Dry Clean Van - Chevrolet 1997-g2500-white-built In Dry Clean Rack For Delivery on 2040-cars
Houston, Texas, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:V8
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Transmission:Automatic
Model: Express
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Trim: Good
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag
Drive Type: Good
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control
Mileage: 112,000
Exterior Color: White
Interior Color: Light Blue
Disability Equipped: No
Number of Cylinders: 8
Number of Doors: 6
This Van is good for Dry Clean delivery. Market value $2,500.00 with built in Dry Clean Rack value $4,000.00.
NOW FOR SALE ONLY $5,000.00 - GOOD CONDITIONS
Chevrolet Express for Sale
2003 chevrolet express g3500 cutaway 14ft box truck, power tail lift platform,(US $9,850.00)
2008 chevy express 3500 custom party van / traveler
2000 chevy express 2500 with custom flame paint job work van
Charlotte carpet cleaning business 2004 chevy express access avenger 500 trkmnt(US $22,995.00)
Air conditioning power locks & windows cd player rear audio vcr hitch v8
New explorer **all wheel drive** hi top conversion van(US $56,995.00)
Auto Services in Texas
Z`s Auto & Muffler No 5 ★★★★★
Wright Touch Mobile Oil & Lube ★★★★★
Worwind Automotive Repair ★★★★★
V T Auto Repair ★★★★★
Tyler Ford ★★★★★
Triple A Autosale ★★★★★
Auto blog
2016 Chevy Volt ads strike frustrating, yet familiar, chord
Fri, Oct 2 2015Sometimes, it's hard to let go. In the six years that GM has been advertising and selling the Chevy Volt, one dominant message is that the car is an EV without any range anxiety. On the one hand, this is a positive thing: our car does something that other electric vehicles don't. Of course, there's another, more reasonable take on the message that EVs only equal limited range: don't promote this viewpoint if you ever plan on selling a pure EV. But, of course, this is exactly what GM is doing with a new ad for the 2016 Chevy Volt. Called Elevator, the spot (watch it above) compares driving an all-electric car with riding in an elevator getting stuck. Your Nissan Leaf might run out of electricity, the ad says, and that would be as uncomfortable as being trapped between floors. The main problem, of course, is that Chevy also offers the Spark EV and is getting ready to sell the Bolt EV. Does the company think that everyone will forget these anti-EV commercials when it come time to shop for a Bolt? Even worse, does GM think we've forgotten the Anthem ad for the Volt back in 2010? Apparently, so. Elevator isn't the only ad for the 2016 Volt that GM debuted today. The other, called Time Capsule (below), takes a swipe at the Toyota Prius. Trouble is, there are two easy ways to dismiss this ad as well. First, and most obviously, if GM is against using old technology, then why does it continue to shove a 100-year-old fossil fuel engine into almost every car it builds? Second, attacking the Prius for using 15-year-old tech – when said tech is still able to mop the floor with any hybrid from GM in the fuel economy race - is more like an admission of defeat than anything to be proud of. "Hey look, the Prius uses technology from the '90s," GM says. To which the observant viewer will ask, "Well, then why can't you build a 50-mile-per-gallon hybrid, GM?" It's also worth noting that Chevy has been on a misguided advertising streak as of late. We bashed their ads that suggested its Silverado is better than the F-150 because it uses steel instead of aluminum, too, especially since those commercials used shark cages and stupid superhero costumes in an attempt to make a point. Chevy, stop assuming we're all idiots. Please. Now, the 2016 Volt is a great car and I know that GM can make a darn good Volt ad (like this one), so seeing the company shoot solid fuel-efficient technologies in the back (again and again) is just frustrating.
This map reveals the cleanest vehicles based on location
Thu, Apr 28 2016Naysayers love to point out how dirty the electricity grid mix is when it comes to charging electric vehicles. Curmudgeons are eager to jump into any conversation about EVs to enlighten the lucky listeners about how plug-in cars contribute to pollution, sometimes even throwing in a dash of climate-change denial for good measure. (Thanks, buddy. Pray, tell me more about the plight of oppressed SUV owners.) Unless someone buys an EV just because they think they're cool (which, yeah, they often are), they probably have at least a passable understanding of their environmental pros and cons. As many EV owners are already aware, location has a lot to do with any particular plug-in car's carbon footprint. Still, there's always more to know, and knowledge is not a bad thing, especially if one uses it to do the right thing. That's why this handy-dandy map from Carnegie Mellon University is so interesting. CMU researchers have compiled information about the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of various EVs based on where they're charged, as compared to gasoline-powered vehicles. The researchers looked at the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, and Prius Plug-In Hybrid versus the gasoline-dependent Toyota Prius hybrid and the stop-start-equipped Mazda3 with i-ELOOP and compared grams of CO2 emitted per mile. CMU takes into account the grid mix, ambient temperature, and driving patterns. CMU takes into account the grid mix based on county, as well as ambient temperature and driving patterns in terms of miles traveled on the highway or in the city. For instance, if you drive a Nissan Leaf in urban areas of California, Texas, or Florida, your carbon footprint is lower than it would be if you were driving a standard Toyota Prius. However, if you charge your Leaf in the Midwest or the South, for the most part, you've got a larger carbon footprint than the Prius. If you live in the rural Midwest, you'd probably even be better off driving a Mazda3. Throughout the country, the Chevrolet Volt has a larger carbon footprint than the Toyota Prius, but a smaller one than the Mazda3 in a lot of urban counties in the US. The Prius and Prius Plug-In are relatively equal across the US. Having trouble keeping it straight? That's not surprising. The comparisons between plug-in and gasoline vehicles are much more nuanced than the loudest voices usually let on.
2016 Camaro gets most revealing tease yet
Mon, May 11 2015Chevrolet started its long teaser campaign for the 2016 Camaro by just revealing the exhaust manifold and front frame, but as time has passed the company has slowly unveiled more. In the latest glimpse ahead of the pony car's May 16 debut, we're actually getting to see the model's profile completely undisguised. As suggested by the recent tease of the rear and hood, the 2016 Camaro wears a sharper, more angular design than the current model. This is especially the case when you look at the taut lines making up the rear. Chevy claims that the new shape underwent 350 hours of wind tunnel tests to be able to generate left lift, improve cooling and reduce wind noise in the cabin. A smooth underbody pan is among the aerodynamic tweaks, and it runs from underneath the front grille to the center of the Camaro. Chevy asserts that all of the changes at the front help reduce lift by 30 percent. Related VIdeo: 2016 Camaro is all about the Aero Total aerodynamic lift improved by 30 percent for improved stability 2015-05-11 DETROIT – After 350 hours of wind tunnel testing – often 24 hours a day – the new Camaro will slip more easily through the wind, and drivers of the Camaro SS will experience a marked improvement in reduced aerodynamic lift. These changes illustrate the lengths the aerodynamics team went to for improved performance, stability, cooling and lower wind noise intrusion "The importance of aerodynamics increases exponentially as we increase vehicle performance," said Kirk Bennion, Exterior Design manager. "As engine output increases, we need more engine cooling. As acceleration and top speeds climb, we need to reduce lift for better high-speed stability. However, we cannot make any changes at the expense of increasing drag, which can hurt fuel economy. "To balance these different aerodynamic targets, we tested literally hundreds of changes on the new Camaro, millimeters at a time." For example, the initial design called for the lower grille bars to be set at a 20-degree angle to the horizon. However, after meticulous testing, the team improved engine-cooling airflow by 1 percent by shifting the angle to 13 degrees – a change that achieved the airflow target while maintaining the original grille design. And rather than a traditional front air dam to reduce aerodynamic lift, the team developed a flush belly pan that stretches from the front grille to the center of the vehicle.