70 Ford Mustang 302 Base 2dr Hardtop on 2040-cars
North Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
I'am the second owner of this car i have owned it for more then 20 years i don't drive it in bad weather or if it's too hot ( in Las Vegas ) if something go's wrong with anything i replace all parts with new parks, its a must have for the true Mustang lovers.
|
Suzuki XL7 for Sale
- 1996 chevrolet camaro z28 convertible 2-door lt1 383 stroker
- 1998 isuzu npr box truck van motor rebuilt in 07 and has 20,000 miles on it(US $5,495.00)
- 1951 ford deluxe base 3.9l(US $2,500.00)
- Ferrari 308 gtsi 1983(US $59,900.00)
- 2001 bmw m3 laguna seca blue 6 speed(US $15,000.00)
- 2006 saturn ion 2 coupe 4-door 2.2l(US $2,500.00)
Auto Services in Nevada
Walkers Mobile Auto Repair ★★★★★
Vegas Speed ★★★★★
Vegas New Finish Technology ★★★★★
Swing Shift Auto ★★★★★
Safe Lube Plus ★★★★★
Purrfect Auto Service ★★★★★
Auto blog
Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?
Wed, Dec 30 2015Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question
Junkyard Gem: 2003 Chevrolet Tracker
Wed, May 22 2024When General Motors created the Geo brand to sell vehicles designed and — in some cases — built by Japanese partners, the first four models were introduced for the 1989 model year: the Metro (Suzuki Cultus), Prizm (Toyota Sprinter), Spectrum (Isuzu Gemini) and Tracker (Suzuki Sidekick). Geo got the axe in 1997, with the Metro, Prizm and Tracker becoming Chevrolets. Of those, the Tracker survived the longest, with U.S.-market sales continuing into 2004. Here's an example of a very late Tracker, found in a North Carolina car graveyard recently. The 1989-1997 first-generation Trackers were based on the Suzuki Sidekick, while the 1998-2004 Trackers had the Suzuki Vitaras (not to be confused with the much grander Grand Vitaras) as their siblings. Production of these trucks for the South American market (as the Chevrolet Vitara) continued in Ecuador all the way through 2014. The Tracker name has also gone onto some versions of the Chevrolet Trax around the world. This one is a base four-door hard top/rear-wheel-drive model, which had an MSRP of $17,330. That's about $29,789 in 2024 dollars. You'll find one in every car. You'll see. The engine is a Suzuki 2.0-liter straight-four rated at 127 horsepower and 134 pound-feet. A five-speed manual was base equipment, but very few American vehicle shoppers wanted three pedals by the middle 2000s. This truck has the Aisin four-speed automatic. We like it loud. It appears that someone associated with this truck graduated from Julius L. Chambers High School last year. In the United States, the Tracker was replaced by the Saturn Vue. If Tracker can handle (unspecified Middle Eastern country), it can survive the jungle back home. Siempre contigo.
Volkswagen forced to sell stake in Suzuki
Mon, Aug 31 2015The six-year-long failed marriage between Volkswagen and Suzuki has finally come to an end. Almost. An arbitration panel in London issued its final verdict which, according to a VW press release, cleared Suzuki in terminating the agreement, so VW now needs to get rid of its 19.9-percent share. However, the tribunal's decision said VW performed all of its obligations and Suzuki didn't – the Japanese carmaker should have given VW last-call rights for a delivery of diesel engines, but failed to. The breach opens Suzuki up to damage claim, but so far VW only says it reserves the right to sue. Now that Suzuki has an outside investor to provide funds it meant to get from VW, perhaps both can get back to their reasons for being. The press release is below. Ruling in arbitration proceedings: Cooperation between Volkswagen and Suzuki deemed terminated - Arbitral tribunal confirms Volkswagen met contractual obligations and finds that Suzuki has ordinary right to terminate agreement based on reasonable notice - Volkswagen to dispose of its 19.9 percent stake in Suzuki and expects positive effect on Company's earnings and liquidity from transaction - Arbitrators also find that Suzuki breached its contractual obligations to Volkswagen under the agreement and that Volkswagen has right to claim damages Wolfsburg, 30 August 2015 - An arbitral tribunal in London has announced its ruling in the dispute between Suzuki Motor Corporation and Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft. As a result, cooperation between the two parties is deemed terminated. The arbitrators confirmed that Volkswagen met its contractual obligations under the cooperation agreement and found that Suzuki has terminated the agreement upon reasonable notice. Volkswagen will therefore now dispose of its 19.9 percent stake in Suzuki and expects a positive effect on the Company's earnings and liquidity from the transaction. The arbitral tribunal also confirmed that Suzuki breached its contractual obligations to Volkswagen under the agreement and that Volkswagen has the right to claim damages. "We welcome the clarity created by this ruling. The tribunal rejected Suzuki's claims of breach and found that Volkswagen met its contractual obligations under the cooperation agreement. Nevertheless, the arbitrators found that termination of the cooperation agreement by Suzuki on reasonable notice was valid, and that Volkswagen must dispose of the shares purchased.