1964 Falcon Two Door Hardtop With 302 Engine , Automatic Trans, Primer Paint on 2040-cars
Crumpler, North Carolina, United States
|
up for bid is a very solid 1964 falcon future with a few modifactions it has a 302 engine with a mild cam.automatic trans. with shift kit hurst promatic shifter flow master mufflers air shocks and traction bars .edelbrock carb and intake' have a new headliner for it still in box. seats and door panels are decent for a driver but would need work for show. has .good solid undercarriage tires has good tread but has some dry cracks the car was originally 260 4 speed car still has clutch linkage. oredt@yahoo.com 336-877-7410 thanks
|
Ford Falcon for Sale
1965 ford falcon sedan delivery base 4.7l(US $12,900.00)
Ford falcon two door bucket seat and console no reserve
1965 ford falcon 289 2 door hardtop
Ford falcon 2 door cold a/c 1964
Mint 68 falcon futura(US $6,500.00)
Falcon(US $8,000.00)
Auto Services in North Carolina
Xpress Lube ★★★★★
Wrightsboro Tire & Auto ★★★★★
Wilburn Auto Body Shop - Lake Norman ★★★★★
Wheeler Troy Honda Car Service ★★★★★
Truck Alterations ★★★★★
Troy`s Auto & Machine Shop ★★★★★
Auto blog
Cars with the worst resale value in 2022
Thu, Nov 10 2022Car values are all over the map right now. Used vehicles that were worth a small fortune earlier this year are now coming back to Earth, but the new vehicle supply remains tight. Prices are still elevated overall, but some models have seen more severe price drops. Depreciation strikes almost every model, supply constraint or not, though a few vehicles are leading the way. New research from analytics iSeeCars found that a handful of cars depreciated more than 50 percent over five years, with the BMW 7 Series dropping 56.9 percent and an average price cut of $61,923 over that time. The vehicles with the highest depreciation — or worst resale value — over five years: BMW 7 Series: -56.9% Maserati Ghibli: -56.3% Jaguar XF: -54% Infiniti QX80: -52.6% Cadillac Escalade ESV: 52.3% Mercedes-Benz S-Class: 51.9% Lincoln Navigator: -51.9% Audi A6: -51.5% Volvo S90: -51.4% Ford Expedition: -50.7% iSeeCarsÂ’ research showed that midsize trucks, sports cars, and fuel-efficient vehicles were slowest to depreciate over five years, while itÂ’s clear that luxury brands tend to lose value much faster. As iSeeCarsÂ’ Executive Analyst Karl Brauer explained, used buyers donÂ’t value high-end vehiclesÂ’ features as much as the first owners, so resale values tend to be softer. The tech and options that made the cars so expensive and appealing new donÂ’t add the same value on the used market. Read more: Cars with the best resale value Interestingly, electric vehicles also depreciated quite heavily, though they were just short of the abysmal numbers in luxury segments. The Nissan Leaf depreciated most among EVs, dropping by 49.1 percent. The average EV depreciation is 44.2 percent, with the Tesla Model S and Model X sliding in right under the bar at 43.7 and 38.8 percent, respectively. As iSeeCars notes, itÂ’s important to be vigilant when car shopping and not let your emotions win over reason. Shiny new luxury cars look great in the showroom, but you could end up taking a bath when you try selling them a few years later on. Related video: Audi BMW Cadillac Ford Infiniti Jaguar Lincoln Maserati Mercedes-Benz Volvo Car Buying Used Car Buying Ownership Resale Value depreciation
Jaguar design boss admits X-Type was a mistake
Thu, 19 Sep 2013History has a way of repeating itself, especially in the auto industry. When Jaguar was owned by Ford, the British brand attempted to field a competitor for the BMW 3 Series, called the X-Type. Based on the bones of a Ford Mondeo, it aped the styling of Jaguar's flagship model, the XJ, while borrowing liberally from the Ford parts bin. That was 2001.
Now, in 2013, Jaguar is planning a new 3 Series challenger based on the platform previewed by the C-X17 Concept, while Ford is attempting to take the latest Mondeo upmarket. The moves have both brands recognizing where, why, and how the X-Type failed. "It didn't look mature or powerful or anything. It was just a car," Jaguar's current head of advanced design, Julian Thomson, told PistonHeads. Basing the X-Type on a front-drive car while giving it styling that was meant for a rear-driver lead to proportions that "were plainly wrong," Thomson told PH. Ford's European head of quality, Gunnar Herrmann, added that the X-Type was "a fake Jaguar, because every piece I touch is Ford."
For what it's worth, the X-Type's successor in the segment will sport rear-drive, with plenty of input from Ian Callum. Thomson described the new model, which would challenge the 3 Series as having, "Big wheels right to the ends of the car, low bonnet, short overhangs, very low cabins." Sounds good to us.
2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise
Mon, Jan 2 2017About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.























