2015 Chevrolet Tahoe Lt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Some 2012-13 Chevy Volts may not have enough battery coolant

The 2012 and 2013 model year Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-in vehicle may have a battery glitch caused by low coolant levels. No recall has been issued and General Motors is taking care of the issue at no cost to drivers. Some of the affected Volts may have lower-than-advisable coolant levels because of some pesky air pockets in the car's cooling circuit. When the coolant levels get too low, the charging system for the battery powering the car's onboard generator (i.e. the Rechargeable Energy Storage System, or the RESS) may be shut down, turning one's Volt into a run-of-the-mill gas-powered car, and a pricey one at that. The Car Connection says GM is advising owners of the '12 and '13 Volts to contact their local Chevy dealer for a free fix. GM representatives didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from AutoblogGreen for more details. We believe this is a separate issue than the one that brought 8,000 Volts back to the dealers for a battery coolant fix, what GM called a "voluntary customer satisfaction effort," a few years ago. General Motors sold 23,094 Chevy Volts last year after selling 23,461 Volts in 2012, so that fix-it list may get fairly lengthy. Check out a GM-Volt.com user thread related to this issue here. *UPDATE: Chevrolet spokesman Randy Fox confirmed in an e-mail to AutoblogGreen that the company issued a service bulletin to dealers that they may need to top off coolant levels on certain Volts because of the issue, and that the vehicle will "return to normal charging operation" once that's done.

2020 Chevy Corvette Stingray vs the world: How it compares on paper

The 2020 Chevy Corvette Stingray in its base form offers an astonishing amount of performance for the money. In fact, so impressive is the car's spec sheet that the Corvette kind of exists in two different competitive sets: one of cars priced similarly, and another with cars of similar performance and reputation. To get a feel for how it handles each of these segments, we've compiled specifications for those two sets of players. You can find the first set below, which looks at cars of roughly the same price point. Following that is a bit of analysis, and then there's a chart of cars with similar performance and reputation. And that chart will also have some analysis. Though final pricing for the Corvette hasn't been announced yet, we know the Corvette will start at less than $60,000. And as far as pricing goes, its closest competitor is the Porsche 718 Cayman, which also starts at just under $60,000. Both are mid-engined and rear-drive, but the Corvette offers an extra 195 horsepower and 190 pound-feet of torque. The Cayman does boast a curb weight of right around 3,000 pounds, so it weighs a few hundred pounds less than the Corvette, but it's likely not enough to make up for the power deficit. The Corvette's sub-3.0-second 0-60 time bears this out against the Cayman's best 4.5-second run. Impressively, though, the Cayman has more cargo space than the Corvette in a package that's nearly 10 inches shorter. The Cayman also still offers a manual option for those that prefer self-shifting. The 2020 Toyota Supra is on the cheap end of this sports car class, just crossing $50,000. It also boasts more power than the Cayman, though it's still down by 160 ponies and 105 pound-feet of torque to the C8. It's also about as roomy as the Corvette, despite being about the same size as the Cayman. Cargo space is a bit tighter. Its driving characteristics will likely differ, too as the Supra sits on a front-engine platform. It might even feel closer to a C7 Corvette in some ways. The other mid-engine entry in this price range is the 2019 Alfa Romeo 4C Spider. Its small 1.7-liter turbo inline-4 only makes 237 horsepower and 258 pound-feet of torque, but it's also far and away the lightest of this group at 2,487 pounds. That's roughly 1,000 pounds lighter than the Corvette. It isn't as fast as the Corvette in a straight line, but that lightness surely pays dividends in cornering and braking.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.