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

1956 Thunderbird Frame Off Rottisserie Restortion 597 Miles on 2040-cars

US $59,900.00
Year:1956 Mileage:597
Location:

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
Advertising:

 1956 FORD THUNDERBIRD HAD A FRAME OFF ROTISSERIE RESTORATION IN ITS CORRECT ORIGINAL WHITE COLOR WITH RED@WHIT VINYL INTERIOR COMPLETED IN 2012.  312CI ENGINE,  AUTOMATIC TRANS, CONTINENTAL KIT, POWER STEERING @ BRAKES,  POWER SEAT @ WINDOWS, AM FM STEREO  RADIO,  CHROME ENGINE DRESS UP KIT, CANVAS BLACK SOFT TOP, WIRE WHEELS, TELESCOPIC STEERING WHEEL, TINTED GLASS, BACK UP LIGHTS, CAR COVER, OWNERS MANUAL, CAR HAS 597 MILES SINCE RESTORATION, MUST SEE THIS ONE. WON FIRST PLACE @ BEST RESTORATION AT  THE SUPER NATIONAL CAR SHOW IN ALB NEW MEXICO  FEB 2014. THANKS FOR LOOKING   RAY 505-269-2800

Auto Services in New Mexico

Viva Ford ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers, Automobile Parts & Supplies
Address: 5550 N Desert Blvd, Sunland-Park
Phone: (915) 834-2800

Transmission Warehouse ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Auto Transmission
Address: 655 N Solano Dr, Las-Cruces
Phone: (575) 233-0000

Taos Tire Factory ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Tire Dealers, Wheels
Address: 523 Paseo Del Pueblo Sur, Taos
Phone: (575) 758-8688

Sun Country Cycles and Equipment ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Motorcycle Dealers, Motorcycles & Motor Scooters-Repairing & Service
Address: 2333 E Main St, Fruitland
Phone: (505) 325-4195

Service One ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Automobile Restoration-Antique & Classic, Auto Body Parts
Address: 6446 Edith Blvd Ne, San-Jose
Phone: (505) 552-2918

Sam`s Auto Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 50 S Main St, Rowe
Phone: (505) 757-2503

Auto blog

Should reflective paint earn automakers EPA credits?

Tue, Jul 7 2015

No matter where you look around the world, governments are cracking down on vehicle emissions and aiming for higher fuel economy standards. Generally, automakers are pushing back against the increased regulation, and in the US, General Motors, Ford, and FCA US are looking for new compromises. The Big Three want to the EPA to grant them retroactive emissions credits for using tech that they claim reduces CO2 but not on the government agency's on-road testing. Among these technologies are things like reflective paint and glass, LED lights, ventilated seats, stop/start, and more efficient air conditioning compressors. Starting with the 2014 model year, the automakers can receive credits for a few grams per mile reductions on models with some of these solutions, according to Automotive News. However, the companies are also petitioning the EPA to make the credits apply to earlier vehicles with them, as well. The emissions advantages for systems like stop/start and less polluting AC refrigerants seem fairly obvious. For reflective paint and glass, the belief is that keeping a vehicle interior cooler should mean a lower need for air conditioning and therefore a decrease in CO2. Margo Oge, the former boss of the EPA's Office of Transportation Air Quality, told Automotive News these credits are part of the plan. "That's the whole point of what we tried to establish," she said. "We wanted companies to invest in and develop these technologies." The EPA wants vehicle emissions at the corporate average equivalent of 54.4 miles per gallon fuel economy by 2025, and so far that seems achievable. It will translate to less than 40 mpg on the EPA sticker. In a report last summer, the industry was about 10 grams per mile of CO2 better than the rules required, and that was solely based on 2012 model year vehicles. In an update for 2013, the companies were up to 12 grams per mile beyond targets. News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Mark Humphrey / AP Photo Government/Legal Green Ford GM Emissions Fuel Efficiency FCA fca us

2015 Ford Focus Electric hides in plain sight

Wed, 16 Apr 2014

The styling changes to the 2015 Ford Focus were shown off at the recent Geneva Motor Show, so what the EV version looks like is not that much of a surprise. Still, the 2015 Focus Electric is making its world debut here at the New York Auto Show, so we wanted to know what changes we are looking at compared to both the internal combustion engine version and the earlier EV models.
The exterior visual distinctions between the ICE and EV are minimal, and basically nonexistent from the A-pillar to the rear. Up front, you can see the charge port, of course, but the front fascia has also undergone a bit of an adjustment. The front doesn't have the ICE version's flattened grille and the EV's Ford logo creates a bump in the hood line where none exists on the ICE. The 2015's grille is also different than the one on the 2014 Focus Electric, being slightly smaller (you can see this better if you compare pictures in our new gallery above to these of the 2011 Focus Electric and these of the gas-powered 2015 Focus).
The updated 2015 interior - which we couldn't access ourselves - has things like a new center stack, improved cupholders and is basically identical between the gas and electric models. With the car off, you can't even tell if you're in an EV or ICE, Seema Bardwaj, the US brand manager for the Focus, told AutoblogGreen. The only things that are different, she said, are extra menu screens to show EV powertrain information to the driver.

Should heavy-duty pickup trucks have window stickers with fuel mileage estimates?

Sat, Sep 23 2017

If you were to stroll into your nearest Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Nissan, or Ram dealership, you'd find a bunch of pickup trucks. Most of those would have proper window stickers labeled with things like base prices, options prices, location of manufacture, and, crucially, fuel economy estimates. But you'd also run across a number of heavy-duty trucks with no such fuel mileage data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA doesn't require automakers to publish the valuable miles-per-gallon measurement for vehicles with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. That makes it difficult for consumers to compare behemoths powered by turbocharged diesel engines – between one another, and between smaller, gasoline-fueled trucks. Consumer Reports doesn't think it should be this way, and it's spearheading an effort (PDF link) to get the government to require manufacturers to publish fuel economy estimates. In its own testing, CR found that heavy-duty pickups powered by Ford's Power Stroke, GM's Duramax, and FCA's Cummins diesel engines (which doesn't include the Ram's EcoDiesel) get worse fuel mileage than their lighter-duty gas-powered siblings. We're not so sure HD-truck buyers are unaware of this fact – big diesels don't really come into their own until big loads are placed in their beds or attached to their trailer hitches. Under heavy workloads, the diesel trucks will almost certainly return greater efficiency than a similar gas-powered truck. What's more, HD trucks with lumbering diesels in general make the driver feel more confident while towing due to greater torque at low engine RPM than gas trucks. They also offer greater max-weight limits. Still, we agree EPA fuel mileage estimates should be offered for heavy-duty pickups. And we think the comparisons provided by Consumer Reports might be interesting to potential buyers. Click here to see the results of CR's tests, and let us know what you think using the poll below. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Ford F-Series Super Duty: First Drive View 22 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Read This Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan RAM Fuel Efficiency Truck Commercial Vehicles Diesel Vehicles poll gmc sierra hd chevy silverado hd