1982 Chevrolet Camaro on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM trucks get hybrid versions, but you'll probably never see one

A few years ago, General Motors sold hybrid versions of its Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups. They weren't very good, using GM's old two-mode hybrid system that resulted in only negligible fuel economy gains. But GM's trying again, launching eAssist models of the 2016 Silverado and Sierra that are said to offer 2-mpg improvements in city, highway, and combined fuel economy ratings. Problem is, you probably won't be able to get one. Only 700 eAssist trucks will be made for the 2016 model year – 500 Silverados and 200 Sierras. When you consider that GM moved 824,683 examples of its light-duty pickups in 2015, this small run represents 0.08-percent of all Silverado/Sierra production, and GM says it "will monitor the market closely ... and adjust as appropriate moving forward." But that's not the only limitation. The eAssist trucks will only be sold through California dealers. For the Silverado, eAssist can only be optioned on the 1500 Crew Cab 1LT 2WD model, and for the Sierra, the fuel-saving technology is solely available on the 1500 SLT Crew Cab 2WD model with the SLT Premium Plus package. Granted, in terms of the Sierra, that means you get niceties like LED headlights and taillights, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, Bose premium audio, heated seats and steering wheel, lane keep assist, and more. In the trucks, eAssist combines a small electric motor and 0.45-kWh battery pack with the pickups' 5.3-liter V8. GM estimates total output of 355 horsepower and 383 pound-feet of torque – no more horsepower than the non-eAssist trucks, but three more pound-feet of torque. GM says the eAssist trucks can tow up to 9,400 pounds, and the battery only adds 100 pounds to the trucks' weight. The electric motor provides 13 hp and 44 lb-ft of torque for a boost of acceleration off the line, or during passing. It also allows the engine to run in four-cylinder mode for longer periods of time. eAssist uses regenerative braking to help power onboard electrical systems, and adds start/stop to the powertrain. Finally, the so-equipped trucks have a six-percent improvement in aerodynamics, thanks to a soft tonneau cover and active grille shutters in the front fascia. Great news is, the eAssist option is relatively inexpensive, only costing $500. But good luck getting your hands on one.

Chevy might've pulled out of NASCAR if it weren't for new Gen 6 car

We've been on the fence with NASCAR for some time now. On one hand, it's some of the closest racing anywhere in motorsports, with actual passing and door-handle-to-door-handle action as a matter of course. But on the other, it's become template racing - a personality-driven sport more about the drivers than any sort of loyalty to a particular automaker. The Car Of Tomorrow format really rammed that message home, with a racecar's identity coming down to little more than headlamp stickers slapped on the nose. That's not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, but we've wondered for some time what's in it for the automakers, who pay big money to stay in a series that has had little increasingly little do with street car sales, let alone innovation.
Apparently General Motors was beginning to wonder the same thing. In a new ESPN report, Rick Hendrick, team owner of Hendrick Motorsports, suggests that GM would have seriously considered leaving NASCAR if it wasn't for the move away from the COT to the new Gen 6 racer. According to Hendrick, GM North America boss Mark Reuss spearheaded the charge away from the 2007 COT and toward a racecar with clearer automaker ties - cars like the new Chevrolet SS racer shown above. Learn more about the fight for a closer-to-production look in the ESPN story at the link.
Now, if we could just get more rear-wheel drive V8 coupes into showrooms....

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.