Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

2014 Nissan S Plus on 2040-cars

US $13,905.00
Year:2014 Mileage:5
Location:

Costa Mesa, California, United States

Costa Mesa, California, United States

Auto Services in California

Zip Auto Glass Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Windshield Repair, Glass-Auto, Plate, Window, Etc
Address: 2175 Market St, Pacifica
Phone: (888) 355-8508

Woodland Motors Chevrolet Buick Cadillac GMC ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, New Car Dealers, Automobile Parts & Supplies
Address: 1680 E Main St, Zamora
Phone: (888) 990-7501

Willy`s Auto Repair Shop ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 963 Harrison street,, San-Quentin
Phone: (415) 771-8805

Westside Body & Paint ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Automobile Body Shop Equipment & Supplies
Address: 5054 W Avenue M2, Leona-Valley
Phone: (661) 943-3639

Westcoast Autobahn ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Diagnostic Service, Automobile Inspection Stations & Services
Address: 841 W Collins Ave, Cowan-Heights
Phone: (714) 997-7888

Westcoast Auto Sales ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers, Wholesale Used Car Dealers
Address: 5180 Holt Blvd # A, Chino-Hills
Phone: (909) 900-0000

Auto blog

Nissan's Dacia Duster-based Terrano revealed

Thu, 22 Aug 2013

The new Nissan Terrano has appeared in production form after an apparent August 20 launch in India, but the small sport utility vehicle remains sadly aloof from the US market. We've had our eyes on the Terrano ever since we learned it would be produced as an upscale alternative to the Dacia Duster on which it's based, but currently Nissan has no plans to import it here. Blame safety and perhaps emissions laws - the Duster was never designed for our market.
Even with these less-than-high resolution images, it's clear that the beyond the obvious badges, Nissan's signature trapezoidal grille and a slightly altered rear end with new taillights are the biggest visual clues that this is the Terrano, but those with astute eyes will also notice a slightly redesigned hood and blacked-out door pillars instead of the Duster's body-colored items. Either way, it looks to be a handsome, low-cost little brute - the sort of simple and rugged SUV that's hard to come by in today's marketplace.

Ford Mustang chief engineer, mid-engine Corvette | Autoblog Podcast #488

Fri, Sep 16 2016

Note: There were some technical difficulties that prevented some of you from downloading this week's podcast. The player and link below should be working now, and the file has reached iTunes and other feeds as well. Thanks to everyone who wrote in to let us know of the issues! On the podcast this week, we have some questions for Ford Chief Engineer Carl Widman. Plus, Associate Editor Reese Counts joins Mike Austin to talk about the latest news, most notably the spy photos of the upcoming mid-engine Corvette. We also chat about the Jaguar F-Type Coupe, the Nissan Armada, and why 0-60 mph is a stupid performance figure. And, of course, we get into some Spend My Money advice, telling strangers what car to buy. And new this week is a cost-no-object what-cars-would-you-buy game. The rundown is below. And don't forget to send us your questions, money-spend or otherwise, to podcast at autoblog dot com. Autoblog Podcast #488 The video meant to be presented here is no longer available. Sorry for the inconvenience. Topics and stories we mention Mid-engine Chevrolet Corvette spied Chevy Bolt EV comes with 238 miles of range Ford will sell self-driving cars by 2025 Jaguar F-Type Coupe 2017 Nissan Armada (yes, Mike knows it's not a Patrol) Ford Mustang Chief Engineer Carl Widman interview Spend My Money - we give purchase advice Why 0–60 mph is a stupid performance test Rundown Intro - 00:00 The news - 03:30 What we've been driving - 16:20 Carl Widman - 26:44 Spend my money - 37:03 New fun game - 51:48 0–60 mph is overrated - 56:50 Total Duration: 1:04:57 Get The Podcast iTunes – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Feedback Email – Podcast at Autoblog dot com Review the show in iTunes Podcasts Chevrolet Ford Jaguar Nissan Car Buying nissan armada mid-engine corvette jaguar f-type coupe

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Mon, Aug 6 2018

Over 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.