1999 Chevrolet Express 2500 Cargovan One Owner Clean Carfax Runs Good No Reserve 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

GM recalls 3,300 pickups and SUVs for new ignition-switch issue [UPDATE]

UPDATE: A statement from GM about the recall has been added below. The exact total of vehicles affected is 3,296, including 3,073 of them in the US. General Motors isn't letting an ignition-switch problem grow into a massive scandal again. The automaker is recalling about 3,300 North American trucks and SUVs. They are: the 2014 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra and the 2015 Chevy Suburban and Chevy Tahoe, as well as 2015 model heavy-duty pickups, the Detroit News reports, citing an Associated Press story. The issue appears to have been caught fairly quickly. In this case, the keys can get stuck in the "start" position and then slip to "accessory" if bumped. This is because the ignition lock gears have an outer diameter that's larger than the specifications allow. When that happens the engine shuts off, and the driver loses assistance to the steering and brakes. The airbags might also be affected. The vehicles get a new ignition-lock housing to fix the problem. According to the Detroit News, an employee who experienced the problem with the switch discovered the issue, and this person then let officials at the automaker know as part of the Speak Up for Safety program. A total of five reports of the fault were discovered. However, there are no cases of injuries or crashes. The claims to the automaker's resolution program eventually tallied that GM's previous ignition switch problem included 124 deaths and 275 injuries. The company also had to recall millions of vehicles and pay significant fines to the US government. GM Statement General Motors is recalling 3,073 full-size trucks from the 2014 and 2015 model years in the U.S. Some of these vehicles may have an ignition lock actuator gear with an outer diameter that exceeds specifications, which may make turning the ignition key difficult. The ignition key could get stuck in the "start" position. This may be more likely at higher interior ambient temperatures. If the vehicle is driven with the key stuck in the "start" position, and the vehicle experiences a significant jarring event or the vehicle's interior temperature cools, the ignition lock cylinder could move out of the "start" position, rotate past the "run" position, and move into the "accessory" position, leading to loss of power steering assist, power brakes and potentially air bag deployment in certain crashes. Dealers will replace the ignition lock housing.

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.