2014 Ford F150 Xlt on 2040-cars
115 Regency Park, O'Fallon, Illinois, United States
Engine:3.5L V6 24V GDI DOHC Twin Turbo
Transmission:6-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1FTFW1ET1EKD38794
Stock Num: 47695
Make: Ford
Model: F150 XLT
Year: 2014
Exterior Color: Black
Options: Drive Type: 4WD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 27
Auffenberg Ford North has the area's best New selection of Fords. Mustangs, F150, Fusion....the list goes on and we have them ALL! Cars, Trucks and SUV's. We offer superior sales and service for our valued customers. We are committed to serving our friends and customers and look forward to hearing from you
Ford F-150 for Sale
2014 ford f150 xlt(US $32,843.00)
2014 ford f150 xlt(US $36,947.00)
2014 ford f150 xlt(US $35,989.00)
2014 ford f150(US $46,024.00)
2014 ford f150 platinum(US $47,722.00)
2014 ford f150(US $34,227.00)
Auto Services in Illinois
White Eagle Auto Body Shop ★★★★★
Tremont Car Connection ★★★★★
Toyota Of Naperville ★★★★★
Today`s Technology Auto Repair ★★★★★
Suburban Tire Auto Repair Center ★★★★★
Steve`s Tire & Service Center ★★★★★
Auto blog
Detroit 3 to implement delayed unified towing standards for 2015
Mon, 10 Feb 2014Car buyers have a responsibility to be well-informed consumers. That's not always a very simple task, but some guidelines are self-evident. If you live in a very snowy climate, you generally know a Ford Mustang or Chevrolet Camaro might not be as viable a vehicle choice as an all-wheel drive Explorer or Traverse, for example. If you want a fuel-efficient car, it's generally a good idea to know the difference between a diesel and a hybrid. But what if it's kind of tough to be an informed consumer? What if the information you need is more difficult to come by, or worse, based on different standards for each vehicle? Well, in that case, you might be a truck shopper.
For years, customers of light-duty pickups have had to suffer through different ratings of towing capacities for each brand. For 2015 model year trucks, though, that will no longer be a problem. According to Automotive News, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler Group have announced that starting with next year's models, a common standard will be used to measure towing capacity. The Detroit Three will join Toyota, which adopted the Society of Automotive Engineers' so-called SAE J2807 standards way back in 2011.
The standard was originally supposed to be in place for MY2013, but concerns that it would lower the overall stated capacity for trucks led Detroit automakers to pass. Ford originally passed, claiming it'd wait until its new F-150 was launched to adopt the new standards, leading GM and Ram to follow suit. Nissan, meanwhile, has said it will adopt the new standards as its vehicles are updated, meaning the company's next-generation Titan should adhere to the same tow ratings as its competitors.
Ken Block hoons his Ford F-150 RaptorTrax on the slopes
Wed, 08 Oct 2014Ken Block drives Fords. Hoons the heck out of 'em, actually. Mostly Fiestas, but also the occasional Focus or Mustang. But earlier this year, the Gymkhana guru revealed his baddest Ford yet: an F-150 SVT Raptor on tracks. And true to form, here he is putting it to the test in the latest video from Monster Energy and Hoonigan Racing.
Filmed at Baldface Lodge in Nelson, BC, the video pairs Block up with snowboarders Zak Hale and Ethan Deiss for some deep-powder action. You'll want to watch the video for yourself, but the bottom line is that the RaptorTrax beats the heck out of waiting on line for the ski lift. It's enough to make us start to look forward to winter... almost.
Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid
Tue, Jun 17 2014It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.

























