|
IT HAS A CLEAR MARYLAND TITLE (even though history report says it has title issues) You are bidding on a 95 Full size Bronco, 5.8 liter V8 4X4 6inch suspension lift 39.5 superswampers with some life left on them truck runs strong, trans shifts fine, 4x4 works NEW: water pump, oil pump, oil pan, drag link, tie rod, powers steering pump needs alignment cap does come off but has never been off truck was originally white and you can only see that if you lift the hood.
the interior cap trim is not installed but comes with the truck carpet is in great condition
buyer responsible for vehicle pick up with in 30 days of auction end. after that vehicle is considered abandoned and will be relisted with out any refund $500.00 deposit is due at the end of auction via paypal remainder of payment due with in 3 days of auction end. payments can be made via credit card, money order, or certified check, contact me to make final payment arrangements |
Ford Bronco for Sale
Ford bronco silver anniversary special edition(US $7,500.00)
1995 ford bronco xlt sport utility 2-door 5.8l(US $6,000.00)
1991 ford bronco eddie bauer 4x4. full size. super clean! new gaskets.(US $4,880.00)
Red eddie bauer ford bronco(US $4,000.00)
1969 ford bronco 4x4 with a numbers matching 302 v8 and a 3 speed manual trans
1996 ford bronco eddie bauer 59k actual miles!!
Auto Services in Maryland
Wes Greenway`s Waldorf VW ★★★★★
True 2 Form Collision Rep ★★★★★
Souder`s Autowerks ★★★★★
SD Auto Service ★★★★★
Sarandos Automotive Technology Inc ★★★★★
Pensyl`s Body Shop ★★★★★
Auto blog
Camaro chief: 'rock-star' 4-cylinder set for Mustang fight
Wed, Jul 8 2015It was inevitable, the 2016 Chevy Camaro had to have a four-cylinder engine. The archrival Ford Mustang packs a spunky 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-banger, and everyone from BMW to Subaru uses four-cylinders to great effect to power their sports cars. Now it's Chevy's turn. Again. The Camaro ran the infamous Iron Duke four-cylinder with 88 to 92 horsepower in the 1980s. It was a fuel-economy play at a time when performance was not a priority. After the 1970s muscle-car era, output even for the V8s didn't top 200 hp again until the mid-'80s. Thankfully for enthusiasts, things have changed dramatically in the last 30 years. The gen six Camaro will offer a 2.0-liter inline four-cylinder with 275 horsepower. It's the standard engine, slotting below the 335-hp V6 and the 455-hp V8. But don't mistake the new I4 for an Iron Duke encore. Camaro chief engineer Al Oppenheiser called it a "rock star" and said cars equipped with it feel lighter than V6 models. The four-cylinder (295 pound-feet at 3,000-4,500 rpm) also summons more torque in quicker fashion than the V6 (284 lb-ft at 5,300 rpm). Chevy expects the Camaro to hit 60 miles per hour in "well under six seconds," according to press materials. The Mustang EcoBoost (310 hp, 320 lb-ft) clocks times in the low to mid five-second range. "We're not doing it just so we have one," Oppenheiser said. "We're not doing it because like in gen three you're forced to do it because of fuel economy. We're doing it because it belongs in the car. It has a distinct character." Speaking with Autoblog recently at the Detroit Grand Prix racecourse on Belle Isle, Oppenheiser said he expects the I4 to attract a younger crowd to the Camaro and will put up stiff competition against the V6 for sales. "I've read blogs where younger folks won't buy a Camaro because it doesn't have a 2.0-liter turbo or a turbocharged four-cylinder," he said. "So we're going to excite them." While we talked a lot about four-cylinder engines, Oppenheiser also elaborated on the V6 (It's pretty damn good, too. We drove it.) and the new Alpha platform that the Camaro borrowed from Cadillac. Here's the rest of our edited conversation. Autoblog: Talk a little bit about the four-cylinder – the first turbo four-cylinder ever for Camaro. Do you have any idea what the take rate's going to be? Al Oppenheiser: I think it's going to surprise a lot of people. It's actually a fun car to drive. It's got a really good balance of turbo noise and exhaust note.
2016 Ford Fusion hybrid, plug-in getting $900 price cut
Thu, Feb 19 2015While the overall the green car market in the US suffered a slump in 2014 with a 6.5-percent drop in sales, the demand for electric vehicles and plug-ins actually jumped a healthy 28 percent. The Ford Fusion Energi plug-in was among the winners in the segment with a nearly 90 percent boost to 11,550 examples sold for the year. To keep the ball rolling in the face of low gas prices and updated challengers entering the field, the Blue Oval is slashing $900 off the cost of both the Energi and standard Fusion Hybrid to make them even more attractive to buyers. Ford's Monique Brentley told Autoblog that, the reduction was done, "basically, just to attract more customers and promote sales." The cut affects every trim of both electrically assisted versions of the Fusion for the 2016 model year, according to Cars Direct, and it comes without the removal of standard equipment. On the contrary, the Energi reportedly gets a new EcoSelect driving mode that activates additional regenerative braking and more gentle acceleration. The $900 pricing adjustment is only for these models and not available on the versions with only an internal combustion engine, which makes it clear Ford wants to tantalize green car buyers towards this pair. According to Cars Direct, the models should go on sale in late 2015. The least expensive 2016 Fusion Hybrid S will retail for $25,675, plus $825 destination on all of them, and a 2016 Energi start at $33,900. Autoblog's own pricing pages for them show the same numbers (here and here). Cars Direct also predicts for the Blue Oval to keep most incentives in place even after the adjustment. Assuming these figures don't change before the sedans actually go on sale, the price cut makes a 2016 Energi less expensive than a 2015 Chevrolet Volt starting at $34,345 (plus $825 destination). The cost of the updated 2016 model for the Chevy isn't announced yet.
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.









