Car News | The Drive (2024)

This past weekend’s Formula 1 race in Montreal may have been a banger on-track, but off-track it was reportedly a bit of a disaster, with many fans (and notable F1 personnel) reporting a venue, organizers, and local police that simply weren’t prepared and not very organized.

In a video posted to X, F1 photographer Kym Illman detailed a situation in which General Admission ticketholders apparently found a primo spot near Circuit Gilles Villeneuve’s start/finish line and stayed there for multiple hours (in the rain, no less) only to have their view of the track covered up by a big, black mesh by race organizers an hour before the race. Some spectators said that the tarp wasn’t present by the time they got to the spot later in the afternoon, but either way, the decision must’ve been frustrating for fans when the green flag dropped.

Meanwhile, other attendees were stuck on the bridge to the track on Friday after being told by allegedly misinformed police that the weekend’s first two practice sessions had been canceled. (There were indeed bouts of heavy rain in Montreal on Friday, but neither practice was canceled.) Adding insult to injury, one of those people stuck on the bridge happened to be 1997 World Drivers’ Champion, son of Gilles Villeneuve of “Circuit Gilles Villeneuve” fame, and professional sh*t-talker Jacques Villeneuve.

pic.twitter.com/y2Iok9ijCb

As mentioned in the video, here is what happened on Friday. Montreal Police turned fans away from the gates and at Metro stations in the city, stating that the event had been cancelled. As we saw, it had very clearly not. Very great race for those at…

— Kym Illman (@KymIllman) June 12, 2024

Sky Sports F1 commentator and every celebrity’s favorite grid walk run-in Martin Brundle even chimed in on how much of a gong show the Canadian GP was this year, writing in a column:

“I’ve been visiting the Canadian GP in Montreal since 1984, and this year was undoubtedly the least enjoyable in terms of the venue. The popularity and scale of today’s F1 has outgrown the facilities, and the rain turning accesses into mud didn’t help. The police and security appeared increasingly aggressive and unhelpful to boot, it was a logistical mess.”

According to PlanetF1, hospitality units were flooded by heavy rain, water leaked into TV commentary booths allegedly resulting in damaged equipment, and VIP parking areas became very muddy (the circuit is on an island). There was also the issue of fans spilling onto the track after the race, which the FIA was apparently super not happy about. Things were so bad, it caused F1 CEO Stefano Domenicalito issue an apology to team principals, per Autosport.

But on behalf of those fans who got erroneously turned away and their views blocked at the last minute: don’t be sorry, be better.

Got a tip or question for the author? You can reach him here:chris.tsui@thedrive.com

The post The Canadian F1 Grand Prix Was a Mess for Fans on the Ground appeared first on The Drive.

Waymo is updating its self-driving fleet’s “damage scoring” after one of its unoccupied Jaguar I-Pace EVs self-drove into a telephone pole. Looks like the cars didn’t consider those particular objects enough of a threat to avoid them. Waymo issued a voluntary recall to rectify the situation, but the concept of damage scores assigned to various obstructions is nevertheless funny and unsettling at the same time.

According to The Verge, the Waymo taxi was driving down a narrow alley, on its way to pick up a passenger. The alley was lined with street-level telephone poles placed within yellow lines, and the driverless I-Pace crashed into one while trying to pull over. The would-be passenger didn’t see the crash but did hear it, according to 12News.

Following the crash, Waymo updated all 672 vehicles in its fleet, to upgrade telephone poles to a higher damage score. This update is reportedly done in person, at the company’s shop by its engineers, rather than with an over-the-air update.

Waymo then filed the voluntary recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). “We have already deployed mapping and software updates across our entire fleet, and this does not impact our current operations,”said Waymo spokesperson Katherine Barna, in a recent statement. “As we serve more riders in more cities, we will continue our safety first approach, working to earn trust with our riders, community members, regulators, and policymakers.”

Thankfully, the issue seems to have been solved already and no one was hurt in this Jaguar-versus-pole collision.

The NHTSA had already opened an investigation into Waymo last month, after a run of 22 different incidents involving its self-driving vehicles. At least the Google-backed company is acting responsibly and not only fixing issues as they arise but reporting them (as well as the solutions implemented) to the authorities. Personally, I’d love to see what other potentially crash-worthy objects have low damage scores, given that we now know Waymo robotaxis don’t flinch at the sight of telephone poles.

Got tips? Send ’em to tips@thedrive.com

The post Waymo Recalls Robotaxis to Give Telephone Poles a Higher ‘Damage Score’ appeared first on The Drive.

The writing has been on the wall for years now for the Porsche 718. One day soon, the Boxster and Cayman will go electric, and Porsche’s cheaper internal-combustion sports car will be no more. Now, we may know the 718’s expiration date: Fall of 2025, when Porsche’s junior coupe allegedly goes out of production for good. With a combustion engine, anyway.

So claims Twitter user Zerin Dube, who shared an image allegedly originating from Porsche’s dealer portal. The screen capture depicts a bulletin supposedly sent to Porsche dealers with updated product and sales information, including a projection that the current-gen 718 (the 982) will exit production in October 2025. That fits with the expected timeline for the 718’s replacement, which is expected to arrive in 2025 or 2026.

Porsche did not respond to a request for confirmation at the time of publication.

From the dealer portal https://t.co/8TGjZ07GhA pic.twitter.com/S2XZafRGRs

— Zerin Dube (@SpeedSportLife) June 12, 2024

The 718 model line formally dates back to 1996 with the introduction of the Boxster, though its name pays tribute to the lightweight race car from 1957. The Boxster and its hardtop alter ego the Cayman came to not only punch at their weight, but above it, with some believing it could’ve surpassed the 911’s capability given the chance. That could never be allowed to happen under Porsche brand politics though, and the ICE 718 is already on its way out, having been taken off the market in Europe due to a new EU cybersecurity law.

The sports car that replaces it will, for better or worse, be electric. It won’t be an EV that aims for thousands of horsepower and long range, but one that remains conscious of weight and the compromise it imposes on driving dynamics. There are those who will mourn the switchover, but it (and the intro of the hybrid 911) will allow Porsche’s sports cars to carry on into the future. It might even allow for the 718 to escape the 911’s shadow once and for all, and for Porsche to finally explore its true potential.

Got a tip or question for the author? You can reach them here: james@thedrive.com

The post Dealer Leak Says Porsche 718 Cayman, Boxster Will End Production in 2025 appeared first on The Drive.

We finally know why Toyota’s twin-turbo V6s are self-destructing: There’s machining debris from the manufacturing process stuck inside. These tiny bits of shrapnel force main bearing failures, which can lead to engine knock and, eventually, total shutdowns. The news broke nearly two weeks ago when Toyota issued a recall for 2022-2023 Tundras and Lexus LX600s, and now, dealers are refusing to take those trucks as trade-ins due to the recall.

The trend was first spotted by Pickup Truck and SUV Talk, who spoke directly with a handful of Tundra owners. One tried swapping their truck for a 2024 GMC Sierra AT4X but was told no by Castle Automotive Group in McHenry, Illinois. A Tundras.com forum user was denied when trying to trade for an older 2020 Land Cruiser, simply because dealerships don’t want to sit on the trucks while Toyota issues an official fix. There’s no timeline for that yet, but some speculate it could be a total long-block replacement.

Truthfully, that might be the preferred solution for Toyota dealers, even if it takes a while. Some owners who have already made warranty claims for failed V6s had their engines largely disassembled, resulting in a serious headache for technicians. Photos and videos of the process show hundreds of components sprawled across mechanics’ workspaces, taking serious time and effort to repair, not to mention storage.

It’s important to note that 2024 model-year Tundras aren’t part of the recall as it seems the machining debris isn’t an issue on those trucks. Curiously, 2022-2023 Tundras with the iForce Max hybrid powertrain aren’t included either. There’s growing concern that the older, electrified models will be added in time, though Toyota hasn’t given any official indication that will be the case.

This leaves Tundra and LX600 owners waiting for Toyota to release the recall fix, hoping their engines don’t grenade themselves in the meantime. It’s understandable why dealers don’t want those trade-ins; however, it’s unfair that customers are forcibly stuck with a truck that has epic failure potential. It’s a manufacturer problem, and since dealers are Toyota’s representatives to the public, you could argue that they bear at least some responsibility to rectify the situation. Just how far they should go in doing that is debatable.

Once the recall fix is issued and trucks are repaired, will customers still want to trade them in to avoid potential future problems? If so, what will their value be? The uncertainty is proving to be immensely frustrating for customers, and how long they’ll be waiting for a resolution is still up in the air.

Got tips? Send ’em to tips@thedrive.com

The post Dealers Are Refusing Toyota Tundra Trade-Ins Over Twin-Turbo V6 Recall appeared first on The Drive.

Yesterday, a TikToker posted a video of a Rivian R1T that she claims has been stuck in an Arizona ditch for four months. According to user SayWhatWendy, the R1T slid backwards into the ditch in February, due to ice buildup, and it’s been stuck there ever since. However, from what we can see, it doesn’t seem impossible to remove from the ravine, which makes you wonder why it’s been left there so long. There has to be something we don’t know.

Several towing companies have supposedly declined the job to remove the R1T for liability reasons. That seems odd, but it admittedly doesn’t look like the easiest rescue. Not only is the Rivian nearly 7,200 pounds, but it also appears to be beached, with its belly-mounted battery tray resting on sand and rocks. Pulling it out could possibly damage the battery pack, which would not only be costly but potentially lead to a fire. The Drive reached out to Rivian for comment and will update this story should we receive more information.

There are some oddities about this predicament, however, that have caused commenters to question the video’s validity—chiefly, the situation itself. Whoever the owner is, they supposedly got stuck and figured recovery would be tough, so they just abandoned their electric pickup there for at least a whole season? Seems fishy. Also, the truck is remarkably clean for having supposedly sat all through the spring. There’s a tree over my driveway, just like there are surrounding this Rivian, and my car looks far worse when I leave it home for a week. Even stranger, the R1T appears to be unlocked, given the front door handles sticking out. Who leaves their very expensive truck behind for months unlocked? The frunk is closed in one of SayWhatWendy’s videos, but in another it’s open, indicating that someone is accessing it.

Some commenters suggested calling a crane company. According to the video’s poster, crane companies have been called but declined the task due to the road not being safe for crane duty. Others recommended jacking up the rear of the truck and either pouring in gravel or getting ramps underneath it, to lift the back end up enough for a tow truck to pull it out. That sounds feasible, but we don’t know for sure what lies beneath. Several people naturally recommended Matt’s Off-Road Recovery, a company with an incredible reputation for getting vehicles un-stuck from the stickiest of situations. While Matt’s is located near Zion National Park in Utah, its crew has recovered vehicles in Arizona before—it’s just unclear if this Rivian is close enough.

Back on TikTok, Arizona 4×4 Off-Road Recovery chimed in that they’d help out if asked. “If they do [call] it’s getting out,” one comment from the account reads.

Without actually putting boots on the ground, there’s no way of confirming how difficult recovering this truck is. Maybe it’s damn near impossible. Maybe it’s simpler than it looks. All we know is that there’s so much we don’t know, and we want to learn more.

Got off-road recovery tips? Send ’em to tips@thedrive.com

The post This Rivian Has Apparently Been Stuck for Months, But Tow Trucks Won’t Touch It appeared first on The Drive.

Most of the $325,000 that people will pay for the 2025 Ford Mustang GTD will go toward its performance, which is unrivaled by any factory Mustang in history. Still, you’d expect even a track car at that price to have a markedly better interior than a regular Mustang. And the GTD does, with plentiful high-end materials—but are they enough? That’s up to you to decide.

Ford will show off the Mustang GTD’s interior to the public for the first time this weekend, at the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Sidling in through the door, GTD buyers will slump into standard Recaro bucket seats and cast eyes on an interior bedecked in carbon fiber and leather. A rotary dial shifter (available in titanium) shares the center stack with a pair of new buttons that activate the front-axle lift, and can pull up the Track Apps page in the car’s 13.2-inch touchscreen.

Some sound deadening is stripped back in cars with the Performance Package, though that’s kept out of the driver’s sight. What isn’t is the GTD’s mesmerizing rear suspension, though the production cars won’t have those zip ties.

Dead center in front of said driver is a unique, flat-bottomed steering wheel, which Ford has clad in leather, carbon fiber, and Dinamica, a “microsuede” that’s derived from polyester. It features extra driver controls with buttons to adjust suspension firmness and exhaust mode, and it’s backed by 3D-printed titanium paddle shifters with a hexagonal pattern for grip. Behind them is a 12.4-inch configurable digital cluster, which has a special track mode that hides all unnecessary info; only the tachometer and gear display are shown.

The interior is a big upgrade over a regular Mustang’s, though whether it befits a $325,000 car is up to you. That is, if you have both the money to make Ford care about your opinion and the C.V. to make it consider you as a GTD buyer to begin with. They’ll be sold to applicants only, and those who are anything other than ride-or-die for its iconic pony car need not apply. Ford already has more takers than cars available, and I suspect that’d be the case even if every GTD shipped with the cheapest interior possible. Saves weight, man.

Got a tip or question for the author? You can reach them here: james@thedrive.com

The post This Is What a $325K Ford Mustang GTD Interior Looks Like appeared first on The Drive.

The 1974 IH Scout you’re looking at here is being auctioned with no reserve. The thing is, it was also being auctioned a couple of weeks ago, supposedly with no reserve before it was mysteriously pulled over a low winning bid. It’s already soared past the previous high offer with five days to go on Bring a Trailer, and that’s only part of the drama that has commenters up in arms.

I wrote the story Monday detailing how this situation took shape. Chris Picconi, a 4×4 collector who won the Scout’s “no-reserve” Clasiq auction for $12,000 on May 28, alerted me of the ordeal after the online marketplace nullified the sale. Clasiq representatives wrote it off as a technical error while telling Picconi the auction should have featured a reserve of $32,500. They offered it to him for $31,500—nearly $20,000 more than he’d just agreed to pay—but he declined.

It became even more interesting when the same Scout was listed Sunday, June 9, on Bring a Trailer—again with no reserve. Picconi flagged the situation to me immediately, saying he attempted to contact the auction site’s lead executive about his experience. All the while, Picconi says his comments were being removed by Bring a Trailer. This is where the story left off, though there’s been a handful of key developments since.

First, and most importantly, Bring a Trailer co-founder Randy Nonnenberg’s response to Picconi in the listing’s comments:

“When you reached out to the team this seemed like a confusing level of frustration and ‘I’m sending it to the national press’ to us because you didn’t tell us your connection, but The Drive story clarifies that you were the high bidder on that other auction. Makes more sense now. That is indeed a weird outcome, and you are quick to blame it on the seller but it sounds like that other auction website claimed it was their mistake. So either it was, or they are taking the fall for the seller, both of which are not good for that venue, in my view. In 150,000 we have not had a scenario where it was marked No Reserve on the website and then we said there was one. Not from our side.

“Some sellers, particularly first time sellers who don’t understand the value of sticking around, will try to go back on their word after agreeing to No Reserve. That behavior get them banned for life from BaT, as well as any associated accounts. We review the paper title and do identity verification checks, which I suspect most other auction sites do not given their effort and cost. This makes are [sic] bans actually have teeth. I’ve [sic] very surprised if that other marketplace just apologized and did not promise to forever ban that seller to dissuade that behavior. We take a fatalistic stance on liars.”

Nonnenberg then promised to contact the seller, @tomwstein, and report back. The Drive reached out for further comment but Bring a Trailer declined.

Not long after, @tomwstein gave his defense:

“I am just learning and reading about this. I 100% did not know that my truck was on these sites. I let my personal friend who was in financial trouble have a shot at brokering my truck. He asked me to give him a few months to try to sell it and I would pay him a commission. I had a price he had to meet, and never did. I was always up front with him that if he didn’t sell it within the time frame BAT was going to get the listing. Whatever auction site it was on or ad it was in I was 1000000% NOT aware of it nor did I approve it. I am 100000% a serious seller and I am NOT playing games. I am sincerely sorry for any inconvenience my friend caused as I was not aware. This Scout is a beautiful truck, and well maintained and ready for a happy owner that will appreciate it.”

Some users bought the explanation, others didn’t. No matter how people feel about it, @tomwstein committed to honoring the auction result regardless if it came close to the aforementioned $32,500. The Bring a Trailer listing seems to have been arranged directly by him, and as Nonnenberg says, the site goes to great lengths to enforce no reserve sales on its platform.

It looked like bidders might freeze the auction once Picconi placed a bid of $12,750. Several commenters insisted on it, but after less than an hour, a user named @Jamesdhaas bid it to $19,000. The substantial jump raised a flag for people watching the auction, especially when they saw the profile was new with no previous bids and a creation date of June 2024. At this point, though, any accusations are purely speculative.

The saga has been messy. People are picking sides and standing their ground, for or against the legitimacy of the auction. Picconi himself has changed his stance, now telling buyers to “bid with confidence” after his back and forth with Nonnenberg as well as the seller. I definitely didn’t have that on my bingo card.

So much has happened in so little time, and there are still five days to go until the auction closes. It’s anyone’s guess if the bids will continue to climb, but it’s worth noting this same Scout was bid to $29,000 in a 2022 Bring a Trailer listing. That wasn’t enough to meet the reserve then, but @tomwstein promises he’s “a man of his word.”

Got a tip or question for the author? Contact them directly: caleb@thedrive.com

The post The ‘No-Reserve’ IH Scout Auction Saga Continues as Bring a Trailer Responds appeared first on The Drive.

The first season of Westworld had scenes in a high-tech basem*nt where humanoid robots were repaired after being “killed.” It was pretty cool, and a little creepy. Believe it or not, the crash-test dummy lab at Magna’s cavernous R&D facility in Sailauf, Germany looks very similar. Less sinister, though… unless you’re a million-dollar mannequin marked for death.

Some of Magna’s crash test dummies are, in fact, worth over a million bucks. And if you want to be fancy, you can call them Anthropomorphic Test Devices (but we won’t). Dummy or ATD, there’s a lot more to these human-shaped data-gathering tools than floppy arms and caution tape stripes. We got the opportunity to step into the company’s crash lab during a tour recently, and now you get the rare chance to peek inside the respawn point for the same crash dummies that have validated countless cars for crashworthiness.

Magna is not a name brand that casual car appreciators will necessarily know, but it’s one of the most prolific in the biz. It’s what’s known as a tier-one supplier; it performs a huge range of functions for car companies you do know and drive.

For example, Magna currently conducts the manufacture of the BMW Z4 and Toyota Supra, Mercedes G-Class, some Minis, some Jaguars, EV batteries, supercar transmissions, gasoline engines, cameras and collision-warning sensors, and more. The company also performs its own research and development of car parts, manages supply chains, and does a great deal of validation for cars at various stages of development, among other things.

Crash testing is, of course, a critical part of that validation. And in a few huge buildings around Sailauf, which is sort of in the lower-middle area on a map of Germany, Magna does that by throwing cars at walls, ramming spikes through EV batteries, and torturing these heavily computerized dummies to determine how safe (or not) vehicles are.

Technically the outfit doing this testing is ACTS GmbH & Co. KG, (stands for “Advanced Car Technology Systems”), which is a subsidiary of Magna. Regardless, a lot of cars and crash dummies are smashed here in the name of science and safety. The crew at the lab told me it typically runs 600 dummy-crewed crash tests a year, which apparently translates to about 3,200 injury events for Magna’s dummies in the same amount of time.

There were 25 dummies on the duty roster at Sailauf when I was down there, including simulated men, women, children, and some specialty pieces like standalone torsos and legs to measure the effects of injuries in specific scenarios. No pets yet, though.

For babies, I was interested to see what type of car seat is considered the gold standard. But as it turns out there’s no such unit—we were told that OEMs prescribe what baby seats should be crash-tested for youngsters. So if you’re curious on what seat your car’s maker recommends, check your owner’s manual, ask the parts desk at a dealership, or try Googling around with your year-make-model.

In some instances of crash research, human cadavers have been employed. I was grateful that that wasn’t the case at this facility, though. I don’t consider myself particularly squeamish but I would not be in a rush to look at actual bodies being deconstructed by vehicles colliding with concrete.

While a once-warm body would provide, er, visceral information on the effects of a crash, Magna’s dummies are a lot more effective at quantifying and recording their traumatic experiences.

Magna’s people said that crash dummies as we know them came into use in the 1960s. The ones in use at Sailauf today would be considered the “third-gen” of their design. And while several outfits make these dummies, it’s governments that set the crash-measurement standards to which they’re built.

One particularly weird-looking one—really the only dummy that didn’t look at least partially human—was a girthy column. It’s called a legform, so you can probably guess what it’s designed to simulate. It’s more than just a leg, though. With a raft of impact sensors between its “foot” and “pelvis,” it’s made to measure how much it’d hurt to be run into by a car.

Magna does two main tests with such a device to study pedestrian safety. The legform is tossed at the hood from a specific angle, and of course, it’s hit with a bumper.

The staff wheeled out an adult dummy that had been built in 2022. We were told it cost 800,000 euros before any sensors were mounted up to it. The raft of small speedometers and gyroscopes and accelerometers and other such things allows it to record 160 channels of activity (speed, force, ect) in a crash. Another tech said a full-sized dummy, as equipped, would be about 1,200,000 euros.

Dummies are rebuilt and recalibrated after every crash, and typically rebuilt completely after 10 to 20 accidents, depending on how rough of a life it’s had. One of Magna’s techs told me that the dummies could essentially live forever since they’re so modular and are rebuilt so often. You get into a Ship of Theseus situation pretty quickly when you start trying to calculate a crash-test dummy’s lifespan, though.

Quick aside for those of you who didn’t have a Greek mythology class or remember that one scene from that Avengers movie: Theseus was a guy with a ship, and like most of my cars, that ship was repaired so many times that, eventually, it had none of the original parts it left the factory with. So “Theseus’ Paradox” asks: Is it still the same ship, or is it now a new ship?

While scratching my head at that one and thinking about the War Boys chat from Fury Road (“We live! We die! We live again!”) I asked one of the technicians how much damage had been done to the humanoid torso he had partially dissected on his workbench. He kind of laughed and shrugged, gestured to a spiderweb of strange-looking materials, and essentially said that no single part on the desk was “under 1,000 euros.” Ouch indeed!

And of course, it’s not just bodies that have to be tested for crashworthiness—it’s the cars themselves, and more recently, EV batteries.

Magna’s main car-crashing lab at Sailauf looks like a spaceport from science fiction. A cold, concrete stadium-sized venue with colossal doors, intimidatingly strong robotic armatures, and intense lights is where cars are chucked into barriers at various angles, to be studied in slow-motion while somebody sweeps up broken glass.

The central “crash block,” a 100-ton monolith that has killed countless cars, rests in the middle of the room surrounded by cameras. As cars bounce off it, the results are recorded at a rate of 5,000 frames per second. That gives engineers a very precise look at exactly what happens to their vehicle design at every stage of its demise. Sadly, I wasn’t allowed to get any pictures of it.

Electric cars present one particularly interesting new factor in crash safety: The giant battery slung under the passengers. While EVs get smashed and crashed into the kill block like everything else, EV batteries are currently being torture-tested on their own too.

Magna runs a range of tests on batteries, including 10,000 power cycles and simulations of years of use. Batteries are crushed by immensely powerful squeezers with 250 kilonewtons, or more than 50,000 pounds of force for observation. But the most exciting battery crucible is what’s referred to as “the nail test.” In the nail test, an EV battery is placed into a special containment box and spiked with a 6-millimeter nail. That forces the battery to short-circuit, and inevitably, catch fire. Engineers watch this process through a protected camera and take notes.

One of Magna’s people mentioned that the burn rate of EV batteries was inconsistent. I guess running the same test with the same battery sometimes yielded a quick fire while other times it took longer. I suppose that’s why these situations are still being studied.

We weren’t allowed to take many pictures, because a few prototype items from OEMs were in various states of dismantlement around the facility. But I can show one last interesting detail from my trip to Magna’s Sailauf facilities: Its EV battery fire exhaust system.

A big battery burning makes a lot of noxious smoke, and that’s got to go somewhere. Before it makes it to the atmosphere, emissions from a battery burn go through water, like a bong, and then are washed again through a charcoal filter. The exhaust rig looked like it might have taken up as much square footage as the burn box itself.

Unfortunately, that’s all I can really share about Magna’s safety and crash-testing operation in Bavaria. Working with multiple, sometimes rival, automakers and developing numerous prototypes requires a high level of security and vagueness in answers to questions about future vehicles.
However, I did come away with an elevated appreciation for the complexity of crash testing. The crash dummies I met weren’t quite as charismatic as Vince and Larry, but I’m glad there are good robots going to work at the smash factory day in and day out to help make our cars safer.

The post Inside a Crash-Test Dummy Lab: Check Out This Cool and Creepy Corner of the Car World appeared first on The Drive.

While you might not be able to find one on a road near you, I’ve had the opportunity to drive Chevy’s first-ever electric pickup—the Silverado EV—in both of its current configurations: the Work Truck and high-performance RST. When I drove the latter, a puzzling six-figure speed machine, I thought it lacked focus. It felt like Chevy was split between making a traditional pickup and a new-school electric truck. That got me thinking: This would have worked so much better as a new Avalanche.

I’ll explain.

I understand that changing its name doesn’t necessarily change the truck, but I’ll argue that it’s more important than you think. Any marketing major will tell you the same. Had Chevy planned on making its EV pickup an Avalanche from the beginning, it could have narrowed its focus and create a more purposeful truck with a clearer target audience. Customer expectations of an Avalanche are different than those of a Silverado, so Chevy could have stuck with a similar formula while targeting those buyers specifically.

The Chevy Avalanche was last on sale in 2013, so more than a decade ago now. It may not have seemed super significant at the time, but it was sort of a precursor to the lifestyle trucks we see so much of today. Riding on a ladder frame chassis, it shared more with the Tahoe than with the Silverado in terms of design, interior, and practicality. The Avalanche sported signature C-pillar sails and a short-ish five-foot bed, so it wasn’t the most utilitarian pickup; however, the mid-gate improved its practicality as long as you didn’t have rear passengers. Having said all that, let’s look at what the Silverado EV has: A short-ish bed that comes in just under six feet long, C-pillar sails, and a mid-gate. See where I’m going with this?

During Chevy’s presentation at the RST press launch, company reps repeatedly said that with the Silverado EV, they didn’t set out to make a great electric truck. Instead, they wanted to develop a great pickup that just so happens to be electric. The plan, then, was to create an all-new, from-the-ground-up chassis built on GM’s Ultium battery platform, rather than just stuffing batteries into a normal Silverado’s ladder frame like what Ford does with the F-150 Lightning. But it doesn’t make much sense to create an entirely new chassis, with a completely unique design, and then give it the name of an existing truck. It’s confusing for customers. Is it a Silverado or not?

This echoes what Silverado EV Chief Engineer Nichole Kraatz told MotorTrend when the truck was revealed in 2022:

“There are design cues that are reminiscent [of Avalanche]. We absolutely did not have Avalanche in mind when we were designing the truck. What drove the design of the truck was really the ground-up approach to the architecture. What were we going for? We were going for 400, or more, miles of range. We were going for design styling that looks more athletic, more sporty.”

Kraatz continued, “It’s not like we said let’s redo an Avalanche, it was never the conversation.”

Look, I get what Chevy was going for. The Silverado has long been a dependable and capable workhorse. The automaker wants to leverage that nameplate’s provenance for its first electric truck. And it is almost as capable as an ICE Silverado in the real world—even more so, in certain ways.

Obviously it’s quicker than the gas and diesel options, and thanks to the trick midgate, it’s capable of hauling longer objects without a trailer. It feels mostly like a traditional pickup, too, with its jouncy ride, vague steering, and utilitarian interior. However, its massive wheels and 9,000-pound-plus curb weight make that ride feel brittle and uncomfortable. Its interior is also fine for a pickup, with mostly hard plastics and a simple design, but it’s not as nice as it ought to be. Longtime truck customers are used to those features, but is that what anyone wants for $95,000?

It’s important to know who’s buying electric pickups that come close to the six-figure mark: Wealthy, tech-focused customers who at least want the appearance of an active lifestyle. Those customers probably don’t want the traditional truck experience, nor do they want a truck with a traditional name. Instead, they’ll spend their cash (or crypto, whatever) on a lifestyle vehicle like the Rivian R1T, with its stylish design, impressive cabin technology, and a better interior. The Rivian is also faster and available with a triple-motor setup for around the same price.

However, if Chevy positioned its electric pickup as an Avalanche, it could have marketed it as a rival to the Rivian or even the Tesla Cybertruck. Chevy could have shifted costs from making it somewhat familiar, like a traditional model, to making its interior nicer and suspension comfier. With a supple ride, luxurious cabin, snazzy cabin tech, and the Avalanche name, I really think its six-figure price tag would make more sense and appeal to the buyers in that space.

Is “Avalanche” the most beloved and exciting Chevy nameplate? No. The truck was only around for two generations and it’s been dead for years now. However, nostalgia is an easy sell and Chevy could have made a marketing hubbub about the model’s revival as a new electric truck. It would bring the type of excitement that’s missing from the Silverado EV’s complicated launch. And most importantly for the Bowtie brand, it would make them a lot easier to sell.

Got tips? Send ’em to tips@thedrive.com

The post The Chevy Silverado EV Should Have Been Named the Avalanche appeared first on The Drive.

Despite their reputation for unreliability, classic Alfa Romeos aren’t cars you expect to find in American junkyards. Alfa’s long absence from our market means the broken ones often end up as parts cars passed around between Alfa owners. But right now, a junkyard near the heart of the U.S. auto industry is lousy with them. We have part of the story as to why, but we only know enough to warn you away from trying to find out yourself.

The Alfas are being kept on the lot of US Auto Supply in Sterling Heights, Michigan, in the greater Detroit metropolitan area. Photos recently uploaded by the business show a couple dozen classic Alfa Romeos lined up in various stages of disrepair, with some looking like they could run, and others showing damage from crashes. Clearly, these aren’t from some curated collection but are a group of parts cars.

The photos don’t make clear what the full variety of models is, but we can identify a bunch of Spider sports cars, 164 sedans, and at least one Alfetta. A Giulia TI was also confirmed to be among them by the person who knows these cars best—their erstwhile caretaker, Dean Russell.

Russell runs a local Alfa specialty shop called Trail Auto, where these cars were stored until a recent spat with the city. He told me the cars were hauled off after a court order following a zoning dispute, but still has the cars’ titles and intends to take them back. He declined to elaborate on what exactly was going behind the scenes, saying that he’s already getting too many calls about the cars as-is. So, don’t ring him up.

Commenters under the junkyard’s post speculate reasons as to why a mechanic’s parts car fleet was hauled off and put up for sale like this. Some allege a years-long struggle between the shop and city, though their reasons conflict and don’t clearly identify wrongdoing, leaving the exact situation a mystery.

One way or another though, it’s turning into a clash over one of the biggest treasure troves of Alfa parts in the country. No matter who takes possession, the most important thing is that the parts make their way to people who need them. Lord knows Alfa isn’t reproducing many of these parts any time soon.

Got a tip or question for the author? You can reach them here: james@thedrive.com

The post Man’s Collection of Old Alfa Romeos Forcibly Scrapped After Battle With City appeared first on The Drive.