2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo Ss Supercharged Dale Jr Edition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Next Chevrolet Malibu to have 'groundbreaking,' 'passionate' design

In our First Drive of the Chevrolet Malibu after its redesign in 2013 we wrote, "Chevy has quickly worked up a host of changes for its ever-important midsize sedan, and will be launching this 'there, we fixed it' 2014 Malibu like it's an all-new product." Still, no one cared. The Malibu has been mentioned in eight posts this year, all but two of them dealt with recalls, and one of those two was about a 2011 Malibu university science project. It came up in precisely zero posts from November 2013 to March 2014. That's why, according to a report in Automotive News, Chevrolet honchos are "hustling" to have a new Malibu ready in a year. Mark Reuss, General Motors' head of global product development, said it will have "groundbreaking design" and "groundbreaking technology," and asked investors who were showed a picture of it, "When is the last time you saw a [midsize] car this distinctive and this dramatic from General Motors?" Doubling down on the bullishness, Reuss said, "We've got our act together here on the midsize-car segment." Then, throwing every last chip on the pile, global design head Ed Welburn said the next Malibu's design will "make a significant statement" with "a very passionate design." Based on the number of comments Malibu posts get, we figure a fair few number of you would love for this to be the case; yet this is a lot of braggadocio to slather on a car that probably hasn't made "a significant statement" since Elton John had a number one record with Honky Chateau. That was 1972, if you're trying to remember. No matter the looks, the AN report says the new 'Bu will make a profit statement, selling for more money while costing less to produce. Alongside the Cruze, GM figures the pair will bring in an extra $800 million in variable profit in 2016. Which, in case it ends up being another 'butterface,' isn't bad for a silver lining. Featured Gallery 2014 Chevrolet Malibu: First Drive View 36 Photos News Source: Automotive New - sub. req. Design/Style Chevrolet GM Sedan

Next-gen Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra may use carbon fiber

It's been generally accepted that the next generation of full-size GM trucks will use some sort of strong, lightweight material for the beds while retaining steel for the cab. While aluminum seems like the most obvious choice, according to Automotive News, the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra will incorporate both aluminum and carbon fiber in their beds. The publication cites sources from within GM, though it seems the introduction of this comparatively exotic material mix is still a few years off. While carbon fiber is both stronger and lighter than steel and aluminum, it takes significantly more time and money to produce, essentially relegating the material to small-volume cars. The main benefit for trucks is the resulting reduction in weight to improve fuel economy without sacrificing the tough, rugged capabilities truck buyers expect. The Ford F-150 made the switch to aluminum for the 2015 model year and it's proved highly successful. It seemed like it was only a matter of time before the competition followed suit. Automotive News says that the next-gen trucks will launch with aluminum beds and that it will take a couple of years before we'll see any carbon fiber incorporated into the design. Even then, only look for the composite material on higher-trim models, with a trickle down to lower-spec trucks possible further in the future. In 2011, GM announced it was working with Japan-based Teijin Limited on a carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic. There's a good chance that material's introduction will be on trucks. Related Video: News Source: Automotive News Plants/Manufacturing Rumormill Chevrolet GM GMC Truck

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.