Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

2009 Ford F350 Refrigerated Box Truck 18,000 Miles! on 2040-cars

Year:2009 Mileage:18321 Color: Red /
 Gray
Location:

Brockport, New York, United States

Brockport, New York, United States
Advertising:
Transmission:Automatic
Body Type:Dual Wheel 10' Body
Engine:V10
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
VIN: 1FDWF36Y09EA58631 Year: 2009
Number of Cylinders: 10
Make: Ford
Model: F-350
Trim: XL
Cab Type (For Trucks Only): Reg Cab
Drive Type: 2WD
Power Options: Air Conditioning
Mileage: 18,321
Sub Model: Refrigerated Truck
Exterior Color: Red
Warranty: Unspecified
Interior Color: Gray
Condition: Used: A vehicle is considered used if it has been registered and issued a title. Used vehicles have had at least one previous owner. The condition of the exterior, interior and engine can vary depending on the vehicle's history. See the seller's listing for full details and description of any imperfections. ... 

2009 Ford F350 traded in by local school! Used to drive lunches around to district buildings, only 18,000 miles! 10 Foot Morgan Refrigerated body, Thermo King V300 refrigeration unit with 115v external power source, 1600lb Waltco power tailgate lift. V10 engine, air conditioning, automatic, one owner, clean CarFax, you won't find a nicer one! Call Randy at 585-509-1585 with questions.

Auto Services in New York

Vogel`s Collision ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Auto Oil & Lube
Address: 100 N Winton Rd, Ontario-Center
Phone: (585) 482-9655

Vinnies Truck & Auto Service ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 451 Windsor Pl, East-Rockaway
Phone: (929) 224-0634

Triangle Auto Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Engine Rebuilding & Exchange, Auto Engine Rebuilding
Address: 60 Park Ave, Castleton
Phone: (718) 442-9159

Transmission Giant Inc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Auto Transmission
Address: 1114 Broadhollow Rd, Glenwood-Landing
Phone: (631) 293-0090

Town Line Auto ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 6501 State Route 32, Berne
Phone: (518) 966-8003

Tony`s Service Center ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Brake Repair, Tire Changing Equipment
Address: 503 Brown St, Evans-Mills
Phone: (315) 639-6300

Auto blog

2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost loses big power on 87 octane

Mon, Jan 5 2015

The 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

Aluminum Ford F-150 earns five-star crash rating [w/video]

Thu, Apr 16 2015

The scores are in, and the 2015 Ford F-150 has been awarded a five-star Overall Vehicle Score in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's testing. That makes it, according to Ford, the safest F-150 ever. "The five-star safety rating is a terrific example of One Ford collaboration and innovation," Vice President of Global Product Development Raj Nair said in a statement. "Our truck team worked together for years to deliver this accomplishment, using an unprecedented combination of advanced materials throughout the all-new F-150. The 2015 model is engineered to be the safest F-150 ever, which matters to customers who depend on this truck to not only get the job done, but also get them safely home." The new F-150's aluminum and high-strength-steel construction posed some unique challenges to truck's engineers. "The team had to invent new ways to manage crash energy, because advanced materials like high-strength steel behave differently," Matt Niesluchowski, the truck's safety manager. "We found that changing certain shapes led to a weight reduction, while also improving crash performance." Beyond the structural safety features, the 2015 F-150 is loaded with additional safety features, including an adaptive steering column and Ford's inflatable seat belts, that protects drivers in the event of a collision. Beyond that, there's the usual array of active safety features meant to prevent a crash in the first place, including Curve Control and forward collision warning with brake support. Check out Ford's full press release on its five-star score, as well as video on the truck's safety features.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

Mon, Oct 10 2016

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.