1968 El Camino on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche wins the 2015 24 Hours of Le Mans

The question going into this year's 24 Hours of Le Mans was whether or not the Porsche 919 Hybrid would be able to combine its qualifying pace with race reliability. After battling neck-and-neck with Audi's R18 for most of the race, the answer is a resounding yes. Not only did Porsche drivers climb the first two spots on the podium, they did so without any major mishaps on track. This win is the first overall trophy for Porsche since 1998. Audi previously won the last five races, and 13 of the last 15. Corvette also returned to the winner's circle, with the No. 64 C7.R taking winning the GTE Pro division. The victory is the first class win for Corvette since 2011. KCMG won the LMP2 class in ninth overall. With 45 minutes to go the No. 98 Aston Martin crashed out of first place in GTE Amateur, giving the class win to SMP Racing's Ferrari and second place to the Patrick Dempsey Racing Porsche 911 RSR. For the full list of official results, click here. The GTE Pro class proved to be just as exciting as the P1 class, with a four-way battle for first after four hours into the race. For most of the race, the battle at the top went back and forth between the two German manufacturers. An tire puncture in the No. 7 Audi gave up the lead to Porsche, and moments later a crash forced the No. 8 into the garage. But a three-minute replacement of the front and rear bodywork kept the Audi in contention. As the race wore into the night, Porsche maintained a slightly faster pace than Audi. Nick Tandy took the lead on Lap 253 early Sunday morning, and car No. 19 never gave up the top position. The win is the first for all three drivers of the No. 19 – Nico Hulkenberg, Earl Bamber, and Nick Tandy. A lap behind in second was the No. 17 Porsche. The Audis fought reliability problems late in the race but still finished third with the No. 7 R18. The GTE Pro class proved to be just as exciting as the P1 class, with a four-way battle for first after four hours into the race. As the Aston Martin cars dropped away, the lone Corvette Racing entry took over, followed by a charging AF Corse team Ferrari 458 Italia. The Corvette and Ferrari continued to trade places in the final hours until gearbox trouble forced the No. 51 Ferrari out of contention. It was eventually passed by the other AF Corse car, No. 71. Nissan experienced all the pain of a first-year effort with its front-wheel-drive GT-R LM Nismo.

Next Chevy Volt will be 2016 model and ride on new chassis

What do we know about the 2016 Chevy Volt? Well, for now, all we can do is try to put the puzzle together without the box. Thankfully, a new batch of pieces has arrived from a new report in Edmunds, which says that the 2016 model year will introduce the second generation of a car that hasn't been dramatically updated since it went on sale in 2010. The new Volt is getting an "evolutionary styling change" and will ride on a new front-drive platform that has been developed by General Motors. GM's Kevin Kelly told AutoblogGreen that he has "no comment on future products," but he did acknowledge that Chevrolet is working on a second-generation Volt, "but I can't say anything about timing." Everybody already knew that a next-gen Volt is coming, so that's not a surprise. What we don't know is any real concrete information on the car itself. The few tidbits of information we do have help define the outlines of the next version of Chevy's halo car, but they're not confirmed yet. For the record, they range from the eye-raising (a $10,000 price drop) to the logical (20 percent more electric range). We can't see the whole picture yet, but the pieces do point to the 2016 Volt, which would be released next year sometime, being a much bigger deal than the last update, when the Volt's range was increased by three electric miles thanks to a battery capacity increase of 16 kWh to 16.5.

GM recalls Cadillac ATS and Chevy Impala for separate issues

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration added two recalls from General Motors in the government organization's daily update of safety campaigns. Both were for failing to meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards but for completely separate reasons. The larger recall covers 58,698 units of the 2013-2015 Cadillac ATS, but it doesn't really carry huge safety concerns. In vehicles produced between April 25, 2012, and February 9, 2015, the controls for the tilt and slide of the moonroof are not recessed enough, as required by federal law. According to NHTSA, it's possible that someone could inadvertently activate the auto-close for the roof panel, which the agency claims increases "the risk of personal injury." Dealers will install a new trim plate that will add the necessary clearance. The other campaign covers 1,177 examples of the 2014 Chevrolet Impala from between November 15, 2012, and May 27, 2014. However, this is actually a repeat of a previous recall on the Chevy and the Cadillac XTS from 2014. The affected Impalas here "were remedied incorrectly" under the earlier campaign, according to NHTSA. On these sedans, it's possible the electronic parking brake might not fully disengage and still remain in some contact with the rotor, which is in violation of federal rules. The fault can cause excessive heat from the brakes that could potentially lead to a fire, according to NHTSA. To fix the problem, dealers will reprogram the electronic parking brake control module. Show full PR text RECALL Subject : Inadvertent Press of Roof Panel Switch/FMVSS 118 Report Receipt Date: FEB 24, 2015 NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V106000 Component(s): VISIBILITY Potential Number of Units Affected: 58,698 All Products Associated with this Recall Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) CADILLAC ATS 2013-2015 Details Manufacturer: General Motors LLC SUMMARY: General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 2013-2015 Cadillac ATS vehicles manufactured April 25, 2012, to February 9, 2015. In the affected vehicles, the power-operated roof panels auto-close when the non-recessed "Slide" or "Tilt" switches are pressed. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No.