1955 Chevrolet Bel Air on 2040-cars
Matherville, Illinois, United States
Transmission:Automatic
Vehicle Title:Clean
Engine:235 6cyl
Fuel Type:Gasoline
Year: 1955
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): C55K
Mileage: 999999
Number of Cylinders: 6
Model: Bel Air
Exterior Color: Blue
Make: Chevrolet
Drive Type: RWD
Chevrolet Bel Air for Sale
1957 chevrolet bel air hardtop(US $15,500.00)
1957 chevrolet bel air(US $23.50)
1953 chevrolet bel air hard top / hardtop / sports coupe(US $1,600.00)
1962 chevrolet bel air(US $92,500.00)
1958 chevrolet bel air(US $12,500.00)
1956 chevrolet bel air sport coup(US $6,100.00)
Auto Services in Illinois
X Way Auto Sales ★★★★★
Twins Auto Body Shop ★★★★★
Trevino`s Transmission & Auto ★★★★★
Thompson Auto Supply ★★★★★
Sigler`s Auto Ctr ★★★★★
Schob`s Auto Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
Diesel details: Comparing Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, Chevy Silverado Duramax, Ford F-150 Powerstroke
Thu, Jun 13 2019With specifications for the 2019 Ford F-150 Power Stroke diesel already out, and the details on the 2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel and Chevy Silverado Duramax (and its GMC Sierra twin) trickling out, we felt it was a good time to start comparing the full-size trucks' light-duty diesels. Bear in mind, we've only driven one of these new diesel trucks, so we'll be sticking to numbers for now. Some numbers haven't been announced yet, either, but stay tuned, because we'll be updating this post with additional specifications as they become available. And if you want to compare any other versions of these trucks with other vehicles, be sure to check out our comparison tool. Now let's start comparing, starting with our big chart of numbers below. As we can plainly see, these trucks are quite closely matched. Each one has six cylinders, a displacement of 3.0 liters and a turbocharger to boost it. The output of each is somewhat close, too. The Ram 1500 EcoDiesel is the torque king at 480 pound-feet, 20 more than the GM trucks and 40 more than the Ford. The GM trucks win on power, though, with 277 ponies, 17 more than the Ram, and 27 more than the Ford. GM does report that you get their trucks' peak 460 pound-feet of torque from 1,500 rpm to 3,000 rpm, whereas the others only report peak torque at a particular point in the rev band, but all of these trucks should have wide, flat torque curves as you would expect from modern turbodiesels. 2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel View 8 Photos Engine output is only one part of the truck performance equation. We also have towing and payload capacity, as well as fuel economy. With towing, the Ram 1500 is the current leader with a maximum capacity of 12,560 pounds. That tops the Ford F-150's 11,400-pound tow rating by well over 1,000 pounds. The F-150 can carry 2,020 pounds in its bed, but we don't know yet whether that's better or worse than the Ram or the GM trucks. We also don't have numbers for the GM trucks' towing capacities. View 9 Photos As for fuel economy, the Ford F-150 manages a thoroughly impressive 22 mpg in the city and 30 on the highway with two-wheel drive. Choosing four-wheel drive drops those numbers to 20 and 25 respectively. The fuel economy numbers for the Ram, Chevy and GMC haven't been revealed yet, but for some comparison, we can look at the old Ram EcoDiesel. That truck's best fuel economy was 20 in the city and 27 on the highway with two-wheel drive.
2016 Chevrolet Camaro: Everything we know so far [UPDATE]
Fri, May 15 2015UPDATE: We fully expect the floodgates to open as facts and photos leak throughout the day. Watch this space for more information as it breaks, including these leaked photos, and some new powertrain speculation. Chevrolet has made a grand production of teasing the all-new, sixth-generation Camaro. That slow trickle will become a deluge this weekend, when the 2016 model hits the stage on Detroit's Belle Isle as part of an all-day Camaro-palooza. Considering you're likely to hear plenty about the next-gen muscle car in the next couple days, we figured now is the perfect time to sort out all the facts and rumors we've heard about the next-generation coupe that's coming this weekend. Here's everything we know about Camaro Six. What Will It Look Like? Arguably the easiest Camaro question to answer after all the teasers and spy shots, General Motors' design team favored evolving the current car's retro design language while retaining the same basic shape. The long hood will carry on, joined by an even shorter, wing-topped rear deck, giving the 2016 an almost fastback-like look. The greenhouse is still slim, but lateral visibility may improve slightly owing to the larger quarter windows. We can only hope. The rear end looks to have been rounded, while Chevy's own teaser shows off larger, more prominent taillight housings than the simple rectangular lights on today's car. Expect quad-tipped exhausts to be offered on at least one version of the Camaro. Judging by the single teaser of the car's profile, the rear haunches will be larger and more chiseled. The muscular aluminum hood and its accompanying power bulge are more heavily styled than on today's car, although it looks largely similar in terms of size. It sits atop an even slimmer upper grille that's barely big enough for Chevy's Bowtie logo, with most of the visual mass moving to the gaping lower grille. One of the more tantalizing rumors surrounding the new Camaro focuses on its roof. As evidenced in a rather bizarre round of spy photos, it almost looks like Chevy is considering a removable panel, a la Corvette Stingray. T-tops are also a distinct (and more probable, we hope) possibility. The new shape will result in a more aerodynamic car, and Chevy claims the 2016 Camaro spent 350 hours in the wind tunnel. Overall lift has apparently been cut by 30 percent, thanks partially to a new, smooth underbody panel. Chevrolet has been far less forthcoming with information on the new Camaro's cabin.
GM says safety is a reason it's dropping Apple CarPlay, Android Auto
Tue, Dec 12 2023Update: GM sent us a statement as a follow-up to its original comments seen in this post: "We wanted to reach out to clarify that comments about GM's position on phone projection were misrepresented in previous articles and to reinforce our valued partnerships with Apple and Google and each company’s commitment to driver safety. GM's embedded infotainment strategy is driven by the benefits of having a system that allows for greater integration with the larger GM ecosystem and vehicles." The original story can be read in its entirety below.  General Motors announced its intention to remove Apple CarPlay and Android Auto functionality from its upcoming EVs earlier this year, and internet comments sections haven't been kind since. As the first of many EVs to follow – the 2024 Chevrolet Blazer EV – hits the market, GM is expanding on its initial explanations for dropping the tech. Motor Trend spoke with Tim Babbit, GMÂ’s head of product for infotainment, to learn more. Attributed to Babbit, from the story: “They have stability issues that manifest themselves as bad connections, poor rendering, slow responses, and dropped connections. And when CarPlay and Android Auto have issues, drivers pick up their phones again, taking their eyes off the road and totally defeating the purpose of these phone-mirroring programs. Solving those issues can sometimes be beyond the control of the automaker.” Babbit suggests that a world without Apple CarPlay or Android Auto will be a safer one, as folks wonÂ’t be looking to control their infotainment systems via their phones. However, Babbit also tells MT that this theory hasnÂ’t been tested in either the lab or the real world yet. Instead of using a navigation or music-playing app powered through your phone, upcoming GM EVs will use a Google-based infotainment system called “Ultifi” that runs a ton of integrated Google apps. Google Maps will be the native navigation app in the system; youÂ’ll be able to log in to Spotify or other apps to load your music up, and so on. The idea here is that youÂ’ll have all the same apps that were on your phone available but integrated within the infotainment system instead, and you'll be able to use voice controls to control every last bit of it with no need to reach for a phone. That sounds amenable in theory, but how consumers react to the removal of a feature that they know and love now is a risky gamble.


















