Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

1987 Ford Van 5.8 Eng. Auto Trans Heavy Duty- Camper-hauler-cargo- on 2040-cars

US $1,800.00
Year:1987 Mileage:115956
Location:

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Fort Worth, Texas, United States
Advertising:

The Van is Heavy Duty 8 Lug
The Odometer has 15956 that would be 115956 miles
We purchased it to pull a race car trailer a few years back 
and have only used it around 10 times to travel to races around Texas . 
It was a passenger type van that held around 12 people,The
3 sets of seats that were in it have been taken out and it has the two Bucket seats
in front and one bench seat behind it.
It is equipped with a 5.8 v/8 and 3 speed automatic transmission
P/S-P/B-A/C the A/C Has a leak ,but is all there.The engine and trans along with drive train are in good condition. The body is in good condition also. It has a sliding side door and two back doors. 
If you Have any questions please ask ,Van is sold as is .
A $125 deposit made to paypal within 24hrs of purchase and the remainder in Bank cashier check are in person within 5 days after sell . 
Thank You

Auto Services in Texas

World Tech Automotive ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automotive Tune Up Service
Address: 213 E Buckingham Rd Ste 106, Fate
Phone: (972) 414-5292

Western Auto ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Tire Dealers, Wheels
Address: 106 W Clayton St, Hull
Phone: (936) 258-3181

Victor`s Auto Sales ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers, Wholesale Used Car Dealers
Address: 5808 Manor Rd, Geneva
Phone: (512) 270-5635

Tune`s & Tint ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Glass Coating & Tinting Materials, Consumer Electronics
Address: Booker
Phone: (806) 373-8863

Truman Motors ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers
Address: 5701 Burnet Rd Ste B., Cedar-Park
Phone: (512) 765-4494

True Image Productions ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: N Waddill St, Copeville
Phone: (972) 542-4445

Auto blog

Ford Mustang GT Bi-Fuel CNG

Tue, 23 Jul 2013

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.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

Tue, Jun 17 2014

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.

Ford Mustang Mach-E fails Sweden's moose test

Wed, Sep 29 2021

The infamous moose test has claimed another casualty. This time it's the Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD Long Range, which was tested in an electric four-way alongside the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Skoda Enyaq iV (an electric utility vehicle closely related to the Volkswagen ID.4 that is sold in the United States). According to the Swedish testers at Teknikens Varld, Ford's electric car not only failed to hit the speed necessary for a passing grade, it didn't perform well at slower speeds, either. To pass the outlet's moose test, a car has to complete a rapid left-right-straight S-shaped pattern marked by cones at a speed of at least 72 km/h (44.7 miles per hour). The test is designed to mimic the type of avoidance maneuver a driver would have to take in order to avoid hitting something that wandered into the road, which in Sweden may be a moose but could just as easily be a deer or some other member of the animal kingdom elsewhere in the world, or possibly a child or car backing into the motorway. Not only is the maneuver very aggressive, it's also performed with weights belted into each seat and more weight added to the cargo area to hit the vehicle's maximum allowable carrying capacity. The Mustang Mach-E only managed to complete the moose test at 68 km/h (42.3 mph), well below the passing-grade threshold. Even at much lower speeds, Teknikens Varld says the Mach-E (which boasts the highest carrying capacity and was therefore loaded with more weight than the rest of the vehicles tested in this quartet) is "too soft in the chassis" and suffers from "too slow steering." Proving that it is indeed possible to pass the test, the Hyundai and Skoda completed the maneuver at the 44.7-mph figure required for a passing grade and the Tesla did it at 46.6 mph, albeit with less weight in the cargo area. It's not clear whether other versions of the Mustang Mach-E would pass the test. It's also unknown if Ford will make any changes to its chassis tuning or electronic stability control software, as some other automakers have done after a poor performance from Teknikens Varld, to improve its performance in the moose test. Related video: