1964 Chevy Impala Ss 409 on 2040-cars
Racine, Wisconsin, United States
Exceptionally clean 1964 Chevy impala SS 409 - This is a very very straight, clean car. NO rust or dents of any kind. No bondo at
all. I am not a dealer or flipper. I’m just a guy that has one too many cars and
its time to sell one and let my wife park her car in the garage this
winter.
Stock 425 HP duel 4 brl carburetors
engine – VERY clean and smooth running.
Recent professional tune up that really nailed the carburetor
sinking. Runs like a kitten and you can
rip the tires right off if you’re so inclined.
This is a white glove car
that you can drive, not a trailer queen.
I entered it into one car show this summer and won, see photo of trophy
below.
Sold AS IS with no warranty.
Buyer is responsible for delivery and transportation or any charges or fees. I will meet and help transport company if
it’s a reasonable after work time.
There are many extra parts
that go along with the sale: full set of stock wheels along with good Goodyear
rubber on them. A fresh/extra rebuilt
starter. Original factory carburetors
included. Has been update to modern twin
4 barrels. Various books and manuals and
clear Wisconsin title. |
Chevrolet Impala for Sale
2005 chevrolet impala sedan police cruiser 3.8 liter v6 n mississippi no reserve
1962 chevrolet impala ss 409 4 speed
1996 chevrolet impala ss sedan 4-door 5.7l
1994 callaway impala ss 34k miles mint rare hot street rat rod collector 95 96
2008 chevy impala lt 3.5l v6 automatic
2001 chevrolet impala ls(US $1,750.00)
Auto Services in Wisconsin
Young`s Auto Repair ★★★★★
Whealon Towing & Service Inc ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Tower Auto Body CARSTAR ★★★★★
Sternot Auto Repair Inc ★★★★★
State Auto Body ★★★★★
Auto blog
Race Recap: Rolex 24 at Daytona was fast and feisty
Mon, Jan 26 2015Let the record show that victory at the 2015 Rolex 24 at Daytona went to the No. 02 Chip Ganassi Racing with Felix Sabates Target/Ford EcoBoost Riley DP driven by Verizon IndyCar drivers Scott Dixon and Tony Kanaan and NASCAR drivers Jamie McMurray and Kyle Larson. The winner did 740 laps to cover 2,634.3 miles in 24 hours and 57.667 seconds. That's a statement to this year's pace in spite of 18 cautions, two more than last year: the Michael Shank Racing Ligier got pole with a time of 1:39.194, slower than last year's pole time of 1:38.270; however, the winning car last year only did 695 laps. The fight for top honors was shaved to a four-car battle over the first third of the event. The No. 02 Ganassi car took the lead on the first lap, swapping it well into the night with the No. 01 Ganassi car, the No. 10 Wayne Taylor Racing Corvette DP, and the defending champion No. 5 Action Express Corvette DP, all of them staying within about 20 seconds of one another. The Action Express car had a fuel connector come loose and lost three laps getting towed back to the pits to have it reattached, but was back in the lead 18 hours in. The No. 01 Ganassi car dropped out with recurring clutch problems 22 hours in, retiring not long after. A race-within-the-race is where the concluding action happened, a seven minute, 30-second dash from the end of the last caution to the checkered flag. During the penultimate pit stops with an hour to go, Dixon was in second place followed Jordan Taylor in the Wayne Taylor Racing DP into the pits but beat him out, taking the lead. The Action Express car was in third. In the last pit stops of the race, Dixon gained even more time, getting a four-second advantage over Taylor. Then a full-course caution came out twenty minutes before the finish when a Prototype Challenge car hit the wall and caught fire, bunching up the field. That closed the pits, but the Wayne Taylor Racing car had to pit during that yellow because of a miscalculation of driver time. No driver can be behind the wheel for more than four hours in a six-hour period but Jordan Taylor was going to go over, so he came in to swap out for brother Ricky. That cost the team any chance of second place, since they took an additional drive-through penalty for entering closed pits. When the track went green again, Sebastien Bourdais in the Action Express car stayed all over Dixon for the final five laps but couldn't get around him.
Chevy Bolt, GM's 200-mile EV, could debut in Detroit
Sat, Jan 10 2015It's not news that General Motors is working on a $30,000 electric vehicle with a 200-mile range. Then-CEO Dan Akerson said as much back in 2013. What we've heard before is that this mystery EV will be based on the Chevrolet Sonic and will will arrive in 2017. So, if that's all correct, then it would make sense that confirmation of this plan would come at the 2015 Detroit Auto Show, which is just around the corner. And lookee here... The Wall Street Journal is reporting that GM will unveil a concept Chevy Bolt at the Detroit show on Monday. That name sure makes sense, too, since GM registered that trademark back in August. According to the Journal, the rumored numbers – 200-mile range, $30,000 price – are still what's expected. Some new purported details are that the battery will come from LG Chem, which also makes the Volt's batteries, and that the Bolt will be a crossover that could be sold around the world. This all smacks of a preemptive strike against the Tesla Model 3, which is also due around 2017. Currently, GM sells the Spark EV in limited areas of the US, despite a lot of excitement for wider availability. To sell a 200-mile EV for $30,000 means that GM and LG Chem will likely have drastically reduced the cost of making a big plug-in vehicle battery. What this means for the new Volt and GM's future plans is something we're more than a little excited about to learn more of on Monday, the same day that we get to see the redesigned Chevy Volt for the first time. Well, aside from the CES teaser. Green Chevrolet Crossover Electric 2015 Detroit Auto Show Chevy Bolt bolt
BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index
Mon, Oct 10 2016While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.