1968 El Camino Ss396 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM issues stop-sale for 3 SUVs over incorrect MPG rating

This week, GM sent a memo to Chevy, GMC, and Buick dealers to tell them to stop selling three SUVS. The 2016 Chevy Traverse, the GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave all have EPA window stickers that show higher fuel economy ratings than the vehicles actually have. Unlike other recent – and very public – fuel economy ratings problems from VW and Mitsubishi, it doesn't seem like GM did anything wrong with the testing for these vehicles, it just misprinted the labels. New labels are being printed and should arrive at dealerships this weekend and early next week. After that, the SUVs will be able to be sold and delivered again. The official fuel economy rating for the three SUVs are all the same. The correct numbers for the all-wheel drive versions are 17 miles per gallon combined, 15 city, and 22 highway. The stickers say the SUVs get 17/24/19. The front-wheel driver models were also incorrectly labeled, and the total number of affected vehicles is 59,823. In the memo, GM said the problem was caused by an "inadvertent error," Automotive News says. GM is working with the EPA to solve the issue. We have asked GM for a comment on the mistake and will update this post if we hear back. Related Gallery 2013 GMC Acadia View 16 Photos News Source: Automotive News – sub. req. Government/Legal Green Buick Chevrolet GM GMC Fuel Efficiency mpg gmc acadia chevy traverse

This is how GM is hiding new Chevy Volt in public

General Motors is letting the public know that, well, it's not about to let the public know anything else about the next-generation Chevrolet Volt. But the automaker is willing to talk about its camouflaging process for upcoming versions of the extended-range plug-in. So it's a half-hearted secret, at best. GM actually has a "camouflage engineer" charged with creating ways to disguise the styling of new vehicles. In the Volt's case, the company is applying black and white swirly color patterns on top of the materials, such as plastics, vinyl and foam, that are used liberally across the body. It's all part of a teaser campaign that started last month with pictures of part the 2016 Volt. Earlier this month, GM said it was keeping track of Volt drivers' habits as it works on the next-gen model. The company noted that more than four out of five trips are being made in all-electric driving mode, and that 60 percent of Volt owners use a plain-old 100-volt outlet to recharge their cars. The car is slated to make its global debut at Detroit's North American International Auto Show next January, and the early word is that performance and all-electric range will be improved (we should hope so). The car will also be sleeker. By how much, we can't tell yet, because of those darn swirly patterns. GM's got more non-details in its press release below. Engineers charged with hiding styling while vehicle testing proceeds in public DETROIT – The styling of the next-generation Chevrolet Volt is one of the automotive world's best-kept secrets. Keeping customers and media eager to see the successor to the groundbreaking original at bay until the new Volt debuts at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit in January is tricky business. First, it is engineers, not designers, who are charged with creating camouflage that balances styling secrecy with the need to validate the Volt and its systems in public. "If it were up to me it would be a shoebox driving down the road," said Lionel Perkins, GM camouflage engineer. "The design team wants us to cover more of the vehicle and the engineering team needs to have enough of the vehicle's weight and aero exposed so that the tests in the development process are consistent with the product that will come to market." The engineers responsible for the "cool" designs covering the car might deserve style points but their efforts are intended strictly to hide the metal beneath.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.