Wrecked Damaged Salvage Repairable Project Supercab 4x2 Fixer That Runs & Drives on 2040-cars
Riverton, West Virginia, United States
| |||||
Ford Ranger for Sale
2007 ford ranger xlt standard cab pickup 2-door 3.0l(US $6,700.00)
2002 ford ranger xl 5-speed manual low miles(US $4,300.00)
2006 ford ranger regular cab(US $4,500.00)
1999 ford ranger supercab xlt v6 4x4 5 speed new tires!!(US $4,480.00)
2003 ford ranger xlt extended cab pickup 4-door 4.0l
Extended cab fx4 clean tow package excellent condition 4x4 low mile carfax
Auto Services in West Virginia
Zim`s Tire & Auto Svc ★★★★★
Taylor Auto Body ★★★★★
Ramey Save A Lot ★★★★★
Price Brothers Garage ★★★★★
Outcast Bug & Buggy Shop ★★★★★
Lee`s Auto & Small Engine Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
Focus ST diesel variant coming, just don't look for it here
Fri, 07 Mar 2014A few years back, Volkswagen made some waves when it announced the Golf GTD - a diesel-powered car that, aside from its ultra-efficient, ultra-torquey engine, was identical to the gas-powered GTI. That meant cosseting sport seats, larger wheels, sportier suspension, larger brakes and a body kit that made the GTD indistinguishable from the GTI, except for the three little letters on the back and in the grille.
Now, Ford is looking to replicate VW's success, with a diesel version of the Focus ST. According to Motor Trend, the diesel-powered ST will use a 2.0-liter, 182-horsepower four-cylinder. With an unspecified amount of torque on offer (we'd guess around 280 pound-feet), the diesel hot hatch should hit 62 miles per hour in about eight seconds.
The report, which originally comes from Auto Express, claims the ST Diesel was confirmed by Ford Chief Marketing Officer Mark Fields during this week's Geneva Motor Show. Not surprisingly, it doesn't appear there are any plans to bring a diesel-powered Focus of any kind to the US, let alone one that uses the suspension, steering and other items from the ST. Of course, if there's an official confirmation from Ford, we'll be sure to report on it.
Ford nets $924M in first quarter
Wed, Apr 29 2015Where General Motors' first-quarter 2015 financials showed growth in many major metrics, Ford's newly released numbers had falling figures in most of the vital categories. The automaker's Q1 revenue shrank to $33.9 billion, down $2 billion, and net income fell to $924 million, a $65-million drop. However, pre-tax profits increased slightly to $1.4 billion, $24 million more than in the same period in 2014, and operating margin rose to 3.6 percent, up 0.2 percent. Despite the less-than-stellar numbers, the Blue Oval thinks 2015 should be positive for the company. "The first quarter was a good start to a year in which our results will grow progressively stronger as the new products we have been launching start to pay off," CEO Mark Fields said in the financial announcement. The automaker has 15 vehicles to launch globally this year, and only three of them are already out. By the end of 2015, Ford predicts pre-tax profits of between $8.5 billion and $9.5 billion. In terms of vehicle sales, Ford slipped by 21,000 to a total of 1.568 million worldwide in the first quarter. North American sales dropped to 678,000, which was 39,000 less than last year, and pre-tax profits fell to $1.34 billion, a $160-million fall. The company explained the reductions on this continent as linked to the launches of the latest F-150 and Edge. In other major markets, European wholesales grew to 376,000 vehicles, a 9,000-car boost from last year. Pre-tax results there increased by $9 million, but the area still showed an overall loss of $185 million. In the Asia Pacific region, Ford moved 16,000 more units than in Q1 2014 to reach 366,000. However, due in part to preparing for new vehicles, the company only made $103 million there, a $188-million drop. The automaker released all of these figures as part of a PDF, which you can download here. 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.























