2007 Chevy Tahoe 4x4 6-pass Navigation Rear Cam 41k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars
Stafford, Texas, United States
Engine:See Description
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Transmission:Automatic
Body Type:SUV
Warranty: Vehicle has an existing warranty
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Tahoe
Options: CD Player, 4-Wheel Drive
Power Options: Power Seats, Power Windows, Power Locks, Cruise Control
Mileage: 41,311
Sub Model: WE FINANCE!!
Exterior Color: White
Number Of Doors: 4
Interior Color: Tan
CALL NOW: 281-410-6100
Number of Cylinders: 8
Inspection: Vehicle has been inspected
Seller Rating: 5 STAR *****
Chevrolet Tahoe for Sale
2005 chevy tahoe ls 6 pass leather cruise ctrl 51k mi texas direct auto(US $15,980.00)
Chevrolet tahoe 4wd z71 heated leather 3rd row tv/dvd sunroof clean no reserve
Only 57k one owner miles, navigation, rear entertainment, 3rd row seat(US $29,900.00)
2004 chevy tahoe 2wd lt, loaded, financing available(US $10,987.00)
2008 chevrolet tahoe ls sport utility 4-door 5.3l, lic#8454
2004 chevy tahoe lt z71 4x4,rust free,1 tx owner,clean title(US $6,990.00)
Auto Services in Texas
Your Mechanic ★★★★★
Yale Auto ★★★★★
Wyatt`s Discount Muffler & Brake ★★★★★
Wright Auto Glass ★★★★★
Wise Alignments ★★★★★
Wilkerson`s Automotive & Front End Service ★★★★★
Auto blog
GM recalling 1.4 million older vehicles for oil leak fire risk
Tue, Oct 27 2015General Motors is recalling 1,411,332 older vehicles with its 3.8-liter V6 yet again due to a fire risk. Specifically, there are 1,283,340 of them in the US, and the affected models are the: 1997-2004 Pontiac Grand Prix 2000-2004 Chevrolet Impala 1998-1999 Chevrolet Lumina 1998-2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo 1998-1999 Oldsmobile Intrigue 1997- 2004 Buick Regal The fault with these vehicles is that oil can drip onto the hot exhaust manifold during hard braking, which can potentially cause of fire. In the last six years, there have 19 reported minor injuries from this problem but no crashes or fatalities, according to the company. Spokesperson Alan Adler also told Autoblog: "GM has reports of 1,345 fires in vehicles that were repaired under two previous recalls for this issue." At this time, GM is still developing a remedy for the problem. According to Adler, the company advised owners to park these vehicles outside for the previous recalls. "The cars can be safely driven. In cases where a customer reported an engine fire while driving, smoke was reported, which would be an indication of a malfunction," he said. This is GM's fourth recall for this problem since 2008, according to The Detroit News. At one point it was believed that aging valve cover gaskets allowed the oil to leak out and drip onto the manifold. A campaign in 2009 covered nearly 1.5 million of these models through the 2003 model year for the same issue. At the time, dealers installed new spark plug wire retainers as a fix. Related Video: GM Statement: General Motors is recalling 1,283,340 older sedans and coupes in the U.S. from the 1997 to 2004 model years because drops of oil may be deposited on the hot exhaust manifold through hard braking, which can cause engine compartment fires. GM is working on a remedy. The company is aware of post-repair fires in some vehicles but no crashes or fatalities. There have been 19 reported minor injuries over the last six years. These vehicles with 3.8-liter V6 3800 engines are affected: 1997-2004 Pontiac Grand Prix, 2000-2004 Chevrolet Impala, 1998-1999 Chevrolet Lumina and 1998-2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, 1998-1999 Oldsmobile Intrigue and 1997-2004 Buick Regal. Including Canada, Mexico and exports, the total population is 1,411,332.
Best car infotainment systems: From UConnect to MBUX, these are our favorites
Sun, Jan 7 2024Declaring one infotainment system the best over any other is an inherently subjective matter. You can look at quantitative testing for things like input response time and various screen load times, but ask a room full of people that have tried all car infotainment systems what their favorite is, and you’re likely to get a lot of different responses. For the most part, the various infotainment systems available all share a similar purpose. They aim to help the driver get where they're going with navigation, play their favorite tunes via all sorts of media playback options and allow folks to stay connected with others via phone connectivity. Of course, most go way beyond the basics these days and offer features like streaming services, in-car performance data and much more. Unique features are aplenty when you start diving through menus, but how they go about their most important tasks vary widely. Some of our editors prefer systems that are exclusively touch-based and chock full of boundary-pushing features. Others may prefer a back-to-basics non-touch system that is navigable via a scroll wheel. You can compare it to the phone operating system wars. Just like some prefer Android phones over iPhones, we all have our own opinions for what makes up the best infotainment interface. All that said, our combined experience tells us that a number of infotainment systems are at least better than the rest. WeÂ’ve narrowed it down to five total systems in their own subcategories that stand out to us. Read on below to see our picks, and feel free to make your own arguments in the comments. Best infotainment overall: UConnect 5, various Stellantis products Ram 1500 Uconnect Infotainment System Review If thereÂ’s one infotainment system that all of us agree is excellent, itÂ’s UConnect. It has numerous qualities that make it great, but above all else, UConnect is simple and straightforward to use. Ease of operation is one of the most (if not the single most) vital parts of any infotainment system interface. If youÂ’re expected to be able to tap away on a touchscreen while driving and still pay attention to the road, a complex infotainment system is going to remove your attention from the number one task at hand: driving. UConnect uses a simple interface that puts all of your key functions in a clearly-represented row on the bottom of the screen. Tap any of them, and it instantly pulls up that menu.
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.