1967 Ford Mustang Fastback S Code 390 on 2040-cars
San Diego, California, United States
1967 Mustang Fastback S Code 390 Big Block
Sitting In The Original Color Vintage Burgundy
Deluxe Interior With Deluxe Hard Back Seats, Factory Tach, Upper And Lower Consoles, Fold Down Rear Seat, Power
Disc Brake, Power Steering, C6 Auto Transmission
Original Floor Pans 100% Rust Free California Car All It’s Life Built And Sold In San Jose CA
The Hood was adjusted to sit a half inch higher for the air cleaner.
Ford Mustang for Sale
1970 ford mustang(US $15,750.00)
1969 ford mustang(US $15,400.00)
1965 ford mustang(US $14,000.00)
1966 ford mustang(US $14,700.00)
1965 ford mustang(US $19,600.00)
1970 ford mustang mach 1(US $16,800.00)
Auto Services in California
Xtreme Auto Sound ★★★★★
Woodard`s Automotive ★★★★★
Window Tinting A Plus ★★★★★
Wickoff Racing ★★★★★
West Coast Auto Sales ★★★★★
Wescott`s Auto Wrecking & Truck Parts ★★★★★
Auto blog
Hertz goes Dutch with Ford Focus ST-H
Wed, 23 Oct 2013Want to take a performance car for a ride? Hertz can make that happen. Spin by your local rental location (depending, of course, on availability) and you can take out a Dodge Challenger, Ford Mustang, Chevy Camaro, even a Corvette as part of the Adrenaline Collection. Hertz's Dream Cars lineup even includes Porsches and AMGs. But the really interesting stuff is what you can't get anywhere else: cars built specifically for Hertz.
Back in 1966, Hertz had Ford cook up a special run of Mustang GT350H models in back with gold stripes. It became an icon in and of itself, and in 2008 Hertz had a new batch of Shelby GT-Hs made. Earlier this year, Hertz contracted Penske to deliver another fleet of specially-built Mustangs you can rent. But if your travel plans include a trip to the Netherlands, Hertz has a completely different type of specially-prepared Ford on offer for you.
Back in August, Ford delivered a couple of Focus STs made specifically for Hertz in Holland. Now it's expanded that fleet even further. The Ford Focus ST-H features the same 252-horsepower 2.0-liter turbo four (and everything else) as the standard Focus ST, but gets that signature black exterior with gold stripes and a black leather interior with Recaro buckets. So in case a trip to Amsterdam doesn't hold enough thrills, now you can throw a hot hatch into the mix as well. Scope out the press release (in Dutch - isn't that weird?) below.
Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names
Tue, Mar 17 2015Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.
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.


