1961 Apache C-10 Panel Truck on 2040-cars
Plattsmouth, Nebraska, United States
Body Type:panel truck
Vehicle Title:Rebuilt, Rebuildable & Reconstructed
Engine:inline 6
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Number of Cylinders: 6
Make: Chevrolet
Model: C-10
Trim: base
Drive Type: manual
Mileage: 100,000
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
1961 chevy apache c-10 panel truck
3 speed on the tree
has original stereo and speedometer
truck has had new turn key installed so you can start it up
wood bed
has all four rims and comes with spare rim
all original truck has not been redone at anytime
would be great to restore
Inline 6 runs great
there is no master cylinder so we can not test the brakes or tranny truck does role free though
no bench seat
NO TITLE you can apply to get one though
Please look at all picture as they explain the condition of the truck. truck will need to be rebuilt
Chevrolet C-10 for Sale
Auto Services in Nebraska
Troy`s Automotive ★★★★★
Rojam Machine ★★★★★
Parkway 66 Service ★★★★★
Ming Auto Beauty Center ★★★★★
Lakeside Auto Recyclers ★★★★★
CARSTAR Glenn`s Body Shop ★★★★★
Auto blog
Chevy's low-cost pedestrian avoidance to debut on 2016 Malibu
Tue, Jul 28 2015The mainstreaming of safety technologies that began on luxury vehicles will get a big boost from General Motors later this year. The General says it plans to offer 22 driver assistance systems across its product portfolio of 2016 models, starting with the redesigned Chevrolet Malibu - the one that we know will keep tabs on teenagers for the benefit of parents. Pedestrian avoidance will be another of its available options. Instead of kitting the sedan out with numerous and expensive radar arrays, the GM system uses the camera mounted next to the rearview mirror that is already used for the lane-keeping function. New software lets it detect pedestrians, and when it detects a potential collision with one, it can alert the driver and brake autonomously if the driver doesn't react. Eventually, engineers want to give it the ability to do the same with cyclists. Because it uses existing hardware updated with new code, GM says the application costs "a few hundred dollars." GM demonstrated the Front Pedestrian Braking preventing a crash with a dummy pedestrian at speeds up to 15 miles per hour. Automotive News reports that it will reduce the severity of impact up to 40 miles per hour, but "may not be of much use in collisions at higher speeds." That feature will also join the options list of the Cadillac CT6. The press release below has more on GM's driver tech soon on the way. Related Video: GM Paving Way to Smarter and Safer Driving at All-New Active Safety Test Area 22 crash-avoidance technologies offered on 2016 Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac models MILFORD, Mich. 2015-07-24 – Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac will offer 22 different active safety technologies across their 2016 model year U.S. lineups, ranging from driver alerts to those that automatically intervene and assist the driver in critical situations. Safety engineers will develop and test these and other safety technologies for products around the world at GM's new, 52-acre Active Safety Test Area at its Milford Proving Ground near Detroit. The $14 million facility officially opened Friday. "Our comprehensive safety strategy of helping customers before, during and after a crash continues," said Jeff Boyer, vice president of GM Global Vehicle Safety.
GM adds 1,200 jobs at Detroit-Hamtramck plant
Thu, Oct 22 2015General Motors is making a big move at its Hamtramck, MI, factory, announcing it will add a second shift and hire over 1,200 workers within the next several months. It's expected that by early 2016, the factory will employ over 2,800 workers to build the Chevrolet Volt, Impala, Malibu, Cadillac ELR, and by early next year, the new CT6. According to GM Hamtramck spokesperson Courtney Zemke, 40 of the 1,200 positions are for salaried employees, while the remainder will be hourly positions. As for where these employees will go, positions are being made available across the factory, so GM isn't focusing on any particular area for its new hires. It's a similar story behind the hiring surge itself. GM said in its press release that the "second shift is necessary to meet forecasted market demand," a position Zemke reiterated. It's a matter of demand across the plant's portfolio, rather than any one particular product seriously outstripping supply. Naturally, the United Auto Workers is happy with the move. "The workforce at Detroit-Hamtramck is second to none," UAW Local 22 Shop Chairman Don LaForest said in the attached release. "We appreciate the opportunity to expand our UAW-GM family." Hiring is going on now, with the second shift slated to get underway in early 2016. GM's Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly to Add Second Shift and More Than 1,200 Jobs Plant will nearly double its workforce by early 2016 2015-10-22 DETROIT – General Motors is nearly doubling its workforce at Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly by adding a second shift and more than 1,200 hourly and salaried jobs. The addition of a second shift will increase the plant's workforce to approximately 2,800 people when hiring is completed. The second shift is necessary to meet forecasted market demand for the five cars produced at Detroit-Hamtramck. "This is the result of the award-winning vehicles Detroit-Hamtramck produces and the confidence GM has in our team to build world-class quality for our customers," said Plant Manager Gary West. Second shift hiring is underway, and the shift is scheduled to begin operations in early 2016. "The workforce at Detroit-Hamtramck is second to none," said UAW Local 22 Shop Chairman Don LaForest. "We appreciate the opportunity to expand our UAW-GM family." The 4.1 million-square-foot Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly opened in 1985. GM has invested $1 billion in the plant over the last six years, making it one of the company's most-agile manufacturing facilities in North America.
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.