2014 Chevrolet Express 1500 Work Van on 2040-cars
615 NC-66, Kernersville, North Carolina, United States
Engine:4.3L V6 12V MPFI OHV
Transmission:4-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1GCSGAFXXE1130786
Stock Num: 130786
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Express 1500 Work Van
Year: 2014
Exterior Color: Summit White
Interior Color: Medium Pewter
Options: Drive Type: RWD
Number of Doors: 3 Doors
This 2014 Chevrolet Express Cargo Van 3dr RWD 1500 135 Van features a ENGINE, VORTEC 4.3L V6 MF 6cyl Gasoline engine. It is equipped with a 4 Speed Automatic transmission. The vehicle is Summit White with a Medium Pewter interior. It is offered with a full factory warranty. - - Parks Chevy has a longstanding history of making it a pleasant process when buying or servicing your new Chevrolet, offering you guaranteed credit approval and the Triad's best selection... Get the vehicle you want for the payment you need. Minutes from Winston-Salem or Greensboro, Come see why The Little Cheeper Dealer is Worth The Drive!
Chevrolet Express for Sale
- 2014 chevrolet express 1500 work van(US $25,929.00)
- 2014 chevrolet express 1500 work van(US $26,859.00)
- 2014 chevrolet express 1500 work van(US $26,859.00)
- 2014 chevrolet express 1500 work van(US $27,129.00)
- 2014 chevrolet express 3500 work van(US $33,633.00)
- 2014 chevrolet express 3500 lt(US $36,587.00)
Auto Services in North Carolina
Winr Auto Repair ★★★★★
Universal Motors ★★★★★
Universal Automotive 4 x 4 & Drive Shaft Shop, Inc. ★★★★★
Turner Towing & Recovery ★★★★★
Triad Sun Control Inc ★★★★★
Tom`s Automotive ★★★★★
Auto blog
GM recalls 8,500 Chevrolet Malibu models for rear suspension glitch
Mon, 04 Feb 2013According to a letter from General Motors to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, flaws in the build process of the 2013 Chevrolet Malibu have led to the recall of 8,519 cars. Units built between December 6, 2011 and January 15, 2013 may have been assembled with rear suspension cradles that had insufficient torque applied to certain bolts. That out-of-spec assembly could lead to issues ranging from slight noises to a loss of vehicle control.
The problem was first noticed in December of last year by a GM test fleet driver and eventually tracked back to the improperly torqued bolts on the suspension cradle assembled through July 2012 by a supplier located not too far from the Malibu's Detroit/Hamtramck Assembly Plant. Since an official NHTSA recall notice has not been issued yet, it isn't clear whether or not Detroit-built Malibus were the only ones affected (the 2013 Malibu is also built at GM's Fairfax Assembly Plant in Kansas City, Kansas). Dealers will fix the problem by inspecting vehicles for proper torque specs, retightening if not within specs and, in some cases, perform a rear-wheel alignment.
2018 Ford Expedition vs other big SUVs: How it compares on paper
Fri, Nov 10 2017With our Alex Kierstein rightly impressed in his first-drive review of the new 2018 Ford Expedition, we decided to dig a little deeper into the numbers, and we came up with the spreadsheet below to highlight how the new 2018 Expedition compares on paper to its main full-size SUV competitors: the 2018 Chevy Tahoe and Suburban (and therefore the 2018 GMC Yukon), 2018 Toyota Sequoia and 2018 Nissan Armada. We also threw in the new, even bigger 2018 Chevrolet Traverse since, as you'll see, its massive dimensions should put it on the radar for anyone who needs loads of passenger and cargo space but doesn't care as much about towing. A few notes about the chart above. First, the 6.2-liter V8 that's included with the new-for-2018 Tahoe RST trim level is the standard engine on the GMC Yukon Denali. You can apply most of the Tahoe's numbers to the entire Yukon and Yukon XL lineup. Second, though we highlighted categories where the Traverse led, we also highlighted the runner-up full-size SUV, since this was ultimately about that segment. Traverse numbers are broadly applicable to the new Buick Enclave. Related Video: Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan Toyota SUV Comparison consumer ford expedition gmc yukon chevy traverse toyota sequoia nissan armada chevrolet tahoe ford expedition max
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.