1965 Chevy C-20 Pickup!!!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat vs. Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 in latest Head 2 Head

"Olympian" is one of the terms we use to signify the greatest height, the seat of the gods. Yet Mt. Olympus is the second-highest peak in the Balkans ranges, overshadowed by the crest at Musala in Bulgaria's Rila mountains. Both great heights, but one is a little higher. That's how we get the Olympian Chevy Camaro ZL1 pitched at the Musalic Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat in Motor Trend's latest episode of Head 2 Head. The side-by-side spec sheet is filled with farcical numbers. For the ZL1, that's a 6.2-liter V8 with 580 horsepower, 556 pound-feet of torque, a 4,051-pound curb weight, 0-to-60 miles per hour in 3.9 seconds, a quarter-mile time of 12.2 seconds and a base price of just $57,800. Opposing that, the Hellcat wrings out its 6.2-liter V8 for 707 hp, 650 lb-ft of torque, weighs 4,449 pounds, does the quarter in 11.7 seconds and has a base price of just $60,990. Except in the case of the Hellcat, when Motor Trend put it on the dyno the machine spit out a reading of 672 hp and 606 lb-ft at the wheels. If there's a 10-percent driveline loss through those beefed-up internals and heavy-duty eight-speed transmission, that means the Hellcat is actually rated at about 750 horsepower and 700 lb-ft. But once they get put on a closed-off strip of coast road in Northern California, there are only a few strands of hair between their respective performances. That's not the case for they sensations provide; host Jonny Lieberman calls one of them, "One of the most incredible cars ever made," and says, "It changes everything." Watch the video above to see who got the verdict and how. Related Video:

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.

Driving Granatelli's turbine-powered 1978 Chevy Corvette [w/video]

With its curvy snout and feminine haunches, the third-gen Chevrolet Corvette looks like a dreamy – if dated – exemplar of Sports Car Fantasy 101 when viewed through modern eyes. This particular specimen circa '78, clad in silver and black paint with red pinstripes, appears to be a well-preserved example from the era. Apart from its low-profile Pirellis, slightly raised and slotted hood, spacious stance and a certain hand-painted descriptor alongside its crossed flag logos, you'd never guess there's a Space-Age propulsion unit powering this Coke bottle-bodied ride. Climb inside, and you're presented with aircraft gauges and big, colorful square buttons in the center panel. It takes a push of the "Ignitor" button, a tap of the starter button, and a slide of a T-handle for this nearly 40-year-old sports car to start sounding like Gulfstream G650 ready for takeoff. Yep, you're sitting in an 880-horsepower, turbine-powered Corvette, the only one of its kind in the world. Welcome to the whoosh. What The...? Built by Vince Granatelli, son of Indy 500 guru Andy Granatelli, this curious Corvette came into being by cramming a Pratt & Whitney ST6N-74 gas turbine engine into the donor car's lengthy front end. The same type of Jet A-burning mill powered Granatelli Senior's STP-sponsored racecar at the 1967 Indianapolis 500, where it famously led most of the 198 of 200 laps until a $6 transmission bearing failed, knocking it out of the race. The idea of turbine power usurping internal combustion was so threatening that Indy's governing body restricted turbine performance into obsolescence thereafter. A turbine-powered Corvette sounds excessive because it is. But there are also things about this 880-horsepower, 1,161-pound-feet monster that might surprise you. While it smacks of futurist exoticism and cost a then-dizzying $37,000 in 1967, the Canadian-built powerplant uses 80 percent fewer parts than an internal combustion V8 and will run on virtually anything combustible – whiskey, diesel, even Chanel No. 5. Though it's triple the length of a V8, the Pratt & Whitney beast weighs only 285 pounds. It's also one hell of a robust workhorse, typically serving as an auxiliary power unit for commercial aircraft or a generator in oil fields, where it can run for tens of thousands of consecutive hours before needing an overhaul. To adapt the Chevrolet for jet duty, the nose section was gutted and a sub-frame was built to compensate for the loosey-goosey front end.