2013 Gmc Yukon Slt 8pass Nav Rear Cam Dvd Htd Seats 23k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.

Chevy Colorado, GMC Canyon get updated tachometers due to graphical error

After James Bearing bought a Chevrolet Colorado, he noticed a discrepancy between the truck's spec sheet and the truck's tachometer: Chevrolet said 3.6-liter V6 in the little pickup produces 305 horsepower at 6,800 rpm, but the the tachometer indicates a redline at 6,500 rpm. So either he wasn't making as much power as he was promised, or the tachometer display was incorrect. Bearing said he asked Chevy about it but got no response. Until now. A General Motors spokesman said the rev limiter is indeed set for 6,800 rpm, but the tach graphics "are slightly off" in the Colorado and the GMC Canyon, and submitted an SAE horsepower certification to back him up. If you're wondering how such a thing got past quality control... well, let's just say you're not alone. GM is going to fix "the graphics on future trucks," which makes it sound like Bearing will just have to learn to live with the indicated redline he's got. He could always pretend he's driving a sleeper, with four more ponies waiting to be unlocked in the danger zone for those who dare. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2015 Chevrolet Colorado: First Drive View 38 Photos Related Gallery 2015 GMC Canyon: Quick Spin View 27 Photos News Source: Auto Guide Auto News Chevrolet GM GMC Truck gmc canyon

2018 GMC Canyon Denali isn't worth the money

In the GMC lineup, Denali is the top dog. It's the trim with all the bells and whistles, and often provides an experience comparable to Cadillac. Unfortunately that's not the case in the GMC Canyon Denali we drove recently. In the Canyon's case, the Denali trim isn't worth the price premium because it isn't luxurious enough and doesn't distinguish itself from the midlevel SLT trim. While the outside maintains the Denali look with a unique chrome grille, chrome door handles, 20-inch wheels, and big Denali badges (which a guy at a car wash immediately noticed when this editor drove past), the interior and feature set don't rise to meet the borderline Cadillac image of Denali. All GMC did to spruce up the already drab, gray, plasticky interior of the Canyon was give it black leather, some real aluminum trim, some fake wood trim, and stitched soft-touch surfaces. The aluminum and leather are nice touches, but they don't look much different from the black and aluminum-look plastic in lower trim models. The fake wood also looks really fake. They're also exactly the same upgrades as what you'll find in an SLT. But the SLT offers a dark brown color scheme as an option, which would help alleviate the dinginess, and the SLT, equipped exactly like a base Denali, costs $2,690 less at $41,575. The same issue comes up with equipment. The Denali has heated seats and steering wheel, navigation, automatic climate and navigation, but so does the SLT. The big problem here is that Denali is supposed to indicate the best, most luxurious vehicle GMC has to offer, but there's not enough differentiation — or specialness, even — to separate it from a well-optioned SLT. GMC needs to give the Denali something more. It needs some real wood trim, or perhaps some interior schemes with contrasting materials you can't find in other Canyons. It should have some other special luxury features included that can't be added to lower trim GMCs such as a heads-up display, automatic windshield wipers, push-button keyless entry and starting, things like that. The real reason to buy the Canyon Denali is really to get the prestige that the Denali badge brings, rather than the specific equipment it has — the Denali name has some value, after all. But if you can look past the badge and focus on practicality, the SLT is the runaway winner, offering the exact same experience for a notably lower price.