Lt , Low Miles, Sunroof on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Weekly Recap: Tesla loses money, still dominates the news

Some people get an inordinate amount of attention. In politics, it's Donald Trump. In football, it's Jim Harbaugh. And in the auto world, it's Elon Musk and his always-fascinating electric car company, Tesla Motors. General Motors is spending $877 million to upgrade a factory. So what! US auto sales are up. Who cares? Tesla has a metal snake that will recharge your car! So was the week in Tesla – er, the industry. Snarkiness aside, Tesla did dominate the news cycle, led by the announcement the company lost $184 million in the second quarter. Tesla also said it expects to deliver between 50,000 and 55,000 vehicles this year, and is preparing for a full launch of the Model X crossover in September. Musk also made news during the earnings call by simply not answering a question about ride sharing, leading to speculation Tesla could be considering its own operation. While the financials were the arguably the most important company news, reports of a Model S cyber hacking were more compelling fodder for Tesla followers. Researchers were able to attack the sedan and bring it to a stop, though they required access to the car first. Tesla says it already has deployed a remedy for the situation. On a lighter note, Tesla published a video of its metal charger prototype that autonomously uncoils like a snake to power up the company's vehicles, provoking plenty of humorous comments and comparisons. Watch it and decide for yourself. While some of this might seem trivial, much of Tesla's recent attention has been warranted. It's the first startup US automaker in decades to launch from nothing and actually gain traction in the market. Sure, Musk is a lightning rod and Tesla always seems to be in the spotlight. But amid all of the publicity, it easy to lose sight of the new reality: Tesla is a force. OTHER NEWS & NOTES 2016 Chevy Volt lights up 106 MPGe The Chevy Volt's vitals are looking healthier for 2016. The second-generation plug-in hybrid racks up a gaudy 106 miles per gallon equivalent, which is an increase of eight MPGe from the 2015 model. The new Volt can travel 53 miles on electricity, a significant jump from the 2015 Volt's 38-mile range. The new car also has a 420-mile total range when factoring in the capability of the gasoline engine, which is 40 miles greater than the current car offers.

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.

General Motors and EVs: No stranger to firsts, but where's the leadership?

2015 is already shaping up to be the year of "affordable, 200-mile EV" concepts. Nissan and Tesla have each been talking about them for some time, the latter promising to unveil its Model 3 at the North American International Auto Show in January before balking when the time came. Instead, Chevrolet beat them all by unveiling the Bolt concept at the same event, followed shortly thereafter with suggestions of a 2016 launch – potentially offering the first nationwide EV with anything close to that range. It was the ballsiest EV-related move General Motors has made in a quarter century. But will it remain so? Exactly 25 years before the Bolt rolled up onto the turntable, then-Chairman Roger Smith unveiled GM's last ground-up EV concept, the even-more-unfortunately-named Impact, at the Los Angeles Auto Show in January 1990. A few months later, he surprised most of his colleagues by announcing its intended production in honor of Earth Day. It was the first modern foray into electric vehicles for the US by any automaker, one that was rewarded by the State of California with what is now known as the Zero Emissions Vehicle mandate. The program not only forced other automakers into competing with Roger's pet project, but inspired all of them to fight it like small children against bedtime. Some years later, the drivers themselves weighed in, with a biting documentary about that obstinance and the leadership it cost both GM and the country. Within months, GM was first back into the fray of plug-in vehicles. Many criticized the company for starting with a PHEV rather than jump straight back into EVs. The choice wasn't totally out of the blue – even EV1 was meant to be followed by a PHEV. And especially on the heels of Who Killed the Electric Car?, some skittishness was understandable: even a successful EV would invite a "we told you so" public reaction, underscoring their mistake in ending the EV1 program. If a new EV didn't do well, they'd be convicted in the public eye as serial killers. All while seeking a federal bailout. For all the flak, the resulting Chevy Volt was and is a better car than GM has ever gotten credit for. But the company seemed to grow weary of having to overcome its varied past, and while the current owners remain happy, much of the stakeholder and community engagement that so effectively built early goodwill and sales growth faded not long after launch. Marketing has been spotty in both consistency and effectiveness.