2014 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Lt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NHTSA approves hybrid rearview mirror display in Cadillac CT6, Bolt EV

The Chevy Bolt EV prototype doesn't just have a fancy new all-electric powertrain. Just outside the driver's line of sight is a newfangled rearview mirror, one that can turn into a screen that shows a moving image from the rear-facing camera. Speaking to NPR's Robert Siegel yesterday, Department of Transportation secretary Anthony Foxx said that NHTSA has now approved this type of mirror/screen for use in vehicles. According to a letter from NHTSA to General Motors, GM will likely use this Full Display Mirror first in the 2016 Cadillac CT6 before coming to the Bolt. In its letter to GM, NHTSA said that the Full Display Mirror will only qualify as a standard rearview mirror as long as there are normal side mirrors in place. In other words, don't expect to see cameras and screens replacing all the mirrors in a motor vehicle just yet. @AutoblogGreen @NPR - #NHTSA has OK'd GM rear-view system that can switch between mirror & camera views. pic.twitter.com/6CBeIit10v — Anthony Foxx (@SecretaryFoxx) February 22, 2016 The Full Display Mirror was developed by Gentex, which has long worked with GM. The FDM debuted in 2014 and some people hoped it would also make its way into the Tesla Model X. Gentex, which also makes auto-dimming mirrors, says that it has "set out to develop the technologies and core competencies necessary to manage this evolution of the rearview mirror." The Chevy Bolt EV will start at $37,500, before incentives. The 200-mile EV will go into production late this year for likely sale in early 2017. Related Video:

GM recalls 3.8 million vehicles in North America due to braking issue

WASHINGTON — General Motors Co said Wednesday it was recalling 3.46 million U.S. pickup trucks and SUVs to address a vacuum pump issue that could make braking more difficult and that has been linked to 113 accidents and 13 injuries. The recall covers 2014-2018 model year vehicles, including some Cadillac Escalade, Chevrolet Silverado, Chevrolet Tahoe, GMC Sierra, Chevrolet Suburban and GMC Yukon vehicles. In late June, GM recalled 310,000 vehicles in Canada for the same issue. GM did not immediately explain why the Canadian recall occurred more than two months before it called back the vehicles in the United States. The recall was triggered because the amount of vacuum created by the vacuum pump may decrease over time, GM told the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in documents posted on Wednesday. The NHTSA opened a preliminary investigation into the issue last November, and said it had reports of nine related crashes and two injuries. It provided GM in July with additional field reports that prompted the automaker to open an investigation. GM said it could affect braking in "rare circumstances." The NHTSA said in a statement the "vehicles may experience brake boost failure, which would require increased brake pedal effort, leading to a hard brake pedal feel, and potentially increased stopping distance." GM said dealers will reprogram the electronic brake control module to improve how the system utilizes the hydraulic brake boost assist function when vacuum assist is depleted. GM said the vacuum assist pump, which is lubricated with engine oil that flows into the pump through a filter screen, can in some cases lose effectiveness over time, as debris such as oil sludge can accumulate on the filter screen. GM told NHTSA that prior model years used a different brake assist system design, and vehicles manufactured after 2018 were not equipped with the affected pump design. Separately, GM said on Wednesday it is recalling 270,000 additional U.S. vehicles in three smaller recalls, including 177,000 2018 Chevrolet Malibu cars with 1.5L turbo engines because an error in the engine control module software may result in the fuel injectors being disabled.

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.