1969 Ford Thunderbird Base Hardtop 2-door 7.0l on 2040-cars
La Mesa, California, United States
Body Type:Hardtop
Engine:7.0L 7030CC 429Cu. In. V8 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Private Seller
Number of Cylinders: 8
Make: Ford
Model: Thunderbird
Trim: Base Hardtop 2-Door
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Drive Type: U/K
Exterior Color: Gold
Interior Color: Gold
Mileage: 72,000
Ford Thunderbird for Sale
2003 gray prem!(US $15,800.00)
1978 ford thunderbird
1961 ford thunderbird convertible(US $18,000.00)
1964 thunderbird, 22k, cokers, mild custom, driver, garage find, rat
2003 ford thunderbird base convertible 2-door 3.9l(US $14,998.00)
Auto Services in California
Yoshi Car Specialist Inc ★★★★★
WReX Performance - Subaru Service & Repair ★★★★★
Windshield Pros ★★★★★
Western Collision Works ★★★★★
West Coast Tint and Screens ★★★★★
West Coast Auto Glass ★★★★★
Auto blog
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.
Car technology I'm thankful and unthankful for
Mon, Nov 27 2017The past few years have seen a surge of tech features in new vehicles — everything from cloud-based content to semi-autonomous driving. While some of it makes the driving experience better, not all tech is useful or well thought out. Automakers who are adept at drivetrains, ride quality and in-cabin comforts often fail at infotainment interfaces and connectivity. From testing dozens of vehicles each year and in the spirit of gratitude, here are three car tech features I'm thankful — and a trio I could live without. Thanks Connected search: This seems like a no-brainer since everyone already has it on their smartphones, but not all automakers include it in the dashboard and as part of their nav systems. The best ones, such as Toyota Entune, leverage a driver's connected device to search for a range of services and don't charge a subscription or require a separate data plan for the car. I also like how systems like Chrysler Uconnect use Yelp or other apps to find everything from coffee to gas stations and allow searching via voice recognition. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto: It took two of the largest tech companies to get in-dash infotainment right. While they have their disadvantages (you're forced to use Apple Maps with CarPlay, for example), the two smartphone-integration platforms make it easier and safer to use their respective native apps for phoning, messaging, music and more behind the wheel by transferring a familiar UI to the dashboard — with no subscription required. Heated seats and steering wheels: I really appreciate these simple but pleasant features come wintertime. It's easy to get spoiled by bun-warmers on frosty mornings and using a heated steering wheel to warm the cold hands. I recently tested a 2018 Mercedes-Benz E400 Coupe that also had heated armrest that added to a cozy luxury experience. Bonus points for brands like Buick that allow setting seat heaters to turn on when the engine is remotely started. No thanks Automaker infotainment systems: Automakers have probably poured millions into creating their own infotainment systems, with the result largely being frustration on the part of most car owners. And Apple CarPlay and Android Auto coming along to make them obsolete. While some automaker systems, such as Toyota Entune and FCA's Uconnect, are easy and intuitive to use, it seems that high-end systems (I'm looking at you BMW iDrive and Mercedes-Benz COMAND) are the most difficult.
Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid
Tue, Jun 17 2014It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.