on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The Opel GT is the concept General Motors should build for the US

Now is the time. General Motors should double-down on performance cars and build the Opel GT concept that's set to debut next week at the Geneva Motor Show. Better yet, sell it in the United States as the Chevy GT. Consumers are showing a thirst for performance cars not seen in decades. Ford has them coming in waves, with everything from the F-150 Raptor to a hotted-up Fusion. FCA US is unrepentantly building loads of Hellcats. GM should respond. The General's cupboard is hardly bare. With the Corvette, Camaro, and Cadillac's V-Series, GM has more than enough to compete with its crosstown rivals and anything Europe or Japan can throw at it. But there's also an opportunity. There's not many front-mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, two-seat sports cars out there like the Opel GT concept. A Chevy GT that used that layout and captured some of the concept car's proportions and curves would ignite a different kind of passion in enthusiasts. It would be Miata-like. With Chevy branding, this sports car would be the everyday exotic. The concept has a turbocharged 1.0-liter three-cylinder engine, which makes about 143 horsepower to motivate a structure that weighs less than 2,200 pounds. It can hit 60 miles per hour in less than eight seconds. All of those numbers are within the front-engined Miata's territory. This new Opel is inspired by two great mid-1960s concepts that helped put its design studio, and that of its sister brand, the British Vauxhall, on the map. (The GT concept is also technically a Vauxhall, as the brands are linked in GM's European strategy.) One of them, the '66 Vauxhall XVR remained a concept. The '65 Opel Experimental GT was on the road by 1968. That shows this is doable. There's precedent. The Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice shared a chassis with a modern GT during that trio's brief run. If GM ever makes this concept, Opel and Vauxhall should get their versions. But Chevy is the one that could make this car a global icon. Chevrolet GT. Make it happen. News & Analysis News: The potential return of the Ford Bronco is generating a ton of attention. Analysis: That's not news, per se. But when the Bronco6G.com fan site did a rendering of a next-generation Bronco, it almost broke the Internet. Everyone from Automotive News to Jalopnik picked up the illustrations. Our own post has drawn a lot of traffic and passionate responses. People are clamoring for the Bronco's return.

This map reveals the cleanest vehicles based on location

Naysayers love to point out how dirty the electricity grid mix is when it comes to charging electric vehicles. Curmudgeons are eager to jump into any conversation about EVs to enlighten the lucky listeners about how plug-in cars contribute to pollution, sometimes even throwing in a dash of climate-change denial for good measure. (Thanks, buddy. Pray, tell me more about the plight of oppressed SUV owners.) Unless someone buys an EV just because they think they're cool (which, yeah, they often are), they probably have at least a passable understanding of their environmental pros and cons. As many EV owners are already aware, location has a lot to do with any particular plug-in car's carbon footprint. Still, there's always more to know, and knowledge is not a bad thing, especially if one uses it to do the right thing. That's why this handy-dandy map from Carnegie Mellon University is so interesting. CMU researchers have compiled information about the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of various EVs based on where they're charged, as compared to gasoline-powered vehicles. The researchers looked at the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, and Prius Plug-In Hybrid versus the gasoline-dependent Toyota Prius hybrid and the stop-start-equipped Mazda3 with i-ELOOP and compared grams of CO2 emitted per mile. CMU takes into account the grid mix, ambient temperature, and driving patterns. CMU takes into account the grid mix based on county, as well as ambient temperature and driving patterns in terms of miles traveled on the highway or in the city. For instance, if you drive a Nissan Leaf in urban areas of California, Texas, or Florida, your carbon footprint is lower than it would be if you were driving a standard Toyota Prius. However, if you charge your Leaf in the Midwest or the South, for the most part, you've got a larger carbon footprint than the Prius. If you live in the rural Midwest, you'd probably even be better off driving a Mazda3. Throughout the country, the Chevrolet Volt has a larger carbon footprint than the Toyota Prius, but a smaller one than the Mazda3 in a lot of urban counties in the US. The Prius and Prius Plug-In are relatively equal across the US. Having trouble keeping it straight? That's not surprising. The comparisons between plug-in and gasoline vehicles are much more nuanced than the loudest voices usually let on.

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.