2014 Chevy Silverado 2500hd Lt Crew Diesel 4x4 Auto 13k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Top horsepower-per-dollar cars in 2017

Bang for the buck. That quasi-scientific statistic is bandied about by motor heads everywhere from classrooms to barrooms, though the truth of the matter is that it's exceedingly complex to measure. A fair performance-per-dollar index would include something like cross-referencing MSRP (Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price) with point-to-point times on a track or driving route, which is obviously hard to do comprehensively. But, for the sheer joy of talking about cars and playing with a big spreadsheet, there's always the horsepower-per-dollar index, which is more straightforward, albeit hilariously flawed. There are vagaries even with this simple formula, of course: MSRP for vehicles can change at a moment's notice, to say nothing of the bottom-line shifting that happens with local deals or showroom negotiation. For this list we're running with the straight MSRP wherever possible, and as recently reported as we can get it. All the vehicles on this list are 2017 models, and all trims are reported where the lowest price and differing power levels intersect. Some choices were made for personal preference and some for sanity, avoiding things like all 48 trim levels of the Ford Transit, all with the same horsepower). If this list were a simple top ten, or even a top fifty, you'd be bored to tears with all the red, white and blue that is represented. Following perfectly with conventional wisdom, American cars really do lead the world where hp/$ is concerned. So, for the sake of variety (and the sheer joy of seeing a minivan 'win' one round of this thing) I've sorted out some top five and bottom five lists for broad power categories. Let's dive in. Less Than 100 Horsepower Okay, okay, this is hardly a category we'll grant you. But we've often tried to click off all the sub-100-hp cars on sale in the US, and making this list gave us an excuse. It also illustrates that none of these smallish vehicles bring cheap horsepower to the table - for that you'll need a motorcycle. The segment-leading Chevy Spark (above) asks just over $139 for each hp, and that Smart Fortwo Electric Drive has hp on sale for about the same price as its very distant family cousin, the Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG (insert your favorite Smart joke here... we know you want to).

Chevrolet considering midsize crossover to slot between Traverse and Equinox

Crossovers are the new hotness, and automakers are looking to cash in by offering a size and shape for every customer. With Chevrolet's debut of the new 2018 Traverse in Detroit, which grew ever so slightly compared to the first-generation model, there is now a midsize-crossover-sized hole between the three-row Traverse and the compact Equinox. When asked about that obvious space, a Chevrolet spokesperson told us the company is looking into the possibility of expanding its crossover lineup. It should be a relatively simple thing to do, since all it would take is reskinning and rechristening the GMC Acadia with a bow tie, and we all know how much GM loves platform sharing. Although they're now different sizes, the new Acadia and Traverse still use the same platform; the Acadia is now on a short-wheelbase version of the C1XX while the Traverse uses long-wheelbase C1XX parts. A short-wheelbase Chevy built on the C1XX likely would be differentiated visually from both the Acadia and the larger Traverse. It may seem like flooding the lineup with more and more models would cannibalize sales of existing ones, but Chevrolet said it would rather have customers stay within the brand rather than going to another automaker. There have been whispers that some form of the Blazer name (possibly TrailBlazer) may make a return on a midsizer, but if it does don't expect an old-school body-on-frame SUV like the old one. In the end, if Chevy builds it, customers will come. Related Video:

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.