2006 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer Leather Sunroof Only 63k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars
Stafford, Texas, United States
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:4.0L 245Cu. In. V6 GAS SOHC Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Sport Utility
Transmission:Automatic
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Ford
Options: Sunroof, Leather
Model: Explorer
Power Options: Power Seats, Power Windows, Power Locks, Cruise Control
Trim: Eddie Bauer Sport Utility 4-Door
Number of Doors: 4
Drive Type: RWD
CALL NOW: 832-947-9941
Mileage: 63,495
Inspection: Vehicle has been inspected
Sub Model: WE FINANCE!!
Seller Rating: 5 STAR *****
Exterior Color: Brown
Interior Color: Tan
Number of Cylinders: 6
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Ford Explorer for Sale
2013 explorer limited.no reserve.leather/navi/heatd/20's/sync/dvd/p/fold/rebuilt
Dealer trade! clean title! clean carfax! tow package! must sell! 7 passenger!(US $6,500.00)
2001 purple xlt!
Explorer suv 2x4 expedition ford economy affordable 2 wheel drive sport utility
2005 beuatiful texas ford explorer - excellent condition - wholesale price!(US $6,995.00)
2013 ford explorer limited fwd,3.5l,auto,camera,leather,like new,16,000 miles(US $24,500.00)
Auto Services in Texas
Your Mechanic ★★★★★
Yale Auto ★★★★★
Wyatt`s Discount Muffler & Brake ★★★★★
Wright Auto Glass ★★★★★
Wise Alignments ★★★★★
Wilkerson`s Automotive & Front End Service ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford 2Q profit drops 86% as it restructures overseas
Thu, Jul 25 2019DEARBORN, Mich. (AP) — Ford's net profit tumbled 86% in the second quarter due largely to restructuring costs in Europe and South America. Net income for the April-through-June period dropped to $148 million, or 4 cents per share. Without the charges the company made 28 cents per share. Revenue was flat at $38.9 billion. On average, analysts surveyed by FactSet expected earnings 31 cents per share on revenue of $38.49 billion. Chief Financial Officer Tim Stone says the company had charges of $1.2 billion as it moved to close factories in Europe and South America. He says Ford already is seeing an impact from its global fitness measures that included a reduction of 7,000 white-collar workers. Ford, which released numbers after the markets closed Wednesday, says its results include a $181 million valuation loss on an investment in a software company, trimming 4 cents off adjusted earnings per share. Its stock fell 6.3% in after-hours trading to $9.68. Stone said Ford is in the early stages of its restructuring, but already is seeing improvement in some regions. Free cash flow also improved by 80% to $2.1 billion in the first half of the year, he said. "We're already starting to see some early benefits," he said. "A lot of work to do." The company expects improvement in the second half of the year as more new big SUVs hit dealerships and more of the restructuring takes hold. Ford on Wednesday forecast pretax adjusted earnings of $7 billion to $7.5 billion for all of 2019, compared with $7 billion last year. The company previously had only said that pretax earnings would improve. Full-year adjusted earnings per share are forecast to be $1.20 to $1.35, up from $1.30 in 2018. Previously it did not give per-share guidance. Ford's U.S. sales fell nearly 5% in the second quarter, according to the Edmunds.com auto pricing site, as the company exited most of its passenger car business. But Stone said sales of the new Ford Ranger small pickup offset much of that as its share of the small truck segment rose 14%. Edmunds, which provides content for The Associated Press, said Ford's average vehicle sale price rose 2.8% to $41,328 during the quarter. In North America, Ford's biggest profit center, pretax earnings fell 3% to just under $1.7 billion, which the company blamed on switching its Chicago factory to build new versions of midsize SUVs.
Diesel details: Comparing Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, Chevy Silverado Duramax, Ford F-150 Powerstroke
Thu, Jun 13 2019With specifications for the 2019 Ford F-150 Power Stroke diesel already out, and the details on the 2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel and Chevy Silverado Duramax (and its GMC Sierra twin) trickling out, we felt it was a good time to start comparing the full-size trucks' light-duty diesels. Bear in mind, we've only driven one of these new diesel trucks, so we'll be sticking to numbers for now. Some numbers haven't been announced yet, either, but stay tuned, because we'll be updating this post with additional specifications as they become available. And if you want to compare any other versions of these trucks with other vehicles, be sure to check out our comparison tool. Now let's start comparing, starting with our big chart of numbers below. As we can plainly see, these trucks are quite closely matched. Each one has six cylinders, a displacement of 3.0 liters and a turbocharger to boost it. The output of each is somewhat close, too. The Ram 1500 EcoDiesel is the torque king at 480 pound-feet, 20 more than the GM trucks and 40 more than the Ford. The GM trucks win on power, though, with 277 ponies, 17 more than the Ram, and 27 more than the Ford. GM does report that you get their trucks' peak 460 pound-feet of torque from 1,500 rpm to 3,000 rpm, whereas the others only report peak torque at a particular point in the rev band, but all of these trucks should have wide, flat torque curves as you would expect from modern turbodiesels. 2020 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel View 8 Photos Engine output is only one part of the truck performance equation. We also have towing and payload capacity, as well as fuel economy. With towing, the Ram 1500 is the current leader with a maximum capacity of 12,560 pounds. That tops the Ford F-150's 11,400-pound tow rating by well over 1,000 pounds. The F-150 can carry 2,020 pounds in its bed, but we don't know yet whether that's better or worse than the Ram or the GM trucks. We also don't have numbers for the GM trucks' towing capacities. View 9 Photos As for fuel economy, the Ford F-150 manages a thoroughly impressive 22 mpg in the city and 30 on the highway with two-wheel drive. Choosing four-wheel drive drops those numbers to 20 and 25 respectively. The fuel economy numbers for the Ram, Chevy and GMC haven't been revealed yet, but for some comparison, we can look at the old Ram EcoDiesel. That truck's best fuel economy was 20 in the city and 27 on the highway with two-wheel drive.
Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel
Mon, Apr 14 2014When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).