1930 Ford Model A on 2040-cars
Galloway, Ohio, United States
Transmission:Automatic
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Vehicle Title:Clean
Engine:350 chevy
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): A3860347
Mileage: 400
Make: Ford
Model: Model A
Interior Color: Tan
Number of Seats: 4
Number of Cylinders: 8
Drive Side: Left-Hand Drive
Engine Size: 0.5 L
Car Type: Classic Cars
Exterior Color: Black
Number of Doors: 2
Ford Model A for Sale
1931 ford model a(US $5,000.00)
1930 ford spot coupe(US $19,500.00)
1931 ford model a deluxe many prewar goodies as t packard(US $15,000.00)
1929 ford model a(US $22,000.00)
1929 ford model a(US $20,000.00)
1931 ford model a(US $12,900.00)
Auto Services in Ohio
World Import Automotive Inc ★★★★★
Westerville Auto Group ★★★★★
W & W Auto Tech ★★★★★
Vendetta Towing Inc. ★★★★★
Van`s Tire ★★★★★
Tri County Tire Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
2020 Ford Escape plug-in vs. Toyota RAV4 Prime, Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV: How they compare on paper
Tue, Jun 9 2020This year is when the entry-level plug-in crossover market really starts to heat up. Both Ford and Toyota have new models in the 2020 Ford Escape and the 2021 Toyota RAV4 Prime. They join the segment veteran Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, which has been available in the U.S. since the 2018 model year. And of course that means it's time to look at how the numbers add up while we wait for our chance to drive the new competitors. You can find a chart with all the details immediately below, followed by more detailed analysis. Powertrain One of the key factors for any hybrid, particularly plug-in models, is how little fuel they use. Overall, the Ford Escape is the winner with 100 mpg-e, the fuel economy equivalency for the vehicle when assessing it with a full battery. The Toyota is close behind with 94 mpg-e. We're expecting the Escape to also be a bit more efficient when running only on gas, as it reportedly gets 41 mpg. The RAV4 will likely get 40 mpg, or possibly slightly less, since the non-plug-in RAV4 Hybrid achieves 40 mpg combined. Running solely on electric power, though, the RAV4 edges out the Escape with 42 miles of range versus 37. Behind both of them is the Mitsubishi with just 22 miles of range, 25 mpg on gasoline only, and 74 mpg-e with a full battery. One unique feature the Mitsubishi claims is DC fast charging capability, meaning 80% of its electric range can be restored in just 25 minutes, possibly allowing for more electric use depending on where you're driving it. While fuel economy is a priority for hybrids, customers won't want to compromise on other features. The Toyota is easily the least compromising, as it returns impressive range and efficiency while also providing a whopping 302 horsepower and all-wheel drive. The Mitsubishi also has all-wheel drive, but a comparatively paltry 190 horsepower. The Ford produces slightly more power at 200, but is front-wheel-drive only. While low in comparison to the RAV4 Prime, the Mitsubishi and Ford have very competitive output to many comparably-sized conventional crossovers with base engines, such as the Honda CR-V, Chevy Equinox and others. Size and space Naturally one of the reasons for buying a crossover is for its practical shape for comfortable hauling of people and stuff. In this regard, all three crossovers are very close. The Escape wins out with legroom, the Toyota with shoulder room. Headroom is split between the Toyota and Mitsubishi.
Moon landing anniversary: How Detroit automakers won the space race
Fri, Jul 19 2019America's industrial might — automakers included — determined the outcome of the 20th centuryÂ’s biggest events. The “Arsenal of Democracy” won World War II, and then the Cold War. And our factories flew us to the moon. Apollo was a Cold War program. You can draw a direct line from Nazi V-2 rockets to ICBMs to the Saturn V. The space race was a proxy war — which beats a real war. It was a healthy outlet for technology and testosterone that would otherwise be used for darker purposes. (People protested, and still do, that money for space should go to problems here on Earth, but more likely the military-industrial complex would've just bought more bombs with it.) As long as we and the Soviet Union were launching rockets into space, we were not lobbing them at each other. JFKÂ’s challenge to “go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard,” put American industry back on a war footing. We were galvanized to beat the Russians, to demonstrate technological dominance. (A lack of similar unifying purpose is why we havenÂ’t been to the moon since, or Mars.) NASA says more than 400,000 Americans, from scientists to seamstresses, toiled on the moon program, working for government or for 20,000 contractors. Antagonism was diverted into something inspirational. The Big Three automakers were some of the biggest companies in the moon program, which might surprise a lot of people today. Note to a new generation who marveled when SpaceX launched a Tesla Roadster out into the solar system: Sure, that was neat, but just know that Detroit beat Elon Musk to space by more than half a century. This high point in human history was brought to you by Ford ItÂ’s hard to imagine in this era of Sony-LG-Samsung, but Ford used to make TVs. And other consumer appliances. Or rather Philco, the radio, TV and transistor pioneer that Ford bought in 1961 — the year Gagarin and Alan Shepard flew in space. Ted Ryan, FordÂ’s archives and heritage brand manager, just wrote a Medium article on the central role Philco-Ford played in manned spaceflight. And nothingÂ’s more central than Mission Control in Houston, the famous console-filled room we all know from TV and movies. What we didn't know was, that was Ford. Ford built that. In 1953, Ryan notes, Philco invented a transistor that was key to the development of (what were then regarded as) high-speed computers, so naturally Philco became a contractor for NASA and the military.
Ford Police Interceptor with 2.0L EcoBoost rated most fuel-efficient police sedan
Tue, 26 Nov 2013Back in September, Ford announced a non-pursuit version of its Police Interceptor Sedan, which swaps out a choice of two V6 engines for a fuel-efficient 2.0-liter EcoBoost inline four-cylinder. This Special Service Police Sedan will be marketed to law enforcement agencies looking to cut fuel costs and don't need the extra power.
For college campuses, detectives and the like, this new police car has now been certified with EPA fuel economy estimates of 20 miles per gallon in the city, 32 mpg on the highway and a combined rating of 24 mpg. These figures represent a decrease of two mpg in city and combined ratings compared to the civilian-spec 2014 Taurus. These police cars still offer active grille shutters for better aerodynamics, although we're guessing agencies upfitting their cars with light bars and push bumpers aren't exactly concerted with aerodynamics. The true benefit of the SSP version is when it's compared against other police sedan options like the Dodge Charger, Chevy Impala, Chevy Caprice and even the V6 Police Interceptor Sedan.
Ford claims the new Police Interceptor Sedan SSP is the most fuel-efficient current option for police departments, saying that this car can save $1,720 per car over three years and almost $260,000 over the same span of time for fleets with 150 vehicles. There is an official press release posted below, and also check out the gallery of images from Ford collected from various police agencies across the US (although none show the 2.0-liter SSP model). Head on over to Ford's Police Interceptor mini-site for even more pictures of the Police Interceptor Sedan and Utility.