1984 Chevrolet El Camino - V8-305 Blue/white With Hard Top Option on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Motor Trend puts Chevy Camaro Z28 and Porsche 911 GT3 Head 2 Head

Motor Trend admits, "This is an unfair comparison." But that doesn't make it any less fun to watch when they pit a Camaro Z/28 against the Porsche 911 GT3. The former has a 7.0-liter V8 with 505 horsepower and 481 pound-feet of torque shifted through a six-speed manual. The latter has a 3.8-liter flat-six with 475 hp and 324 lb-ft shifted through a seven-speed dual-clutch transmission. Yet those are only the little disparities – the big disparities are mass and money: the Camaro weighs 3,882 pounds and costs $76,150 as-tested, the Porsche weighs 3,267 pounds and costs $145,785. But they're both about hardcore performance, so MT takes them out on the street, to the drag strip, to the parking lot for figure eights and a skidpad test, and finally to Big Willow for Randy Pobst to give his professional assessment. Remember when a lotta people spent a lotta time debating Pirates vs. Ninjas? This is like that, only it's the "haul-ass good-time car" vs. the "track surgeon." Enjoy the debate in the video.

Motor Trend wheels the 2015 Corvette Z06

The new Chevrolet Corvette Z06 is capable of some absolutely wild metrics. Want proof? Carlos Lago from Motor Trend is here to break it all down. 60 miles per hour? 3.2 seconds. 60 to 0? 91 feet. Lateral acceleration? A staggering 1.16g, a figure that is the highest MT has ever recorded for a vehicle that isn't a race car. It's an utterly astonishing piece of work, this Z06, and just when you think it can't possibly get any more impressive, Randy Pobst hustles an auto-equipped Z06 around Road Atlanta in just 1:30. Aside from the eight-speed auto, Pobst's Z06 had the most aggressive aerodynamic package, the so-called Stage III. Take a look at the 650-horsepower Z06 in Motor Trend's latest video.

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.