1960 Ford F100 Flareside 302 C.i. 4 Speed 6.5' Bed on 2040-cars
Milford, Connecticut, United States
Body Type:Other
Engine:Unspecified
Vehicle Title:Clear
Interior Color: Black
Make: Ford
Model: F-100
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Mileage: 12
Sub Model: Flareside
Number of doors: 2
Exterior Color: Red
Inspection: Vehicle has been inspected (include details in your description)
Ford F-100 for Sale
- Ford f-100 custom cab shortbox(US $2,800.00)
- 1955 ford f-100 project truck, hot rod, rat rod(US $3,500.00)
- 1955 ford f-100 hot rod custom pick up truck - santa claus red(US $18,000.00)
- 1966 ford f100 truck
- 1955 ford f100, nice truck(US $13,000.00)
- 1965 ford short wheel base, custom cab, twin i beam, sharp
Auto Services in Connecticut
Tender Car Care ★★★★★
Supreme Auto Collision Inc ★★★★★
Sunoco Ultra Service Center ★★★★★
Pete`s Tire & Oil ★★★★★
Napa Auto Parts - Fair Auto Supply Inc ★★★★★
Moran`s Service Ctr ★★★★★
Auto blog
Project Ugly Horse: Part IX
Thu, 20 Jun 2013One Step at a Time
Nearly every flavor of exotic driveline has been shoved into the ubiquitous Ford at some point or another.
Chuck Schwynoch had been patiently listening to my ramblings on the other end of the phone for a solid half hour. I'm not too big of a man to know when to ask for help, and at this point, I desperately needed some assistance. The truth is, working on a machine like a Fox Body Mustang is as easy as breathing thanks to the wealth of information available on the web. Nearly every flavor of exotic driveline has been shoved into the ubiquitous Ford at some point or another, and odds are the sorry souls behind those builds shared the highs and lows of their torment with the internet community.
Vaughn Gittin Jr. takes his dog for a drift
Tue, 09 Sep 2014
Vaughn Gittin Jr. spends a great deal of his workday going sideways, but he's usually alone in the endeavor. For a guy that is clearly a dog lover, we imagine that can get a bit lonely.
That won't be a problem for Gittin in this latest video, which features the racer hanging out with his good pal Brody (a dog) and everyone's favorite hot hatch, the Ford Fiesta ST.
Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid
Tue, Jun 17 2014It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.
2040Cars.com © 2012-2024. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.048 s, 7783 u