2013 Chevy Suburban Z71 4x4 Leather Sunroof Dual Dvd 6k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Audi S4 drivers are the most accident-prone, insurance report says

Culling data from more than 4.6 million automobile insurance applications, researchers at the Insurify insurance comparison marketplace picked a winner — or more to the point, a loser — in its determination of the car model with the most accidents so far in 2023: the Audi S4. Why does the sporty, luxury-class German sedan rank so high (or so low)? The organization found that S4 drivers, piloting a car with almost 350 horsepower, are among those who collect the most speeding tickets, and that they get into accidents at a rate 54 percent higher than the national average. If the S4 isnÂ’t a surprise with an at-fault accident rate of 11.7 percent, consider the “family friendly” brand that appears three times on the Insurity list: Subaru. It is represented by three models, including the turbocharged WRX and XV Crosstrek, and at the better-performing bottom of the list, the Subaru Impreza, with an accident rate of 10.3 percent.  In 2023, 7.6 percent of U.S. drivers were involved in at least one at-fault accident in the prior seven years. For drivers of cars on this list, the average at-fault accident rate was 10.5 percent, meaning these drivers are 1.4 times as likely to have an at-fault accident on record. According to its statement, the Insurity data science team explored key safety features, driver behavior, and Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) evaluations to pinpoint possible reasons behind these carsÂ’ high accident rates. Following is the list, counting down to the models with most reported accidents: 10. Subaru Impreza (percentage of drivers with a prior at-fault accident on record: 10.3 percent; MSRP base model): $19,795) 9. Kia Niro (percentage of drivers with a prior at-fault accident on record: 10.4 percent; MSRP base model): $26,590) 8. Chevrolet Silverado LD (percentage of drivers with a prior at-fault accident on record: 10.4%, MSRP base model): $34,500) 7. Subaru XV Crosstrek (percentage of drivers with a prior at-fault accident on record: 10.5 percent, MSRP 6. Subaru WRX.(percentage of drivers with a prior at-fault accident on record: 10.7% MSRP base model): $29,605) 5. Toyota GR86 (percentage of drivers with a prior at-fault accident on record: 10.8 percent MSRP base model): $29,900) 4. Hyundai Veloster N (percentage of drivers with a prior at-fault accident on record: 10.9 percent; MSRP base model): $32,500) 3.

Cadillac Celestiq, Lyriq, Hummer, other future GM electric cars: Here's everything we saw at ‘EV Day’

WARREN, Mich. — Today, General Motors held an “EV Day” event at its Warren, Michigan, campus to present its new “Ultium” battery technology, modular electric vehicle architecture and soon-to-come electric vehicles. Unfortunately, we were forbidden from bringing cameras into the event, so while we canÂ’t show you what we saw, we can tell you more about it. While we saw the previously teased Cadillac EV (which we now know to be called the Lyriq) and the GMC Hummer pickup teased during the Super Bowl, there were a number of other future cars at the event, which GM President Mark Reuss assured us are all real vehicles in the works. The biggest surprise came at the end of the event, though, in the Cadillac Celestiq electric sedan, which Reuss described as a future flagship that would be hand-built “very locally.” It had been hiding under a dark sheet all morning, with the front and rear illuminated Cadillac emblems shining from underneath. When the wraps came off, we saw a long, white, four-seat fastback sedan. The 23-inch wheels were pushed out to the very corners of the car, giving it what appeared to be a very long wheelbase. The model on the stage had no side mirrors or visible door handles. The grille mirrored that of the Lyriq crossover next to it, with integrated lighting in lieu of the usual mesh or slats youÂ’d see in an internal combustion car. The entire roof, all the way until it tapered to the tail of the vehicle, was tinted glass. In back, vertical tail lighting ran down the C-pillar before turning rearward across the top of the trunk. Inside, everything below the beltline of the windows — essentially all but the headrests and top portion of the steering wheel, was hidden from view. Behind the Celestiq, a large digital display showed a rendering of its interior. The dash consists of a pillar-to-pillar curved LED display serving as both instrument panel and infotainment system. Protruding forward between the front seats was another touchscreen that appeared to house some more controls, with open area, probably for storage, below it. The rear seats had the same sort of touchscreen between them. Built into the back of the front seats were a pair of rear-seat entertainment screens, much like we saw in the Lyriq. The door panels blended wood, metal and animated lighting to give character and a sense of opulence. GM interior design manager Tristan Murphy was on hand to tell us a bit more about the Celestiq.

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.