No Reserve Low Miles Cold A/c Clean Runs Drives on 2040-cars
Levittown, Pennsylvania, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Transmission:Automatic
Make: Ford
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Model: Explorer
Mileage: 74,497
Options: CD Player
Sub Model: XLS 4WD AWD
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes
Exterior Color: Tan
Power Options: Power Windows
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Cylinders: 6
Ford Explorer for Sale
Loaded eddie bauer 4x4, v8, sun roof, tow pkg, clean carfax, see all pics(US $5,675.00)
2004 ford explorer limited sport utility 4-door 4.6l
Eddie bauer suv 4.6l cd 4 speakers am/fm radio mp3 decoder air conditioning
2006 ford explorer xlt sport utility 4-door 4.0l
No reserve 2002 ford explorer 4x4 awd eddie bauer clean
1995 ford explorer xl sport utility 4-door 4.0l(US $900.00)
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Wayne Carl Garage ★★★★★
Union Fuel Co ★★★★★
Tint It Is Incorporated ★★★★★
Terry`s Auto Glass ★★★★★
Terry`s Auto Glass ★★★★★
Syrena International Ltd ★★★★★
Auto blog
2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost loses big power on 87 octane
Mon, Jan 5 2015The 2015 Ford Mustang with the 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder is a pretty potent package on paper. With 310 horsepower and 320 pound-feet of torque, it boasts better performance numbers than the 3.7-liter V6, but with better fuel economy as an added benefit. However, if you're in the market for one of these boosted 'Stangs, you should probably keep in mind that it really prefers to gulp premium, 93-octane fuel. It can drink 87-octane swill in a pinch, but you're going to find significantly less power underfoot when pulling away. While it's not shocking that the ponies are dialed back with a lower grade of gasoline, an alleged page from a Ford training manual obtained by Mustang 6G purports to show just how much power is lost, though. According to this document, the 2.3-liter EcoBoost makes 275 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque when running on lower octane fuel. That's a substantial reduction of about 11.3 percent compared to when the engine drinks 93 octane. Interestingly, according to Mustang 6G, that finding was a bit better than expected, because a Ford engineer reportedly said power would be down about 13 percent without altering peak torque. In speaking with Autoblog, Paul Seredynski of Ford powertrain communications, objected to part of this document. While he couldn't confirm the specific losses listed for the Mustang EcoBoost, "torque remains unchanged" with lower octane gasoline, Seredynski said. He speculated this training manual page was "possibly from before the engine was certified" and therefore showed incorrect figures. Serendynski did confirm that the automaker recommends using 93 octane, and like all modern engines, the software adapts if it's lower. "Peak power would be reduced" by using a lesser grade, he confirmed. Featured Gallery 2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost: First Ride View 20 Photos News Source: Mustang 6GImage Credit: Copyright 2015 AOL, Ford, Mustang 6G Ford Technology Convertible Coupe Performance ecoboost ford mustang ecoboost
Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy
Thu, Jan 8 2015With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.
Lincoln MKC recalled because start button located too close to touchscreen [UPDATE]
Wed, Dec 31 2014UPDATE: Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker responded to our questions and let us know that the fix for the push-button start on the 2015 MKC has the switch moved to the top of the of the column of gear shift buttons instead of the bottom. Owners should be notified about both campaigns "toward the end of February." After massive campaigns from General Motors and to fix Takata airbag inflators, 2014 will undoubtedly go down as The Year Of The Recall. And with little time to spare, Ford is getting in just under the wire to adding two more to its yearly total. The larger of the campaigns is actually one of the most bizarre campaigns we've heard of all year. Lincoln is recalling 13,574 units of its 2015 MKC compact crossover in North America to move the location of the push-button ignition switch on the dashboard. According to the automaker's announcement: "Due to the switch's close proximity to other controls, occupants are inadvertently shutting off the engine while driving." The button is located near the bottom of the touchscreen, which can apparently make it possible to hit by mistake. Back when Autoblog first drove the new MKC in June, we came away very impressed, but noted: "... we're still not completely sold on the aforementioned pushbutton transmission selector ... it still seems somewhat gimmicky and it can't be operated by feel alone, as you might when shifting a traditional console-mounted lever from Park to Drive." According to Lincoln, there have been no reported accidents or injuries stemming from this button misapplication. Of the affected vehicles, there are 11,144 in the US, 2,033 in Canada and 397 in Mexico. To fix the problem, dealers are moving the button to a different location and reprogramming the powertrain control module. According to Automotive News, models built since September already have a different layout. The change was reportedly done to match the rest of the Lincoln lineup. The second recall covers 12,205 units of the 2014 Ford Escape (2015 model year pictured below) and 2015 Lincoln MKC in North America because of a problem with nickel plating on the fuel pump. The issue can cause the pump to seize, which can cause the crossovers not to start or stall while driving. The automaker is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this fault. Dealers are replacing the fuel deliver module to fix the situation. Of the affected vehicles, there are 9,038 in the US, 3,074 in Canada and 93 in Mexico.