Excellent Truck To Own For You And Your Family. Comes With Tree Row Sit. on 2040-cars
Elmont, New York, United States
Nissan Pathfinder for Sale
- 2005 nissan pathfinder se off-road sport utility 4-door 4.0l(US $8,500.00)
- 2006 nissan pathfinder se off-road sport utility 4-door 4.0l no reserve auction!
- Super clean 1 owner(US $19,975.00)
- Se 4.0l traction control - abs and driveline rear defogger reclining rear seats(US $15,000.00)
- Se 3.5l power heated mirrors 3.5 liter v6 dohc engine with variable valve timin(US $7,500.00)
- 2011 nissan pathfinder
Auto Services in New York
Westchester Toyota ★★★★★
Vision Dodge Chrysler Jeep ★★★★★
Village Automotive Center ★★★★★
TNT Automotive ★★★★★
Sterling Autobody Centers ★★★★★
Sencore Enterprises ★★★★★
Auto blog
2014 Nissan Pathfinder Hybrid priced from $35,110*
Sat, 26 Oct 2013Nissan has announced pricing for the 2014 Pathfinder Hybrid, which was revealed earlier this year at the 2013 New York Auto Show. Offering two- or all-wheel drive, the hybridized crossover sports a 3.5-liter V6 and a 15-kilowatt electric motor, for a total of 250 system horsepower and 243 pound-feet of torque. Those numbers match up well with the 260 horsepower and 240 pound-feet of torque put out by the V6-powered Pathfinder. Naturally, fuel economy sees a hefty boost, to 25 miles per gallon in the city and 28 mpg on the highway, bumps of five and two mpg, respectively.
The Pathfinder Hybrid is available in three grades. Prices start at $35,100 for an SV and jump to $38,050 for the mid-level SL. A top-flight Platinum, meanwhile, moves the price up to $42,750. Adding all-wheel drive to the package bumps the price up to $1,600 across the range, and keep in mind that these prices don't include Nissan's $860 destination charge. Take a look below for the full press release from Nissan, including detailed pricing charts for both the Hybrid and V6 Pathfinder.
Ford F-150, Chevy Silverado, Toyota Tundra flunk IIHS headlight test
Tue, Oct 25 2016The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety put pickup truck headlights to the test and found that the majority of them were equipped with subpar units. The 2017 Honda Ridgeline was the only truck to earn a rating of "good." The large pickup truck test was comprised of the: 2016 to 2017 GMC Sierra, 2017 Nissan Titan, 2016 Ram 1500, 2016 to 2017 Chevrolet Silverado, 2016 to 2017 Ford F-150, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tundra. The Sierra's headlights earned a rating of "acceptable," the headlights found on the Titan and Ram 1500 were found to be "marginal," and the ones on the Silverado, F-150, and Tundra were rated as "poor." IIHS claims the F-150 was the most disappointing out of the large pickup trucks as both its halogen and optional LED headlights failed to provide adequate visibility during testing. The Ridgeline (which earned a "good rating"), is usually considered a midsize or small truck, though IIHS included it in the field of large pickups. The headlights on the 2016 Chevrolet Colorado, 2016 GMC Canyon, 2016 Nissan Frontier, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tacoma, which made up the small pickup truck group, all earned a rating of "poor." The IIHS claimed the Colorado had the worst headlights of any truck that was tested, as the base vehicle's units were only able to illuminate up to 123 feet in front of the car. The Ridgeline's headlights, for reference, were able to illuminate up to 358 feet in front of the vehicle. To conduct its test, the IIHS utilizes a special tool to measure how far light is projected out of the headlights in different driving situations. The trucks' headlights were tested in a straight line and in corners, while vehicles with high-beam assist were given extra praise. The headlights on the pickup trucks also mimic the testing that was done on small SUVs and cars earlier this year. Next year, automakers will need to fit their vehicles with headlights that earn a rating of either good or acceptable to earn the IIHS Top Safety Pick+. Related Video:
BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index
Mon, Oct 10 2016While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.