2010 Ls Used 5.3l V8 16v Automatic 4wd Premium Onstar on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The U-2 spy plane needs high-performance cars to help land

Typically, aircraft deploy their landing gear from three main points. Most military aircraft, for example, deploy two gears at the back and one forward, like a tricycle. Some civilian aircraft flip the layout, with two in front and one in back - tail-draggers. The U-2 Dragon Lady is wildly different than any of these. With a 103-foot wingspan but a body that's just 63-feet long, the layout of the U-2 makes a traditional landing setup infeasible. Instead, the U-2 utilizes a pair of wheels, one up front and one in back. With such a bizarre layout, landings are so tough that since the U-2's earliest flights at Area 51, the US Air Force has used high-performance chase cars to guide the pilot down safely. The landing process isn't over there, though. As this video from Sploid shows, balancing out the aircraft to fit the detachable "pogos" – think training wheels for spy planes – is a comical procedure requiring a number of airman using their full body weight to even out the U-2. This video also recaps some of the great vehicles that have served as chase vehicles for this legendary spy plane. They include Chevrolet El Caminos, and the Fox-body Ford Mustangs so favored by the California Highway Patrol. For the last several years, the USAF has utilized products from General Motors, using fourth-generation Chevy Camaros, before switching over to the Pontiac GTO and most recently, the awesome Pontiac G8. It's fair to say that if you're a gearhead in the Air Force, this is the job you want. Check out the video, embedded up top. News Source: Sploid via YouTubeImage Credit: Sploid Chevrolet Ford GM Pontiac Military Performance Videos

GM re-recalls 11k SUVs

General Motors is recalling a bunch of previously recalled SUVs because, well, they still aren't quite fixed. The latest repairs are necessary on 10,974 SUVs in North America, including 9,932 in only the US. Affected models include the 2006-2007 Buick Rainier, Chevrolet Trailblazer, and GMC Envoy; plus the 2006 Trailblazer EXT and Envoy XL. While not listed by NHTSA, a statement by GM to Autoblog says the 2006-2007 Saab 9-7X and Isuzu Ascender are also affected. In these SUVs, it's possible that liquid could get into the driver's door master power window switch module and cause a short circuit. This could potentially lead to a fire, and owners are urged to park the vehicles outside until repaired. GM has been trying to fix this issue for years. It started as an investigation into fires, and that led to a recall for about 250,000 vehicles in cold-weather states. A nationwide campaign came in 2013 for 193,000 of them in the US. Last year, the automaker decided to replace the whole module as a repair. However in a recent investigation of these recalls, GM discovered that this latest group of SUVs never received the new part. According to documents submitted to NHTSA (as a PDF), "Some dealers incorrectly used the labor code associated with module replacement when, instead of replacing the module, they only added a protective coating to the module." To fix things this time, the models finally get the correct component. Related Video: GM Statement General Motors is recalling 9,932 older midsize SUVs in the U.S. because they were mistakenly excluded from an earlier recall. Certain 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer EXT and GMC Envoy XL, and 2006-2007 TrailBlazer, Envoy, Buick Rainier, Saab 9-7X and Isuzu Ascender vehicles may continue to have a condition in which the printed circuit board inside the driver's door may corrode and short if exposed to certain fluids such as melted snow containing road salt. GM is aware of four fires but no crashes, injuries or fatalities associated with the expanded recall. The total number of vehicles being recalled, including Canada, Mexico and exports is 10.974. Customers are urged to park these vehicles outside until repairs have been made. GM reported this recall to the NHTSA on September 23.

Chevy Volt replacement battery cost varies wildly, up to $34,000

There's a growing hubbub in the plug-in vehicle community over what looks like some ridiculously cheap replacement batteries for the Chevrolet Volt going up for sale. GM Parts Online, for example, is selling a replacement Volt battery with an MSRP of $2,994.64 but, with an online discount, the price comes down to $2,305.88. For the 16-kWh pack in the 2012 Volt, that comes to a very low $144.11 per kilowatt hour (kWH). But is it a real deal? How can it be, when a Chevy dealer may quote you a price of up to $34,000 to replace the pack? For a 16-kWh Volt pack, $2,305.88 comes to a very low $144.11 per kWh. But is it a real deal? Battery packs in alternative propulsion vehicles are usually priced by the kWh and, historically, they've been thought to be in the range of $500-per-kWh for OEM offerings. Since automakers are understandably secretive about their costs, we still don't know what the real number is today, but we do know it varies by automaker. Tesla, for example, has said it pays less than $200-per-kWH at the cell level but, of course, a constructed pack would be more. Whatever is going on, li-ion battery prices are trending downward. So, $144.11 certainly sounds great, but what's the story here? Kevin Kelly, manager of electrification technology communications for General Motors, reminded AutoblogGreen that GM Parts Online is not the official GM parts website and that, "the costs indicated on the site are not what we would charge our dealers or owners for a replacement battery. There would be no cost to the Volt owner if their battery needs replacement or repair while the battery is under the eight year/100,000 mile limited warranty coverage provided by Chevrolet." A single price tag also can't be accurate for everyone, Kelly said. "If the customer needs to have their battery repaired beyond the warranty, the cost to them would vary depending on what needs to be replaced or repaired (i.e. number of modules, which specific internal components need replacement, etc.)." he said. "So, it's hard for us to tell you exactly what the cost would be to the customer because it varies depending on what might need to be repaired/replaced. As a result, the core charge would vary." But, is the $2,300 price even accurate for anyone? Thanks to a reader comment, we see that this similar item on New GM Parts makes it look like the lithium-ion modules that Kelly mentioned – where a lot of the expensive bits are – are not included.