1994 Chevrolet Corvette Base Convertible 2-door 5.7l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM finds steering flaw, decides it doesn't warrant a recall

Guess what? General Motors is back in the spotlight for not recalling something. This time, though, not only does the company have an argument against a recall campaign, but its position is supported by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. According to The New York Times, over 50 owners of GM vehicles have reported instances of stuck or seized steering after driving long distances without moving the wheel. One owner complained to NHTSA that the "locked" steering of their 2013 Buick Verano caused a collision with a concrete barrier in a construction zone. Along with the 2013 to 2014 model year Verano sedans, Chevrolet Cruze and Malibu sedans are also affected. Considering the popularity of those models, GM needs to have a reason for not issuing a recall, right? "Based on a very low rate of occurrence – ranging from less than one half to less than two incidents per thousand vehicles – and the fact that the condition is remedied when the wheel is turned, GM determined this was not a safety issue," spokesman Alan Adler told The Times. The company has, however, issued a technical service bulletin for owners that complain of the problem. The fix is nothing more than a software update that is covered for 10 years or 150,000 miles from new. NHTSA cited GM's actions, along with descriptions of the problems from customers, in its decision not to issue a recall, with spokeswoman Catherine Howden saying, "the symptoms described would be a brief, perceptible change in steering feel that has little to no effect on the driver's ability to safely steer the vehicle." "When terms like 'notchy,' 'stick,' 'slip' or 'feel' are used, it does not indicate a meaningful increase in steering effort," Howden told The Times via email. What do you think? Is GM in the wrong here? Should there be a recall, or is the issue so limited as to not warrant one? Have your say in Comments. Featured Gallery 2013 Buick Verano Turbo: Review View 20 Photos Related Gallery 2014 Chevrolet Malibu: First Drive View 36 Photos Related Gallery 2014 Chevrolet Cruze Turbo Diesel: Quick Spin View 14 Photos News Source: The New York TimesImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Steven J. Ewing, Seyth Miersma / AOL Government/Legal Recalls Buick Chevrolet GM Safety Sedan buick verano

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.

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.