2010 F-250 Sd Fx4 Crew Cab Turbo Diesel Loaded Low Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Top 11 Lego Technic cars to buy on Amazon in 2024

Autoblog may receive a share from purchases made via links on this page. Pricing and availability are subject to change. I recently got a birthday wish list from my 11-year-old nephew, and I couldn't help but smile when I saw “Lego Technic Cars” at the top. Lego isnÂ’t a phase, itÂ’s a lifestyle. Once a Lego fan, always a Lego fan. In fact, IÂ’d be willing to bet that many of you reading this right now have some kind of Lego vehicle in a box somewhere, or better yet, on display in your home. While theyÂ’re not necessarily cheap, getting into building Lego Technic vehicles doesnÂ’t have to bankrupt you, either, unless you go for the $400 Lamborghini right off the bat. Here are 11 of our favorite Lego Technic vehicles on Amazon, right now, ranging from an affordable $35 all the way up to $450. LEGO Technic Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Ages 9+ (544 Pieces) - $39.99 (20% off) One of my first and favorite model cars growing up was a first-gen Ford Mustang GT350, so this GT500 for under $40 is right up my alley. At 544 pieces and made for ages 9 and up, the GT500 is a considerable step up from Grave Digger but a great starter to a Technic collection nonetheless. It isnÂ’t the most accurate-looking vehicle in this list, but the AR app and the fact that it can drive make it a worthwhile purchase. $39.99 at Amazon LEGO Technic Formula E Porsche 99X Electric Ages 9+ (422 Pieces) - $49.99 Not a Ford fan? Not a problem. This Formula E Porsche 99X is the same price and better looking than the GT500. Even though there are 122 fewer pieces in this Porsche set, it has a level of detail seen in much more expensive Technic sets including numerous decals and a pull back motor.  $49.99 at Amazon LEGO Technic Jeep Wrangler Ages 9+ (665 Pieces) - $54.99 This is the set I ended up going with for my nephew, not because I think it is the coolest, but because for the price, I think you get the most bang for your buck. 665 pieces is over 50% more than the comparatively priced Porsche 99X and it also scratches the nostalgia itch for me: The first-ever model vehicle I built was a yellow Jeep Wrangler Sahara. This Wrangler Rubicon has definitely had some aftermarket mods like the front winch, which makes it one of the coolest Technic sets under $60.  $54.99 at Amazon LEGO Technic Monster Jam Grave Digger Ages 7+ (212 Pieces) - $34.16 If ever there was a gateway Lego Technic, this Grave Digger is it.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.