Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

2003 Ford Crown Victoria Lx Sedan 4-door 4.6l on 2040-cars

US $5,000.00
Year:2003 Mileage:85000
Location:

Cocoa, Florida, United States

Cocoa, Florida, United States

This is a low mileage, two owner vehicle.  We purchased it from an estate when it was only a few years old.  It is in good condition.  There are a couple of small tears in the seat, a couple of small rust spots and one dent in the rear passenger side door where the original owner hit is with a wheel chair.

Auto Services in Florida

Zip Automotive ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Truck Service & Repair
Address: 5630 Maloney Ave, Sugarloaf
Phone: (305) 292-6915

X-Lent Auto Body, Inc. ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 1422 9th St W, Siesta-Key
Phone: (941) 747-0686

Wilde Jaguar of Sarasota ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers
Address: 4821 Clark Road, Tallevast
Phone: (941) 924-3019

Wheeler Power Products ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Machine Shop
Address: Julington-Creek
Phone: (904) 317-8099

Westland Motors R C P Inc ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers, Wholesale Used Car Dealers
Address: 3699 NW 79th St, Miramar
Phone: (305) 696-1116

West Coast Collision Center ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Truck Body Repair & Painting, Automobile Body Shop Equipment & Supply-Wholesale & Manufacturers
Address: 1444 Alternate Hwy 19, Holiday
Phone: (727) 937-5196

Auto blog

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

Mon, Oct 10 2016

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Mon, Aug 6 2018

Over 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.

Ford Q1 profits dragged down by warranty costs

Fri, 25 Apr 2014

General Motors isn't the only Detroit automaker posting falling profits in the first quarter. Ford just released its Q1 2014 financial data, and it reported a net income of $989 million, down $622 million from Q1 2013. The drop is partially blamed on higher warranty and recall expenses than the company had anticipated.
Financially, Ford suffered a rough quarter almost across the board. Its pre-tax profit of $1.4 billion was also down $765 million from a year ago. Things were even worse in the North American market where operating profit fell significantly to $1.5 billion, down from $2.392 billion in Q1 2013. However, its global revenue ticked up slightly to $35.9 billion, from $35.6 billion in this period in 2013.
Ford admitted that it spent about $900 million on expenses that it hadn't planned for during this quarter. According to Reuters, the company paid about $400 million in additional warranty and recall costs in North America. The automaker didn't explain why the costs were so much higher than expected. However, in the last three months, Ford has had several recalls, including on the 2001-2004 Escape for rust, Explorer for its steering, Edge for its fuel line and others.