1999 Ford Ranger Xl 4x4 3ltr 6cyl on 2040-cars
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, United States
Body Type:Pickup Truck
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:3.0L 182Cu. In. V6 FLEX OHV Naturally Aspirated
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Make: Ford
Model: Ranger
Cab Type (For Trucks Only): EXT CAB
Trim: XL Extended Cab Pickup 4-Door
Options: CD Player
Drive Type: 4WD
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Mileage: 129,961
Power Options: Air Conditioning
Sub Model: XL 4X4
Exterior Color: Blue
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Doors: 3
Number of Cylinders: 6
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Bidding on a 1999 Ford ranger, 122,961 miles. Runs good, average condition for its age. AIr conditioning works great. Tires pretty new, 4 wheel drive works great. Misc scratches and rust spots.Selling as is, no warranty. Car is for sale locally and we reserve the right to end auction anytime. Thanks for looking.
Ford Ranger for Sale
1998 ford ranger xl extended cab pickup 2-door 3.0l
2004 ford ranger edge extended cab pickup 4-door 4.0l one owner,only 46k miles!(US $11,950.00)
1984 diesel ford ranger - very rare -
Ford ranger 5 speed manual 4 cyl cheap on gas very clean aftermarket wheels(US $7,649.99)
2000 ford ranger xlt 4 door supercab red 4x4 automatic bed liner trailer hitch
2011 ford ranger sport extended cab pickup 4-door 4.0l
Auto Services in Ohio
Williams Auto Parts Inc ★★★★★
Wagner Subaru ★★★★★
USA Tire & Auto Service Center ★★★★★
Toyota-Metro Toyota ★★★★★
Top Value Car & Truck Service ★★★★★
Tire Discounters Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
Chevy says not to look at the 2019 Silverado's fuel economy rating
Tue, Nov 20 2018The 2019 Chevy Silverado is hitting dealerships soon, and one of the most notable changes for the new full-size pickup is the addition of a 2.7-liter turbocharged inline-four. The engine replaces the naturally-aspirated 4.3-liter V6 in volume consumer models like the Silverado LT and promises more power, less weight and — most importantly — better fuel economy. The thing is, the gains in efficiency haven't been as dramatic as some might have hoped, especially when stacked up against competitors from Ford and Ram. As Automotive News reports, GM's response is a little murky. First, let's talk numbers. We're pulling all figures from FuelEconomy.gov, the official U.S. government source for fuel ratings. Fuel economy numbers on trucks vary greatly based on a number of factors. Bed and cab configuration play a part, but so does a four-wheel-drive system. You also have to factor in tires, transmissions, rear-axle gearing, hybrid systems and cylinder deactivation. Things like that can make the difference between best- and worst-in-class. The EPA's website doesn't give enough information a lot of the time, so there's really no easy way to compare apples-to-apples. First, take a look at the ratings for the 2019 Silverado. A 2.7-liter model with two-wheel drive is rated 20 city, 23 highway and 21 combined. That's both better and worse than a two-wheel drive 2018 Silverado with the 4.3-liter V6 (18 city, 24 highway and 20 combined). The updated 2019 Silverado with a 4.3-liter V6 has yet to be rated. With less weight and a smaller engine, many hoped Chevy would make bigger gains. It's unusual to see any decrease in a fuel economy metric these days. GM says that it's not done tuning the new 2.7-liter engine, so fuel economy could theoretically increase. Expanding further, a V8-powered 2019 Silverado (17 city, 24 highway and 19 combined) actually gets better highway fuel economy than a turbocharged four-cylinder powered truck in certain configurations, even if the latter has a better overall average. But that's only with two-wheel drive, the 8-speed transmission and cylinder deactivation. A Silverado with the 5.3-liter V8 and a 6-speed automatic is rated at 15 city, 22 highway and 17 combined. The biggest issue with the Silverado 2.7-liter doesn't come from within GM itself but from Ford and Ram. GM cites the Ford F-150 with the 3.3-liter V6 and the Ram 1500 with the 3.6-liter V6 as the closest competitors to its new 2.7-liter inline-four.
Official USPS Muscle Cars stamps coming to a mailbox near you
Thu, 21 Feb 2013As much as our digital lives have cut down on our trips to the post office, there are still times that sending "snail mail" is necessary. With us car lovers in mind and philately in their hearts, the good folks at the United States Postal Service will introduce a new stamp design called "Muscle Cars" starting on February 22.
Designed by artist Tom Fritz, the new collection of stamps consist of five classic muscle cars: 1969 Dodge Charger Daytona, 1970 Chevrolet Chevelle SS, 1967 Shelby GT-500, 1966 Pontiac GTO and 1970 Plymouth Hemi 'Cuda. In addition to just the stamps, the USPS is also commemorating the new series with plenty of collectable memorabilia. Previous car-related stamps include 50s Sporty Cars from 2005 and 50s Fins and Chrome from 2008.
Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America
Thu, Apr 28 2022You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.









