2007 Gmc Yukon Denali Awd Lifted Sunroof Nav Dvd 97k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

2019 GMC Sierra Denali Drivers' Notes Review | Half measures

Associate Editor Reese Counts: This truck feels a full generation behind the competition. It's a half measure that feels more like a mid-cycle refresh than a whole new truck. There are a few high points: the 6.2-liter V8 is great (if thirsty) and the bed is wider than anything else in the class. The tailgate, too, is nifty, though some might write it off as a novelty. I also dig the tech, particularly the infotainment system and heads-up display. Ram might brag about its giant touchscreen, but I think I actually prefer the GMC's user interface. The rest can be summed up with a series of shoulder shrugs. The Sierra finally looks different than a Silverado, but I wouldn't call it handsome. The interior is spacious, but I'd knock the design and materials in a $45,000 truck, much less one approaching $70,000. It's not Toyota Tundra levels of terrible, it's just plain, cheap, and not nearly as space efficient as the Ram. It feels like GM's not even trying to move the needle with this truck. The more time I spend behind the wheel, the less I like it. Assistant Editor Zac Palmer: I got to spend a lot of seat time in this 2019 GMC Sierra Denali, and I came away generally unenthused by GM's most luxurious truck. We harp a lot about how expensive pickup trucks are these days, and this one's near $70,000 price tag is just the same. When you step inside a similarly-specced Ram, it feels like it's worth its price. When I step out of a Silverado and into a more expensive Sierra, I want to feel like it's money well spent. This Sierra Denali does not. Beyond the leather seats and a few small pieces of wood trim, it's hard, black plastic galore. What makes it all the more frustrating is that GM has most of the tech and features it needs (solid infotainment, 360-degree camera, wireless phone charging and the rear camera mirror is genuinely awesome). The presentation just comes off as dated from the start. It's a shame, because I have a strange affinity for how this truck looks from the curb. The sharp angles, brash styling and "tough truck" attitude is appealing to me. I like stomping on the gas and letting the 6.2-liter torque monster under the hood loose. But man do you pay the price for using that engine. Over a few hundred miles of driving I ended at a dismal 15 mpg reading on the trip computer — the saddest part of this was knowing these were mostly highway miles.

GM can't keep up with most popular pickup orders

With the market for pickup trucks at its best since before the recession, General Motors can't afford any hiccups with the launch of its new 2014 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra twins, but it sounds like the popularity of V8-powered trucks is causing some supply-chain issues. Bloomberg reports that GM is experiencing a shortage of 5.3-liter V8 engines because an unnamed parts supplier has been unable to keep up with demand. This is leading GM to restrict the number of V8 Silverado and Sierra trucks that Chevrolet and GMC dealers are allowed to order.
Although it's unclear how long it will take to resolve the parts shortage, GM doesn't have much time to sort it out, as a new Ford F-150 looms on the horizon. At launch, GM's fullsize trucks were offered only with a base 4.3-liter V6 and the 5.3-liter V8, but a burlier 6.2-liter V8 will be available soon. Interestingly, at least at the moment, GM truck buyers don't seem as willing to downsize to V6 power as buyers of the F-150, which gets some 42-percent of its sales from trucks equipped with its EcoBoost V6 engine (not including the normally aspirated base V6).
Working out the kinks in the Silverado and Sierra's supply chain couldn't be more important to the health of the company. Full-size pickups are a huge profit driver - in 2012, the trucks were said to make up about two-third of GM's total profits.