72 Nova Ss 350-4 300hp Th400 Dual Exhaust Power Disc Ice Cold Factory Ac on 2040-cars
Braselton, Georgia, United States
Body Type:Coupe
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Used
Year: 1972
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Nova
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Mileage: 103,747
Sub Model: SS Options
Exterior Color: Red
Interior Color: Black
Doors: 2
Number of Cylinders: 8
Engine Description: 350-4bbl 300+hp
Chevrolet Nova for Sale
1971 nova pro touring *350 ram jet *od auto* factory a/c*(US $25,000.00)
1962 chevy ii nova fully restored !!(US $19,000.00)
Documented 9k mile nova ss 327/350 l79 v8 4 speed(US $149,900.00)
1969 chevy nova 350***(US $6,000.00)
1963 chevy ii/ nova wagon
1970 nova ss l78 l34 4 speed factory big block
Auto Services in Georgia
Wright`s Professional Window ★★★★★
Vick`s Auto ★★★★★
V-Pro Vinyl & Leather Repair ★★★★★
Trailers & Hitches ★★★★★
Tire Town ★★★★★
Thornton Auto Care ★★★★★
Auto blog
2014 Corvette Stingray meets Tesla Model S in drag strip showdown
Wed, Jan 29 2014They come from two different worlds and have little in common. The Tesla Model S P85 is the sportiest version of this paradigm-punching sedan from California, while the 2014 Corvette Stingray Z51 is a performance-enhanced version of Michigan's recently-updated sports car stalwart. The West Coast car seats five adults and eats electrons like Popeye eats spinach, the Easterner has two passenger places and, surprisingly, sips gasoline like one might bourbon. An attribute they do happen to share is extreme quickness. This similarity is all the excuse Drag Times needed to set the vehicles beside each other at the Palm Beach International Raceway for a bit of mano-a-mano quarter-mile combat. Fortunately enough, cameras were rolling for each of two bouts down the blacktop and the results recorded for our edification and enlightenment. The winner? We won't spoil it for you, but let's just say it's really, really close. How close? Scroll below and watch the video for yourself. Just be warned, the results may surprise you. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.
Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]
Tue, 05 Feb 2013Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.
Smaller Cars Endure Big Problems On Crash Test
Wed, Jan 22 2014In a crash test of 11 of the smallest cars on the market, only one vehicle received an acceptable rating. The rest received marginal or poor ratings in the study, providing evidence that supports a widely held notion that smaller cars are among the least safe on the road. No other vehicle group has performed as poorly on a new crash test than these mini cars, says the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the nonprofit group that conducted the testing. The latest results of which were released Wednesday. The Chevrolet Spark was the only car earning an overall "acceptable" rating on the small-front overlap test, and even that vehicle had its shortcomings, IIHS said. "Small lightweight vehicles have an inherent safety disadvantage," said Joe Nolan, the senior vice president for vehicle research at IIHS. "That's why it's even more important to choose one with the best occupant protection. Unfortunately, as a group, minicars aren't performing as well as other vehicle categories." The Mazda2, Kia Rio, Toyota Yaris and certain Ford Fiesta models all received "marginal" overall grades on the test, while the Mitsubishi Mirage, Nissan Versa, Toyota Prius C, Hyundai Accent, Fiat 500 and Honda Fit all earned "poor" ratings. Results from these sub-compact cars fare much worse than vehicles sized just a little bit bigger, IIHS said. Among 17 cars evaluated in the small category, five earned "good" ratings and five more earned "acceptable." Only introduced a year ago, the small-front overlap test has quickly become a key indicator of differences in automotive safety. IIHS introduced it as a way to replicate what happens when the front corner of a vehicle collides with a tree or utility pole at 40 miles per hour. In the real world, these sorts of accidents are more dangerous than others, in part because they bypass the front-end crush zones on most cars. TOP 5Most Researched Sedans 2013 Honda Accord MSRP : $21,680 2013 Hyundai Sonata MSRP : $20,895 2013 Nissan Altima MSRP : $21,760 2014 Honda Accord MSRP : $21,955 2013 Toyota Corolla MSRP : $16,230 Automakers have been rushing to make design changes to the front ends of their cars. Without a grade of acceptable or better, they cannot qualify for the IIHS' overall Top Safety Pick+ honor, given annually to the safest models on the market.
2040Cars.com © 2012-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.058 s, 7822 u