2015 Gmc Sierra 2500 Sle on 2040-cars
56 E Broadway St, Shelbyville, Indiana, United States
Engine:6.0L Vortec V8
Transmission:6 speed automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1GT12YEG8FF105071
Stock Num: F101
Make: GMC
Model: Sierra 2500 SLE
Year: 2015
Exterior Color: Fire Red
Interior Color: Jet Black
Options: Drive Type: 4X4
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
MSRP $49915 Call for pricing with current incentives. SANDMAN BROTHERS INC., SINCE 1918, NO CLOSING/DOCUMENT FEES, 3RD GENERATION FAMILY OWNED, FREE NATIONWIDE LOCATOR SERVICE, BUICK, CADILLAC, GMC, DODGE, JEEP, CHRYSLER, CERTIFIED SERVICE DEPARTMENT AND BODYSHOP, FINANCING AVAILABLE. CALL TODD RAY, TODAY, 1 888-902-7750
GMC Sierra 2500 for Sale
2004 gmc sierra 2500 h/d(US $17,985.00)
2003 gmc sierra 2500 h/d(US $22,995.00)
2014 gmc sierra 2500 sle(US $56,185.00)
2003 gmc sierra 2500 h/d(US $13,995.00)
2007 gmc sierra 2500 h/d(US $21,306.00)
2013 gmc sierra 2500 denali(US $56,995.00)
Auto Services in Indiana
USA Mufflers And Brakes ★★★★★
Total Auto Glass ★★★★★
Tieman Tire of Bloomington Inc ★★★★★
Stoops Buick GMC ★★★★★
Stephens Honda Hyundai ★★★★★
Southworth Ford Lincoln ★★★★★
Auto blog
Submit your questions for Autoblog Podcast #313 LIVE!
Mon, 17 Dec 2012We record Autoblog Podcast #313 tonight, and you can drop us your questions and comments regarding the rest of the week's news via our Q&A module below. Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes if you haven't already done so, and if you want to take it all in live, tune in to our UStream (audio only) channel at 10:00 PM Eastern tonight.
Discussion Topics for Autoblog Podcast Episode #313
2014 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra introduced
Which electric cars can charge at a Tesla Supercharger?
Sun, Jul 9 2023The difference between Tesla charging and non-Tesla charging. Electrify America; Tesla Tesla's advantage has long been its charging technology and Supercharger network. Now, more and more automakers are switching to Tesla's charging tech. But there are a few things non-Tesla drivers need to know about charging at a Tesla station. A lot has hit the news cycle in recent months with regard to electric car drivers and where they can and can't plug in. The key factor in all of that? Whether automakers switched to Tesla's charging standard. More car companies are shifting to Tesla's charging tech in the hopes of boosting their customers' confidence in going electric. Here's what it boils down to: If you currently drive a Tesla, you can keep charging at Tesla charging locations, which use the company's North American Charging Standard (NACS), which has long served it well. The chargers are thinner, more lightweight and easier to wrangle than other brands. If you currently drive a non-Tesla EV, you have to charge at a non-Tesla charging station like that of Electrify America or EVgo — which use the Combined Charging System (CCS) — unless you stumble upon a Tesla charger already equipped with the Magic Dock adapter. For years, CCS tech dominated EVs from everyone but Tesla. Starting next year, if you drive a non-Tesla EV (from the automakers that have announced they'll make the switch), you'll be able to charge at all Supercharger locations with an adapter. And by 2025, EVs from some automakers won't even need an adaptor. Here's how to charge up, depending on which EV you have: Ford 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E. Tim Levin/Insider Ford was the earliest traditional automaker to team up with Tesla for its charging tech. Current Ford EV owners — those driving a Ford electric vehicle already fitted with a CCS port — will be able to use a Tesla-developed adapter to access Tesla Superchargers starting in the spring. That means that, if you own a Mustang Mach-E or Ford F-150 Lightning, you will need the adapter in order to use a Tesla station come 2024. But Ford will equip its future EVs with the NACS port starting in 2025 — eliminating the need for any adapter. Owners of new Ford EVs will be able to pull into a Supercharger station and juice up, no problem. General Motors Cadillac Lyriq. Cadillac GM will also allow its EV drivers to plug into Tesla stations.
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.