We Finance!!! 2011 Gmc Yukon Auto Roof Nav Tv Reverse Camera Texas Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy and GMC trucks get CNG option pricing

Chevrolet and GMC have clued us in to pricing of the bi-fuel option for the 2015 Silverado and Sierra 2500HD CNG and 3500HD CNG pickups: it starts at $9,500; we're still missing the rest of the pricing inferred by the word "starts," however. If you remember from the Chicago Auto Show introduction, the 6.0-liter V8 puts out 360 horsepower and 380 pound-feet of torque when drinking gas, 301 hp and 333 lb-ft when inhaling CNG.
Chevrolet figures that a bi-fuel Silverado HD is worth $2,000 in savings if driven 19,500 miles on CNG and 7,500 miles on gasoline in the span of a year, a recoup rate easily attainable to high-mileage fleet owners. It can be specced on double- and crew-cab pickups with single rear wheels, not on dualies.
The 2015 Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana short-wheelbase passenger and cargo vans also get CNG options, starting at $10,825 for the three-tank system, and $12,090 for the four-tank system that can only be had on the cargo hauler. You'll find a bit more info on all of the permutations in the press release below.

2016 GMC Terrain Denali Quick Spin

Here's a bewildering statistic – General Motors sold over 347,000 GMC Terrain and Chevrolet Equinox crossovers in 2014, making the Theta platform twins the best selling vehicles in their segment. GM sold more Equinox/Terrain crossovers than Honda did CR-Vs, Ford did Escapes, and Toyota did RAV4s. After a week behind the wheel of the 2016 Terrain Denali, we can't fathom why GMC's entry, which accounts for nearly a full third of GM's annual small CUV sales, has been so popular. An inefficient engine, cheap interior plastics, uncomfortable seats, a shortage of technology, and a high price left us questioning why anyone would order this Denali over a Titanium-trim Ford Escape, a Jeep Cherokee Limited, or a Hyundai Santa Fe Sport with the Unlimited Package. Driving Notes While looks are subjective, we'd posit that GMC didn't go far enough with its 2016 mid-cycle refresh. New accents on the front bumper, a tweaked grille surround, and LED running lights round out the changes up front, while the rear gets a slightly different bumper. GMC claims there's a new hood, although we challenge you to pick out the differences – here are the official galleries for the 2013 and 2016, if you'd like to try. GMC missed a tremendous opportunity here. New headlights, some restyled taillights, and tweaked mirrors would have given the impression of a more significant refresh. As it stands, these changes don't add up to much. GMC also claims it made changes in the cabin, adding a "revised instrument panel center stack." Aside from the missing CD slot, which has been replaced with an oddly shaped and not terribly useful shelf, it's hard to spot much of a difference. The Terrain Denali's cabin materials feel cheap. You'll be spending at least $35,000 to park one of these in your driveway, but aside from the leather-and-faux-wood steering wheel, no material feels worthy of that price tag inside. The lower dash plastics are hard and scratchy, the center stack feels hollow and creaks when pressed on, and the too-small shade over the seven-inch display feels flimsy. The upper dash is covered in a cheap-feeling, leather-like material that looks unchanged from when the Terrain Denali debuted back in model year 2013. These materials don't make sense in a vehicle that, as tested, exceeded $41,000. The most egregious thing about the refreshed Terrain is the lack of content.

Should heavy-duty pickup trucks have window stickers with fuel mileage estimates?

If you were to stroll into your nearest Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Nissan, or Ram dealership, you'd find a bunch of pickup trucks. Most of those would have proper window stickers labeled with things like base prices, options prices, location of manufacture, and, crucially, fuel economy estimates. But you'd also run across a number of heavy-duty trucks with no such fuel mileage data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA doesn't require automakers to publish the valuable miles-per-gallon measurement for vehicles with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. That makes it difficult for consumers to compare behemoths powered by turbocharged diesel engines – between one another, and between smaller, gasoline-fueled trucks. Consumer Reports doesn't think it should be this way, and it's spearheading an effort (PDF link) to get the government to require manufacturers to publish fuel economy estimates. In its own testing, CR found that heavy-duty pickups powered by Ford's Power Stroke, GM's Duramax, and FCA's Cummins diesel engines (which doesn't include the Ram's EcoDiesel) get worse fuel mileage than their lighter-duty gas-powered siblings. We're not so sure HD-truck buyers are unaware of this fact – big diesels don't really come into their own until big loads are placed in their beds or attached to their trailer hitches. Under heavy workloads, the diesel trucks will almost certainly return greater efficiency than a similar gas-powered truck. What's more, HD trucks with lumbering diesels in general make the driver feel more confident while towing due to greater torque at low engine RPM than gas trucks. They also offer greater max-weight limits. Still, we agree EPA fuel mileage estimates should be offered for heavy-duty pickups. And we think the comparisons provided by Consumer Reports might be interesting to potential buyers. Click here to see the results of CR's tests, and let us know what you think using the poll below. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Ford F-Series Super Duty: First Drive View 22 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Read This Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan RAM Fuel Efficiency Truck Commercial Vehicles Diesel Vehicles poll gmc sierra hd chevy silverado hd