* 1970 Super Sport L34 * Factory 396 Big Block * Protct-o-plate * Like Chevelle on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM's MPG overstatement could affect 2 million vehicles

Late last week, GM admitted that three of its large SUVs fuel economy window stickers did not match their actual efficiency ratings, and so the vehicles couldn't be sold. The stickers on the 2016 Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Buick Enclave said their ratings were one to two miles per gallon better than they should have been. Officially, the number of affected vehicles sits at about 60,000. But Consumer Reports makes a good point: what's up with all of the previous model year SUVs that are basically the same vehicle? To wit: the 2016 model year vehicles are not substantially different than the 2015 or the 2014, or even going all the way back to 2007. On the EPA's fuel economy website, all of these older models will "have better stated fuel economy numbers than the new vehicles in GM's dealerships," Consumer Reports noted. CR's best point, and the one that makes the 60,000 number potentially grow to 2 million if all of the vehicles built on this platform are affected, is that "[i]t seems unlikely that the company would change the powertrain on these carryover models so late in their model cycles in a way that would cause a dramatic, negative impact on fuel economy." GM says that earlier model year SUVs are not affected and the EPA did not respond to CR's question about the potential for more discrepancies. We've seen automakers reverse course before, so if GM has to come out with a mea culpa soon, don't be surprised. GM is rushing corrected stickers to dealers so that the SUVs can be sold again, but a fix for the already-sold vehicles could be trickier to solve. Related Video: Related Gallery 2013 GMC Acadia View 16 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Buick Chevrolet GMC Fuel Efficiency mpg gmc acadia chevy traverse

Weekly Recap: Lincoln Continental serves up the style, Cadillac CT6 delivers the substance in New York

Lincoln and Cadillac grabbed the spotlight this week at the New York Auto Show in a dramatic fashion that evoked the brands' glory days. America's two luxury carmakers went toe-to-toe with their glittering reveals and plans for ambitious expansion. Both were selling their technology, style and the promise of a better future. Cadillac vs. Lincoln. At the Javits Center, 2015 seemed a lot like 1956. Neither company was interested in drawing comparisons with the other, which is fair, and accurate. They're in vastly different places in terms of sales and the pace of their turnarounds, but they hope to reach the same eventual destination at the pinnacle of the luxury-car world. Lincoln used the element of surprise to great effect with the Continental concept. A production version is still at least a year away, and the company was vague on details. Officially, we don't even know if it is front- or rear-wheel drive, though speculation abounds. Who cares? The seats can be adjusted 30 ways! The Continental also showed off a bold chrome grille that will be the new face of Lincoln. The blue bomber also rolled on blinged-out 21-inch polished aluminum wheels, used a 3.0-liter EcoBoost engine and had huge LED head lights with "laser-assisted" high beams. All of this resulted in almost blinding attention. The concept drew rave reviews, stirred controversy with Bentley designers who argued Lincoln ripped them off, and most importantly, pointed a way forward for the newly determined brand that hopes to compete with Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Cadillac and Lexus. View 32 Photos Meanwhile, Cadillac showed the CT6, a finished product that will top its range and is loaded with the best and latest technologies General Motors has at its disposal. With production starting late this year, Cadillac had more specifics at the ready. Engines? Cadillac has a couple V6s and a turbo four for sure. It's working on a hybrid, and has considered a V-Series variant. It's based on a new rear-wheel-drive, aluminum-intensive chassis called Omega, features an advanced collision-mitigation system with automatic braking and has a cabin that's laden with "leathers, exotic woods and carbon fiber." It will be assembled at GM's Detroit-Hamtramck factory and goes on sale next year. At this point, Cadillac is more than willing to talk about every except for the price. The devil was not in the details for Cadillac, as evidenced by the CT6. But it wasn't for Lincoln either.

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.