2000 Chevrolet S10 Ls Extended Cab Pickup 3-door 2.2l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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!

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.

GM won't pay owners of recalled cars for lost value

Kenneth Feinberg, the man in charge of the General Motors compensation fund dealing with the its widespread ignition switch woes, has issued an informal, two-letter response to the plaintiffs in more than 70 lawsuits seeking redress for lost resale value of their Cobalts: "No." The cases were recently combined into one, but Feinberg told The Detroit News that the fund will deal "only with death and physical injury claims," and that "perceived diminished value" will get no consideration.
ALG, the firm specializing in establishing residual values, determined that Cobalt owners had lost $300 compared to the segment competition and doesn't envision any long-term effects from the recall situation. Feinberg's statement comes in advance of public details on how the compensation fund will work and adheres to GM's long-held position on the matter. The company has already asked a judge to throw out such suits using the pre-bankruptcy defense, even as it stopped using that defense in cases of injury and death.
With plenty of potential gain from the GM suit, however, don't expect the plaintiffs to give up yet. When Toyota was sued for the same reason during the unintended acceleration debacle, it eventually settled the case for between $1 billion and $1.4 billion just to get it over with. Since the 85 law firms involved in the Toyota litigation took home more than $250 million of that total, we shouldn't expect the attorneys to give up on a GM payout, either.