1963 1/2 Ford Galaxie 500 on 2040-cars
Menomonie, Wisconsin, United States
Body Type:Coupe
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:352
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Number of Cylinders: 8
Make: Ford
Model: Galaxie
Trim: 2 door 500
Drive Type: rwd
Mileage: 144,000
Disability Equipped: No
Exterior Color: Black
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
For Sale is a 1963 1/2 Ford Galaxie 500, 352 motor, auto trans, power steering, dual exhaust, body has been repainted has a couple of minor scratches, odometer reads 144,xxx, motor runs good it uses a quart of oil to 1200 miles other than that runs great, interior is in good shape, seam on driver side front seat has opened up about 7 inches other than that no issues with interior. All glass is in good condition no cracks, door seals around windows replaced, transmission work great, has minor leak. the frames has been repaired below doors on both sides, have owned this car for 5 years and is driven every summer and I have not had any issues with the frame or any other part of the car, overall this car is in excellent shape.
Ford Galaxie for Sale
1964 ford galaxie z code nice clean car(US $19,499.00)
1964 galaxie 500 fastback 406 dual quads 4 speed very sharp!!!
62 galaxie convertible 500 xl 352 v8 automatic red(US $19,900.00)
1965 ford galaxie 500 xl coupe 352cu,5.8l,hot rod,rat rod,drag race,car,roadster
1963 ford country sedan wagon(US $12,500.00)
1959 ford galaxie 500-barn find-no reserve
Auto Services in Wisconsin
Wrenches Automotive ★★★★★
Weber Auto Repair ★★★★★
Van Horn Dodge Chrysler Jeep ★★★★★
Sturtevant Auto ★★★★★
Sparkle Auto Body ★★★★★
Smart Motors Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
2021 Ford F-150 Raptor vs. 2021 Ram 1500 TRX | How they compare on paper
Wed, Feb 3 2021Yep, the F-150 Raptor is back, though you'd be forgiven for not noticing that it ever left. Ford's off-road model is taking a few months off to accommodate the broader 2021 F-150 redesign from which it benefits. And the fine folks over at Ram took full advantage of that lull to launch the new 702-horsepower TRX, which in one big way (hint: it's the engine) stands at the top of the performance pickup heap. Ford says that's all going to change in 2022, but for now, the Raptor returns with a familiar 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 (albeit with an unspecified power figure) along with several other revisions to Ford's tried-and-true formula. The 2020 Raptor was already a worthy adversary to the beefy Ram despite the latter's definitive power advantage, so how has that picture evolved for 2021? Let's take a look.  Powertrain This is a big question mark for the Ford right now, but it seems reasonable to expect a bit more than the outgoing model's 450 horsepower and 510 pound-feet of torque. The TRX's Hellcat-sourced powerplant needs no introduction. Its 702 horsepower will easily eclipse whatever Ford has planned for its 3.5-liter twin-turbo V6, even if the V6 has more grunt than it did before, but that's OK. It's not the base-model Raptor's job to dethrone the TRX in straight-line speed; that honor will go to the 2022 Raptor R. We also don't know what the Raptor's fuel economy will be like, but we suspect it will be better than the TRX's, if only slightly. Both these trucks come with four-wheel-drive standard, and they both have a number of drive modes that alter the powertrain’s characteristics depending on the terrain. Baja mode transforms the trucks into the desert runners that they both are at heart, but theyÂ’re plenty capable of crawling around rocks, too. We wonÂ’t know for certain which is best at specific tasks until we can get them both on (or off) equal ground. Suspension / off-roading capability And the ground is where things narrow significantly, both on- and off-paper. The specs are freakishly similar when we compare ground clearance, approach/departure angles and water fording, but the Raptor's leapfrog here is clearly evident. Both trucks utilize a coil-sprung rear suspension now, with Ford having abandoned the Raptor's previous leaf-spring setup with the redesign. The two use different shocks to handle 100-mph-plus desert running.
Ford delays North American production restart from coronavirus lockdown
Tue, Mar 31 2020Ford said on Tuesday it was postponing its plan to restart production at its North American plants due to safety concerns for its workers amid the coronavirus pandemic. To generate cash, the No. 2 U.S. automaker had said last week it was poised to restart production at some plants in North America as early as April 6, bringing back such profitable vehicles as its top-selling F-150 full-sized pickup, the Transit commercial van and SUVs. But on Tuesday, Ford said it had been aiming to resume production at several key U.S. plants on April 14, but would now instead do so at dates it would announce later on. "The health and safety of our workforce, dealers, customers, partners and communities remains our highest priority," Kumar Galhotra, president of Ford's North American operations, said in a statement. Still, the automaker will open a plant in Ypsilanti, Michigan, during the week of April 20, that will make ventilators to treat patients afflicted by the coronavirus. Rival Fiat Chrysler Automobiles said last week it plans to resume production in North America on April 13. General Motors has shuttered its plants indefinitely and has not provided a date for vehicle production to restart. It is facing a delay in the production launch of its redesigned large SUVs and is delaying work on other SUVs. "Once it is safe to resume production, we will do so," a GM spokesman said. As of Monday, Volkswagen was shooting for an April 5 reopening at its Tennessee plant. Honda, Nissan and Subaru facilities in North America will remain closed through April 6, and Hyundai through April 10. Toyota was planning to reopen its North American plants April 17. Plants/Manufacturing Chrysler Fiat Ford GM coronavirus
Defying Trump, major automakers finalize California emissions deal
Tue, Aug 18 2020WASHINGTON — The California Air Resources Board (CARB) and major automakers on Monday confirmed they had finalized binding agreements to cut vehicle emissions in the state, defying the Trump administration's push for weaker curbs on tailpipe pollution. The agreements with carmakers Ford Motor Co, Volkswagen AG, Honda Motor Co and BMW AG were first announced in July 2019 as voluntary measures prompting anger from U.S. President Donald Trump. A month later, the Justice Department opened an antitrust probe into the agreements. The government ended the investigation without action. The Trump administration in March finalized a rollback of U.S. vehicle emissions standards to require 1.5% annual increases in efficiency through 2026. That is far weaker than the 5% annual increases in the discarded rules adopted under President Barack Obama. The 50-page California agreements, which extend through 2026, are less onerous than the standards finalized by the Obama administration but tougher than the Trump administration standards. The automakers have also agreed to electric vehicle commitments. Volvo Cars, owned by China's Geely Holdings, said in March it planned to join the automakers agreeing to the California requirements. It has also finalized its agreement. The settlement agreements say California and automakers agreed to resolve "potential legal disputes concerning the authority of CARB" and other states that have adopted California's standards. In May, a group of 23 U.S. states led by California and some major cities, challenged the Trump vehicle emissions rule. Other major automakers like General Motors Co, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV and Toyota Motor Corp did not join the California agreement. Those companies also sided with the Trump administration in a separate lawsuit over whether the federal government can strip California of the right to set zero emission vehicle requirements. Ford said the "final agreement will reduce emissions in our vehicles at a more stringent rate, support and incentivize the production of electrified products, and create regulatory certainty." BMW said "by setting these long-term, predictable, and achievable standards, we have the regulatory certainty that is necessary for long-term planning that will not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions but ultimately benefit consumers as well."Â








