2014 S New 2.5l I4 16v Automatic Fwd Suv on 2040-cars
Mac Haik Ford Lincoln Mercury7201 S IH 35, Georgetown, TX, 78626
Body Type:SUV
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Number of Cylinders: 4
Make: Ford
Model: Escape
Drive Type: FWD
Warranty: No
Mileage: 191
Sub Model: S
Exterior Color: Other Color
Interior Color: Black
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Ford Escape for Sale
- 2014 se new turbo 1.6l i4 16v automatic fwd suv
- 2014 titanium new turbo 2l i4 16v automatic fwd suv
- 2014 se new turbo 1.6l i4 16v automatic fwd suv
- 2013 sel used cpo certified turbo 2l i4 16v automatic fwd suv
- 2013 sel used cpo certified turbo 2l i4 16v automatic fwd suv
- 2014 titanium 4x4 new turbo 2l i4 16v automatic 4wd suv
Auto blog
Ford fights back against patent trolls
Fri, Feb 13 2015Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.
William Clay Ford Sr. dead at 88
Sun, 09 Mar 2014William Clay Ford, retired vice chairman of Ford Motor Company and the last surviving grandchild of company founder Henry Ford, died this morning after a bout with pneumonia. He was 88.
Ford spent 57 years with his grandfather's company, joining the board of directors in 1948 before graduating from college. Ford also held a position as chairman of the design committee, as well as the chairman of the executive committee and vice chairman of the Board of Directors during his tenure with the company. In a 2013 Detroit Free Press story, retired CFO Allan Gilmour said Ford had an eye for design, and was once able to pick out when a fiberglass model of a Ford Contour was asymmetrical, off by an inch on one side. He retired and assumed the position of director emeritus in 2005.
"My father was a great business leader and humanitarian who dedicated his life to the company and the community," said Bill Ford, Jr., Ford's current executive chairman. "He also was a wonderful family man, a loving husband, father, grandfather and great-grandfather. He will be greatly missed by everyone who knew him, yet he will continue to inspire us all."
For EV drivers, realities may dampen the electric elation
Mon, Feb 20 2023The Atlantic, a decades-old monthly journal well-regarded for its intelligent essays on international news, American politics and cultural happenings, recently turned its attention to the car world. A piece that ran in The Atlantic in October examined the excesses of the GMC Hummer EV for compromising safety. And now in its latest edition, the magazine ran a compelling story about the challenges of driving an electric vehicle and how those experiences “mythologize the car as the great equalizer.” Titled “The Inconvenient Truth About Electric Vehicles,” the story addresses the economics of EVs, the stresses related to range anxiety, the social effects of owning an electric car — as in, affording one — and the overarching need for places to recharge that car. Basically, author Andrew Moseman says that EV life isn't so rosy: “On the eve of the long-promised electric-vehicle revolution, the myth is due for an update. Americans who take the plunge and buy their first EV will find a lot to love Â… they may also find that electric-vehicle ownership upends notions about driving, cost, and freedom, including how much car your money can buy. "No one spends an extra $5,000 to get a bigger gas tank in a Honda Civic, but with an EV, economic status is suddenly more connected to how much of the world you get to see — and how stressed out or annoyed youÂ’ll feel along the way.” Moseman charts how a basic Ford F-150 Lightning electric truck might start at $55,000, but an extended-range battery, which stretches the distance on a charge from 230 miles to 320, “raises the cost to at least $80,000. The trend holds true with all-electric brands such as Tesla, Rivian, and Lucid, and for many electric offerings from legacy automakers. The bigger battery option can add a four- or five-figure bump to an already accelerating sticker price.” As for the charging issue, the author details his anxiety driving a Telsa in Death Valley, with no charging stations in sight. “For those who never leave the comfort of the city, these concerns sound negligible," he says. "But so many of us want our cars to do everything, go everywhere, ferry us to the boundless life we imagine (or the one weÂ’re promised in car commercials),” he writes. His conclusions may raise some hackles among those of us who value automotive independence — not to mention fun — over practicalities.