2ss Nav Heated Stripes Camera Assist Bluetooth 2012 2014 2013 Leather Ebony on 2040-cars
Clinton, Missouri, United States
Body Type:Coupe
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:8
Fuel Type:Gas
For Sale By:Dealer
Used
Year: 2013
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Camaro
Mileage: 18,964
Sub Model: 2SS RS NAV HEAD UP Camera Black 6.2L V8
Disability Equipped: No
Exterior Color: Black
Doors: 2
Interior Color: Black
Drivetrain: Rear Wheel Drive
Chevrolet Camaro for Sale
1997 chevrolet camaro convertible black(US $5,900.00)
2001 chevrolet camaro z28 convertible
2011 chevy camaro 2ss convertible htd leather hud 17k texas direct auto(US $28,980.00)
2lt nav heated camera black gray head up 2013 2012 2014 bluetooth auto coupe
1996 chevrolet, chevy, camaro z28(US $4,500.00)
2010 camaro 2ss / 426hp / 6.2l v8 / blacked out / low miles
Auto Services in Missouri
Wodohodsky Auto Body ★★★★★
West County Nissan ★★★★★
Wayne`s Auto Body ★★★★★
Superior Collision Repair ★★★★★
Superior Auto Service ★★★★★
Springfield Transmission Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
GM recalling 70k Chevy Malibus, Pontiac G6s over steering issue
Sun, Feb 15 2015A problem with the power steering system in the Chevy Malibu and Pontiac G6 has prompted General Motors and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to issue a recall for an estimated 69,633 vehicles. The issue revolves around the electric power steering assist, which could suddenly fail and increase the risk of a crash, especially at low speeds where the power steering is most helpful. The recall affects 2006-2007 Chevy Malibu sedans and Malibu Maxx wagons (specifically those manufactured between April 1, 2006, and June 30, 2006), as well as the Pontiac G6 (which was offered as a sedan, coupe or convertible) from the same model years and manufactured from April 18, 2006, to June 30, 2006. Owners of the affected units can expect to hear from the manufacturer with instructions to bring in their vehicles to their local dealers to have the torque sensors in the power steering system replaced. RECALL Subject : Sudden Loss of Electric Power Steering , 1 INVESTIGATION(S) Report Receipt Date: FEB 04, 2015 NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V064000 Component(s): STEERING Potential Number of Units Affected: 69,633 Manufacturer: General Motors LLC SUMMARY: General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 2006-2007 Chevrolet Malibu and Malibu Maxx vehicles manufactured April 1, 2006, to June 30, 2006, and 2006-2007 Pontiac G6 vehicles manufactured April 18, 2006, to June 30, 2006. In the affected vehicles, there may be a sudden loss of electric power steering (EPS) assist that could occur at any time while driving. CONSEQUENCE: If power steering assist is lost, greater driver effort would be required to steer the vehicle at low speeds, increasing the risk of a crash. REMEDY: GM will notify owners, and dealers will replace the torque sensor assembly, free of charge. The manufacturer has not yet provided a notification schedule. Owners may contact Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020 or Pontiac customer service at 1-800-762-2737. GM's number for this recall is 14772. Note: This is an expansion of recall 14V-153 to cover additional vehicles built between April 1, 2006 and June 30, 2006. NOTES: Owners may also contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), or go to www.safercar.gov.
Chevy Volt 'acceptable,' Nissan Leaf 'poor' in new IIHS safety tests
Thu, Jul 31 2014Ford C-Max Hybrid also scored "acceptable" rating. With US Nissan Leaf sales up almost 30 percent during the first half of the year, the only thing that might be able to stop the battery-electric vehicle is a good, stiff barrier. Unfortunately, thing's aren't always pretty when that happens in the real world, according to new tests from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Things with the Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-in are a little bit rosier, though. The two plug-in vehicles were part of a batch of a dozen vehicles that just went through the IIHS's "small overlap" test, in which the driver's side front corner of the vehicle is crashed into a rigid barrier at 40 miles per hour. Out of the dozen, only the Mini Cooper Countryman was given a "good" rating. Five vehicles, including the Volt and the Ford C-Max Hybrid, were rated "acceptable," two were "marginal" and two, including the Leaf, were "poor." Plug-in vehicles are unique in the crash-test context because of their relatively large battery sizes. In the Volt's case, the driver had a "low risk" of injury, said the IIHS. But the Leaf's crash substantially pushed back the instrument panel and steering column, creating a scenario where the driver was "likely" to sustain leg injuries. The batteries in both the Leaf and the Volt passed safety tests specifically targeted at things like thermo and electrical properties and overall integrity. "Nissan is proud of the Leaf's 'Good' rating in all other IIHS tests, a 4-star NCAP rating from NHTSA and its IIHS Top Safety Pick rating in all previous years since the car's release," the company said in an e-mail sent to AutoblogGreen. "As for the performance of the 2014 Leaf in the 'small overlap frontal test,' Nissan will continue to review these and other results from the IIHS 'small overlap frontal test' as we seek opportunities for improvement." Check out the IIHS's press release and small car crash-test video footage below. Range of ratings: Small car ratings run the gamut in challenging small overlap front test The Mini Cooper Countryman is the only small car to earn a good rating among the latest group of 12 cars subjected to the Institute's small overlap front crash test. Two electric models and a hybrid also are in the mix, with varied results. The electric-powered Chevrolet Volt (with a gasoline engine "range extender") earns an acceptable rating, while its battery-electric rival, the Nissan Leaf, earns a poor rating.
Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans
Thu, Apr 30 2020Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.
2040Cars.com © 2012-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.048 s, 7948 u



