1970 Ford Mustang on 2040-cars
North Branch, Michigan, United States
Transmission:Manual
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Vehicle Title:Rebuilt, Rebuildable & Reconstructed
Engine:351 Cleveland
Year: 1970
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 0T01T146113
Mileage: 92000
Interior Color: Black
Number of Seats: 5
Number of Previous Owners: 3
Make: Ford
Service History Available: Partial
Drive Side: Left-Hand Drive
Model: Mustang
Exterior Color: Green
Car Type: Classic Cars
Number of Doors: 2
Ford Mustang for Sale
1969 ford mustang convertible "f" code original(US $19,769.00)
1972 ford mustang grande(US $9,000.00)
1967 ford mustang(US $29,500.00)
1969 ford mustang mach 1 r code(US $53,630.00)
1967 ford mustang fastback restomod(US $359,900.00)
2004 ford mustang premium(US $4,050.00)
Auto Services in Michigan
Zoomers Express Care ★★★★★
Wetmore`s Inc ★★★★★
Westnedge Auto Repair ★★★★★
Warren Transmission ★★★★★
Village Ford ★★★★★
Vehicle Accessories ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford recalling 126,000 Fusions and Milans over wheel separation concern
Fri, 09 Dec 2011Ford has announced a recall of certain Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles after an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. A total of 128,616 2010 and 2011 models equipped with steel wheels may have been manufactured with wheel studs that could crack and split over time. If that happens, the vehicle may experience a wheel separation.
According to The Detroit News, the company is aware of a total of 30 wheel separation incidents, one of which occurred on the front of the vehicle. Even so, no injuries have been reported as a result of the defect.
The problem apparently stems from the fact that the mounting pads on the vehicles' steel wheels may have been faulty from the factory. In addition, the wheel mounting face on rear disc brakes may not have been installed properly. Ford will inspect the rear disc face and replace them as necessary. In addition, the company will replace all of the vehicle's wheel studs free of charge. Head to the NHTSA website for more information, and click past the jump to view the full recall notice.
8 car technologies designed to keep you safe
Thu, Feb 22 2018Technologies are always advancing forward, especially in your vehicle. As more safety technologies are being introduced into the market, it can be hard to keep track of everything. So here are 8 technologies designed to keep you safe on the road. Want more coverage? Head over to http://bit.ly/2CcOngW Ford Kia Mercedes-Benz Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Volvo Autoblog Minute Videos Original Video FCA automatic emergency braking
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.















