1998 Ford Ranger Xl Standard Cab Pickup 2-door 2.5l on 2040-cars
Williamstown, Kentucky, United States
Body Type:Standard Cab Pickup
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:2.5L 153Cu. In. l4 GAS SOHC Naturally Aspirated
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Private Seller
Make: Ford
Model: Ranger
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Trim: XL Standard Cab Pickup 2-Door
Options: CD Player
Drive Type: RWD
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Mileage: 135,000
Power Options: Air Conditioning
Exterior Color: Green
Number of Cylinders: 4
2.8L 4 cylinder 5 speed. Runs and drives great. Has new tires on it. 135000 miles. Gets great gas mileage. Has little rust above rear fender wells.
Ford Ranger for Sale
2001 ford ranger xlt extended cab pickup 2-door 4.0l
2004 ford ranger xlt ext cab pickup 4-door 3.0l w/ tool box and utility rack
2005 ford ranger fx4 off-road supercab pickup 4x4(US $13,399.00)
Sport 4.0l cd rear wheel drive tow hitch power steering tires - rear all-terrain
2001 xlt used 4l v6 12v automatic no reserve-one owner-no accidents-beautiful !
1992 ford ranger v8 swap almost complete from missouri
Auto Services in Kentucky
West Side Auto Body ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
The Tint Shop ★★★★★
Tatum`s Auto Repair and Towing ★★★★★
Simpsonville Automotive ★★★★★
Select Suzuki ★★★★★
Auto blog
2018 Ford F-150 Powerstroke vs. 2018 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel: comparing the specs
Mon, Jan 8 2018Now that Ford has finally released specifications for its diesel Ford F-150, we can finally see how it stacks up against its sole competition, the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel. Naturally, since we haven't driven the new diesel F-150, we can't tell you which is better on the road, but there are interesting things we can glean from the numbers. Compare these and other potential new vehicle purchases using our tool. For one thing, the two trucks are extremely similar from a powertrain perspective. Both trucks use a turbocharged 3.0-liter V6 diesel, with the Ford using a 10-speed automatic, and the Ram using an 8-speed automatic. The Powerstroke engine is built in the U.K. but specifically tuned by Ford for American pickup truck duty. It is also is related to the diesel V6 used by Jaguar and Land Rover. The Ram 1500's engine is made by VM Motori. Only 10 horsepower and 20 pound-feet of torque separate the two, with the Ford getting the slight advantage. The Ford also produces its horsepower and torque slightly sooner than the Ram. Peak power in the Ford comes at 3,250 rpm compared to 3,600 rpm in the Ram, and peak torque arrives at 1,750 rpm in the Ford, and 2,000 rpm in the Ram. View 9 Photos More significant differences become apparent in the payload and towing area, both of which put the Ford at an advantage. The F-150 Powerstroke can carry 2,020 pounds of cargo, or tow 11,400 pounds. The Ram EcoDiesel, depending on configuration, can carry 1,100 to 1,600 pounds of cargo, and tow between 7,560 and 9,210 pounds. Fuel economy might go to the Ford if it hits the company's target of 30 mpg highway. That would beat the Ram's 27 mpg highway. We don't know what Ford's target city mpg is, but the Ram manages 20 in town with two-wheel drive. Four-wheel drive drops the city rating to 19 mpg. View 6 Photos The biggest decider between the trucks might be cost. Ford is only offering its diesel engine on higher end trims, which means that the cheapest diesel F-150 starts at $46,315. That's for a two-wheel drive Lariat extended cab with a 6.5-foot bed. Ram on the other hand, offers the diesel in everything from its ultra-bare-bones Tradesman pickup, allowing for a base price of just $28,585, up to the fancy Laramie Longhorn and Limited trims. Ram's diesel is also available with all cab variants, while Ford's is only offered in extended- and double-cab body styles.
Ford C-Max sales hold steady despite fuel economy fracas
Mon, 09 Sep 2013Despite the ballyhoo that accompanied Ford's lowering of the C-Max fuel economy figures, the Blue Oval is still seeing strong demand for the five-seat MPV, as Automotive News reports. Speaking to marketing boss Jim Farley, AN says that the controversy surrounding the C-Max's fuel economy figures won't force Ford to change its marketing strategy.
Ford lowered the fuel economy rating of the C-Max after public outcry and legal action by customers that were unable to reach the 47 miles per gallon promised by the window sticker. The new ratings were dropped about a month ago to 45 mpg on the freeway and 40 mpg in the city. Ford offered rebates for current C-Max owners, with $550 going to those that bought their car and $325 to lessees. The issue, says Ford, stemmed from testing standards that allowed the automaker to base the C-Max's fuel economy on the Fusion Hybrid, because they use identical powertrains. The C-Max's less aerodynamic shape wasn't taken into account, though.
Whether Ford's PR team handled the crises perfectly or people just aren't that bothered by a four-mpg drop in combined ratings, demand remains strong for the C-Max among consumers. Ford moved 3,000 units in August, which was a 12-percent jump over July sales. Meanwhile, consumer demand through third-party shopping websites remains strong as well, according to Autometrics, a data analysis company that spoke with Automotive News. While the long-term effects of the adjustments remain unknown, the C-Max appears to have fared well in the near term.
More 2015 Ford Mustang pricing information leaks [UPDATE]
Tue, 20 May 2014The big news this morning was that the 2015 Ford Mustang would start at $24,425, including its destination pricing. The big news this afternoon is, well, bigger.
Mustang6G.com has come up with what it claims is pricing info for the entire Mustang line, rather than just the V6. That means we know all about the EcoBoost and GT prices now, which, when combined with the dealer order sheets we reported on last week, gives us our clearest look yet at how the Mustang can be outfitted (we're still a bit short on pricing info for some standalone options, like paint premiums and such).
The base EcoBoost starts at $25,995, while the GT rings up at $32,925.