate styling puts it under the radar – more so than competitors like a Dodge Charger 392, anyway. But maybe it's too under the radar. Even in the new, "Some Like It Hot Red" color (yes, really), photographer Drew Phillips reports that people often mistook the SS for a Malibu. "Is that a rental car?" Yikes. Exterior styling is our only gripe with the SS. Moving inside, there's a lot to like. This is easily one of Chevy's nicest, well thought-out interiors (thanks, Holden), with premium materials and tons of equipment. The Chevy MyLink infotainment system carries over, and now features 4G LTE and wifi connectivity. The touchscreen is a bit slow to respond, but otherwise, it's bright, well organized, and packed with functionality. This is easily one of Chevy's nicest, well thought-out interiors.

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.