1973 Nova Ss Big Block on 2040-cars
Sylvania, Georgia, United States
I have a 1973 Nova SS that I took in on trade. It is a solid car. Recently built $5000.00 427 stroker with th400 transmission and positive traction rear. The car needs paint and some interior work(carpet and headliner0. I will post more pictures but if you need them sooner just message me and I will send you some. The thing is fast very very fast too fast for me but the person that started restoring it wanted a fast car. I have had it a few weeks and checked it out pretty good. It is outside under a cover at the moment. I do not like cars outside but just have too many projects now and no room inside. If I still have it in a few weeks I will finish it and do something else with it. Thanks for your time |
Chevrolet Nova for Sale
1972 pro street chevrolet nova show car
1972 nova 9 second 700hp street driven pump gas show car 555 ci mirror finish(US $32,900.00)
1972 rally nova vary rare sky roof rag top
1973 chevrolet nova custom coupe 2-door 5.7l(US $29,000.00)
1968 chevrolet chevy ii nova w/427 ci rat motor 650+hp this is 1 bad rat!! lqqk(US $21,000.00)
1977 chevrolet nova base coupe 2-door 5.7l(US $9,500.00)
Auto Services in Georgia
Wright`s Car Care Inc ★★★★★
W And R Automotive ★★★★★
US Auto Sales - Lithia Springs ★★★★★
Unity Auto Body & Mechanic ★★★★★
United Brake & Muffler Inc ★★★★★
Tri Star Automotive ★★★★★
Auto blog
GM's Reuss predicts 2016 Chevy Camaro will outperform Ford Mustang in every way
Tue, Apr 7 2015We aren't going to be seeing the next-generation Chevrolet Camaro until next month. But even though we know when we're going to see the new muscle car, it's totally unclear whether Chevy will dole out technical details. That means we can't answer the latest version of the age-old question: Camaro or Ford Mustang? Not surprisingly, General Motors North America President Mark Reuss has already stated his position, saying he was "very confident" that the sixth-generation Camaro will be faster, more agile and more efficient than the Ford. Reuss made his comments after saying he drove the new Camaro back-to-back with the Mustang the week prior. Reuss' statement came in a conversation with Fox News about the 2016 Camaro where he elaborated on the car's weight shedding and how it fit into GM's strategy on other new models. "There are some really cool things in the Camaro, that are quite different than the Malibu, [and] CT6," Reuss told Fox. As we reported previously, the Camaro will shed some 200 pounds by switching to aluminum and other lightweight composites for some of its components. With May 16 just over a month away, here's hoping Reuss decides to loose some other details on the next Camaro ahead of its debut. Related Video:
GM investing $167m in Spring Hill for new midsize vehicles
Tue, 06 Aug 2013General Motors has announced a large investment in its Spring Hill, Tennessee facility. The former home of Saturn production will be getting a $167 million addition to a previously announced $183 million, to cover a pair of new midsize vehicles. The investment is expected to create 1,800 jobs at the factory.
That $350 million is being divvied up for a pair of programs at Spring Hill. The first will take the bulk of the money ($223 million) and create 1,000 of the 1,800 jobs, while the other will take the remaining $127 million and generate the leftover 800 positions. But GM says the investment will cover "midsize vehicle programs." So what could they be?
The leading candidate in our minds is a new crossover for Buick, called the Anthem, that will slot between the Encore and Enclave, but will be slightly smaller than the Equinox and Terrain. As we've explained, the new model will likely be the first product to sport GM's new D2UX platform, which will eventually replace both the Delta and Theta platforms. Spring Hill is already building the Equinox, so there could be some credence to this theory.
BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index
Mon, Oct 10 2016While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.