2016 Ford Mustang Shelby Gt-h on 2040-cars
Englewood, Colorado, United States
Engine:5.0L V8
Fuel Type:Gasoline
Body Type:2dr Car
Transmission:Automatic
For Sale By:Dealer
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1FA6P8CF7G5307270
Mileage: 15748
Make: Ford
Trim: Shelby GT-H
Drive Type: 2dr Fastback GT
Features: ENGINE: 5.0L TI-VCT V8
Power Options: --
Exterior Color: Black
Interior Color: Black
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Model: Mustang
Ford Mustang for Sale
2015 ford mustang gt premium digidash supercharged w/ many upgrades(US $33,991.00)
1973 ford mustang blue flame mach 1 fastback 351 cleveland(US $34,995.00)
2021 ford mustang shelby gt500(US $149,900.00)
1989 mustang gt(US $38,500.00)
2012 ford mustang saleen 302 white label(US $34,790.00)
2022 ford mustang shelby gt500 cftp(US $88,100.00)
Auto Services in Colorado
Wollert Automotive ★★★★★
Vanatta Auto Electric ★★★★★
Ultra Bond Windshield Repair & Replacement ★★★★★
Tunerz, Boomerz And More ★★★★★
Star Crack Windshield Repair By Joy ★★★★★
Spradley Barr Mazda ★★★★★
Auto blog
2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost loses big power on 87 octane
Mon, Jan 5 2015The 2015 Ford Mustang with the 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder is a pretty potent package on paper. With 310 horsepower and 320 pound-feet of torque, it boasts better performance numbers than the 3.7-liter V6, but with better fuel economy as an added benefit. However, if you're in the market for one of these boosted 'Stangs, you should probably keep in mind that it really prefers to gulp premium, 93-octane fuel. It can drink 87-octane swill in a pinch, but you're going to find significantly less power underfoot when pulling away. While it's not shocking that the ponies are dialed back with a lower grade of gasoline, an alleged page from a Ford training manual obtained by Mustang 6G purports to show just how much power is lost, though. According to this document, the 2.3-liter EcoBoost makes 275 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque when running on lower octane fuel. That's a substantial reduction of about 11.3 percent compared to when the engine drinks 93 octane. Interestingly, according to Mustang 6G, that finding was a bit better than expected, because a Ford engineer reportedly said power would be down about 13 percent without altering peak torque. In speaking with Autoblog, Paul Seredynski of Ford powertrain communications, objected to part of this document. While he couldn't confirm the specific losses listed for the Mustang EcoBoost, "torque remains unchanged" with lower octane gasoline, Seredynski said. He speculated this training manual page was "possibly from before the engine was certified" and therefore showed incorrect figures. Serendynski did confirm that the automaker recommends using 93 octane, and like all modern engines, the software adapts if it's lower. "Peak power would be reduced" by using a lesser grade, he confirmed. Featured Gallery 2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost: First Ride View 20 Photos News Source: Mustang 6GImage Credit: Copyright 2015 AOL, Ford, Mustang 6G Ford Technology Convertible Coupe Performance ecoboost ford mustang ecoboost
Ford Australia pulls the ol' talking car prank
Mon, 07 Apr 2014Siri from Apple has proven that being able to talk to your technology doesn't always work perfectly. But what if it could eventually go far enough to give a personality to inanimate objects like our cars? Ford took just this path to comedic effect by playing a prank on many unsuspecting Australians, in a new commercial for its EcoSport compact crossover.
The Aussies seem very nonchalant about having a random parked car talk to them, and they seem surprisingly game when it asks them to get in, call a celebrity and tell a joke. (We're guessing there are some hilarious outtakes, too.) Scroll down to watch some folks from Down Under have a conversation with Ford's CUV.
2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise
Mon, Jan 2 2017About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.