1969 Chevelle W/ Pro Built Big Block Ss 396 Engine 11 Sec. Street Car No Reserve on 2040-cars
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Thank you for looking at this NO RESERVE auction for my 69 Chevelle. This car has new paint and new interior on a rust free body from Yuma, Arizona. SS badging and clearcoated SS stripes. It started life as a 350 powered Malibu but now has a super rare 1967 vintage SS 396 BBC (block casting number 3902406396) that is an AR code California engine rated at 325HP at birth. Now up-graded with; forged pistons, forged crank, rectangular port heads, Doug Herbert cam, solid roller, Victor Jr intake, Quickfuel 950 carb w/ stainless plumbing, Holley Red fuel pump, MSD ignition, gear reduction starter motor, Hooker comp headers and mufflers, Moroso pan w/ tray & scrapers, Griffin aluminum radiator. Engine is strong, reliable, with no smoke. TH350 trans built with TCI and B&M internals, HD sprag, Hurst quarterstick, TCI streetfighter converter. 1350 driveshaft, trussed 9” rear end (pinion seal does leak some gear oil), Summers Brothers 31 spline axles, Detroit locker, 4.86 gear, 1350 Mark Williams yoke. Its never seen nitrious or a dyno but has run 11.50 @ 119 w/slicks. All urethane body mounts and suspension bushings, Centerline Convo-Pro wheels at 4.5" & 8.5" wide. Trunk mounted battery with taillight panel cut off switch. Fiberglass cowl hood, decklid and bumpers. Adjustable Corbeau seats w/Diest harnesses, no back seat, Chassis Engineering roll cage (but stock headliner is intact). Not cut up, not tubbed and not a scratch or door ding on it. Always garaged. All original trunk and floor pans. No dash pad or windshield wipers. Door locks, programable tach, oil pressue and water temp gauges work but speedo, odometer and gas gauge do not. Manual steering and power drum brakes. No radio or antenna. This car is solid and quick. A perfect street / strip car to piss off your neighbors and scare your friends. Original cost to build engine, trans, and rear axle was over $12K alone. Available now for only $15488. One bid can win it !!! International buyers OK. Shipping to Los Angeles, San Diego, Vegas, Albequerque or El Paso only $300. Call (480) 330-1495 for more info or e-mail me for more photos. Thanks again for looking. |
Chevrolet Chevelle for Sale
Auto Services in Arizona
Wright Cars ★★★★★
World Class Automotive Repair ★★★★★
Walt`s Body & Paint, LLC ★★★★★
Upark We Sell IT ★★★★★
Tristan Express Auto Sales ★★★★★
Superstition Springs Lexus ★★★★★
Auto blog
The U-2 spy plane needs high-performance cars to help land
Thu, Oct 15 2015Typically, aircraft deploy their landing gear from three main points. Most military aircraft, for example, deploy two gears at the back and one forward, like a tricycle. Some civilian aircraft flip the layout, with two in front and one in back - tail-draggers. The U-2 Dragon Lady is wildly different than any of these. With a 103-foot wingspan but a body that's just 63-feet long, the layout of the U-2 makes a traditional landing setup infeasible. Instead, the U-2 utilizes a pair of wheels, one up front and one in back. With such a bizarre layout, landings are so tough that since the U-2's earliest flights at Area 51, the US Air Force has used high-performance chase cars to guide the pilot down safely. The landing process isn't over there, though. As this video from Sploid shows, balancing out the aircraft to fit the detachable "pogos" – think training wheels for spy planes – is a comical procedure requiring a number of airman using their full body weight to even out the U-2. This video also recaps some of the great vehicles that have served as chase vehicles for this legendary spy plane. They include Chevrolet El Caminos, and the Fox-body Ford Mustangs so favored by the California Highway Patrol. For the last several years, the USAF has utilized products from General Motors, using fourth-generation Chevy Camaros, before switching over to the Pontiac GTO and most recently, the awesome Pontiac G8. It's fair to say that if you're a gearhead in the Air Force, this is the job you want. Check out the video, embedded up top. News Source: Sploid via YouTubeImage Credit: Sploid Chevrolet Ford GM Pontiac Military Performance Videos
Mustang retakes monthly pony car sales crown from Camaro
Wed, Dec 3 2014Going back to their origins in the Swinging '60s, the Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Camaro have been fierce rivals for fans' hearts and dollars. Historically, the Ford often led in volume, but Chevy took the muscle car top spot in 2009 upon the Camaro's rebirth. However, with the launch of the latest Blue Oval pony car, the tide is turning back in Ford's favor. November was the first full month of sales for the new 2015 Mustang, and according to TheDetroitBureau.com, the model did spectacularly well. The Blue Oval shifted 8,728 of them, up 62 percent from same month last year, with the automaker proclaiming it the model's best November sales since 2006. Conversely, 4,385 units of the Camaro were delivered, down 13.5 percent year-over-year, meaning its sales were roughly half that of the new-generation Mustang. Ford is understandably happy with the results, and product development director Raj Nair even hinted to TDB that another version of the Mustang might be unveiled at January's North American International Auto Show. Rumor has it that the model will be the even more potent Shelby Mustang GT350R. Despite the Mustang's November success, the Camaro outsells it year to day. So far in 2014, Ford has sold 73,124 Mustangs versus 79,669 examples of the Camaro. With December offering the last chance for an overtake, the Bowtie may yet remain king for this year's sales crown. A new Camaro is peeking over the horizon, as well. It's reportedly moving to the Alpha platform used by the Cadillac ATS, and production could start in late 2015. Prototypes are already testing at the Nurburgring, and camouflaged examples have been spotted weirdly being compared to its '80s forefather.
BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index
Mon, Oct 10 2016While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.