Ford Expedition King Ranch Leather Nav Sunroof Bluetooth 3rd Row 20" Wheels on 2040-cars
Houston, Texas, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag, Side Airbags
Make: Ford
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Seats, Power Windows
Model: Expedition
Vehicle Inspection: Vehicle has been Inspected
Mileage: 21,661
CapType: <NONE>
Sub Model: 2WD KING
FuelType: Ethanol-FFV
Exterior Color: Red
Listing Type: Pre-Owned
Interior Color: Red
Certification: None
Warranty: Warranty
BodyType: SUV
Cylinders: 8 - Cyl.
Options: CD Player, Leather Seats, Sunroof
DriveTrain: REAR WHEEL DRIVE
Ford Expedition for Sale
2003 ford expedition xlt lthr 4wd
Warranty reverse cam leather dual climate non smoker clean carfax(US $30,900.00)
2005 ford expedition xlt sport utility 4-door 5.4l(US $6,995.00)
2008 expedition limited 5.4l great family car one owner drives great must see
2004 ford expedition xlt 4x4 5.4 liter v8 7 passenger(US $6,900.00)
2004 ford expedtion xlt 1 owner runs great 5.4l v-8 auto leather make fair offer(US $6,995.00)
Auto Services in Texas
Yos Auto Repair ★★★★★
Yarubb Enterprise ★★★★★
WEW Auto Repair Inc ★★★★★
Welsh Collision Center ★★★★★
Ward`s Mobile Auto Repair ★★★★★
Walnut Automotive ★★★★★
Auto blog
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.
Chevy's latest Silverado videos assume we're idiots
Mon, Jul 6 2015UPDATE: This article has been revised to reflect that any mention of materials used in a future Chevrolet Silverado is speculation. Can we have a sound, rational debate about the merits of aluminum versus steel? According to Chevrolet's latest marketing videos pitting the Silverado against the Ford F-150, the answer is no. The tone of all three ads is almost Orwellian: steel good, aluminum bad. Of course, this will all be a hilarious joke when an aluminum-bodied Silverado comes in 2018. That's an if, as a member of the General Motor public relations team has reminded me that any articles regarding future product are pure speculation. Until then Chevy needs to sell the current Silverado, with its body comprised chiefly of steel, against the Ford F-150's lightweight aluminum panels. Instead of touting the merits of the "most-dependable, longest lasting pickup," the strategy seems to center around negative propaganda towards the 13th element. The tone of all three ads is almost Orwellian: steel good, aluminum bad. Of the three videos, the most fair is Silverado vs. F-150 Repair Costs and Time: Howie Long Head to Head. Basically: aluminum costs more than steel, it's more difficult to repair, and requires special equipment for body shops. In terms of Chevy versus Ford, the blue oval truck costs more and takes longer to repair - an average of $1,755 more and 34 more days in the shop, according to the ad. But why stop there when you can have pitchman Howie Long raising an eyebrow at random facts? When Silverado Chief Engineer Eric Stanczak says of the Ford, "It's manufactured in a way that combines aluminum, rivets, and adhesive in a process that's different than Silverado." Long responds, "Huh. Interesting." At the end of the video, Long says "I'd be interested to know what happens to insurance costs." Note he's not saying anything substantive. If Chevy's legal team could sign off on some facts about insurance rates, it would be in this ad. On our Autoblog Cost to Own calculator, there is no significant difference in projected insurance costs between the two trucks. But at least that ad has facts. The other two videos are pure hype. In Cages: High Stength Steel, real people are asked what they think of aluminum and steel in a room with two cages. Then a bear is released into the room, and the subjects scurry to the safety of the steel cage.
UAW Chief Shawn Fain disrupts Detroit's labor tradition
Fri, Sep 15 2023He's known to quote the Bible and Nation of Islam civil rights leader Malcolm X. He's a social media fanatic who keeps the pay stubs of his union member grandfather in his wallet. And now, Shawn Fain is representing nearly 150,000 auto workers in one of the biggest labor strikes in decades. In taking action against all three Detroit carmakers, Fain, the head of the United Auto Workers, has remade the strategy of the union he leads, choosing a bolder, much riskier path than his predecessors after he won office by a narrow margin in a first-ever direct election earlier this year. The strike started as the clock hit midnight on Friday, and followed Fain's decision to open negotiations with Ford Motor, General Motors and Stellantis simultaneously and eschew public niceties involving choreographed handshakes that famously kicked off previous negotiating efforts. The strategy is not without risk. A weeks-long strike would hit workers who live paycheck to paycheck, while the Detroit Three automakers have billions in cash to withstand the walkout. Fain, 54, has made creative use of social media, appearances on network and cable news programs and alliances with high-profile progressive politicians such as U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, to reframe the UAW's contract bargaining as a battle to re-set the balance of power between workers and global corporations. He has rebutted automakers' concerns about labor costs by pointing out that they have poured billions into share buybacks to benefit investors. "If they’ve got money for Wall Street they sure as hell have money for the workers making the product," he said. “We fight for the good of the entire working class and the poor." In lengthy social media talks to UAW members, Fain alternates quoting Bible verses with the use of charts and graphs to dissect wage and benefit offers from the automakers - details his predecessors kept behind closed doors during bargaining crunch time. Fain, in his unorthodox approach, ran what amounted to a public auction among the companies to push each one to top the other to avoid a costly walkout. Prior UAW presidents picked just one automaker to set a pattern for the other two. Over and over, Fain has told UAW members at the Detroit Three that they can reverse 20 years of wage and retiree benefit concessions, stop further plant closures and end a seniority-based, tiered compensation system that pays new hires as much as 44% less than veteran workers.
