Used Chevrolet Silverado 2500 Hd Duramax Diesel 4x4 Pickup Trucks We Finance Car on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Opel's own ad shows Ampera-e beating Opels in drag race

The Opel Ampera-e isn't expected to set any world records on a quarter-mile drag strip. But when it comes to crossing a major boulevard, though, the European version of the Chevrolet Bolt electric vehicle will more than hold its own, potentially scaring inattentive pedestrians everywhere. According to a 35-second video posted by General Motors' Opel division, at least. Opel set up the Ampera-e against four other small-and-sporty vehicles, including racing versions of the Opel Adam and Opel Astra as well as stock versions of the Opel Insignia and Corsa (what, you expected a Corvette to be in there?). With the EV's off-the-line torque as a selling point, Opel showed the Ampera-e beating the other vehicles in a 30-meter (100-foot) drag race. Of course, the video also shows the EV getting passed by some of the others soon after, but the point was made. Opel doubled down by adding the tagline "Fun to Drive" at the end of the video. While Opel hasn't revealed the single-charge range of the Ampera-e, it should be roughly the same as the Chevrolet Bolt, which will be about 200 miles. In addition, the Ampera-e, like the Bolt in the US, will get 200 horsepower from its electric motor, and will be able to go from 0 to 60 miles per hour in less than seven seconds. The Ampera-e will debut at the 2016 Paris Motor Show later this month. General Motors said in February that Europe would get the Ampera-e by next year. Opel had previously used the Ampera name with the Euro version of the Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-in. Related Video: News Source: Opel/YouTube via Green Car Reports Green Chevrolet GM Opel Electric opel ampera-e ampera-e

Should heavy-duty pickup trucks have window stickers with fuel mileage estimates?

If you were to stroll into your nearest Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Nissan, or Ram dealership, you'd find a bunch of pickup trucks. Most of those would have proper window stickers labeled with things like base prices, options prices, location of manufacture, and, crucially, fuel economy estimates. But you'd also run across a number of heavy-duty trucks with no such fuel mileage data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA doesn't require automakers to publish the valuable miles-per-gallon measurement for vehicles with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. That makes it difficult for consumers to compare behemoths powered by turbocharged diesel engines – between one another, and between smaller, gasoline-fueled trucks. Consumer Reports doesn't think it should be this way, and it's spearheading an effort (PDF link) to get the government to require manufacturers to publish fuel economy estimates. In its own testing, CR found that heavy-duty pickups powered by Ford's Power Stroke, GM's Duramax, and FCA's Cummins diesel engines (which doesn't include the Ram's EcoDiesel) get worse fuel mileage than their lighter-duty gas-powered siblings. We're not so sure HD-truck buyers are unaware of this fact – big diesels don't really come into their own until big loads are placed in their beds or attached to their trailer hitches. Under heavy workloads, the diesel trucks will almost certainly return greater efficiency than a similar gas-powered truck. What's more, HD trucks with lumbering diesels in general make the driver feel more confident while towing due to greater torque at low engine RPM than gas trucks. They also offer greater max-weight limits. Still, we agree EPA fuel mileage estimates should be offered for heavy-duty pickups. And we think the comparisons provided by Consumer Reports might be interesting to potential buyers. Click here to see the results of CR's tests, and let us know what you think using the poll below. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Ford F-Series Super Duty: First Drive View 22 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Read This Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan RAM Fuel Efficiency Truck Commercial Vehicles Diesel Vehicles poll gmc sierra hd chevy silverado hd

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.