1963 Chevrolet Impala on 2040-cars

Auto blog

What we know, and think we know, about the 2016 Chevy Volt

With the next-gen Chevy Volt due to make an appearance at the Detroit Auto Show early next year, bits and pieces about the new car are making their way into the press. Perhaps most importantly, the new Volt is going to have better "fuel economy and efficiency," according to GM executive vice president Mark Reuss. The current Volt gets 98 MPGe and 37 miles per gallon on premium fuel. It also has a 38-mile electric-only range. We don't know how GM will improve the efficiency or to what degree, but the logical options include making the car lighter, giving it better aerodynamics and/or improving the powertrain. To that end, one of the big things we don't know for sure includes information on the new gas-powered engine. Forbes says it will be a downsized 1.0-liter, three-cylinder mill instead of the 1.4-liter, four-cylinder used in the current model, which could certainly help the car be more efficient. The new Volt is also going to have more technology, which shouldn't surprise anyone. GM is now openly talking about how it will change the way it markets the Volt, shifting away from the mass-market mentality to focus on the regions where the car is already popular. "There's a Northeast and West Coast market for Volt, and there's nothing wrong with that," Chevy chief marketing officer Tim Mahoney told Forbes. There are rumors that the new Volt will have seating for five by adding a seat in the back. This is something a lot of current Volt owners would love, but we've heard nothing official hinting that this would be the case. We expect the battery to be the new 17.1-kWh version, or maybe even have a capacity increase, so GM would have to seriously repackage the pack to eliminate the ridge that runs from between the front seats and then back to the rear two seats. If you've heard anything official, do let us know.

Junkyard Gem: 1980 Chevrolet LUV Mikado

During the 1970s and into the 1980s, each member of the Detroit Big Three imported Japanese small pickups and sold them with Ford (Mazda Proceed), Dodge/Plymouth (Mitsubishi Forte), or Chevrolet (Isuzu Faster) badges here. Ford developed the Ranger and killed the Courier for 1983 (though Americans could still buy the Mazda-badged version all the way through 1993), while The General axed the LUV after the S-10 debuted in the 1982 model year. Isuzu sold the same truck as the P'up through 1987, though, and we might as well follow up our recent P'up Junkyard Gem with its LUV predecessor. LUV stood for Light Utility Vehicle, and I've managed to spot a handful in the boneyards over the years. This one now resides in a yard in northeastern Colorado. The Mikado trim package included striped seat upholstery and a sporty steering wheel, plus these cool dash badges. As far as I can tell, no LUV Mikado advertising featured any Gilbert and Sullivan tunes. This one is fairly rusty for Front Range Colorado, and it has endured a bed swap from some other small truck. The engine is the 75-horse Isuzu 1.8-liter. Members of this engine family went into everything from Chevy Chevettes to Isuzu Troopers in the United States. Very unusually for a small pickup during the Malaise Era, this one has a luxurious automatic transmission. Acceleration must have been a leisurely affair in this truck. Air conditioning? Unheard of! Someone stuck every one of their lunchtime apple stickers on the driver's door. After 41 years of work, this truck is done. Come on strong in a LUV of your own!

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.