1985 Mercury Capri Caged And Ready To Drag on 2040-cars
Coldwater, Michigan, United States
Engine:NONE
Drive Type: REAR
Make: Mercury
Mileage: 0
Model: Capri
Sub Model: RS
Trim: RED
1985 MERCURY CAPRI
Mercury Capri for Sale
1991 mercury capri convertible automatic white 55k miles hard top(US $3,600.00)
1983 mercury capri rs 5.0 roller motor 5 speed fox body mustang(US $5,750.00)
1994 mercury capri convertible rare cobalt blue(US $1,600.00)
1986 mercury capri 5.0 hatchback 3-door 5.0l
1993 mercury capri convertible 2-door 1.6l
1992 mercury capri convertible
Auto Services in Michigan
Zielke Tires & Towing ★★★★★
Your Auto Service Inc ★★★★★
Victory Motors ★★★★★
Tireman Central Auto Center ★★★★★
Thomas Auto Collision ★★★★★
Tel-Ford Service ★★★★★
Auto blog
This Mercury Cyclone is an American Muscle Car in Norway
Tue, Oct 27 2015The picturesque Norwegian countryside certainly doesn't seem like the natural stomping grounds for a 1969 Mercury Cyclone, but owner Alexander Brevik makes the odd combo look like an ideal match. Even with the beautiful surroundings, Brevik sees no need to enjoy the scenery; he'd much rather just be driving this vintage muscle car. Take a ride with him in the latest clip from Petrolicious. Like many of us, Brevik's automotive obsession started at childhood, and today he has amassed a multitude of projects to wrench on. While he loves working on all of these cars, we all need a break sometimes, and that's what the Cyclone is for. Even when the rest of his collection isn't running, this orange beauty is always ready to go. Brevik may not pay much attention to the landscape, but Petrolicious makes the muscle car look fantastic in the Norwegian woods nonetheless. With its rumbling V8 engine and three-speed manual, this Cyclone turns out to be a perfect cruising companion in the Land of the Midnight Sun. And if you just can't get enough of classic muscle cars and the people who love them, check out our video coverage of the 2015 Woodward Dream Cruise in Detroit down below. Related Video:
Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output
Mon, Jan 6 2014How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.
Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans
Thu, Apr 30 2020Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.


















