2002 Ford F-450 V8 Super Duty Diesel Cab & Chassis 180,100 Miles Salvage Title on 2040-cars
Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
Body Type:Pickup Truck
Engine:7.3L Diesel
Vehicle Title:Salvage
Fuel Type:Diesel
For Sale By:Private Seller
Number of Cylinders: 8
Make: Ford
Model: F-450
Trim: Cab & Chassis
Cab Type (For Trucks Only): Regular Cab
Drive Type: 2-Wheel
Mileage: 180,100
Sub Model: Super Duty
Disability Equipped: No
Exterior Color: White
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Interior Color: Gray
2002 Ford F-450 V8 Super Duty Diesel Cab & Chassis 180,100 Miles SALVAGE TITLE
Ford F-450 for Sale
1994 ford f450 super duty century rollback aluminum bed tow truck(US $12,950.00)
2006 f450 sd xl auto diesel 6.0l reg. cab stake/flat bed dually 2wd low miles(US $17,990.00)
F550
1995 tow truck wrecker eagle claw repo truck ford 7.3 liter turbo diesel(US $7,500.00)
White ford f450 240k miles 4-door very clean!!(US $16,000.00)
1999(US $17,500.00)
Auto Services in Utah
Wrenches ★★★★★
Tunex Orem ★★★★★
Terrace Muffler & Auto Repair ★★★★★
Ted`s Express Auto ★★★★★
Rocky Mountain Collision and Auto Painting ★★★★★
Rick Warner Body Shop ★★★★★
Auto blog
Old vs. new debate gets new life with $25,000 Fiesta ST vs. E46 M3 showdown
Fri, 10 Jan 2014You know who you are. There's probably a few of you reading; the ones that say, "Why would I spend $27,000 on a new Mazda MX-5 when I could get a used Chevrolet Corvette with more power." Yes, we're talking to you, used car proponents. While it is a fair argument, it's not like used cars don't come with drawbacks of their own, though.
In an attempt to put this new-versus-used argument to bed once and for all, Matt Farah of the The Smoking Tire has picked up a pair of $25,000 cars - a used, but lightly modified, 2003 BMW M3 and a 2013 Ford Fiesta ST. Naturally, there's a comparison.
Farah, as he's wont to do, does get into the nitty gritty of what each car is like to drive, and discusses the merits of used and new-car shopping. But as he rightly points out while testing the M3, "So, it is a good car. But like any used car, it really does depend on the individual car."
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.
Ford, Volvo, Google, Uber and Lyft form self-driving alliance
Tue, Apr 26 2016Five companies arguably leading the worldwide effort to develop autonomous cars said Tuesday they're forming an organization to lobby the federal government to better prepare America's roads for self-driving technology. The founding members include some of the biggest companies in the automotive, autonomous, and ride-sharing realms – Ford, Google, Lyft, Uber and Volvo. Operating as the "Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets," they aim to work with lawmakers and regulators to clarify a disparate set of rules and regulations at both the state and federal levels that could hinder the deployment of autonomous cars. "The U.S. risks losing its leading position due to the lack of federal guidelines for the testing and certification of autonomous vehicles." – Hakan Samuelsson David Strickland, a former administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration who issued the first set of autonomous-related policies in that role (pictured below), will serve as the group's counsel and spokesperson. "The best path for this innovation is to have one clear set of federal standards, and the Coalition will work with policymakers to find the right solutions that will facilitate the deployment of self-driving vehicles," he said in a written statement. In January, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said his department would accelerate efforts to craft such federal standards. Those efforts include holding two public hearings on standards, the second of which is scheduled to be held Wednesday in Palo Alto, California. Foxx signaled the intent to deliver them by June. Google has been leading the efforts to ensure such standards are national in scope, warning their cars could run afoul of state-specific laws should they cross state borders or if standards varies between the federal efforts and regional ones. The complexity of such efforts was underscored recently, when NHTSA agreed that Google's software could be considered the driver of a vehicle for the purpose of meeting federal motor vehicle standards, an interpretation that would conflict with preliminary California rules that mandate a licensed driver operate a self-driving car that comes equipped with human controls like a steering wheel and brakes. At South By Southwest last month, Jennifer Haroon, Google's self-driving car business leader, said the company couldn't accomplish its goals under those regulations.