1965 Ford Galaxie 500 Convertible - Rust Free Original Southern Car!!! on 2040-cars
Monroe, North Carolina, United States
|
1965 Ford Galaxie 500 Convertible Rust free original - Southern car! FEATURES:
RECENT IMPROVEMENTS:
HISTORY:
COMMENTS:
Very reasonable and low reserve price! Offered by a reliable seller who has sold classic cars for over 30 years. If you have any questions or want to see any specific or additional images, please email me and I will send them out to you. Final payment for car must be received within 10 days off auction end via certified funds. I ship world wide and will be glad to assist you with the shipping arrangements. |
Ford Galaxie for Sale
1959 ford galaxie convertible
1968 ford ltd 2 dr hardtop coupe rare 428 q-code car galaxie 500 custom 68
1964 ford galaxie 500xl convertable(US $25,000.00)
1971 ford ltd convertible 400 v8 and only 62,000 miles with factory a/c
1969 ford xl gt clone convertible
1968 ford galaxie 500 390 car - many parts
Auto Services in North Carolina
Your Automotive Service Center ★★★★★
Whistle`s Body Shop ★★★★★
Village Motor Werks ★★★★★
Tyrolf Automotive ★★★★★
Turner Towing & Recovery ★★★★★
Triangle Auto & Truck Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee vs. midsize crossovers and SUVs: How they compare on paper
Fri, Mar 30 2018In a world full of SUVs and crossovers all competing for similar buyers in similar segments, there are still some models that find their own little niches that lack such fevered fighting. The Jeep Grand Cherokee is one of those vehicles. It's an oddball in the sense that it's a midsize crossover SUV with a unibody chassis and independent suspension, but it still uses rear-wheel-drive and four-wheel-drive systems and has some off-road capability. It's also a midsize crossover, but only offers two rows of seats. Despite the Grand Cherokee's odd nature, we did come up with a few crossovers and a classic SUV that seem to match the Jeep in size and pricing. We looked at the numbers to compare them on paper. You can find the raw data in the chart below and deeper analysis after that. As always, this is just a comparison of specifications and you'll want to check out our driving impressions of each car if you're getting serious about one or all of these vehicles. And if you want to compare any of these against other vehicles, be sure to check out our comparison tool. Engines and Drivetrains When comparing base engines, the Jeep Grand Cherokee's 295-horsepower is the clear power winner, beating the next most powerful 4Runner by 25. But in torque, the 4Runner takes the laurels with 278 pound-feet, narrowly edging out the Edge's (no pun intended) turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder's 275. That four-cylinder in the Edge will also be picking up another 5 horsepower for 2019, but it still won't win this power contest. Both Ford and Jeep also have another advantage in the fact that you don't have to settle for the base powertrain. Ford has two other engine options, a naturally aspirated V6 and a twin-turbocharged V6, the latter of which outguns the Grand Cherokee's gasoline V6 in both power and torque. That engine will also be bumped up to an impressive 335 horsepower and 385 pound-feet of torque. View 20 Photos The Jeep has the most engine options, though, and it's the only to offer V8 and diesel options. On most Grand Cherokees, the options include a 5.7-liter V8, which is only available with 4WD. It makes 360 horsepower and 390 pound-feet of torque, outperforming even the 2019 Edge's twin-turbo V6. The diesel engine doesn't make much power with just 240, but it makes up for it with torque at 420 pound-feet. And of course there are the SRT and SRT Trackhawk models with even bigger and supercharged V8 engines respectively.
Automakers drop support for Trump effort against California emissions
Tue, Feb 2 2021WASHINGTON — Toyota, Fiat Chrysler (now known as Stellantis following its merger with Peugeot) and other major automakers said on Tuesday they were joining General Motors in abandoning support for former President Donald Trump's effort to bar California from setting its own zero emission vehicle rules. The automakers, which also included Hyundai, Kia, Mitsubishi, Mazda and Subaru, said in a joint statement they were withdrawing from an ongoing legal challenge to California's emission-setting powers, "in a gesture of good faith and to find a constructive path forward" with President Joe Biden. The automakers, along with the National Automobile Dealers Association, said they were aligned "with the Biden administrationÂ’s goals to achieve year-over-year improvements in fuel economy standards." Nissan in December withdrew from the challenge after GM's decision in November shocked the industry and won praise from Biden. On Monday, the Justice Department asked the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia to put the California emissions litigation on hold to "ensure due respect for the prerogative of the executive branch to reconsider the policy decisions of a prior administration." Biden has directed agencies to quickly reconsider TrumpÂ’s 2019 decision to revoke CaliforniaÂ’s authority to set its own auto tailpipe emissions standards and require rising numbers of zero-emission vehicles, as well as Trump's national fuel economy rollback. Asked to respond to the automakers' action, White House climate adviser Gina McCarthy said in a statement that "after four years of putting us in reverse, it is time to restart and build a sustainable future, grow domestic manufacturing, and deliver clean cars for America." California Governor Gavin Newsom praised the automakers on Twitter for "dropping your climate-denying, air-polluting, Trump-era lawsuit against CA" and urged them to join the voluntary framework. TALKS WITH BIDEN Separately, an industry trade group on Tuesday proposed to start talks with Biden on revised fuel economy standards that would be higher than Trump-era standards but lower than ones set during the prior Democratic administration. The Trump administration in March finalized a rollback of U.S. Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards to require 1.5% annual increases in efficiency through 2026, well below the 5% yearly boosts under the Obama administration rules it discarded.
The tricky business of octane, power, and MPG
Thu, Aug 27 2015Given tepid green-car sales numbers this year, consumers in the US aren't making the transition away from internal combustion engines too quickly. Regulations are still mandating cleaner emissions, though. In addition to downsizing and turbocharging, there's growing consideration about moving to higher-octane fuel to improve overall efficiency. In a new report, engineers at FCA, Ford and General Motors Powertrain are showing that it could work, too. The major advantage to higher-octane fuel is that it supports higher compression ratios. That in turn can lead to more power from burning the same amount of gas. "Higher ethanol content is one available option for increasing the octane ratings of gasoline and would provide additional engine efficiency benefits for part and full load operation," the researchers write in the study's abstract. The authors even think it could be possible to update some modern vehicles' engine calibration to be optimized for the better gas. While the benefits are there, we still have a long way to go before higher-octane fuel becomes a national standard. According to Green Car Congress, 87 percent of the gas sold in the US is regular grade 87-octane. Meanwhile, premium 91-93 octane makes up just 10 percent. The various grades of fuel illuminate even more annoyances with the current system. For example, Ford generally recommends 93-octane for EcoBoost engines, and the power outputs that the company publishes are based on using it. However according to Green Car Reports, such premium gas is very difficult to find in some regions of the US, especially along the West Coast. The powertrains still run on lesser grades but with lower power output. The researchers' discussion of possibly increasing ethanol in gas also comes during a heated debate on the substance. The current administration is pushing for less of the corn-based fuel in the coming years. Although, several presidential hopefuls might be favor of reversing that course.



















