No Reserve 1999 F350 Dually Xlt Ecab, 7.3 Motor, 104,000 Miles, 3.73 Rear End on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford Mustang GT Bi-Fuel CNG

Highly intrigued, we recently visited a Southern California Gas Company office to check out several hybrid vehicles promising something new. Unlike more commonplace gasoline-electric hybrids, we were there to evaluate innovative gasoline-compressed natural gas (CNG) hybrids - yes, they run on unleaded gasoline and compressed natural gas. According to the experts on hand, this arrangement delivers extended range and reduced emissions while chipping in with lower operating costs than pure-gasoline vehicles. There are advantages over its gasoline-electric counterparts, as well.
The program is part of a three-way collaboration between The Carlab, a Southern California-based automotive consulting firm, Landi Renzo USA, a company specializing in alternative fuel solutions, and America's Natural Gas Alliance, a group that promotes CNG. Long story short, the team has engineered a way to allow a modified internal combustion vehicle to seamlessly switch between two fuels (gasoline and CNG) with no driver intervention. In theory, and if it works as well as promised, it's a win-win for the vehicle owner and the environment.
Parked at the Gas Company office were six different gasoline-CNG hybrid vehicles. To demonstrate the technology's versatility (just about any gasoline vehicle may be modified) Carlab brought a varied assortment of bodystyles, each from a different automaker. After taking a quick glance at the half-dozen in the parking lot, we made a beeline for the performance-oriented Ford Mustang GT - a 2012 model - with the six-speed manual gearbox.

Why Edmunds took a sledgehammer to its 2015 Ford F-150

The discussion around repair bills for the aluminum-bodied 2015 Ford F-150 pickup continued from the beginning of last year to the end, and haven't abated; as an aside, some Tesla Model S owners have been shocked at disquieting repair estimates for minor damage to their aluminum wunder-sedans. Edmunds decided to inject some fact into the fray: it bought a $52,000 long-term 2015 F-150 and clouted it with an eight-pound sledgehammer. Twice. The rear of the bedside took the impacts since it couldn't be replaced, it would have to be repaired. To the pickup's credit, the only reason associate editor Travis Langness hit it twice was that the first sledgehammer blow didn't do as much damage as Edmunds wanted. After the second, the visible damage included the two direct impacts, a few creases, and a cracked taillight, so they drove the pickup to Santa Monica Ford to get an estimate, complete with a fictitious story about how the damage occurred and the mercy plea that Langness was paying for the repair out-of-pocket. In Part 2 Langness hits on some of the details with getting the truck fixed, such as the massively expensive taillight and the list of tools Ford recommends dealers have to work on aluminum. But he was promised he'd have his truck back in seven days, and Santa Monica Ford got it back to him in seven days. In Part 3 we get the bill. It's not small, but it's quite a bit less than it could have been if the service manager had charged Edmunds the official labor rate for aluminum. We're not going to spoil it here, so check out the videos above and below for the beginning and the end, and head over to Edmunds for the complete story about how it all happened and some riffing on the repair numbers. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Related Video:

Ford faces class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles without brake override systems

A total of 20 Ford customers are suing the automaker in a class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles "vulnerable to unintended acceleration." According to Reuters, the suit names 30 models built between 2002 and 2010 with electronic throttle control systems but without a brake override system. Those include the 2004-2012 F-Series pickups and the 2005-2009 Lincoln Town Car. Adam Levitt, a partner with the law firm of Grant & Eisenhofer says the plaintiffs in the case want "to be compensated for their economic losses by having overpaid for cars that contained defects." Levitt contends that the plaintiffs would not have bought their vehicles or paid less for them had they known there was no brake override system in place.
Ford began installing brake override systems in its vehicles beginning in 2010. In response to the lawsuit, Ford has pointed to research by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that indicated that unintended acceleration is mostly caused by driver error, saying in a statement that, "NHTSA's work is far more scientific and trustworthy than work done by personal injury lawyers and their paid experts."
Belville et al v. Ford Motor Co. will be heard in US District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia.