2010 Chevy 2500hd Diesel 4x4 Lt1 Crew Cab 1 Owner on 2040-cars
Mansfield, Texas, United States
Chevrolet Silverado 2500 for Sale
- 2006 grill guard gray cloth trailer hitch v8 duramax diesel 105k miles
- 2013 chevy silverado 2500hd crew z71 4x4 diesel leather texas direct auto(US $42,480.00)
- Chevy crew cab ltz 4x4 duramax diesel leather shortbed rev camera auto tow
- Chevy silverado 2500hd 4wd extended cab 6.0l gas autocheck no reserve
- Duramax turbo diesel!allison trans!crew cab 4x4 lt ! just serviced !warranty !05(US $14,870.00)
- 2001 ls used 6.0 crew cab chevy 4x4 engine apart auto clean title no reserve
Auto Services in Texas
Wolfe Automotive ★★★★★
Williams Transmissions ★★★★★
White And Company ★★★★★
West End Transmissions ★★★★★
Wallisville Auto Repair ★★★★★
VW Of Temple ★★★★★
Auto blog
Why the Corvette's Performance Data Recorder can be illegal in some states
Fri, 26 Sep 2014The Performance Data Recorder with Valet Mode available on the 2015 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray seems like a fantastic tool for many owners. Whether they are taking 720p video while lapping the track in their new 'Vette, or just want to protect their purchase from inconsiderate joyriders, the system offers a lot of functionality in one package. However, one of the PDR's features might get buyers in trouble with the law, and it has nothing to do with recording some illicit high-speed driving on a favorite back road. The problem hinges on the various state laws concerning a person's right to privacy.
According to a letter posted by Jalopnik, Chevy dealers are asking 2015 Corvette owners not to use the Valet Mode portion of the PDR because it records audio in the cabin, in addition to performance specs. That's a problem because privacy laws vary from state to state with some requiring just one side's consent to tape sound and others requiring all parties to agree. According Jalopnik, 15 states mandate everyone's permission beforehand, but it's not clear whether these numbers are up to date. (Actually, the report varies, saying 13 states in some places and 15 in a list.)
According to the letter, Chevy is already working on a software update for the near future to rectify the issue. It's possible that simply adding a warning to drivers and the ability to turn off the audio recording function in Valet Mode might solve the problem. Obviously, this doesn't preclude Corvette drivers from using the performance aspect of the PDR, and owners are free tape lap after lap at the track.
Next Chevy Volt will be 2016 model and ride on new chassis
Fri, Mar 7 2014What do we know about the 2016 Chevy Volt? Well, for now, all we can do is try to put the puzzle together without the box. Thankfully, a new batch of pieces has arrived from a new report in Edmunds, which says that the 2016 model year will introduce the second generation of a car that hasn't been dramatically updated since it went on sale in 2010. The new Volt is getting an "evolutionary styling change" and will ride on a new front-drive platform that has been developed by General Motors. GM's Kevin Kelly told AutoblogGreen that he has "no comment on future products," but he did acknowledge that Chevrolet is working on a second-generation Volt, "but I can't say anything about timing." Everybody already knew that a next-gen Volt is coming, so that's not a surprise. What we don't know is any real concrete information on the car itself. The few tidbits of information we do have help define the outlines of the next version of Chevy's halo car, but they're not confirmed yet. For the record, they range from the eye-raising (a $10,000 price drop) to the logical (20 percent more electric range). We can't see the whole picture yet, but the pieces do point to the 2016 Volt, which would be released next year sometime, being a much bigger deal than the last update, when the Volt's range was increased by three electric miles thanks to a battery capacity increase of 16 kWh to 16.5.
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.