Drew Dowdell

It's better than the current one... But I think I'll wait for the GMC.

Chevrolet unveiled the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado today at an event in Ft. Worth, Texas. The new Silverado features new, more aerodynamic styling, and will offer a broader range of powertrain options. While details have not yet been released, expect the 10-Speed automatic co-developed with Ford to be available. GM will increase its use of mixed materials combining steel and aluminum "in the right place" according to GM. This is a subtle dig at crosstown rival Ford's all-aluminum body F-150. Chevrolet and GMC are also expected to begin offering a carbon-fiber bed option, for additional strength and "added lightness". One of the eight new Silverado models will be the TrailBoss (pictured), a trimline first featured on the Chevrolet Colorado Trailboss. The Silverado TrailBoss combines the standard Z71 off-road package with a 2" factory lift kit, fully warrantied and backed by Chevrolet. The surprise release was originally expected to happen during the 2018 Detroit Auto Show next month, however with Ram poised to release their new 1500, perhaps Chevy was trying to steal some thunder. We expect more powertrain details and other information to be released as we get closer to the Detroit Show. View full article

That's a win for me.... cheaper to buy a CPO.

NO. THEY. ARE. NOT. They aren't even the first! 48 volt is not some magical number that is super special. ALL of the mild hybrids that have EVER been built are some large increment over 12 volts. The original GM BAS was 32 volts, the current one is 115 volts. Honda IMA is 114 volts. There are Impalas on the road today with a higher voltage system than what Benz is offering on this. You didn't say they were revolutionary, but SMK seems to think they are. And no I don't think that the combination of technologies is a negative... you're reading me entirely wrong. I'm saying that this combination of technologies is nothing special. This particular combination, again not including the electric turbo which is interesting, isn't particularly special. No I'm not butt-hurt over the combination... I actually think having the BAS and the crank motor adds too much complexity... there really is no need for both unless there is some technical issue that Mercedes can't engineer around that Honda and GM managed to 10+ years ago. Yes you are correct about a supercharger taking power to spin. But again, Volvo is producing the same power figures out of a 4-cylinder in a vehicle released 2 years ago. I'd expect more from a newer Mercedes. This is about expectations. Yes some of the comparisons I'm making are full hybrids... because by the time you've added a crank mounted motor, a belt alternator-starter, an electric turbo, batteries to run it all, plus the programing to make it work properly, why not just go with a full hybrid anyway? What possible cost savings are you getting by not going full-hybrid? At least with a full hybrid, you could also run in EV mode part of the time. So, to set the record straight. The Audi and Benz are NOT the first higher voltage cars out there. I am NOT negative about this engine. I simply expected more than 2 year old Volvo or 6 year old Cadillac specs from something with this much tech thrown at it. It takes a lot of work to smooth out a rough engine. If Buick is using expensive active engine mounts and noise cancelation (they are), then I'm sure Mercedes is too. If they no longer need to spend as much time / money / effort / weight to smooth and silence the engine, they can divert that effort elsewhere.

I would say the S90 is pretty darn close in that regard

70 cents over 10 years

I'll probably publish an auto show predictions article on Monday and again at the beginning of January. @William Maley and I have been filling in our spreadsheet. Looks like I need to start a Chicago spreadsheet too

I get the weirdest random music stuck in my head sometimes. Today it's the underworld theme from Super Mario Bros 2.

I toggled some other things off on your account. Let me know if it stops.

Still a month away, but already getting ready for Detroit auto show.... and the paperwork for Chicago Auto Show in February came yesterday.

Yeah, the diesel option came to mind. A quick local search showed a bunch of PHEVs available in the area too which also intrigues me. My driving is strange, I don't do a lot of driving around town, but then I'll go on long distance trips driving to DC for family or NYC for work. I'll also often do PIT-DC-NYC-PIT. So on a month I don't travel, I could put less than 500 miles on the car, but a month that I do travel could be 2,000+. I would like to drive to Florida more often to visit my parents and take a motorcycle with me, hence the need for the tongue weight rating.

The X5 is an interesting idea... I'll have to look up the tongue weight rating. It should be minimum of 595 which could just squeak me in.

It may have the worst fuel economy numbers, but it is also the only one I can think of that comes with a V6 and not a blasted 4-cylinder lagger turbo. The only other V6 option I can think of is the Journey with its 3.6, but we just won't go there.

It's a 127k... and if it wasn't so damn expensive ($900) to replace the starter on it, it would be making its 3rd flatbed trip this year. But I can't see sinking $900 into a car that I might only get $4500 from in full working order. So I'm ordering the parts, I've had help pushing it into the garage, and I'll start to dig this weekend. It's a 4-cylinder with the starter under the f-ing intake manifold like it's a Northstar or something. $200 part, $700 labor.

Balth, you're only thinking about profitability right now. GM, Porsche, Volvo have all said that they expect their next round of EVs to be profitable. The tax credit helps tide over sales until that point. In that regard, the tax credit is doing exactly what it set out to do... prime the pump of EV infrastructure from the supply side. With all of the investment to ramp up production of electrified vehicles, the unit costs for manufacturers will come down. It took those subsidies to bring residential solar to the the point where it was on par with fossil fuel generation and the same is taking shape for EVs. Just a few more years and it will be there.

I'm not sure when I want to pull the trigger either. We're in another weird spot in life where 2018 could bring some big changes. I don't think my choice in my next vehicle will change, but the "when" could change. That said, the Honda is dead again.... it has GOT to go! Actually, usually a high tow rating means adding things like air suspension.... that least it is that way on the Grand Cherokee and Durango. The GC turns into a total puff ride with the air suspension.

Not all of them need to be together, and one or two of those things missing does not mean a competitor isn't as good. Having a belt driven alternator AND a crank mounted electric motor seems like an excess to me. Honda IMA didn't have an alternator, the crank mounted motor recharged the 12-volt battery. Both the Honda IMA and GM eAssist used their electric motors as starters, but also had conventional starters as backup. Electric driven water pumps are a common thing these days... having it is like bragging that you have direct injection in your car. All modern hybrids have electric A/C. I can't see jumping up and down with excitement over a new MB engine that has tech from a 2008 Malibu. In some cases, other manufacturers will achieve a similar result with different methods. 1. The RX hybrid's electric motors are only connected to the rear wheels and operate completely independently from the gasoline motor. Does that make the RX less advanced than this eAssist Benz? I wouldn't say so. 2. GM puts their electric assist only as a belt alternator-starter in the Silverado eAssist. It contributes 13 hp versus Mercedes' 18hp, but otherwise achieves the same effect. The CT6 has two 100hp motors in the transmission. 3. Volvo uses a supercharger and turbocharger in tandem on their hybrid. This means the boost is instant much like what MB is going for with the electric turbo. Aside from the electric turbo, various combinations of these technologies can be found on any number of electrified vehicles. Off the top of my head: Honda, Toyota, GM, FCA, BMW, Nissan, Ford, Kia, and Hyundai all have them. Is any one combination superior? Well, vote with your dollars... but there is nothing about the MB that is revolutionary.

The New Armada meets the criteria, I drove it back in October at a press event. The thing I don't like about it is the infotainment system is utter rubbish for a 2017 vehicle. I know that wasn't on my list of criteria, but it's a big enough issue to make me not like the car.

I wonder how cushie the new Navi will be. I haven't driven a Sequioa in eons.... Durango is probably at minimum cush level. I get them regularly as rentals and they're on my radar because Hemi..... But I like the GC better

Everyone is going to led light pipe accent lighting these days. Buick actually started on that with the second generation Enclave tail lights.

You realize that everything in that list has been done? "Crank mounted electric motor" = Honda Integrated Motor Assist Belt driven alternator / starter = GM eAssist Electric driven water pump = every GM Ecotec from the second generation on... Plus I'm sure others Electric driven A/C = any second generation full hybrid Inline 6 = @balthazar what year was that? The only thing innovative is the electric turbo.

Well you have to think on a macro scale. $20 million is less than a penny of your taxes. But the investment by those companies represents billions in payroll and high paying jobs. More jobs in the US means higher pay on average (usually). Having just a slightly tighter job market means you get more than your penny back in better wages.

The already limited demand for EVs dries up, no longer a reason to invest. When EV tax credit in Georgia ended, sales there cratered. If you need an existing example, when many state tax credits for residential solar power dried up, the US solar manufacturing and installation industry cratered and now most solar panels and solar development is done in China. Since China and Europe are continuing to push for EVs, I would expect all R&D to move there.... along with all of the peripheral development on batteries.

Yeah, save $20 million (or 6 POTUS Golf trips) a year in taxpayer money , potentially lose billions in EV development and investment. There is a phrase for cutting this tax credit.... it is called being "Penny wise and Pound Foolish"