2013 Nissan Sentra Sr on 2040-cars
615 W Marketview Dr, Champaign, Illinois, United States
Engine:1.8L I4 16V MPFI DOHC
Transmission:Automatic CVT
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 3N1AB7APXDL560185
Stock Num: N14117A
Make: Nissan
Model: Sentra SR
Year: 2013
Exterior Color: Aspen White
Interior Color: Charcoal
Options: Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 1060
SR trim. Extra Clean, ONLY 348 Miles! PRICED TO MOVE $200 below NADA Retail!, EPA 39 MPG Hwy/30 MPG City! Auxiliary Audio Input, CD Player, Head Airbag, ASPEN WHITE, Aluminum Wheels, Serviced here, Autocheck One Owner AND MORE!======KEY FEATURES INCLUDE: Auxiliary Audio Input, CD Player, Aluminum Wheels Rear Spoiler, MP3 Player, Remote Trunk Release, Keyless Entry, Child Safety Locks. ======OPTION PACKAGES: ASPEN WHITE. SR with Aspen White exterior and Charcoal interior features a 4 Cylinder Engine with 130 HP at 6000 RPM*. Serviced here, Autocheck One Owner. ======EXPERTS CONCLUDE: Edmunds.com explains Thanks to improved fuel economy, a welcoming cabin and enhanced infotainment features, the 2013 Nissan Sentra becomes a much more desirable choice in the small sedan class.. Great Gas Mileage: 39 MPG Hwy. ======EXCELLENT VALUE: This Sentra is priced $200 below NADA Retail. Pricing analysis performed on 5/8/2014. Horsepower calculations based on trim engine configuration. Fuel economy calculations based on original manufacturer data for trim engine configuration. Please confirm the accuracy of the included equipment by calling us prior to purchase.
Nissan Sentra for Sale
- 2014 nissan sentra sl(US $20,570.00)
- 2014 nissan sentra s(US $18,220.00)
- 2014 nissan sentra sl(US $23,430.00)
- 2014 nissan sentra sv(US $19,530.00)
- 2014 nissan sentra sl(US $23,660.00)
- 2010 nissan sentra 2.0 sl(US $12,671.00)
Auto Services in Illinois
Woodfield Nissan ★★★★★
West Side Tire and Alignment ★★★★★
U Pull It Auto Parts ★★★★★
Trailside Auto Repair ★★★★★
Tony`s Auto & Truck Repair ★★★★★
Tim`s Automotive ★★★★★
Auto blog
2015 Nissan Murano could have been a lot more boring to look at
Thu, 19 Jun 2014When it debuted at the 2014 New York Auto Show, the third-generation Nissan Murano wowed us more than just about any other car on hand (that's sort of why we handed it an Editors' Choice for the NYIAS). It's sharp, aggressive design was a dramatic departure from the smoother styling of the second-gen CUV, although it wasn't too polarizing. Most importantly, though, it was a vehicle with actual design presence - you want to see it from every angle, all of which draw your eye with something new.
Of course, settling on the design for a new vehicle is far from a straightforward process. While a design might take shape on a designer's drafting table, there are a huge number of steps it needs to get through before making it to an auto show stage or to your local dealer. According to Nissan engineer Chris Reed, those steps very nearly curtailed the Murano's design before the first die was even cast.
Reed has a full account of this sharp design's trials and tribulations in a must-read story from Ward's.
This is Nissan's 2014 Detroit Auto Show concept
Tue, 20 Aug 2013During a media event in Los Angeles today, Nissan flashed a few images of a new concept car that will be unveiled at the 2014 Detroit Auto Show in January. According to Shiro Nakamura, senior vice president and chief creative officer of design and brand management at Nissan, this unnamed concept has a "very strong design signature" and shows "[Nissan's] future design direction."
It's certainly quite sleek, this concept, yet specific elements like the front fascia and taillamps are evolutionary steps from what we're seeing on some of Nissan's newest products. Those rear lamps look like sleeker versions of what the Sentra wears, and that grille appears to be a more stylized version of what the next-generation Rogue has been seen sporting.
As for what, exactly, this concept previews, that's still up in the air, though our best guess is that it hints at a Maxima successor. After all, Nissan did confirm to us that a new Maxima is currently in development, and showing this concept in early 2014 lines up with our predictions that the next-generation sedan should arrive in time for the 2015 model year.
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.