****chevrolet Trailblazer Ss, Awd, Navi, K&n, Coil Over Shock, 51k Miles, Loaded on 2040-cars
Strasburg, Virginia, United States
Body Type:SUV
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:6.0L 5967CC 364Cu. In. V8 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Make: Chevrolet
Model: Trailblazer
Trim: SS Sport Utility 4-Door
Options: Sunroof, 4-Wheel Drive, Leather Seats, CD Player
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Side Airbags
Drive Type: 4WD
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Mileage: 51,917
Interior Color: Black
Number of Cylinders: 8
- Navigation
- Automatic Climate Control
- Leather
- Dual Power Adjustable Seats
- BOSE Stereo
- Heated Seats
- Memory Seats
- Steering wheel controls
- Sunroof
- Onstar
- Rear Climate Controls
- Rear Audio Controls
- Factory trailer hitch and trailer wiring
- Stablitrak Traction Control
Chevrolet Trailblazer for Sale
- 2006 chevrolet trailblazer ss sport utility 4-door 6.0l+++low reserve+++(US $14,999.00)
- 2007 chevrolet trailblazer ss, ls2, needs engine work, mechanic special, n/r
- 2008 chevrolet trailblazer 4wd 4dr ss w/1ss(US $20,950.00)
- 2003 chevrolet trailblazer ls sport utility 4-door 4.2l
- 2003 chevrolet trailblazer ext lt sport utility 4-door 4.2l
- 2006 chevrolet trailblazer ss sport utility 4-door 6.0l
Auto Services in Virginia
Whitten Brothers of Ashland ★★★★★
Valley BMW ★★★★★
Thurston Spring Service ★★★★★
Standard Parts Corp ★★★★★
Soundworks Mobile Audio ★★★★★
Settle Tire Company ★★★★★
Auto blog
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.
Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat vs. Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 in latest Head 2 Head
Fri, Jan 30 2015"Olympian" is one of the terms we use to signify the greatest height, the seat of the gods. Yet Mt. Olympus is the second-highest peak in the Balkans ranges, overshadowed by the crest at Musala in Bulgaria's Rila mountains. Both great heights, but one is a little higher. That's how we get the Olympian Chevy Camaro ZL1 pitched at the Musalic Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat in Motor Trend's latest episode of Head 2 Head. The side-by-side spec sheet is filled with farcical numbers. For the ZL1, that's a 6.2-liter V8 with 580 horsepower, 556 pound-feet of torque, a 4,051-pound curb weight, 0-to-60 miles per hour in 3.9 seconds, a quarter-mile time of 12.2 seconds and a base price of just $57,800. Opposing that, the Hellcat wrings out its 6.2-liter V8 for 707 hp, 650 lb-ft of torque, weighs 4,449 pounds, does the quarter in 11.7 seconds and has a base price of just $60,990. Except in the case of the Hellcat, when Motor Trend put it on the dyno the machine spit out a reading of 672 hp and 606 lb-ft at the wheels. If there's a 10-percent driveline loss through those beefed-up internals and heavy-duty eight-speed transmission, that means the Hellcat is actually rated at about 750 horsepower and 700 lb-ft. But once they get put on a closed-off strip of coast road in Northern California, there are only a few strands of hair between their respective performances. That's not the case for they sensations provide; host Jonny Lieberman calls one of them, "One of the most incredible cars ever made," and says, "It changes everything." Watch the video above to see who got the verdict and how. Related Video:
Buick Encore, Chevy Trax earn Top Safety Pick from IIHS [w/video]
Thu, Feb 12 2015The Buick Encore has been a massive sales success practically from the moment it debuted, and Buick recently decided to increase production to keep up with demand for the premium compact crossover. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently put one to the test again, and the Encore earned a Top Safety Pick award. It's the first model from the brand to score the nod since 2013, according to the IIHS, and the rating also carries over to the 2015 Chevrolet Trax. The 2015 Encore scored a Good rating in all of the IIHS' evaluations, including the 40-mile-per-hour, small overlap front crash test. That was a big improvement over the previous model the institute tested, which scored a Poor result in the overlap test. In the first test, about 13 inches of the lower door hinge pillar came into the passenger compartment, and the steering wheel airbag moved too far to protect the dummy's head. Improvements for the latest model year showed six inches of intrusion this time, and the airbags caught the dummy's head well. The dummy's sensors also indicated a low risk of injury. The two CUVs missed out on the full Top Safety Pick+ because the IIHS scored the Encore as only having a basic front crash prevention system, and there was no such equipment for the Trax. To earn the highest mark, models need at least an advanced rating by the institute for this technology. Buick Encore, Chevrolet Trax earn 2015 TOP SAFETY PICK award ARLINGTON, Va. - A small SUV is the first vehicle from the Buick brand to qualify for a TOP SAFETY PICK award from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety since 2013. The Buick Encore's newly introduced, lower-priced twin, the Chevrolet Trax, also qualifies for the honor. The Encore's award follows improvements to the SUV's structure for better small overlap front protection. The 2015 model earns a good rating in the small overlap test. In contrast, the 2013-14 Encore rated poor in the test. The driver's space was seriously compromised with intrusion measuring as much as 13 inches at the lower door hinge pillar. The dummy's head barely contacted the front airbag before sliding off the left side, as the steering column moved to the right. The side curtain airbag deployed too late and didn't have sufficient forward coverage to protect the head. In the latest test, the driver space was maintained reasonably well, with maximum intrusion of 6 inches at the door hinge pillar and instrument panel. The dummy's movement was well-controlled.