We Finance 02 Chevy Ls 3rd Row 3.4l V6 Power Seat Low Miles Cd Stereo Rear A/c on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Would you pay $17 a month to give your older Ford connectivity?

When it was first introduced in 2007, there was nothing like the original Ford Sync system, since it allowed car owners to connect and use a portable device better than anything that came before it. And because it was a brought-in/tethered and software-based system, Sync leveraged a device's connectivity and was easily updated. It took competitors awhile to catch up: Toyota Entune wasn't available until 2011, and Chevy MyLink didn't roll out until 2012. But now Ford is the one playing catchup since it stuck with the brought-in strategy while most other automakers were quicker to add connectivity via an embedded cellular modem. Ford initially installed 2G/3G modems in its small fleet of electric and plug-in electric vehicles starting in 2012 so that owners could keep tabs on charging. Embedded connectivity came to Lincoln in 2014, and Ford began adding onboard 4G LTE via Sync Connect to select cars starting with the Escape in 2015. To get more cars connected more quickly, last week the automaker rolled out its FordPass SmartLink solution that plugs into the OBD port of 2010 to 2017 model year vehicles. This lets owners retroactively get onboard Wi-Fi, set up a "geo-fence" to keep tabs on a car's location, receive vehicle health reports and allows remote engine starting and door locking/unlocking using a smartphone app, among other features. But to connect older Ford vehicles will cost owners $16.99 a month for two years, not including installation. Ford throws in 1 GB of data or a 30-day trial, whichever comes first, after which owners have to add the vehicle to their Verizon shared data plan, which supplies connectivity for SmartLink, or establish a new account. (Disclosure: Autoblog is owned by Verizon.) By comparison, GM's 4G LTE data plans start at $10 a month for 200 MB and goes up to $30 for 3 GB, and owners can also add a car to an AT&T shared-data plan. But OnStar doesn't have a separate monthly subscription for the embedded modem or an installation charge, and standard features via the RemoteLink Mobile App are free for the first five years of ownership. FCA's Uconnect Access service also uses an embedded modem to provide similar telematics features for $20 per month following a free one-year trial, while a la carte in-car Wi-Fi is offered for $10 per day, $20 per week or $35 per month.

Next-gen Chevy Volt gets Corvette looks, adjustable regen levels

The hood may say "full speed ahead." The regenerative braking system says "slow down a bit." One person's automotive improvements is another's identity crisis, all in a day's work analyzing the new Chevrolet Volt. The next-generation version of General Motors' first extended-range plug in will include design touches taken from to the new Chevrolet Corvette, GM's iconic sports car. Hexagonal taillights and a "taut" hood will be part of the new package, Automotive News says, citing General Motors design chief Ed Wilbur. But does that mean the Volt is shedding any of its green-car cred? Not at all, if one considers that the Volt will also let the driver adjust the degree of regenerative braking using steering-wheel paddles to dial up and recapture as much energy as possible and engage in "one-pedal" driving or turn it down for easier coasting. Check out the 55-second video below featuring GM executives Mark Reuss and Andrew Farah trying out the Volt's new regenerative-braking system that was first used on the Cadillac ELR. GM will have more details for us when it unveils the 2016 Chevy Volt at the North American Auto Show in Detroit next month. The new version is said to have a larger battery, a longer all-electric driving range and more power, but Chevy's been fairly mum on those sorts of performance details so far. Green Chevrolet Electric volt cadillac elr corvette regenerative braking

Ram 1500 bests new F-150 in MT pickup shootout

Ford's 2015 Ford F-150 is a technological tour-de-force, what with its aluminum-intensive construction and its powerful and efficient new 2.7-liter EcoBoost engine option. But now that it's hit the market, it's time to get down to brass tacks and find out how just the latest F-150 actually stands up to its rivals in the hyper-competitive fullsize segment. Motor Trend is among the first to round up the Ford (in Lariat 2.7-liter 4X4 guise here) and put it up against the Ram 1500 Outdoorsman EcoDiesel 4x4 and 5.3-liter-equipped Silverado 1500 LTZ Z71 to find out how Dearborn's new-think truck measures up. The test put the trio through over 1,000 miles of tough driving in California and Arizona in a variety of conditions from just cruising around unladen to hauling a trailer. MT found all three trucks to be competent, but the most praise got heaped on the Ram and the Ford, with the Chevrolet falling a step behind its competitors in many tests. Among the Ford's most-liked features was its 2.7-liter, twin-turbo V6 that helped make the F-150 easily the quickest of the group, with some editors saying the engine felt about the same whether driving around with cargo in the bed or not. There was some minor turbo lag during acceleration while trailering, but that issue affected the Ram, too. The Ram's powertrain was lauded, as well. The EcoDiesel was torquey around town, and the 1500's combination of an eight-speed automatic and air suspension was judged to be the best of the lot. It was the most difficult to get into the bed, though. The Ram also won the fuel economy award by netting 20-miles-per-gallon city and 28-mpg highway in the test to beat its Environmental Protection Agency ratings of 19/27. The Ford's EcoBoost managed 17/22, one mpg off each from the EPA numbers, and using a lot of throttle really depleted its efficiency. As MT notes, however, it would take time for the diesel's mileage savings to pay off at the pump for these two trucks. In the end, the Ram just barely eked out the win, with the title partially earned because of "the Ford's unknown maintenance and aluminum repair costs," according to MT. Go check out the full comparison to read all of the details, then let us know what you think in Comments.