AD #2750 – New Chevy Trailblazer Details; Urus Drives Huge Growth for Lambo; Velabit is Affordable Lidar

January 14th, 2020 at 11:34am

Audio-only version:

Listen to “AD #2750 – New Chevy Trailblazer Details; Urus Drives Huge Growth for Lambo; Velabit is Affordable Lidar” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 7:52

0:07 Strike Hurt GM & UAW
0:51 New Chevy Trailblazer Details
2:02 Kia Plans for Its Electric Future
3:07 Urus Drives Huge Growth for Lamborghini
3:57 Rolls-Royce Has Its Best Sales Year Ever
4:26 Velodyne Develops Affordable Lidar
5:10 Car Sales Will Remain Strong for 5 to 10 Years
6:15 Audi Bringing SQ7 & SQ8 to the U.S.
6:56 Porsche Files Patents for VTOL

Visit our sponsor to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

65 Comments to “AD #2750 – New Chevy Trailblazer Details; Urus Drives Huge Growth for Lambo; Velabit is Affordable Lidar”

  1. George Ricci Says:

    A year ago Autoline was telling us that some auto analysts were say that in 2021/2022 auto sales would drop down to a SAAR of 14-15 million. Now the Detroit News say Millennials in their 30′s are now getting drivers licencees and that will keep the SAAR at 16.5 to 17 million. So who is right?

  2. ChuckGrenci Says:

    “The aircraft is fully electric and autonomous, but does allow qualified people to take over if need be.” I guess if it is you, and the drone decides to cease functioning properly, if it were me, I would like to instantly ‘gain qualification’ to try to get my ‘butt’ (down without peril).

    Does the Trailblazer replace the Trax or is it an additional model. The Trax is listed as a compact, is the Trailblazer a sub-compact or an adjunct to the existing model.

  3. Larry D. Says:

    A. “GM .. lost a tenth of a point of market share”

    First let me point out how miniscule, especially for GM, which has a market share in the 16-17% range, to allegedly lose 0.1%. This is not even a 1% loss, it is 1/170th of its share.

    No, this is not GM’s problem, the problem is that it still is, with maybe the exception of the Corvette, “General Mediocrity”. Ford and FCA are not much better, but Ford may have (for a few years) better profits because it killed all its slow selling, low margin or $-losing cars and sells only profitable trucks and suvs.

    B. “NEW CHEVY TRAILBLAZER: …Under the hood are two engine options, a 1.2L turbo and a 1.3L turbo, which produces 155 horsepower. A CVT is standard…”

    The art of joyless driving. And to buy this toy with the low-rent interior and meager HP, you will pay as much as I will when I buy my S65 AMG with its 6.2 lt or so engine, its 600+ HP and its 738 lbft torque, and an interior fit for an emperor. BUT I will not get the new car smell.

    Well, “You can’t always get what you want” but in my case, I could care less about the stupid new car smell. So we agree, you spend your $25k on a “blazer” and I on the Flagship AMG S65.

  4. Drew Says:

    If GM lost 51k units due to the strike and the industry sold 17M units, then GM lost 0.3 percentage points of market share… not 0.1. Simple math. If they only lost 0.1 percentage points of share, then they made-up 30-35k of production via OT or greater-than-planned up time.

  5. Larry D. Says:

    1 Obviously, the much more up to date Det News.

    The whole issue is NONSENSE. IF New cars were a good value, which they sure are NOT, their sales would be well over 20 million, as the US population today is, low-ball estimate, 50 million bigger than it was in 2008, when sales were also about 17 million a year, and so it the number of drivers.

  6. Larry D. Says:


    Apples and Oranges, to compare a Ferrari that only sells supercars, to a Lambo where more than half its sales are the Breadvan that looks like it has been in an accident.

    Same for Mercedes, with such cheap non-mercedeses as the FWD CLA, which almost undercuts the… Subaru Outback in price, of course it can grow its ‘unit sales’.

    BTW Porsche sales are also double what they were ten years ago, BUT half its sales, or 2,500+ a month, are not just its SUVs, but merely its smallest, cheapest SUV the Macan, which you can call a Porsche all you want, but I never will.

  7. Sean McElroy Says:

    @Chuck – Chevy will be keeping the Trax for now and the Trailblazer slots between it and the Equinox.

  8. Larry D. Says:


    Both the title and the paragraph that follows never mentions NEW car sales, but maybe you assume it.

    If I read it literally, I sure agree that new AND used car sales will go thru the roof the next decades.

    BUT if you implied NEW car sales, it will depend on how good a VALUE they are, and in today’s market they are NOT.

    How much will that cheap Trailblazer with the extremely anemic (I thought it was a typo!) 155 HP 1.2 or 1.3 lt engine sell for? $25k? maybe more? $30k? $35K? In the era of the $60k.. Gladiator and the $90k 4-cylinder Volvos (price as tested), the sky is the limit!

    A fool and his $ are soon parted…

  9. GM Veteran Says:

    @1 This story about drivers licenses = vehicle sales is ridiculous. Having a license does not mean that you have the means to buy a new vehicle(and new vehicles is what they are talking about in this article, not used). The economy, jobs, compensation levels, average debt and vehicle pricing are much more direct influences on vehicle sales. SAAR projections include some or all of these factors.

    @2 The Trailblazer will be an additional crossover, not a replacement for the Trax. Since Chevy eliminated all of their cars other than Camaro, Corvette and Malibu, they need to add some crossover models of comparable size to the eliminated cars to provide enough choices to support their sales goals.

  10. Larry D. Says:

    8 to make a detailed comparison, I drove a 1990 Accord 5-speed for 14 years, and its 125 HP 2.2 lt engine was not up to the task, you could not climb a small hill unless you had it in one of the noisy gears, not pleasant to do.

    The Accord weighed 2,822 lbs, and the Trailblazer, I bet at least 3,500. Maybe 3,800. And if it is full of people and gear, 5,000.

    There is no way in hell this anemic porker will not struggle climbing the smallest gentle hill such as we have here in flyover land.

    And forget about taking it to the mountains around LA, Barstow etc. I tried it with the much lighter, manual Accord 5 speed, and it really struggled.

  11. Albemarle Says:

    Someone has to buy the new cars so people can brag about buying used.

  12. GM Veteran Says:

    Given its size and market category, I would peg the curb weight of the Trailblazer at approx 3,200 to 3,500 lbs, depending on trim level and equipment. It remains to be seen if either powertrain is up to the task. A CVT will never be on my shopping list, so even though the styling is better than most recent Chevys, it won’t be on my recommended list.

    The bigger question is, why would anyone drive an underpowered car that they found unpleasant to drive for 14 years? That’s a long time!

  13. Buzzerd Says:

    I was interested in the Trailblazer until I saw the engine choices…. now not so much. It’s 30 more than the Nissan Kicks but still pretty wimpy.

  14. Buzzerd Says:

    The Chevy has about 10HP less than the Eco sport which is not hot rod.

  15. Drew Says:

    @11 – LOL; LMAO

  16. JoeS Says:

    I looked at the Trailblazer/Encore GS as a replacement for my wife’s Vibe GT. It would be larger with less HP (with a turbo!)than her barely adequate Vibe. About the same for the Terrain with the 1.5T. Nice mpg but no fun.

  17. Kit Gerhart Says:

    8 The TrailBlazer will have equal, or greater power than its direct competition, like Ecosport, C-HR and, H-RV. Yeah, none of these are very exiting, but they can be good “city cars” for some people.

  18. Buzzerd Says:

    @16 at least with the Terrain/Equinox you can opt for the bigger motor, with Trailblazer the bigger one is still pretty small. A Vibe with the 2.4L motor is a reasonably quick machine, we used to have one.

  19. Drew Says:

    @12 – I try to be careful in my use of 2 words… “always” and “never”. The frequent complaint of a CVT is the initial launch feel. Toyota claims to have addressed the issue with a conventional 1st gear. HEVs address the issue with their electric motor assist. We have 2 HEV/CVT vehicle’s and don’t have any complaints.

  20. wmb Says:

    I know people hate them, especially from exotic sports brands, but Lambo, Porsche, Rolls and others are now able to build the vehicles we like due to the cash cow SUV/CUV/Crossovers in their line ups. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if, Bugatti had one in it’s future.

  21. Kit Gerhart Says:

    12 The likely competition weighs 3045 (HR-V) to 3390 (Ecosport). All of the vehicles in that class are SLOW by today’s standards, with 0-60 times of 10.5-11.2 seconds in CR’s tests.

  22. Larry D. Says:

    11 I know people who are econ literate who believe that those who buy cars new are utter fools.

    There are also some (who really are fools) who believe that people who buy used cars cannot afford to buy new ones (LOL!)

    They have obviously not read the book “The Millionaire Next Door” where US millionaires usually drive beat up 10 and 20 year old pickup trucks.

  23. Larry D. Says:

    12 no chance it will be only 3,200 lbs. The much smaller Trax must be more than 3,200 itself.

  24. Larry D. Says:

    15 , see 22. Sorry, I got the last laugh.

    PS try to actually compare what you get, the $25-30k 1.2 lt Blazer and the UEBER-Luxurious, UEber-safe, and Ueber- powerful, 6.2 lt S 65 AMG.

    It is DAY and NIGHT.

    Enjoy that new car smell, geniuses!

  25. Larry D. Says:

    17 why is a fat crossover a good city car? because the little wife can see over the steering wheel more easily what she is about to hit trying to parallel park?

  26. Kit Gerhart Says:

    16 I remember driving an early Vibe GT, with the “hotter” version of the Toyota 1.8. It seemed pretty quick, for the time, but you had to keep the revs up in the lower gears to get much performance. As I remember, it had a 6-speed manual, but it might have been a 5-speed.

  27. Larry D. Says:

    I will watch the detailed car sales with great interest, to see how many true-blue fools shell out $25k ($30k? has the US $ totally lost its value????)

    to buy this miserly, pathetic Blazer with the 1.2 or 1.3 lt engine and the pathetic 155 HP.

  28. Larry D. Says:

    26 Lightweight cars feel much quicker and responsive. My 1991 Civic had only 75 HP from a 1.35 lt I4, but was only 1,875 lbs heavy, and around town was very responsive. Of course it was a 5-sp manual, and the tranny was nice and smooth. The Accord probably had a higher HP to weight ratio, but it was too noisy trying to climb the gentle hill to my office every morning, I had to use 2nd or 3rd gear vs my preferred 4th and 5th.

    COnversely my “Magnificent 7″ with its 4.4 lt V8 had 282 HP, a much higher Hp to weight ratio than the Hondas, but you could feel its 4,300 lbs trying to move from a stop.

  29. Larry D. Says:

    21 3045 (HR-V), that’s prety low, given that an Accord weighs much more than that, and a Civic almost the same. IS the HRV based on the Fit? and how much does today’s Fit weigh? I bet over 2,700. I assume none of these have AWD?

  30. Kit Gerhart Says:

    23 The “much smaller” Trax (5 inches shorter) weighs 3255 pounds with AWD. According to wikipedia, which may, or may not have good information, the TrailBlazer will weigh 3010-3241 pounds. Time will tell about that. In any case, it will have acceleration in the same ballpark with its competition, which is slow, compared to most other classes of current vehicles.

  31. Kit Gerhart Says:

    25 Relatively small “footprint,” making it easy to park, and generally easy to maneuver in tight places.

  32. Kit Gerhart Says:

    29 The 3045 is from CR, which is probably with AWD. They have a weight of 2625 for an automatic Fit, and 2745 for a Civic LX automatic sedan.

  33. Lambo2015 Says:

    12 Dang! You obviously hit a nerve, to get no less than three responses about the bargain of buying used cars. Still doesn’t explain why anyone would drive an inadequate car for 14 years especially when there are so many great AMG’s to be had. Lol

  34. ChuckGrenci Says:

    Sean and GMvet, thanks for the response, clarification. The Trailblazer should do okay; 155 hp will be adequate for what it is intended to do. And along with that new car smell also comes a new car warranty which some either require or want.

  35. Lambo2015 Says:

    Just have to say that almost all the SUVs look about the same as the shape doesn’t allow for much room for creativity or uniqueness. With that said I believe the Urus is an attractive vehicle but not as drastic of a design as I would expect from Lamborghini.
    I remember when the Porsche Cayenne came out back in 1995 and that was a great looking SUV for the time. Just disappointing that 25 years later, it and other SUVs don’t look much different.

  36. Larry D. Says:

    33 Economic Illiteracy is no laughing matter. The ones with the CLOSED MINDS are the ones who never even bother to check used and CFO cars, and they sure suffer the consequences.

    The worst case is those poor devils who cannot afford the new car and take those financing ‘deals’ and have those huge monthly payments, and then they can’t make them and their POS gets repo’d.

    PS 11 I never thought of it as some big deal to “brag” about that a consumer knows how to shop. There are 10,000 TIMES more important things people can ‘brag’ about. Real accomplishments, in case you know what these are.

    To make the obvious decision where to spend the (SAME) budget, on a new or a used car, ALl it takes is COMMON SENSE, but obviously common sense is not very common.

  37. Larry D. Says:

    35 That’s very true for some specific models, I have confused CRVs and RAV4s with Escapes, when viewed from some angles.

  38. Drew Says:

    I once bought an expensive European luxury car… used, at 30 cents on the dollar. The initial acquisition price may have been a deal, but the ongoing cost penalties were not… higher insurance cost, higher license fees, higher maintenance costs, and higher fuel costs (premium only). The much better deal is a CPO 2-year old mass brand vehicle…. unless you want a very specific vehicle (specific color and content) to own for a long time, then buy new. Auto Econ 101.

  39. Larry D. Says:

    38 Ι made the mistake of driving ‘mass brand vehicles’ for more than 25 years, so I know very well what they are worth, and since then (2005) I have never bothered even to look at them. It is a no-brainer really.

    My position is that no matter what your budget is, you can always do better used than spending the same budget on a new car.

    Based on the used cars I bought, in retrospect, I have changed my mind about buying from a private seller to save a couple grand. Overall, you don’t save a thing. I was very satisfied from both my purchases of used E class diesels from two different dealers, one in OH and one in IN. You get a 3 and 6 month warranty, so you don’t worry to check the car by a mechanic, the cars are in perfect shape inside and out, the life left on tires, brakes etc is over 70% or they replace them.

  40. XA351GT Says:

    Can anyone explain why you would offer 2 engines only 6 cubic inches different in size. If one is gas and the other diesel I could understand it but if they are both using the same fuel why?

    Okay the last sentence of the 1st story. Job security, The defenders of unions will go down with the ship before they admit the union is screwing them out of their jobs. My thought is it’s better to have a job even if it isn’t paying the highest than it is to have no job at all. But these union lemmings always believe that is someone else who will get the axe until it isn’t.

  41. Kit Gerhart Says:

    38 I factory ordered my 1989 Dodge Caravan SE, Ice Blue Metallic, with the 2.5 turbo and manual transmission. I had to buy new to get what I wanted, and I kept it a long time. 30 years later, I still have it.

    Yeah, I’ve bought and sold a number of cars since then, and have lost way too much money on them, but as is said, you can’t take it with you, and as long as Medicare keeps going for as long as I do, I’m not going to run out of money.

  42. Kit Gerhart Says:

    40 I don’t understand those engine choices either. Usually, if two engines are offered that are that close to the same power, they are substantially different, like with the 1.5 turbo, and 2.0 non-turbo used in Honda Civic. They are close in power, but quite different in “character.”

  43. Larry D. Says:

    Three Critical Lessons From Tesla’s Epic Rally (the already lofty stock at $180 in June 2019 has tripled in value in just a few months, and even the biggest doubters like Lutz have seen the error of their ways)

    my favorite is

    ” #4 — A Lesson For The Ages

    Never bet against a billionaire rocket scientist who hates short sellers.”

  44. Bob Wilson Says:

    Thursday’s “Autoline After Hours” looks pretty good: Sandy Munro, Munro & Associates; Frank Markus, Motor Trend; Gary Vasilash, AD&P; John McElroy, Now is a good time to submit questions to:

  45. Buzzerd Says:

    @40 yea those unions really screwing us, I’ve heard many walmart workers say they are soooo happy to have their jobs as they are standing in line for food stamps.

  46. Lambo2015 Says:

    40 I thought the same thing. 0.1 liter difference? My guess is they don’t have capacity to supply all the trail blazers from one of those engine plants and are getting them from two different plants. So that begs the question why not just offer the same engine from two plants? I’m just guessing here but GM probably already had a plants tooled up to make these two different size engines so why spend the money to make them the same when so close? So basically the trailblazer is slated for a tiny turbo charged 155hp engine and they’ll get almost the same engine regardless which liter you get. So not really sure why they are touting like two engine choices. They are basically the same engine. Silly.

  47. Kit Gerhart Says:

    46 I don’t know how many cylinders those engines have, 3, 4, or one of each. If one of each, they might sound and “feel” different, but probably the 4 would feel better.

  48. Kit Gerhart Says:

    I found that they are both 3 cyl, at least in China.

  49. XA351GT Says:

    Buzzerd My mother in-law worked for the PA turnpike as a toll collector. The Union decided it would be a good idea to go out on strike for a bigger raise than the state offered and the ability to not pay anything towards their health care . The braintrusts thought the best time to extort the state was to go out at the Thanksgiving holiday the busiest time on the toll road. Well it back fired spectacularly when the governor at the time Rendell, said okay everyone rides for free. They stayed out nearly 3 weeks , finally settled for the amount the state originally offered and had to contribute to the health insurance . So they got ZERO of what they forfeited 3 weeks salary for. Now keep in mind these toll collectors were making over $20 2 hour to make change. Not a job that requires a ton of skill . Now almost every toll collector job is being replaced by E-Z Pass or similar collection methods . So yeah Union well done. I’m sure all those people that were collecting those big checks would love to still have their jobs.

  50. Kit Gerhart Says:

    49 Those jobs were going to be mostly replaced anyway, as they have been with Sunpass in Florida, but the strikers lost 3 weeks’ pay, and the state lost probably a few million, that was made up in higher taxes, more debt, or fewer services. Nobody won, except the users of the road who saved a few bucks.

  51. DonWagner1239 Says:

    A lot of arguments about the Trailblazer’s weight to power that will be a problem especially with a CVT. So, anyone have a Subaru Crosstrek at 3,117 pounds with a 152 bhp 2.0 L NA engine and a CVT ? How’s that for performance? If that one can be sold with a straight face, so can the Chevy with the turbo torque.

  52. Kit Gerhart Says:

    CR got 10.2 seconds 0-60 for the Crosstrek, right in line with its current competition, and what the TrailBlazer will do.

  53. ChuckGrenci Says:

    Also seen on the Trailblazer; nine speed with the AWD version. That might be the ticket if you are not averse to AWD and don’t want a CVT. (and maybe that is the differentiator between the 1.2 and the 1.3 engine offering; different connections between the tranny bolt pattern, this just a guess/conjecture on my part)

  54. JoeS Says:

    26 My wife had an early Vibe non-GT with a 5-speed. The lack of off idle power made it harder to drive than the newer 2.4. When I drove it I would usually stall it at least once after getting out of my S-10 5-speed with the 4.3. The early GT engine needed to rev and did not add any power on the bottom end over the standard 1.8.

  55. Lambo2015 Says:

    52 Great fuel economy in a small SUV sounds all great, but when you actually take advantage of the seating and cargo space I bet it will be a dog to drive. Load up 4 adults at 200lb each and another 200lbs of gear and how does it perform with an extra 1000lbs? I would never buy a vehicle that is so underpowered that if I dare put a roof top carrier and 4 adults in I cant get up a slight incline over 60mph.

    I had a teacher in high school that bough one of those first generation Honda CRXs and did exactly that. Placed a roof top carrier for extra luggage and just him and his wife went on their honeymoon. Said it was great but the extra wind resistance meant he kept the pedal to the floor to keep up with traffic. That kind of anemic power sounds horrible to me.

  56. Kit Gerhart Says:

    55 The extra small SUVs don’t even get good gas mileage, compared to the next size larger. The only reason to buy the smallest ones, is to save a little money in purchase price, or if you just like the small footprint of the smallest ones for parking, etc.

  57. Larry D. Says:

    The average transaction price in 2019 was around $37k. How much will this 1.2 or 1.3 lt Traiblazer sell for (also transaction, NOT base price)? $25k? $30k? $35K? Any of these sounds way too high to me for what meager things it offers. If you disagree, this means that the US $ has become truly worthless.

  58. Kit Gerhart Says:

    55,56 continued.

    Of course, if you actually care about fuel economy, you still consider buying a car. Remember those.

    Then, if you want about 50% better yet mpg, there are the Accord and Camry hybrids. The Rav-4 hybrid does very well, but not like the Camry or Accord.

  59. Larry D. Says:

    55 They bought the wrong car, they shoulda bought my 3 door Civic of the same vintage, the hatch was also low but had ample space for their luggage.

  60. Larry D. Says:

    59 PS and got 44 MPG real HWY mpg at fairly high speeds.

  61. Kit Gerhart Says:

    57 The MSRP range of the competition for TrailBlazer, like Ecosport and HR-V are about $20-30K.

  62. Kit Gerhart Says:

    55 The roof top carrier on the CR-X probably about doubled the drag, if there was a very big box on the carrier. Yeah, that car was not a good candidate for a carrier. A small, light trailer would be better, except for parking and backing.

  63. Larry D. Says:

    61 if these are the ‘base’ prices and not the ‘price as tested’, then add $5k to both ends of the range.

  64. Kit Gerhart Says:

    61 The top trim level include about everything available, with few options, and in most cases, there is “cash on the hood.” I checked HR-V inventory of a nearby Honda dealer, and the prices ranged from about $20K to $26K. I don’t know where you “add $5K” comes from. It isn’t the case.

  65. Kit Gerhart Says:

    64, I meant 63

Leave a Comment