Lariat 4x4 Powerstroke Diesel Owner's Demo. Msrp Was $58015 Mint Condition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express in Generation Gap showdown with 1933 Ford Pickup

Auto enthusiasts love a good debate, whether it's Mustang versus Camaro or Ferrari against Lamborghini. But how about a battle between two very different vintages of classic pickup trucks? In this case, the fight is between a 1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express and a 1933 Ford Model 46 truck with a flathead V8.
The shootout comes courtesy of the internet series Generation Gap, and its concept is super-simple. One guy prefers classics, and the other likes newer rides. They choose a category, pick two vehicles and put them head to head. In this case, neither is exactly modern, though. The Ford is more than old enough to receive Social Security checks, and the Dodge is hardly a young whippersnapper.
Other than both being pickups, these two models were made to serve very different functions. The Li'l Red Express was basically the progenitor of today's muscle trucks, with a big V8 that made it one of the quickest new models in its day (admittedly, 1979 was a rough time for automotive performance). On the other hand, the '33 Ford was just meant to work, with little pretense for anything else. One of the hosts describes it as "the simplest, most difficult" vehicle he's driven because of the tricky double clutchwork necessary to shift gears. Scroll down to watch the video and try to decide which of these two American classics you would rather have in your garage.

Weekly Recap: 2016 CTS-V gives Cadillac new momentum for the new year

It's been a rough year for Cadillac. The historic luxury carmaker been in the news for all of the wrong reasons: Declining sales, ditching its advertising agency and the relocation of its headquarters from Detroit to New York. But in late December, Cadillac reminded everyone what it does best: Build some of the rawest and most compelling luxury sedans in the world, as evidenced by the 2016 CTS-V. This monster churns out 640 horsepower from a supercharged 6.2-liter V8. Sound familiar? That's the Corvette Z06 engine, and it makes this CTS the most powerful production Cadillac ever. It also puts the sporting divisions of the Germans on notice. The new CTS-V easily overpowers the Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S 4Matic and its 5.5-liter biturbo V8 rated at 577 hp, and the BMW M5 (with the competition pack) and its 4.4-liter twin-turbo V8 that pushes out 575 hp. The rear-wheel drive Cadillac can sprint to 60 miles per hour in 3.7 seconds, which is close to the 3.5-second time turned in by the 4Matic-driven E63 S, and a bit quicker than the 4.1 seconds posted by the M5. With Magnetic Ride Control, General Motors' stout eight-speed automatic transmission (also used in the Corvette), Brembo brakes and a carbon-fiber option package that pretty much builds your car out of carbon fiber – it's clear this Cadillac means business. Truth be told, we expected this CTS-V to deliver. It's been a serious sports sedan for a decade, and the recent generation and its 556-hp arrogance have been particularly memorable. But notice what we're doing here? We're talking about product. Not who makes Cadillac's ads, or if the brand's headquarters has a mailing address in NYC. Like the 2016 ATS-V that's due in the spring, the debut of the 2016 CTS-V (on sale in late summer) is a shot in the arm for Cadillac, and its arrival comes during time of transition. The brand is trying to reinvent itself as a modern luxury maker. It wants new customers, a different image and obviously more sales. Those things are going to take time, but with a 640-hp sledgehammer of a sports sedan on tap for next year, Cadillac can still maintain some of its swagger through all of the change. Other News And Views 1984 Audi Sport Quattro heads for the auction block If you're into '80s rally cars, you're really a car person. But if you're into that stuff – and we are – this 1984 Audi Sport Quattro is sure to get your blood flowing.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.