2009 Chevrolet Traverse Lt on 2040-cars
625 W 7th St, Rolla, Missouri, United States
Engine:3.6L V6 24V GDI DOHC
Transmission:6-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1GNER23D69S127818
Stock Num: 13420B
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Traverse LT
Year: 2009
Exterior Color: Dark Cherry Metallic
Options: Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 137382
Big City Selection, Small Town Service. Gassss saverrrr!!! 24 MPG Hwy. Are you interested in a simply outstanding SUV? Then take a look at this impeccable Traverse*** Ready for anything!!! Safety equipment includes: ABS, Traction control, Curtain airbags, Passenger Airbag, Daytime running lights...Relax in the comfort of features like: Power locks, Power windows, Auto, Rear air conditioning, Cruise control... Sakelaris Ford Lincoln of Rolla, where you find "Big City Selection with small town service." Family owned and operated. We have the best selection of used and Certified Pre-Owned Ford Lincoln vehicles, and if we don't have it we will get it. There are no hidden documentation or processing fees. We will make sure you are given the best price and service around. Give us a call at 888-525-0228.
Chevrolet Traverse for Sale
 2012 chevrolet traverse ls(US $22,351.00) 2012 chevrolet traverse ls(US $22,351.00)
 2010 chevrolet traverse lt(US $19,458.00) 2010 chevrolet traverse lt(US $19,458.00)
 2011 chevrolet traverse 2lt(US $23,433.00) 2011 chevrolet traverse 2lt(US $23,433.00)
 2014 chevrolet traverse ls(US $32,220.00) 2014 chevrolet traverse ls(US $32,220.00)
 2014 chevrolet traverse lt(US $39,355.00) 2014 chevrolet traverse lt(US $39,355.00)
 2014 chevrolet traverse lt(US $36,570.00) 2014 chevrolet traverse lt(US $36,570.00)
Auto Services in Missouri
Turner Chevrolet-Cadillac Co Inc ★★★★★
Trouble Shooters ★★★★★
Thompson Buick-Pontiac-GMC-Cadillac-Saab ★★★★★
The Old Repair Shop ★★★★★
Sparks Tire and Auto ★★★★★
Slushers Downtown Tire & Auto Service Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
The real costs of keeping a Chevy Volt on the road
Wed, Sep 2 2015The release of the new, 2016 Chevy Volt is sure to bring a surge of used electric vehicles to the market as early adopters trade their older models in. Many of these cars are selling for a fraction of their original price, thanks in part to federal and state incentives that lowered the initial cost to the first owner, which opens these cars up to a whole new class of consumers. While the prices are getting attractive, potential buyers are still hesitant to buy a used EV due to uncertainty about service and repair costs, but there may be some good news on the horizon. The Chevy Volt comes with a battery warranty that is good for at least 8 years and 100,000 miles, but many of the Volts popping up on the market have passed that 100,000-mile mark. The threat of needing a new battery can be a deterrent, especially with some dealers quoting prices as high as $34,000 for a full "drive motor battery replacement." That sum is more than the MSRP of a 2016 model. Some of the fear of EV maintenance and repair comes from the mystery of the individual pieces that make up the drivetrain and charging system. If we take a look at the Volt in terms of analogs to a traditional internal-combustion vehicle, the outlook becomes a little more friendly. The Volt battery pack consists of three lithium-ion modules in a T-shaped arrangement, each of which can be serviced individually. Module 1 is made up of 90 cells and corresponds to GM part number 22954462, which retails for $3,258.33; module 2 is made up of 72 cells and corresponds to GM part number 22954463, which retails for $2,930.00; lastly, module 3 is made up of 125 cells and corresponds to GM part number 22954464, and retails for $4,933.33. These part numbers have been added to the dealer order systems but have not shown up in the distribution centers at this time. Although all three of the modules add up to a fairly large $11,121.66 total and are still on hold for dealer ordering, the good news is that in most cases these battery cell modules do not need to be replaced. There are many other individual pieces mounted on the battery pack that are serviceable, such as the Battery Energy Control Modules (BECM) and the Battery Interface Control Modules (BICM). These modules control and monitor the battery packs and charging system and have been known to fail while the lithium-ion battery cells are not at fault. Some have been replaced under warranty, but if you are stuck buying one they run about $255 a piece for the part.
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.
Ford F-150, Chevy Silverado, Toyota Tundra flunk IIHS headlight test
Tue, Oct 25 2016The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety put pickup truck headlights to the test and found that the majority of them were equipped with subpar units. The 2017 Honda Ridgeline was the only truck to earn a rating of "good." The large pickup truck test was comprised of the: 2016 to 2017 GMC Sierra, 2017 Nissan Titan, 2016 Ram 1500, 2016 to 2017 Chevrolet Silverado, 2016 to 2017 Ford F-150, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tundra. The Sierra's headlights earned a rating of "acceptable," the headlights found on the Titan and Ram 1500 were found to be "marginal," and the ones on the Silverado, F-150, and Tundra were rated as "poor." IIHS claims the F-150 was the most disappointing out of the large pickup trucks as both its halogen and optional LED headlights failed to provide adequate visibility during testing. The Ridgeline (which earned a "good rating"), is usually considered a midsize or small truck, though IIHS included it in the field of large pickups. The headlights on the 2016 Chevrolet Colorado, 2016 GMC Canyon, 2016 Nissan Frontier, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tacoma, which made up the small pickup truck group, all earned a rating of "poor." The IIHS claimed the Colorado had the worst headlights of any truck that was tested, as the base vehicle's units were only able to illuminate up to 123 feet in front of the car. The Ridgeline's headlights, for reference, were able to illuminate up to 358 feet in front of the vehicle. To conduct its test, the IIHS utilizes a special tool to measure how far light is projected out of the headlights in different driving situations. The trucks' headlights were tested in a straight line and in corners, while vehicles with high-beam assist were given extra praise. The headlights on the pickup trucks also mimic the testing that was done on small SUVs and cars earlier this year. Next year, automakers will need to fit their vehicles with headlights that earn a rating of either good or acceptable to earn the IIHS Top Safety Pick+. Related Video:

