4x4 Supercr Ethanol - Ffv 5.4l Cd 4 Wheel Disc Brakes Abs Brakes Am/fm Radio on 2040-cars
Hinesville, Georgia, United States
Body Type:Other
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Ethanol - FFV
For Sale By:Dealer
Make: Ford
Model: F-150
Warranty: Unspecified
Mileage: 83,412
Sub Model: 4X4 Supercr
Options: CD Player
Exterior Color: Red
Power Options: Power Windows
Interior Color: Black
Number of Cylinders: 8
Ford F-150 for Sale
2wd supercab 3.7l 5 passenger seating 60/40 flip-up rear split bench seat(US $24,387.00)
Limited f150 f 150 lariat awd navigation nav sony power running boards loaded 22(US $39,988.00)
Xlt truck 4.6l cd awd 4 speakers am/fm radio am/fm stereo/clock/single cd
2010 f150 4x4 crew cab xlt package 5.4 v8 1 owner buy it wholesale now l@@k!!!!!(US $20,999.00)
Inexpensive ecoboost power
1998 ford f-150 nascar edition - v-8 - factory roush exhaust. 1 of 3000
Auto Services in Georgia
Young`s Upholstery & Seat Covers ★★★★★
Vic Williams Tire & Auto ★★★★★
United Auto Care ★★★★★
Unique Auto App ★★★★★
Ultimate Benz Service Center ★★★★★
Transmission For Less.Com ★★★★★
Auto blog
Daimler consulting with Ford about 3-cylinder engines
Mon, 27 May 2013Soon enough, Ford will offer its 1.0-liter EcoBoost three-cylinder engine under the hood of the Fiesta here in the United States, building on the success of the small powerplant overseas. In fact, this success has caused other automakers to take notice, and according to Automotive News Europe, Daimler is now talking to Ford about this engine for use in its own products.
In other markets, Ford offers the 1.0-liter mill under the hood of the Focus (we had the chance to sample this package on our home turf), as well as the B-Max MPV. For this new collaboration, Daimler would use the turbo-three in the next-generation Smart ForTwo, as well as the Renault Twingo, which the German automaker will be collaborating on as part of its alliance with Renault-Nissan. Speaking to AN, a Mercedes-Benz engineer called the 1.0-liter mill an "interesting and impressive engine."
In exchange for details about the EcoBoost inline-three, Daimler will supply Ford with information regarding its Euro6 stratified lean-burn gasoline engine, which is found in the new E-Class sedan.
Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid
Tue, Jun 17 2014It'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.
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.




















