Gasser 1956 Chevy on 2040-cars
Smithtown, New York, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:NO ENGINE
For Sale By:Private Seller
Exterior Color: WHITE W/RED & BLUE
Make: Chevrolet
Interior Color: BLK.
Model: Bel Air/150/210
Trim: 210
Drive Type: NO TRANSMISSION
Number of Doors: 2
Mileage: 0
Original c/gas drag car from LI,NY. Been in storage since late 70's early 80's.Has 10%engine setback, Kellison fiberglass doors & tilt nose, plexiglass side windows & a beautiful 2stage urethane paint job with pearl in the clearcoat. Paint is same scheme as when car was raced only redone in modern urethane about 15 years ago. The body & chassis on this car are totally rust free! never ever had any patches or rust repair done! Has all new body mounts. Car needs updated roll cage with a dash bar to be NHRA legal. Needs brake lines, master & pedals. Rear quarters are radiused & rear rims are 16x8 US mags with original 10.00x16 piecrust Racemasters in near mint condition. Front wheels are 15x4 Americans. Rear is Chevy 12 bolt &(originally raced with early Olds rear)has 5.14 gears. Front suspension is stock control arms with Moroso trick springs & ball joint spacers. Was raced in c/gas with a tunnel rammed small block & 4 speed. Car is being sold as a roller, NO engine or transmission. Headers are not for sale. I reserve the right to cancel this auction at any time as this car is also for sale locally.(631) 495-9964 Buyer is responsible for transport. If you do not have the money to pay for this car please do not bid on it! Any bids with feedback below 99% will not be accepted.
Chevrolet Bel Air/150/210 for Sale
Auto Services in New York
Zafuto Automotive Service Inc ★★★★★
X-Treme Auto Glass ★★★★★
Willow Tree Auto Repair ★★★★★
Willis Motors ★★★★★
Wicks Automotive Inc ★★★★★
Whalen Chevrolet Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
GM isn't liable for punitive damages in ignition switch cases
Wed, Nov 20 2019NEW YORK — A federal appeals court said General Motors is not liable for punitive damages over accidents that occurred after its 2009 bankruptcy and involved vehicles it produced earlier, including vehicles with faulty ignition switches. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said on Tuesday that the automaker did not agree to contractually assume liability for punitive damages as part of its federally-backed Chapter 11 reorganization. GM filed for bankruptcy in June 2009, and its best assets were transferred to a new Detroit-based company with the same name. The other assets and many liabilities stayed with "Old GM," which is also known as Motors Liquidation Co. Tuesday's 3-0 decision may help GM reduce its ultimate exposure in nationwide litigation over defective ignition switches in several Chevrolet, Pontiac and Saturn models. It is also a defeat for drivers involved in post-bankruptcy accidents, including those who collided with older GM vehicles driven by others, as well as their law firms. The ignition switch defect could cause engine stalls and keep airbags from deploying, and has been linked to 124 deaths. A lawyer for the drivers and their law firms did not immediately respond to requests for comment. GM had no comment. Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs said GM's agreement to acquire assets "free and clear" of most liabilities excused it from punitive damages claims for Old GM's conduct. He also noted that the judge who oversaw the bankruptcy concluded that the new company could not be liable for claims that the "deeply insolvent" Old GM would never have paid. The decision upheld a May 2018 ruling by U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan, who oversees the ignition switch litigation. Drivers have sought a variety of damages in that litigation, including for declining resale values. GM has recalled more than 2.6 million vehicles since 2014 over ignition switch problems. It has also paid more than $2.6 billion in related penalties and settlements, including $900 million to settle a U.S. Department of Justice criminal case. The case is In re: Motors Liquidation Co, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 18-1940. Government/Legal Chevrolet Pontiac Saturn Safety gm ignition switch
CA Chevy dealer allegedly adds $50K 'market value adjustment' to 2015 Z06
Fri, Jan 9 2015It seems to happen with every eagerly anticipated new car – dealerships, recognizing that crushing demand far outstrips the initial limited supply of a new model, inflate the price via a so-called "market value adjustment." We've seen it in the past with a number of new models, and now it's happening again with one of the Detroit 3's hottest vehicles. A dealership in Roseville, CA, outside of Sacramento, has allegedly attached a staggering $49,995 market value adjustment to a 2015 Corvette Z06. We say allegedly because, despite the evidence uncovered by BoostAddict, John L. Sullivan Chevy's online inventory listing doesn't display the price premium of the Z06 in question, a (normally) $93,965 model with the top-end 3LZ trim. It's unclear if either of the dealer's other Z06s, both 3LZs, one of which is in transit, will receive similar price adjustments. Now, legally, Sullivan Chevy isn't doing anything wrong here. Dealerships are under no obligation to observe a manufacturer's suggested retail price, a point General Motors' spokesperson Ryndee Carney pointed out to Autoblog via email. "For the Corvette Z06, Chevrolet has established a Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price we feel is right for the market. Actual transaction prices, however, are the province of the dealer," Carney said, adding that a dealer zone manager will be discussing the price hike with the dealership. While we also reached out to the dealership over both the market value adjustment and the price of the Z06 as it appears on the company's website, we've yet to hear back as of this writing. Should they reply to our inquiries, we'll be sure to update you. Until then, we'd like to hear what you think about this case. Is Sullivan Chevy simply pricing the cars as high as it thinks the market can bear, or is this a cash grab for an hotly anticipated product? Have your say in Comments.
Ram 1500 bests new F-150 in MT pickup shootout
Tue, Nov 25 2014Ford's 2015 Ford F-150 is a technological tour-de-force, what with its aluminum-intensive construction and its powerful and efficient new 2.7-liter EcoBoost engine option. But now that it's hit the market, it's time to get down to brass tacks and find out how just the latest F-150 actually stands up to its rivals in the hyper-competitive fullsize segment. Motor Trend is among the first to round up the Ford (in Lariat 2.7-liter 4X4 guise here) and put it up against the Ram 1500 Outdoorsman EcoDiesel 4x4 and 5.3-liter-equipped Silverado 1500 LTZ Z71 to find out how Dearborn's new-think truck measures up. The test put the trio through over 1,000 miles of tough driving in California and Arizona in a variety of conditions from just cruising around unladen to hauling a trailer. MT found all three trucks to be competent, but the most praise got heaped on the Ram and the Ford, with the Chevrolet falling a step behind its competitors in many tests. Among the Ford's most-liked features was its 2.7-liter, twin-turbo V6 that helped make the F-150 easily the quickest of the group, with some editors saying the engine felt about the same whether driving around with cargo in the bed or not. There was some minor turbo lag during acceleration while trailering, but that issue affected the Ram, too. The Ram's powertrain was lauded, as well. The EcoDiesel was torquey around town, and the 1500's combination of an eight-speed automatic and air suspension was judged to be the best of the lot. It was the most difficult to get into the bed, though. The Ram also won the fuel economy award by netting 20-miles-per-gallon city and 28-mpg highway in the test to beat its Environmental Protection Agency ratings of 19/27. The Ford's EcoBoost managed 17/22, one mpg off each from the EPA numbers, and using a lot of throttle really depleted its efficiency. As MT notes, however, it would take time for the diesel's mileage savings to pay off at the pump for these two trucks. In the end, the Ram just barely eked out the win, with the title partially earned because of "the Ford's unknown maintenance and aluminum repair costs," according to MT. Go check out the full comparison to read all of the details, then let us know what you think in Comments.