1965 Chevrolet Biscayne Wagon Restomod = Cruiser on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM posts $4 billion third-quarter profit thanks to trucks and SUVs

DETROIT — General Motors is posting huge third quarter numbers, pulling in $4 billion in profit over three months after losing money due to the virus outbreak. GM's adjusted earnings were $2.83 per share, easily outpacing Wall Street's per-share projections of $1.43, according to a survey by FactSet. Revenue of $35.5 billion also edged out most expectations. Shares jumped almost 6% before the opening bell Thursday. The company swung back from a $806 million loss in the second quarter, when it was restarting factories shuttered for safety during the early stages of the pandemic. The Detroit automaker joined most global automakers in reporting better-than-expected earnings from July through September as sales across the globe started to rebound from coronavirus lockdowns, especially in China. GM sales in China jumped 12% in the third quarter, with sales of its Buick and Cadillac brands both rising more than 25%. In the U.S., GMÂ’s most profitable market, sales fell 9.9% in the third quarter compared with a year ago, but were a dramatic improvement over the 34% drop in the second quarter. Sales improved sequentially each month, the automaker said, an encouraging trend. GMÂ’s profit was boosted by higher-priced pickup trucks and large SUVs, which have seen strong sales in the U.S. through the pandemic. It was the best quarter on record for GM's Chevrolet Blazer. Sales of the Cadillac XT6 spiked 45% in the U.S. over last year. Large pickups also sold well. GM also said it was pumping $2 billion into its Spring Hill, Tennessee manufacturing plant to push its transition to produce electric vehicles. Last week, crosstown rivals Fiat Chrysler and Ford reported strong third-quarter net income. FCA said it made $1.4 billion for the period, while Ford earned $2.39 billion. Related Video: Earnings/Financials Buick Cadillac Chevrolet GM GMC

Autoblog fan favorite car ads from Super Bowl XLIX

Super Bowl XLIX is in the books, and the New England Patriots emerged victorious. Of course, if you're like us, the big game wasn't so much about the battle between the east coast and west, so much as a fight between the world's automotive advertisers. We collected and collated all of last night's new ads and put them together for you to vote on. And yes, we're limiting this year's contest to last night's new features. That's why you aren't seeing Dodge's epic Wisdom among our collection of commercials, and it's a similar story with Chevrolet's Truck Guy Focus Group series, which highlights the new Colorado. You can still vote for your favorites. We won't be closing the voting on our Super Bowl page, so while the winners and losers are correct as of this writing, it's entirely possible that there could be some changes in the rankings as time goes on. So, without any further ado, here are the winning ads based on your voting. Nissan: With Dad Fiat: Ready For Action Jeep: Beautiful Lands BMW: Newfangled Idea Mercedes-Benz: Fable NASCAR: America Start Your Engines As for those ads that failed to impact you, loyal readers, Toyota was the absolute, undisputed loser. The Japanese brand ran four ads in total – two for Toyota and two for Lexus – and all of them have negative tallies as of this writing. Lexus' Make Some Noise and Lets Play and Toyota's One Bold Choice and My Bold Dad both had very weak showings among the commercials that aired, although they weren't alone. Neither Mazda nor Kia scored particularly well, despite featuring celebrity magic act Penn and Teller and former James Bond, Pierce Brosnan, respectively. Chevrolet was the winner of the losers, as of our writing, recording the fewest downvotes for its audience-punking The Big Game ad. If you want to take a second look at the losing ads, you can head back to our Super Bowl page for the complete collection. But for now, head into Comments and let us know what you think of the results.

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.