Se 1.6l Cd Front Wheel Drive Power Steering Abs Front Disc/rear Drum Brakes A/c on 2040-cars
Houston, Texas, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Transmission:Automatic
Year: 2014
Make: Ford
Warranty: Unspecified
Model: Fiesta
Mileage: 1,861
Options: CD Player
Sub Model: SE
Power Options: Power Windows
Exterior Color: Other
Number of Cylinders: 4
Ford Fiesta for Sale
S 1.6l front wheel drive power steering wheel covers steel wheels am/fm stereo
2014(14)fiesta se hatchback gray/gray fact w-ty only 8k mls keyless phone save!!(US $14,995.00)
13 ford fiesta 4 door sedan se automatic great gas saver
2011 ford fiesta ses,(US $14,889.00)
1980 ford fiesta base hatchback 2-door 1.6l(US $770.00)
2011 ses 1.6l white
Auto Services in Texas
Yale Auto ★★★★★
World Car Mazda Service ★★★★★
Wilson`s Automotive ★★★★★
Whitakers Auto Body & Paint ★★★★★
Wetzel`s Automotive ★★★★★
Wetmore Master Lube Exp Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
IIHS crash tests second F-150 bodystyle
Mon, Jun 15 2015Sometimes, being the king comes with some extra scrutiny. At the urging of Automotive News, the Ford F-150 is the first truck to have multiple cab configurations crash tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. According to Automotive News, IIHS was preparing to release the crash-test report on the 2015 F-150 after the safety watchdog evaluated the popular, four-door SuperCrew body. However, the agency learned from AN that configuration contained steel bars welded around the front wheels for added protection. Those reinforcements aren't on the other cab variants, and IIHS is now going back to check a SuperCab without the strengthening to check its safety performance, as well. While the added bars might help the SuperCrew score better in the vital but difficult small-overlap front crash test, there's no guarantee that's their sole purpose. As the head of the IIHS crash lab Joe Nolan indicated to Automotive News, if Ford were just trying to beat the system the company could only put the reinforcement on the driver's side where the agency does the small-overlap test. Also, when the National Highway Travel Safety Administration checked the latest F-150, the Feds gave all three cab styles top, five-star overall ratings. Due to the additional testing, IIHS won't have the F-150's scores ready until July, according to Automotive News. Starting next year, the cab variants of other trucks will also starting being crash tested by the agency. Related Video:
Electric pickups compared: 2025 Ram 1500 REV specs vs. Silverado EV, F-150 Lightning
Wed, Apr 5 2023Now that the 2025 Ram 1500 REV has been revealed, along with its most important specifications, we now have information on all of the mainline Big 3 electric full-size pickup trucks. So it's time to see how the numbers stack up, because trucks are all about numbers. We'll see how the Ram compares to the power, battery capacity, payload, towing and other features of the 2024 Chevy Silverado EV and the 2024 Ford F-150 Lightning. Power and torque The Ram has just one powertrain option. It features two electric motors making 654 horsepower and 620 pound-feet. That gives it the most powerful standard powertrain, if not the most torque, as the Chevy Silverado EV has 510 horsepower and 615 pound-feet of torque, while the F-150 Lighting has 452 horsepower and 775 pound-feet. But the Chevy and Ford each have upgraded motor combinations. The Silverado is the most potent with 754 horsepower and 785 pound-feet, and the F-150 has 580 horsepower and 775 pound-feet. The GMC Sierra EV will also be available with this more powerful pair of motors, and most of its specifications will be the same as the Silverado. There are a couple of exceptions which we'll note when they come up. All three trucks come standard with dual motors and all-wheel drive, regardless of output, battery or trim level. They're all available with locking rear differentials, too. Ford F-150 Lightning front low View 48 Photos Battery, range and charging The Ram is packing some serious packs of batteries. The standard model gets 168 kWh and an estimated range of 350 miles. And the optional 229-kWh pack is estimated to deliver 500 miles of range. That's more capacity and range than the others. It also boasts an 800-volt battery system that allows for close to 350-kW charging. The Ford F-150 Lightning has a base battery of 98 kWh with a range around 230 miles. Optional is a 131-kWh pack with between 300 and 330 miles of range, depending on other vehicle specifications. It's the slowest charger, only allowing 150-kW charging maximum. The Silverado EV's battery specs are a bit nebulous. At launch, it will only be available with one battery pack option that GM claims will provide around 400 miles of range. The company didn't give an exact capacity, though. We would guess its size falls between the Ram's 168 and 229 kWh packs. A smaller battery pack will be offered later, with a shorter but unknown range. The Silverado can use 350-kW fast charging like the Ram.
Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy
Thu, Jan 8 2015With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.
2040Cars.com © 2012-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.047 s, 7947 u






