Auto blog

Nissan Leaf ends 2013 with best sales month ever, but can't catch Chevy Volt

Nissan and Chevrolet both ended 2013 with solid sales figures for their plug-in vehicles, the first two that were released (all the way back at the end of 2010) from major automakers. As has been the story for most of 2013, December sales for the Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Volt were roughly the same. When we left the year-to-date running tally at the end of November, the Volt was at 20,702, while the Leaf was at 20,080. As you can tell from the image above (if you've been noticing the trend in these EV sales monthly flash-reports), the Leaf outsold the Volt, but was it enough to put the Nissan on top for the year? In 2013, Nissan sold 22,610 Leafs, more than twice as many as in 2012. Almost. The Leaf made a valiant attempt, and did have its best month ever with 2,529 units sold. That means that for 2013, Nissan moved a total of 22,610 Leafs, more than twice as many as in 2012 (that year, Nissan sold only 9,819 Leafs in the US) and actually more than 2012 and 2011 Leaf sales combined (which was 19,493). Nissan continues to see the effects of its price drop and expanded sales areas, with Georgia rapidly becoming a Leaf hotbed. Nissan's Paige Presley said that Atlanta was once again the Leaf's number one market and that, "sales are expanding deeper into Georgia markets such as Macon and Columbus." The Volt saw a boost upwards from a November slump and sold 2,392 units in December. That puts the plug-in hybrid's annual total at 23,094, just down from the 23,461 sold in 2012. For all of 2013, though, the Volt outsold the Leaf by 484 vehicles. In a competition like this, we'll count that as a win for both sides. We will our more detailed monthly green car sales report, which covers more of the fuel efficient vehicles on the market, up soon. News Source: GM, Nissan Green Chevrolet Nissan Electric Hybrid PHEV ev sales hybrid sales

GM raises 2023 guidance on strong sales, higher profits

General Motors beat first-quarter profit estimates and raised its full-year earnings and cash-flow guidance after vehicle demand at the start of the year surpassed expectations. Its shares rose in premarket trading. GM made $2.21 a share in adjusted profit in the first quarter, compared to a consensus forecast of $1.72 a share. Revenue rose 11% to $39.99 billion, it said Tuesday, which was more than the $39.24 billion analysts expected. The stronger results stem from rising sales in the US, even in the face of higher interest rates and inflation. GM executives said demand was strong enough to revise 2023 guidance upward, boosting profit estimates for the year by $500 million to between $11 billion and $13 billion. “We did it with strong production and inventory discipline and consistent pricing,” GM Chief Financial Officer Paul Jacobson said on a call with journalists. “All in all, weÂ’re feeling confident about 2023.” The Detroit automaker raised per-share full-year guidance to between $6.35 and $7.35, up from $6 to $7 a share, and said free cash flow would also increase by $500 million to a range of $5.5 billion to $7.5 billion.  GMÂ’s shares pared a gain of as much as 4.4% before the start of regular trading Tuesday, rising 3.5% to $35.50 as of 6:55 a.m. in New York. The stock was up 1.9% for the year as of the close on Monday.  North American Strength The automakerÂ’s sales were particularly strong in North America, where first-quarter earnings rose before interest and taxes rose to $3.6 billion. Vehicle sales rose 18% to 707,000 in the region. Jacobson said the company originally expected to sell 15 million vehicles in the US this year, slightly less than the 15.5 million annualized rate automakers foresaw in the first quarter. North American demand was enough to offset a weak performance in China, GMÂ’s second-largest market. The automaker continues to struggle in the country, where its vehicle sales fell 25% to 462,000 vehicles in the quarter. Profits from its joint ventures in the market slumped 65% to $83 million.  The market has struggled overall in the wake of Covid-19 restrictions and foreign automakers have had to overcome a growing preference for Chinese brands by competing on price, squeezing profit margins. The situation in China probably wonÂ’t significantly improve until the second half of the year, according to Jacobson. GM remains on target to sell 150,000 electric vehicles this year, the CFO said.

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.