V6 Leather Onstar Heated Seats 1 Owner Buy It Wholesale Now $13,990 L@@k!!!!!!!! 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.

Cadillac can't keep up with Escalade demand, can't move its sedans

No matter how much Cadillac revitalizes its lineup and its image, it seems that all consumers want is the Escalade. In fact, Automotive News reports that General Motors can't keep up with demand for the fullsize luxury SUV, despite sticker prices that start at over $70,000 and approach six figures at the top end of the spectrum. Contrast that with sedans like the ATS and CTS, which are far cheaper but which Cadillac hasn't been able to move fast enough to keep up with production, prompting both the manufacturer and dealers to offer substantial incentives to keep them from piling up. Cadillac had been resisting a price cut of the ATS or CTS, lest it hurt resale values – itself a factor that could explain consumers' reluctance to buy them in the first place – but been offering subsidized leases, discounted financing, rebates and cheaper options. Combined with incentives from individual dealers, according to AN, buyers can be looking at five-figure discounts on buying a new Cadillac sedan. And now, finally, it seems the CTS will indeed get a little bit off its bottom line. Yet GM has been producing the ATS and CTS at rates that their sales can't keep up with. The automaker was forced to idle the plant in Lansing, MI, where it assembles the ATS and CTS for six weeks starting this past December. And since it reopened late in January, it's been reduced to a single shift as dealers try to move the metal they've already got. Meanwhile the plant in Arlington, TX, that produces the Escalade and its Chevy and GMC siblings has been running on overtime, with three shifts throughout the week and even into the weekend to keep up with demand. Profitable as it's been for Cadillac and GM, though, the Escalade does not represent the future of where it wants to take the brand - separating the Escalade as almost a brand unto itself that's been left out of the company's new naming scheme. If only it could make its sedans as successful as its fullsize SUVs, it'll be all set.

Despite strong profits, GM still fighting flat market share

Looking at the progress General Motors has made since it entered bankruptcy, it's easy to forget that the company still has a long way to go before it's the juggernaut it once was. A recent report from Reuters points out that, while GM is making money, it isn't making any gains in terms of US market share. Quite the opposite, really. Consider this factoid: In 1963, nearly half of the cars sold in the United States were from Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick, GMC or Pontiac. Now, the company's US market share is stagnant at 17.9 percent. That same number is half of just Chevy's 1963 market share. This is all despite GM going on a binge replacing or updating its models. "Market share increases are not instantaneous," Mark Reuss told Reuters at the 2014 Detroit Auto Show. "We've got a lot of baggage. Don't underestimate what people though of us, or these brands, through these hardships and 30 years." The reasons for the stagnant market share are numerous. Reuters points out that retooling of factories and a focus on limiting incentives are both good things for profit, but not necessarily for market share. There's also the troubling turnover of the brand's marketing department. These issues don't change the fact that Chevrolet has lost 1.4 percent of its market share in two years, and that Cadillac - arguably GM's most improved brand overall - has lost 1.2 percent in the same period. Part of that can be blamed on GM's avoidance of fleet sales in favor of more profitable customer sales. "Our focus has really been on retail and that's where we've got the growth," said Alan Batey, GM's interim global marketing boss. "We want to grow GM and that means growing market share and profits, but it's not at all costs," Reuss said. News Source: ReutersImage Credit: paul bica - Flickr CC 2.0 Earnings/Financials Buick Cadillac GM GMC sales profits