1990 Ford Bronco Eddie Bauer Sport Utility 2-door 5.8l on 2040-cars
Milford, Pennsylvania, United States
| ||||
Ford Bronco for Sale
Ford bronco eddie bauer edition(US $10,500.00)
Classic ford bronco, 1971, restored(US $42,000.00)
1971 lifted ford bronco
1968 ford bronco - great condition(US $30,000.00)
66 ford bronco 4x4 trail rig(US $10,000.00)
Amaizing california low mile rust free ford bronco(US $8,800.00)
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Young`s Auto Body Inc ★★★★★
West Shore Auto Care ★★★★★
Village Auto ★★★★★
Ulrich Sales & Svc ★★★★★
Trust Auto Sales ★★★★★
Steve`s Auto Body & Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford says 70% of its models to get stop-start by 2017
Sun, 15 Dec 2013Ford is following up on a report we posted a few weeks back that the Blue Oval would be adding stop-start technology to its entire model range. Now, the Dearborn-based automaker has announced that the fuel-saving feature would be available on 70 percent of the company's range by 2017.
Ford claims the technology will improve fuel economy by around 3.5 percent, although its actual effect will vary based on how the owner drives - apparently up to a 10-percent improvement is possible for those who sit in heavy traffic (Los Angelenos, this means you). The latest recipient of the technology is the updated 2014 Ford Fiesta with the company's three-cylinder EcoBoost powerplant.
Part of the reasoning for the new addition has to do with cost. Ford claims the tech is affordable and easy to implement. "Simply put, Auto Start-Stop helps customers use less fuel, which is an important component of Ford's Blueprint for Sustainability," Ford's global powertrain vice president, Bob Fascetti, said.
NHTSA investigating 500k Ford and Mercury cars for lighting failures
Mon, Apr 6 2015The Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis might be long gone as new models in showrooms, but the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration might check them out yet again for a potential problem. At the urging of North Carolina Consumers Council, the agency may open another investigation into the front lighting control module on vehicles from the 2003-2005 model years, and NHTSA estimates the issue could affect 517,945 vehicles. If the module stops working, it can cause a complete failure of all forward lighting, including the headlights. NHTSA previously investigated the issue in 2008 and 2009 but found no need for a recall, according to Bloomberg. Ford also extended the warranty on the part to 15 years or 250,000 miles. To prompt this new request, the North Carolina Consumers Council received a letter from a woman experiencing the module's failure. Upon further investigation, the council found 604 complaints of this problem on NHTSA's website, including seven crashes. Furthermore, the group has alleged that dealers told customers that the parts to perform the replacement weren't available, despite the extended warranty. According to the government agency, "A defect petition has been opened to evaluate the issue and make a grant or deny decision." Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker tells Autoblog via email, "We will cooperate with NHTSA, as we always do." You can read the council's complete letter to the Feds in PDF format, here. INVESTIGATION Subject : Loss of headlamp/exterior lighting Date Investigation Opened: APR 01, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: DP15002 Component(s): EXTERIOR LIGHTING All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2003-2005 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 2003-2005 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received a petition from the North Carolina Consumers Council, Inc. requesting a defect investigation of an alleged defect condition resulting in headlight and/or exterior lighting failure on 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles. The petition letter is attached for review. The petitioner alleges a defect in the lighting control module that powers the headlights which can result in the loss of vehicle headlights and/or all exterior lighting while driving. ODI has previously investigated this issue under PE08-066 which was closed without a defect finding.
Ford fights back against patent trolls
Fri, Feb 13 2015Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.




