1999 Ford E-250 Econoline Base Standard Cargo Van 2-door 4.2l on 2040-cars
East Meadow, New York, United States
Body Type:Standard Cargo Van
Fuel Type:GAS
Engine:4.2L 256Cu. In. V6 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Vehicle Title:Clear
Number of Cylinders: 6
Make: Ford
Model: E-250 Econoline
Trim: Base Standard Cargo Van 2-Door
Mileage: 178,000
Drive Type: RWD
1999 ford van e 250 -- with - new engine 25,000 miles has 100,000 mile guarantee - - new power steering pump and gear box - new water pump - hoses etc - new calipers , drums ,lines cylinders etc.-- new transmission with 5,000 miles on it still has 9 months on gaurantee --basically all new drive train-- also new ford white paint 5 months ago-- tires are 90%-- very reliable van ready to go . reserve less than cost of engine and trans -- good luck bidding .
Ford E-Series Van for Sale
E-350 kuv utility truck service cargo van knapheide powerstroke diesel(US $12,900.00)
Shuttle bus handicap wheelchair lift limo party bus rv food truck diesel e-450
1994 ford e350 small-medium scale transportation/tour bus solid condition
2007 e350 high top cargo van diesel 15 passenger farenheit tv/dvd new tires lqqk(US $16,995.00)
1997 ford e350 small-medium scale transportation/tour van solid condition
Econoline cab-forward pickup-- 1966
Auto Services in New York
Whitesboro Frame & Body Svc ★★★★★
Used-Car Outlet ★★★★★
US Petroleum ★★★★★
Transitowne Misibushi ★★★★★
Transitowne Hyundai ★★★★★
Tirri Motor Cars ★★★★★
Auto blog
Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel
Mon, Apr 14 2014When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).
Merecedes-Benz EQS, Ford Mustang Mach-E GT and Subaru Forester Wilderness | Autoblog Podcast #702
Fri, Oct 29 2021In this episode of the Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by Senior Editor James Riswick. They've been driving some exciting new EVs, like the Ford Mustang Mach-E GT and the Mercedes-Benz EQS. They also discuss driving the new Subaru Forester Wilderness, as well as the perfectly agreeable Toyota Camry XSE Hybrid. James compares four big-name off-roaders — the Ford Bronco, Jeep Wrangler, Toyota 4Runner and Land Rover Defender — based on their ability to accommodate a big load of luggage. Next they reach into the mailbag for comments on the Genesis GV70, as well as a Spend My Money question about replacing a wrecked Subaru Ascent with another three-row SUV. Send us your questions for the Mailbag and Spend My Money at: Podcast@Autoblog.com. Autoblog Podcast #702 Get The Podcast Apple Podcasts – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes Spotify – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast on Spotify RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown What we're driving: 2022 Ford Mustang Mach-E GT 2022 Mercedes-Benz EQS 2022 Subaru Forester Wilderness 2022 Toyota Camry XSE Hybrid Luggage testing the off-roaders: Ford Bronco vs. Jeep Wrangler vs. Land Rover Defender vs. Toyota 4Runner Mailbag: Thoughts on the Genesis GV70 Spend My Money: Three-row SUV to replace Subaru Ascent Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on Apple Podcasts Autoblog is now live on your smart speakers and voice assistants with the audio Autoblog Daily Digest. Say “Hey Google, play the news from Autoblog” or "Alexa, open Autoblog" to get your favorite car website in audio form every day. A narrator will take you through the biggest stories or break down one of our comprehensive test drives. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.
The next-generation wearable will be your car
Fri, Jan 8 2016This year's CES has had a heavy emphasis on the class of device known as the "wearable" – think about the Apple Watch, or Fitbit, if that's helpful. These devices usually piggyback off of a smartphone's hardware or some other data connection and utilize various onboard sensors and feedback devices to interact with the wearer. In the case of the Fitbit, it's health tracking through sensors that monitor your pulse and movement; for the Apple Watch and similar devices, it's all that and some more. Manufacturers seem to be developing a consensus that vehicles should be taking on some of a wearable's functionality. As evidenced by Volvo's newly announced tie-up with the Microsoft Band 2 fitness tracking wearable, car manufacturers are starting to explore how wearable devices will help drivers. The On Call app brings voice commands, spoken into the Band 2, into the mix. It'll allow you to pass an address from your smartphone's agenda right to your Volvo's nav system, or to preheat your car. Eventually, Volvo would like your car to learn things about your routines, and communicate back to you – or even, improvise to help you wake up earlier to avoid that traffic that might make you late. Do you need to buy a device, like the $249 Band 2, and always wear it to have these sorts of interactions with your car? Despite the emphasis on wearables, CES 2016 has also given us a glimmer of a vehicle future that cuts out the wearable middleman entirely. Take Audi's new Fit Driver project. The goal is to reduce driver stress levels, prevent driver fatigue, and provide a relaxing interior environment by adjusting cabin elements like seat massage, climate control, and even the interior lighting. While it focuses on a wearable device to monitor heart rate and skin temperature, the Audi itself will use on-board sensors to examine driving style and breathing rate as well as external conditions – the weather, traffic, that sort of thing. Could the seats measure skin temperature? Could the seatbelt measure heart rate? Seems like Audi might not need the wearable at all – the car's already doing most of the work. Whether there's a device on a driver's wrist or not, manufacturers seem to be developing a consensus that vehicles should be taking on some of a wearable's functionality.


