1955 Chevy Pick Up, First Series , Big Block .street Rod!! Woody!!!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM pickup truck plant in Flint to add 1,000 assembly workers

FLINT, Mich. — General Motors said Tuesday it will add 1,000 workers to build new heavy-duty pickup trucks at its plant in Flint, Michigan, and will give priority to GM workers who were laid off elsewhere. The announcement comes the day after GM said it was starting to hand pink slips to about 4,000 salaried workers in the latest round of a restructuring announced in late November that will ultimately shrink its white-collar workforce in North America by 15 percent out of 54,000. GM has come under fire from U.S. President Donald Trump and Midwestern lawmakers for its plans to stop production at five North American factories and cut up to 15,000 jobs in all. The automaker has said it is trying to find new jobs for 1,500 U.S. hourly workers at the affected plants. Flint's truck plant could be a haven for many of these employees. Sales of heavy-duty pickups in the United States have grown to more than 600,000 vehicles a year, up more than 20 percent since 2013, according to industry data. Prices for luxury models can easily top $70,000. GM on Tuesday will celebrate the launch of a new generation of heavy-duty GMC and Chevrolet pickups at the assembly plant in Flint, Michigan, that is now building all such trucks for the company. Elsewhere in the company on Monday, two people briefed on the cuts in the white-collar salaried workforce said GM is cutting hundreds of jobs at its information technology centers in Texas, Georgia, Arizona and Michigan and more than 1,000 jobs at its Warren, Michigan Tech Center. GM is filing new required mass layoff notices with state agencies and disclosed the cuts to lawmakers. The largest U.S. automaker announced in November it would cut a total of about 15,000 jobs and end production at five North American plants. The cuts include eliminating about 8,000 salaried workers, or about 15 percent. GM cut about 1,500 contract workers in December and said 2,300 salaried workers accepted buyouts, officials said. "These actions are necessary to secure the future of the company, including preserving thousands of jobs in the U.S. and globally. We are taking action now while the overall economy and job market are strong, increasing the ability of impacted employees to continue to advance in their careers, should they choose to do so," GM spokesman Pat Morrissey said, adding the bulk of the cuts should be completed in the next two weeks. Morrissey said GM would provide salaried workers with severance packages and job placement services.

China's rise, global restructuring wither GM's Korea division

An article in the Daily Kanban suggests the sun is setting on GM Korea, and it could already be well into dusk. GM Korea came about when General Motors, along with co-investors SAIC and Suzuki, bought Daewoo Motors from parent company Daewoo Group in 2001; it had a previous tie-up with GM, a joint venture that ended in 1992, although Daewoo cars were based on GM cars until 1996. Over the decade following the purchase, it became such an important part of operations that it was renamed GM Korea in 2011, "to reflect its heightened status in [the] global operations of GM." Just two years later, the printed rumors were that the subsidiary responsible for a fifth of Chevrolet's global production could be shutting down. The division's sales were down almost 21 percent through November of last year, counting domestic South Korean sales, exports, and CKD – Complete Knock Down – products. That makes the labor strife, already an issue for four years, even more acute, reports say the subsidiary will lose $36 million a year if it can't get the job and wage cuts it wants, and government concessions can't make up for the losses. And it gets worse, so head over to Daily Kanban to read the rest of the story.

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.