1996 Chevrolet Impala Ss Sedan 4-door 5.7l on 2040-cars
Glendale, California, United States
Body Type:Sedan
Engine:5.7L 350Cu. In. V8 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Model: Caprice
Trim: Classic Sedan 4-Door
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Drive Type: RWD
Safety Features: Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Mileage: 62,217
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Sub Model: SS
Exterior Color: Cherry Color
Interior Color: Gray
Disability Equipped: No
Number of Cylinders: 8
Original owner. Muscle car. Like New, Cult car. only 7,500 of this type made that year. Corvette engine and KB Suspension. Rides like the Dickens.
Chevrolet Caprice for Sale
1984 chevrolet caprice classic coupe 2-door 5.0l
1969 chevrolet caprice base hardtop 4-door 6.5l 369
1976 chevrolet caprice estate wagon(US $6,350.00)
1995 chevrolet caprice 9c1 police package
1987 chevrolet caprice classic brougham ls 5.0l v8 only 87k miles *clean carfax(US $9,450.00)
Box chevy 1987 chevy caprice custom everything(US $24,000.00)
Auto Services in California
Windshield Repair Pro ★★★★★
Willow Springs Co. ★★★★★
Williams Glass ★★★★★
Wild Rose Motors Ltd. ★★★★★
Wheatland Smog & Repair ★★★★★
West Valley Smog ★★★★★
Auto blog
Junkyard Gem: 1985 Chevrolet Sprint
Thu, May 21 2020For in the 1985 model year, General Motors began selling Chevrolet-badged Suzuki Cultus hatchbacks in California. Sales of the cheap three-cylinder econobox in the rest of North America followed soon after (with the Canadian version known as the Pontiac Firefly), and did pretty well considering the crash in gasoline prices during the middle 1980s. Starting in 1988, the facelifted Sprint became the Geo (and, later on, Chevrolet) Metro. Here's one of the very first Cultuses sold on our shores, found in a San Francisco Bay Area car graveyard. Amazingly, the primitive rear-wheel-drive Chevrolet Chevette remained available all the way through 1987, competing with the thriftier front-wheel-drive Sprint in the same showrooms. For 1988, Pontiac started selling a rebadged Daewoo LeMans, so the Sprint/Metro never lacked for intra-corporate competition. Inside, you'll find the same stuff most mid-1980s Japanese econoboxes got: tough cloth upholstery and long-wearing hard plastics. Suzuki quality in 1985 wasn't quite up to Honda or Toyota levels, but you weren't paying Honda or Toyota prices for the Sprint. MSRP on this car started at $4,949, or about $12,000 in 2020 dollars. The cheapest possible 1985 Chevette cost $5,340, while a new no-frills Ford Escort would set you back $5,620. Subaru, however, could have put you in a punitively unappointed base-model Leone hatchback for just 40 bucks more than the Sprint that year. I think I'd have sprung the extra for a $5,348 Toyota Tercel, a $5,195 Mazda GLC, or— best cheap-commuter deal of all that year— the $5,399 Honda Civic 1300 hatchback. I was 19 years old and driving a Competition Orange 1968 Mercury Cyclone that year, and I recall feeling pity for Chevy Sprint drivers, new-car smell or not. Still, these weren't bad cars for the price, though a Sprint with an automatic transmission was a real character-builder. Got three cylinders and uses 'em all! 48 horsepower from this hemi-headed SOHC 1-liter. The Turbo Sprint — yes, such a car existed — had a howling 70 horsepower. The hood-latch release is a rectangular button that resembles a badge. 1985 Chevy Sprint Commercial The highest-mileage, lowest-priced car you can buy. 1985 holden barina commercial The Australian-market version was the Holden Barina, and the TV ads featured the Road Runner. 1983 SUZUKI CULTUS Ad In its homeland, this car got screaming guitars and a drive through New York City for its TV commercials.
2016 Chevy Camaro performance figures released
Mon, Sep 14 2015If you want to make a car faster, there are two sure-fire ways to get the job done – add power and/or reduce weight. Chevy has done both for the 2016 Camaro, putting as much as 455 horsepower into its muscle coupe and shaving a few hundred pounds from every trim. That range-topping power comes courtesy of a 6.2-liter V8 engine, and it's enough grunt to push an automatic-equipped Camaro SS to 60 miles per hour in just 4.0 seconds flat (4.3 seconds with a manual) and down the quarter mile in 12.3 seconds at 116 mph (12.5 at 115 for the stick). Not coincidentally, those acceleration specs, at least on paper, put the V8-powered Camaro SS just above the Mustang GT on the muscle-car pecking order. When the road gets twisty, Chevy claims the Camaro SS can generate as much as .97 g on the skidpad. And, thanks in part to its Goodyear Eagle F1 summer tires, the SS can stop from 60 in as little as 117 feet. We look forward to finding out how nimble the new Camaro feels when compared to its primary competitors. <p>Your browser does not support iframes.</p> Moving down one notch to the 335-hp 3.6-liter V6, properly equipped 2016 Camaro coupes can hit 60 in as few as 5.1 seconds and cover the quarter in 13.5 at 103. Perhaps even more intriguingly, the 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder and its 275 horsepower (the only configuration quicker with a manual transmission, incidentally) can propel the Camaro to 60 in 5.4 seconds and through the 'ol 1320 in 14 seconds flat. That's seriously quick, but buyers comparing the Camaro to the Mustang will find that the EcoBoost 2.3-liter is a bit more powerful (310 hp and 320 lb-ft) and quicker (5.1 seconds to 60). Chevy is making lots of noise about the efforts its engineers went through to shed weight from the 2016 Camaro, going so far as to shave down suspension bolts so that no thread went unthreaded. The weight-saving obsession pays off – base Camaro models are down 390 pounds while the SS model drops 223 pounds over the 2015. The 2016 Camaro SS boasts a power-to-weight ratio of 8.1 lbs per pony, a 14-percent improvement over the last-gen. Even though weight is down, chassis stiffness is said to be up by 28 percent over the fifth-gen Camaro coupe. Also of note: The Camaro is now lighter than the Mustang across the board when comparing like-to-like configuration levels. The 2016 Chevy Camaro starts at $26,695 (including $995 for destination).
GM’s Charlie Wilson was right: Stronger regulations can help U.S. automakers
Fri, Oct 26 2018Charlie Wilson had been the president and CEO of General Motors before being nominated to become secretary of defense by Dwight Eisenhower. During his Senate confirmation hearings, he controversially said, "For years I thought what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa." And he was right. While car companies aren't necessarily the most progressive when it comes to things that might have the slightest possibility of political blowback, General Motors should be credited for doing something absolutely forthright in this regard with its announcement that it wants the federal U.S. government not to squash the California Air Resources Board's emissions requirements but to actually create a 50-state "National Zero Emissions Vehicle" program that, in the words of Mark Reuss, executive vice president and president, Global Product Group and Cadillac, "will drive the scale and infrastructure investments needed to allow the U.S. to lead the way to a zero emission future." Filing comments to the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks is one thing. But a graphic the company developed for this announcement — shown above — is something else entirely, something that is absolutely credible, creative and clever. There is a photo of a Chevrolet Bolt EV driving along a highway, which seems to be in Marin County (based on the blurred San Francisco skyline in the background). Text on the photo states: "It's Time for American Leadership in Zero Emissions Vehicles." It seems to say, in effect, "If we want to make America great again, then we're going to do it by leading in technology, not by retreating behind weakened regulations." General Motors understands that the auto market is globally competitive, and if U.S.-based companies are going to be in the game, then they'd better be able to out-innovate the companies based elsewhere, where emissions and economy standards are not being weakened. What's good for our country ... Related Video:



