2014 Chevrolet Volt Base on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM veteran Bryan Nesbitt tapped to head Buick design

General Motors styling veteran Bryan Nesbitt (pictured above) took over a new role on Monday as executive director of global Buick design and global architectures. Andrew Smith, who previously did that job and also coordinated the look for Cadillac, has remained in charge of the pen at Caddy with this shift. Nesbitt rose to prominence when he designed the Chrysler PT Cruiser, according to Automotive News. He joined GM in 2001 and has been there ever since in multiple high-level roles. In 2007, he was appointed vice president of design for North America and was later briefly general manager of Cadillac in 2009-2010. Nesbitt took over as the vice president of GM's international operations design in China in 2011. This shuffle also moves Ken Parkinson, currently styling boss for Chevrolet trucks, to China as design vice president there. In addition, John Cafaro becomes the person in charge of the look for Chevy globally, rather than previously splitting that role between cars and trucks with Parkinson. GM Global Design Leadership Changes – effective June 1, 2015. Bryan Nesbitt, Design Vice President, GM China will repatriate to North America and assume the position of Executive Director, Global Buick and Global Architectures. He will be located in Warren, MI. Bryan will be the design Champion for Buick in the US and China. Ken Parkinson, Executive Director, Global Chevrolet Trucks and Global Architecture will assume the position of Design Vice President, GM China. He will be based in Shanghai, China. Andrew Smith, Executive Director, Global Cadillac and Buick Design will assume the position of Executive Director, Global Cadillac. He will continue to be the design Champion for the Cadillac brand. In addition, he will continue to lead the Global Color & Trim team. He will be based in Warren, Michigan. John Cafaro, Executive Director, Global Chevrolet Cars will assume the position of Executive Director, Global Chevrolet. He will be the design Champion for Chevrolet. In addition, John will lead the exterior components and accessories team. He will continue to be based in Warren, MI. The roles and responsibilities of Helen Emsley, Mark Adams, Carlos Barba, Clay Dean, Michael Simcoe, and Teckla Rhoades remain the same. Related Video: The video meant to be presented here is no longer available. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Expect greater differentiation in GM's next-generation SUVs

General Motors says its next-generation Chevrolet Tahoe, Suburban, GMC Yukon and Cadillac Escalade models will offer shoppers improved interior differentiation. Car and Driver recently caught up with Chris Hilts, GM's creative manager of interior design, who said that the cabins will all feature unique instrument panels, consoles, center stacks and switchgear moving forward. Apparently GM is now aware that consumers may be bothered by the fact that today's $85,000 Escalade has effectively the same cabin as a $45,000 Tahoe. Hilts says SUV buyers want more refinement than their pickup purchasing counterparts - and those same buyers also want their SUVs to have more exterior differentiation between the company's Silverado and Sierra pickup lines. Shocking.
That all sounds good to us, but we've heard this song and dance before. GM made big waves about how different the new-for-2013 Silverado and Sierra would look from each other, but judging by what we've seen so far, GM's stylists are painting in shades rather than with the full spectrum. For more on the what to expect out of GM's new SUVs, click on the C/D link below.

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.