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

2003 Ford Excursion Limited V10 4x4 Dvd Tv Leather 167194 Miles 2 Owner on 2040-cars

Year:2003 Mileage:167194 Color: Gray /
 Tan
Location:

Atlanta, Texas, United States

Atlanta, Texas, United States
Advertising:
Transmission:Automatic
Vehicle Title:Clear
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:6.8L 415Cu. In. V10 GAS SOHC Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Sport Utility
Fuel Type:GAS
VIN: 1FMNU43S33EB56003 Year: 2003
Make: Ford
Model: Excursion
Trim: Limited Sport Utility 4-Door
Transmission Description: 4-SPEED AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION W/OD
Number of Doors: 4
Drive Type: 4WD
Drivetrain: 4 Wheel Drive
Mileage: 167,194
Sub Model: Limited
Number of Cylinders: 10
Exterior Color: Gray
Interior Color: Tan
Condition: Used: A vehicle is considered used if it has been registered and issued a title. Used vehicles have had at least one previous owner. The condition of the exterior, interior and engine can vary depending on the vehicle's history. See the seller's listing for full details and description of any imperfections. ... 

Auto Services in Texas

Z`s Auto & Muffler No 5 ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Brake Repair
Address: 16548 Stuebner Airline Rd, Jersey-Village
Phone: (281) 370-4500

Wright Touch Mobile Oil & Lube ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 6011 Whitter Forest Dr, Jersey-Village
Phone: (832) 272-5376

Worwind Automotive Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 101 Bowser St, Scurry
Phone: (972) 563-3700

V T Auto Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Accessories
Address: 243 Blue Bell Rd Bldg A, Atascocita
Phone: (281) 999-6444

Tyler Ford ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Used Car Dealers
Address: 2626 S Southwest Loop 323, Winona
Phone: (866) 595-6470

Triple A Autosale ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers
Address: 155 Maplewood St, Lumberton
Phone: (409) 246-8030

Auto blog

Ford Mustang Mach-E fails Sweden's moose test

Wed, Sep 29 2021

The infamous moose test has claimed another casualty. This time it's the Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD Long Range, which was tested in an electric four-way alongside the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Skoda Enyaq iV (an electric utility vehicle closely related to the Volkswagen ID.4 that is sold in the United States). According to the Swedish testers at Teknikens Varld, Ford's electric car not only failed to hit the speed necessary for a passing grade, it didn't perform well at slower speeds, either. To pass the outlet's moose test, a car has to complete a rapid left-right-straight S-shaped pattern marked by cones at a speed of at least 72 km/h (44.7 miles per hour). The test is designed to mimic the type of avoidance maneuver a driver would have to take in order to avoid hitting something that wandered into the road, which in Sweden may be a moose but could just as easily be a deer or some other member of the animal kingdom elsewhere in the world, or possibly a child or car backing into the motorway. Not only is the maneuver very aggressive, it's also performed with weights belted into each seat and more weight added to the cargo area to hit the vehicle's maximum allowable carrying capacity. The Mustang Mach-E only managed to complete the moose test at 68 km/h (42.3 mph), well below the passing-grade threshold. Even at much lower speeds, Teknikens Varld says the Mach-E (which boasts the highest carrying capacity and was therefore loaded with more weight than the rest of the vehicles tested in this quartet) is "too soft in the chassis" and suffers from "too slow steering." Proving that it is indeed possible to pass the test, the Hyundai and Skoda completed the maneuver at the 44.7-mph figure required for a passing grade and the Tesla did it at 46.6 mph, albeit with less weight in the cargo area. It's not clear whether other versions of the Mustang Mach-E would pass the test. It's also unknown if Ford will make any changes to its chassis tuning or electronic stability control software, as some other automakers have done after a poor performance from Teknikens Varld, to improve its performance in the moose test. Related video:

Ford Focus Electric gets $6,000 price drop, now starts at $29,995

Mon, Oct 20 2014

In early 2013, the Nissan Leaf shed a massive $6,500 from its $35,200 base price to offer a new starting price of $28,800. Since then, we have seen numerous other plug-in vehicles get smaller price tags, from the Honda Fit EV (lower lease price) to the Chevrolet Volt (around $5,000 lower) to the Mitsubishi i (a $6,130 drop). Last year, Ford lowered the $39,200 price of the Focus Electric by around $4,000, but that hasn't been enough to get the Ford EV to really compete, saleswise, with other plug-in vehicles on the market. But wait, as they say, there's more. This past weekend, Ford lopped another $6,000 from the price of both the 2014 model year Focus EVs currently on dealer lots as well as the redesigned 2015 models that are now rolling out (they're basically the same car, minus some appearance changes). Ford spokesman Aaron Miller confirmed to AutoblogGreen that the Focus EV will now start at $29,995 and said that reducing the price should make the Blue Oval's only pure EV competitive. "We hope by reducing the price we're giving consumers another reason to consider it," he said. Through the end of September 2014, Ford has sold just 1,534 Focus EVs in the US (the model sold 1,335 in the first nine months of 2013). For comparison's sake, the Nissan Leaf starts at $29,010 and sells around 3,000 units a month in the US. Miller notes that the Focus EV has been selling the best on the West Coast, and is also doing well on the East Coast. After that, he said Atlanta and the Great Lakes area also see decent sales of model's admittedly small pie. We can only assume that offering the EV for under $30,000 will make that pie somewhat bigger.

After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality

Fri, Jan 3 2014

Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.