1966 Chevrolet Nova Wagon - 283ci V8 - Only 32k Original Miles - All Original!!! on 2040-cars
Scottsdale, Arizona, United States
Engine:283ci V8
Body Type:Wagon
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
Exterior Color: Maroon
Make: Chevrolet
Interior Color: Light Fawn
Model: Nova
Number of Cylinders: 8
Trim: Wagon
Drive Type: RWD
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Mileage: 32,174
Sub Model: 4dr Wagon
Chevrolet Nova for Sale
Auto Services in Arizona
Vibert Auto Tech ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Town & Country Motors ★★★★★
Tempe Kia ★★★★★
Tanner Motors ★★★★★
Sycata Car Care ★★★★★
Auto blog
Here are all the cars GM is axing as part of its restructuring
Tue, Nov 27 2018GM plans to kill off a couple of great and a few meh cars as part of its restructuring. Here's a rundown of all the cars being phased out of production. None of the vehicles GM axed were SUVs or crossovers. Instead, it was an action reminiscent of what Ford recently decided to do by discontinuing U.S. sales every Blue Oval sedan. GM just didn't explicitly say, "We're killing our cars," like Ford did — probably a smart move by GM. Keep scrolling down to see the full list of deceased GM models. Chevrolet Volt This one was the most surprising of all the cars GM decided to can, primarily because cars with plugs are supposed to be our future. However, maybe consumer demand just isn't quite there yet for a plug-in like the Volt. We came up with all sorts of ideas for what was to blame for the untimely demise of the Volt, so go check that out for a full breakdown of the situation. Cadillac CT6 Here's another car we'll be sad to see go. Cadillac's flagship sedan was such a joy to drive, and it served as the conduit to deliver GM's semi-autonomous Super Cruise system, which still hasn't been surpassed by any other company's technology in our books, even Tesla's Autopilot. That being said, GM does plan to produce the CT6 until March, with the last cars coming off the line set to be twin-turbo V8 V-Series models. If it's going to go, this seems like a pretty great way to make an exit. We'll be patiently awaiting the next flagship Cadillac once this one finally fades away. Chevrolet Impala The Impala is actually a pretty good car. It doesn't sell terribly, and we think it's a completely satisfactory car to drive. However, people would rather have a Traverse or Equinox these days, making the Impala one of the vehicles to find itself on this list. Chevrolet is keeping its smaller brother, the Malibu, but a big, full-size sedan just isn't what people are ordering up these days. It's unfortunate to see it go, but we won't be broken up over it. Chevrolet Cruze We wouldn't rank the Cruze at the top of the compact car class, but if you were looking for a small, cheap American car, it was either this or the Focus. The Cruze had the potential to be a true small performance car if Chevy had ever wanted to make it into one. But sadly, we're seeing it bow out before Chevy ever tried to slot a hot engine and suspension in there to make it competitive with other hot hatches. A Cruze SS would have made enthusiasts take notice.
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.
2019 Chevy Silverado 1500 vs. 2019 Ram 1500 vs. 2018 Ford F-150: How they compare
Mon, Jan 15 2018The full-size pickup truck market is seriously hot right now. Both Ram and Chevrolet have introduced completely redesigned trucks, the 2019 Ram 1500 and the 2019 Chevy Silverado, and as the companies slowly roll each one out, more and more information comes to light. We've put together this comparison post to help you keep track of all the features and specifications of each of these new models, along with the updated 2018 Ford F-150. Among the stats we'll take a look at are engines, power, fuel economy, trim levels, weight and more. Weight savings Both the 2019 Ram 1500 and 2019 Chevy Silverado 1500 have gone on a diet for the new model year, similar to the one the F-150 went on in 2015. The Silverado is the weight-loss leader, having shed 450 pounds when comparing quad-cab V8 models. The Ram 1500 lost 225 pounds compared to the current truck. Both trucks achieve their weight loss in part due to the use of aluminum parts. On the Silverado, the hood, doors, and tailgate are aluminum, while on the Ram, just the hood and tailgate are aluminum on the body. Compare that to the F-150, which uses aluminum for all exterior body panels for a total weight loss of up to 732 pounds, which makes the aluminum-intensive F-150 the weight-loss leader. View 160 Photos Engines and transmissions There's only a bit of overlap in powertrains on the Ram 1500 and Chevy Silverado. Each has a V8 for the top engine. The Ram's is a 5.7-liter Hemi V8 making 395 horsepower and 410 pound-feet of torque. The Silverado will once again use a 6.2-liter V8 as its range topper with the same 420 horsepower and 460 pound-feet of torque as the current model. Both of these V8s boast some extra fuel saving technology. The Chevy's 6.2-liter (and some 5.3-liters) comes with the company's latest cylinder deactivation system that can shut off any or nearly all of the eight cylinders. The Ram's V8 boasts an optional 48-volt mild-hybrid system that, in addition to likely helping fuel economy, can provide up to 130 pound-feet of torque right off the line. With the Ram, fuel economy sees an improvement of 2 mpg in the city and combined ratings for 17 and 19 respectively. Highway fuel economy improves by 1 mpg to 23 with two-wheel drive and 22 with four-wheel drive. The Silverado's 6.2-liter V8 only improves city fuel economy by 1 mpg to 16, and actually loses 1 mpg on the highway. The new 5.3-liter engine with the fancy cylinder deactivation does see an improvement over the simpler version.