2007 Chevrolet Tahoe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM recalls Cadillac ATS and Chevy Impala for separate issues

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration added two recalls from General Motors in the government organization's daily update of safety campaigns. Both were for failing to meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards but for completely separate reasons. The larger recall covers 58,698 units of the 2013-2015 Cadillac ATS, but it doesn't really carry huge safety concerns. In vehicles produced between April 25, 2012, and February 9, 2015, the controls for the tilt and slide of the moonroof are not recessed enough, as required by federal law. According to NHTSA, it's possible that someone could inadvertently activate the auto-close for the roof panel, which the agency claims increases "the risk of personal injury." Dealers will install a new trim plate that will add the necessary clearance. The other campaign covers 1,177 examples of the 2014 Chevrolet Impala from between November 15, 2012, and May 27, 2014. However, this is actually a repeat of a previous recall on the Chevy and the Cadillac XTS from 2014. The affected Impalas here "were remedied incorrectly" under the earlier campaign, according to NHTSA. On these sedans, it's possible the electronic parking brake might not fully disengage and still remain in some contact with the rotor, which is in violation of federal rules. The fault can cause excessive heat from the brakes that could potentially lead to a fire, according to NHTSA. To fix the problem, dealers will reprogram the electronic parking brake control module. Show full PR text RECALL Subject : Inadvertent Press of Roof Panel Switch/FMVSS 118 Report Receipt Date: FEB 24, 2015 NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V106000 Component(s): VISIBILITY Potential Number of Units Affected: 58,698 All Products Associated with this Recall Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) CADILLAC ATS 2013-2015 Details Manufacturer: General Motors LLC SUMMARY: General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 2013-2015 Cadillac ATS vehicles manufactured April 25, 2012, to February 9, 2015. In the affected vehicles, the power-operated roof panels auto-close when the non-recessed "Slide" or "Tilt" switches are pressed. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No.

Leaked GM document shows GMC Sierra I6 diesel is more powerful than F-150's

GM told us earlier this year that the 2019 GMC Sierra would be getting a 3.0-liter I6 diesel option, but it never mentioned power or fuel economy figures. Hold the phone though, because a leaked GM Canada document just showed up online that lists out the details we've been waiting for. Originally published by TFL Truck, the 3.0-liter oil-burner supposedly makes 282 horsepower and 450 pound-feet of torque. For those who are counting, that's more than the Ford F-150's 250 horsepower and 440 pound-feet from its 3.0-liter diesel. It soundly bests the 240 horsepower and 420 pound-feet of torque from Ram's 3.0-liter diesel as well. Fuel economy is another story, though. The promotional material states that it will get 28 mpg on the highway, which is 2 mpg short of the F-150's 30 mpg — mind you, it's only capable of that magical 30 mpg figure in rear-wheel drive form. There's another caveat here, too; these are numbers for Canada, so they're not exactly finalized EPA figures. However, we wouldn't expect drastic differences between the two when the American numbers come out. The leaked documents also state the diesel Sierra will be capable of towing 7,800 pounds. That number seems remarkably low when compared to the F-150, which can tow up to 11,400 pounds with its diesel. Extra power and torque would have us assume that GM could get even better numbers than Ford, so we're going to hold our final judgment for official word. A 10-speed automatic will do the shifting on the diesel, just like on the 6.2-liter V8. Since the Chevy Silverado is also expected to get this engine, we can assume the figures would be almost, if not identical, to those we see here. We recently drove the 2019 Sierra and Silverado without the diesel engines, so go check those reviews out if you'd like to know more of our thoughts on the redesigned GM trucks. Related video:

Our favorite mid-engine Corvette theories and rumors

The mid-engine Corvette! We just saw blurry photos through the foliage, and are hearts are all aflutter because it means that this car is real. And it's the most " never before" Corvette since 1984. Which leads us to all kinds of wacky theories and speculation. Everybody knows something or heard from a guy. None of those guys (or gals) from GM are talking to Autoblog, to be clear. But that won't stop us from stirring the pot. Let's go over a few point-by-point. The pushrod engine will be replaced by an overhead-cam V8 Car and Driver has repeatedly reported that an overhead-cam engine will come after the mid-engine Corvette's debut with an old-school pushrod. We've heard the same thing firsthand, albeit from a source with no connection to the development of the Corvette or powertrain. "At some point two valves can't pass future emissions regulations," said the guy we know. While the pushrod engine is compact, the design makes it difficult - if not impossible - for sophisticated variable valve timing (and lift) systems that control combustion with more precision. Hasty conclusion: The pushrod engine has a finite life in front of it. This one's a lock, it's a just a matter of when. Bowling Green's new paint shop is really the mid-engine assembly line Credit to Reddit for this one. Like we said, everybody knows a guy. But let's look deeper. The new paint facility costs $439 million dollars and adds 450,000 square feet, almost half the size of the existing plant. Plus GM announced another $290 million in upgrades at Bowling Green Assembly. That sure sounds like a lot of money, but you can actually spend that much on a paint booth. Porsche spent 500 million Euros (about $561 million dollars) to add the Macan assembly to its Leipzig, Germany plant in 2014. Chrysler shelled out $850 million for a paint shop in Sterling Heights, Michigan. GM spent $600 million for a new paint shop at the Fairfax (Kansas City) plant. Honda, on the other hand, is working on a thrifty $210 million project in Marysville, Ohio that includes a 300,000 square foot expansion, and the low-volume Acura NSX facility only cost $70 million. Hasty conclusion: The square footage and cost could easily mean a new assembly line instead of (or in addition to) a paint line. And if the NSX plant was really that cheap, GM could have hidden a similar sum in its existing announcements.