2007 Chevrolet Impala - Police Pkg - 3.9l V6 - 417953 on 2040-cars
Lawrenceville, Georgia, United States
Body Type:Sedan
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:3.9L V6
Fuel Type:Gasoline
Number of Cylinders: 6
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Impala
Trim: Sedan 4-Door
Options: CD Player
Drive Type: Front Wheel Drive
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Mileage: 85,236
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Exterior Color: Black
Interior Color: Black
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Chevrolet Impala for Sale
1965 chevy impala south carolina car! low reserve wow trades also
1994 chevrolet impala ss sedan 4-door 5.7l
2004 chevrolet impala base sedan 4-door 3.8l(US $3,800.00)
1966 chevy impala ss - numbers matching - amazing!!!
(C $19,500.00)
Lt 3.5l 3.5 liter v6 engine 4 doors 4-wheel abs brakes air conditioning compass
Auto Services in Georgia
Wright`s Professional Window ★★★★★
Vick`s Auto ★★★★★
V-Pro Vinyl & Leather Repair ★★★★★
Trailers & Hitches ★★★★★
Tire Town ★★★★★
Thornton Auto Care ★★★★★
Auto blog
Want a V8 on the cheap? Buy a work truck
Thu, Aug 3 2017In case you didn't notice, V8 cars have gotten pretty expensive. If you want a modern muscle car like the Dodge Challenger R/T, Ford Mustang GT, or Chevy Camaro SS, you'll need between $34,000 and $38,000 for a stripped out example of one. The cheapest of those is the Challenger, and the priciest is the Camaro. These are also the cheapest V8 cars the companies offer. But if you absolutely have to have a V8 for less, there is an option, work trucks. As it turns out, all of the Big Three offer their most basic work trucks with V8s. And because they're so basic, they're pretty affordable, especially when sticking with the standard two-wheel drive. A Ram 1500 Tradesman with a V8 can be had for as little as $29,840, which is a little more than $4,000 less than a Challenger R/T. For a bit more at $30,275, you can have a Chevy Silverado W/T, almost $8,000 less than a Camaro SS. The most expensive is the V8 Ford F-150 starts at a starting price of $30,670, which is a bit over $5,000 less than the Mustang. Of course you'll be in an ultra bare bones vehicle with few comforts, and the price will go up if you add stuff, but we're bargain hunting here, and sacrifices are sometimes necessary. Besides, what you lose in comfort, you gain in loads of cargo space and towing (try to look at the bright side). Also, as a side note, all three trucks are available with optional electronic locking rear differentials. At the discounted price of these trucks, you still get a heaping helping of power. The most potent of the trio is the Ram 1500 Tradesman with 395 horsepower and 410 pound-feet of torque generated by a 5.7-liter V8. Compared with the Challenger R/T, the Ram is up by 20 horsepower and they're tied for torque. The value proposition is even more stark between the two vehicles when looking at the price per horsepower. Each pony in the Ram costs $75.54, while the Challenger charges you $90.91. The Challenger is also more expensive per horsepower than its close competitors. The F-150's 5.0-liter V8 is just barely behind the Ram with 395 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque. That's still more power than the Challenger, and it matches the torque of the 2017 Mustang GT. On the down side, it still would be down 20 horsepower on that same 2017 Mustang, and it's behind by 60 horsepower and 20 pound-feet on the new 2018 Mustang GT. The F-150 also just edges out the Mustang in the dollar per horsepower measure.
Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures
Tue, Jun 23 2020It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.
2015 Chevrolet Trax
Thu, Dec 4 2014After the obligatory product presentation for the 2015 Trax, I caught up with Steve Majoros, Chevrolet's director of marketing for crossovers and cars, and asked him to elaborate on which markets his planners believe will be the hot starters for this tiny CUV. Without much hesitation, Majoros began to click off traditional sales havens for Subaru, namely, New England and the snowy bits of the East Coast, Colorado and the Pacific Northwest. That news might not surprise you, but it did me. Perhaps it's something as basic as the Trax's tall-hatchback looks, or the emphasis Chevrolet put on the urban driving cycle during my test in San Diego. But before my chat with Majoros, I'd considered this a crossover pointed at the Millennial city mouse more than his bumpkin cousin. But a closer look had me re-examining the granola cred of Chevy's smallest crossover. Having spent my fair share of time in New England and around New Englanders, I started by mentally listing the Trax's Subaru-like traits: practicality, thrift, all-weather ability and, well, just a dash of ugliness. (I suppose a hatchback needn't always be ugly to sell in Maine, or Boulder or Portland... but a 'distinctive' face doesn't seem to hurt.) After a day of driving through sunny San Diego and its surroundings, I can say that Trax makes an interesting case for itself against the standard bearers of the L.L. Bean set, but I'm less sure of its argument for young urbanites. The Trax looks a lot like an Equinox whose suit shrunk in the wash. Chevy's has downsized its own, rather conservative crossover styling to fit the proportions of the subcompact Trax; to my eyes, it looks a lot like an Equinox whose suit shrunk in the wash. That's fine for offering a cohesive look for the Chevy family of crossovers, but it seems out of step with the rest of the segment. If the Trax's current competitive set were the cast of a high school-based TV show, the Kia Soul would play the lovable nerd, the Nissan Juke perhaps the outsider musician and the Subaru XV Crosstrek the athletic outdoorsy kid. Chevy may see the Trax as the hipster chick wearing intentionally ironic mom jeans, but to me the styling is a little too on the nose; more like an actual grownup trying to hang with the kids. These mom jeans are genuine. Per my earlier point, that quasi-conservative look may be just fast enough for staid New Englanders, but I have a hard time seeing the bluff, big-Bowtied front end playing in Bushwick or Wicker Park.