2008 Chevy 2500hd Ltz Z71 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.

2016 Chevy Volt arrives with 50-mile EV range, 41 mpg [w/ video]

Let's start with the numbers. The 2016 Chevy Volt will have an all-electric range of 50 miles from a new, 18.4-kWh lithium battery. It will get 41 miles per gallon (combined) once the battery runs dry and have 102 MPGe. Oh, and it has five seats, sort of. To compare, today's four-seat 2015 Volt has a 38-mile range from a 17.1-kWh battery in a powertrain that offers 37 mpg and 98 MPGe. So, across the board, there are notable improvements. Now that that's out of the way, let's talk story. General Motors will unveil the new Volt at the Detroit Auto Show later today, but it's been talking about how this new version – the first major plug-in hybrid vehicle to get a serious redo in the modern era – was crafted with reams and reams of data from first-gen Volt customers. At a preview event for journalists last week, GM executive chief engineer Pam Fletcher told Autoblog that these owners "gave us the recipe" to make the second-gen model. At the top of the request list was more range (check), more "fun-to-drive" behavior (check?) and a smoother and quieter experience (we'll assume a check here, given that the new 1.5-liter four-cylinder – the first North American application of this new engine family – should offer more power with less noise than the previous 1.4-liter, four-cylinder powerplant). Other customer-driven changes in the new Volt include a different place to store the charging cable (in the side of the trunk instead of under the load floor) and a new brake system with improved blended regenerative braking feel as well as driver-selectable regen levels. The requested 50-mile range comes from a new, lighter battery that has increased capacity from fewer cells (192 vs. 288) and a simplified control architecture. Along with the new battery, the electric drive unit is a two-motor deal that is up to 12 percent more efficient and 100 pounds lighter, while also being "tremendously smaller," notes Fletcher. It offers 294 pound-feet of torque and a maximum 149 horsepower of "motoring power" delivered to the wheels. GM says it has worked hard to reduced the amount of rare earth materials in these motors, and one of them doesn't use any at all. The new powertrain offers improved acceleration times, as well. The 2016 Volt can go from 0 to 60 miles per hour in 8.4 seconds, a seven-percent improvement, while the 0-30 mph time has been improved by 19 percent, down to 2.6 seconds. The new Volt is more conventional looking, but certainly not completely ordinary.

A Chevy Camaro hybrid? That's what EcoCAR3 could bring

Figuring out a way for a hybrid powertrain to co-exist with the performance expectations of a classic American muscle car is a challenge that could vex that most experienced of automotive engineers. It's a challenge, in fact, being handed to a bunch of college students. Over the next four years, students from 16 North American colleges and universities will attempt to wring fuel efficiency from a 2016 Chevy Camaro as part of EcoCAR3, an advanced-vehicle technology competition sponsored by the Department of Energy, General Motors and others. They'll be attempting to use hybrid or plug-in hybrid technology while not sacrificing the performance of the Camaro, which was selected in part because the current model achieves just 17 miles per gallon in city driving and 28 MPGs on the highway, per EPA numbers. Students will get the latest version of the vehicle to work on, one that is expected to be unveiled next month on Belle Isle in Detroit. "If we still want to produce V8 Camaros, we're going to have to look at alternative methods of propulsion," said Al Oppenheiser, the chief engineer on the Camaro. "So the ideas that these college teams come up with could very easily be adapted to a car like the Camaro." Unlike similar competitions that reward fuel efficiency in vehicles, EcoCAR seeks those gains while emphasizing cost and consumer acceptance of these vehicles. The cars shouldn't look like experiments; they should look like everyday vehicles on the road. Previous competitions have allowed the teams to use whatever powertrain they desired. This time, EcoCAR officials designed the competition to concentrate on hybrid, hybrid-electric and diesel options. Competitors won't have the option of using hydrogen fuel cells as they have in the past. Last year, a team from Colorado State built a vehicle that contained both hydrogen and electric power sources. This year's limit is a curious choice, as some automakers such as Toyota have placed heavy bets on fuel cells in recent years. General Motors also runs a fuel-cell program. With the focus on cost and practicality, however, the program officials wanted to narrow the framework of the contest. "We always have some good decisions on what to make within the scope or out of scope," said Jim Kolhoff, global director of software engineering for General Motors.