Chevy 2500 Hd Crew Cab 4wd 4x4 Lt 6.6 Duramax Allison Transmission Florida Truck on 2040-cars
Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Fuel Type:Diesel
For Sale By:Dealer
Transmission:Automatic
Body Type:Pickup Truck
Cab Type (For Trucks Only): Crew Cab
Make: Chevrolet
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Model: Silverado 2500
Mileage: 152,566
Options: Leather Seats
Sub Model: 4WD DURAMAX
Safety Features: Driver Airbag
Exterior Color: White
Power Options: Power Windows
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Cylinders: 8
Vehicle Inspection: Inspected (include details in your description)
Chevrolet Silverado 2500 for Sale
- 2008 chevrolet 2500 hd duramax crew cab 4 x 4(US $24,900.00)
- Lbz duramax diesel 6 speed allison ext cab 4x4 lt pkg 8' longbed 3/4 2500hd nice
- 2008 burgundy lt w/1lt 6.6l v8 4x4 lifted flares extended cab xd wheels onstar(US $30,981.00)
- 06 k2500hd (lbz) 6.6 duramax 6spd allison 4wd (reg. cab) very rare carfax tx !!!(US $12,995.00)
- 2004 chevrolet silverado 2500hd extended cab tow pkg plow pkg 4x4 mint cond.
- 2008 chevy silverado turbo 6.6l v8 32v automatic 4wd onstar keyless entry cd xm(US $39,500.00)
Auto Services in Florida
Yow`s Automotive Machine ★★★★★
Xtreme Car Installation ★★★★★
Whitt Rentals ★★★★★
Vlads Autobahn LLC ★★★★★
Village Ford ★★★★★
Ultimate Euro Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
PickupTrucks.com's latest test results in a familiar winner [w/video]
Wed, 19 Jun 2013PickupTrucks.com has gone and thrown the latest batch of half-ton pickups into a cage match to see who would come out on top. The site put the 2014 Chevrolet Silverado 1500, GMC Sierra 1500, 2013 Ford F-150, Ram 1500, Toyota Tundra and Nissan Titan through a battery of tests. Those included 0-60 miles per hour acceleration, 60-0 mph deceleration, fuel economy, a hill climb, and payload and towing. They even threw the rigs on an autocross course to evaluate overall handling. Each truck was given points based on how it scored in each evaluation.
Who came out on top? Somewhat surprisingly, the 2013 Ford F-150 walked away with the gold, though fewer than 50 points separated first and fourth place. Head over to PickupTrucks.com to read the full evaluation and the final results. You may be shocked to see exactly where some of the segment's newest additions placed. You can also watch a video on the test below.
Chevrolet considering midsize crossover to slot between Traverse and Equinox
Mon, Jan 9 2017Crossovers are the new hotness, and automakers are looking to cash in by offering a size and shape for every customer. With Chevrolet's debut of the new 2018 Traverse in Detroit, which grew ever so slightly compared to the first-generation model, there is now a midsize-crossover-sized hole between the three-row Traverse and the compact Equinox. When asked about that obvious space, a Chevrolet spokesperson told us the company is looking into the possibility of expanding its crossover lineup. It should be a relatively simple thing to do, since all it would take is reskinning and rechristening the GMC Acadia with a bow tie, and we all know how much GM loves platform sharing. Although they're now different sizes, the new Acadia and Traverse still use the same platform; the Acadia is now on a short-wheelbase version of the C1XX while the Traverse uses long-wheelbase C1XX parts. A short-wheelbase Chevy built on the C1XX likely would be differentiated visually from both the Acadia and the larger Traverse. It may seem like flooding the lineup with more and more models would cannibalize sales of existing ones, but Chevrolet said it would rather have customers stay within the brand rather than going to another automaker. There have been whispers that some form of the Blazer name (possibly TrailBlazer) may make a return on a midsizer, but if it does don't expect an old-school body-on-frame SUV like the old one. In the end, if Chevy builds it, customers will come. Related Video:
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.