Hummer H2 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2023 Hyundai Ioniq 5 Cupholder Mega Test: Will the Nalgene bottle fit?

I absolutely adore the Hyundai Ioniq 5, and so was excited to spend a week with it when the EV landed in my driveway. When I first drove the Ioniq 5 in San Diego, though, I hadn't packed my favorite style water bottle: the big 32-ounce Nalgene. Despite it being the best, its sheer size makes it less ideal when trying to pack light for a short trip. It also means it doesn't fit in most cars' cupholders, but, without the bottle on hand, I'd have to wait until this new opportunity with the Ioniq 5 to find out if it passes the Nalgene check. So, let's get to it. Starting at pole position — the front cupholders — we find ourselves unlucky so far. It's not even close to fitting. Not unusual, but our first option for convenient access to megahydration is denied. In most instances, our next best bet is the molded pockets in the front door panels. Here we have success. It's quite a tight fit, so while our drink won't be knocking or rolling around, it's not as easy as it could be to retrieve while driving, and I'll probably eventually wear out the little plastic tether connecting the lid to the bottle, as that's the easiest thing to grab without looking. Still, I'll give these door holders a pass. How about the folks sitting in back? Where can they stash their Nalgenes? No surprise about it not fitting in the center armrest cupholders after our inauspicious start with the fronts. The fact that it won't fit in the door panels is disappointing. C'est la vie. But one more thing ... you might have noticed another potential stash up front in the storage cubby below the center stack. The Nalgene fits in there just fine, but a little bit of extra room means the bottle will be knocking around. It's actually a decent spot, and more accessible than the doors.

Cadillac CT6 production ceases January 2020 as part of D-Ham layoffs

General Motors filed paperwork under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act with Michigan's Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity this week, detailing events to come at the automaker's Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Plant. Starting February 28, 814 salaried and hourly workers at D-Ham, as its called, will be laid off. The 753 workers represented by the UAW will begin receiving offers in January to relocate to facilities in Michigan and Ohio, or buyout offers. As the 4-million-square-foot plant winds down through April 3 to a skeleton crew, the Cadillac CT6 ceases production in January 2020, and the last Chevrolet Impala comes off the line on February 28. The loss of the CT6 represents the end of Cadillac's latest brief, and highly regarded, adventure into flagship sedans. It might also mean the end of the 4.2-liter Blackwing twin-turbo V8 engine, at least for the moment. Both casualties are calamities. The death of the Impala closes the door on a nameplate in production for 52 years since 1957, having started off as a top-tier trim for the 1958 Bel Air known as the Bel Air Impala, once advertised with the line, "Lets you know you're the boss." As part of the new four-year labor agreement with the UAW, GM is keeping D-Ham open to build a new line of battery-electric vehicles, ultimately investing $3 billion and tripling employment to 2,225 workers when fully operational. The agreement described the coming EV as a "van" that would commence production in late 2021, but various reports say what's actually coming is a range of premium EVs in pickup and SUV bodystyles under the program codename BT1. The easy predictions put an electric GMC Sierra and Cadillac Escalade among the EV fold, but not until 2023, according to auto industry forecaster LMC Automotive. Before that, LMC claims an electric van will debut in late 2021, along with a battery-powered rebirth of the Hummer brand in pickup and SUV forms, also in late 2021. 

Why didn't GM recall fire-prone Hummers earlier?

As early as 2009, motorists reported fires in the Hummer H3. In a complaint filed that March with the regulatory agency in charge of vehicle safety, one motorist said they leaped into a smoldering vehicle and drove it away from gas pumps moments before it was engulfed in flames. Three months later, another motorist described how a fire spread from behind the glove box and consumed their H3. Dozens of car owners filed similar complaints with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the six years that followed, detailing car fires of varying severity that originated in the HVAC systems of their Hummer H3s. But General Motors didn't issue a recall for any of the affected cars until last week, prompting fresh questions about how the company treats safety concerns in the wake of an ignition-switch flaw that went unaddressed for years and, at latest count, is responsible for killing at least 124 motorists. In recall documents filed with NHTSA last week, GM initially said it knew of three fires associated with the defect. Within hours, the company said it knew of 42 fires associated with the problem and three injuries sustained by vehicle occupants. A company spokesperson attributed the inconsistency to a "misstated" number in the original documents and that the higher number comes from NHTSA complaints, reports to GM and TREAD data. Beyond that discrepancy, the documents show General Motors, which has touted a revitalized attitude toward safety concerns since the ignition-switch recalls, did nothing upon determining there was a problem with the H3s. Prompted by two complaints the company received in September 2014, General Motors says it launched an internal investigation related to melting blowers in the HVAC system on December 8, 2014. In that investigation, the company says it confirmed a problem existed, finding that "mismatched electrical conductivity could result in overheating and melting of the blower motor connector module." But even with that conclusion, the company opted to close its internal investigation on April 29, 2015, without taking any action. It wasn't until NHTSA officials met with GM representatives in a meeting on June 18, 2015, that General Motors was prompted to reconsider.