1967 Ford F-100 Custom Classic, Short Bed, Step Side Pick Up on 2040-cars
Robinson, Illinois, United States
Body Type:Pickup Truck
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:302 V8
For Sale By:Private Seller
Interior Color: Black and Red
Make: Ford
Model: F-100
Trim: 2 Door Pickup
Options: Cassette Player
Drive Type: RWD
Mileage: 100,160
Disability Equipped: No
Exterior Color: Red
Number of Doors: 2
1967 Ford F-100 Custom Classic, Short Bed, Step Side Pick Up.
Ford F-100 for Sale
1962 ford f100 swb v8 automatic
Ford f100 pickup truck
1956 ford f100 running driving project, hot rod, rat rod, barn find
1960 red runs & drives great body & interior great!
1956 ford f100 big window custom truck ford fe 406 big block
1977 ford f-100 ranger, 428, c-6, shortbed, 2 wd, frame off restoration
Auto Services in Illinois
West Side Motors ★★★★★
Turi`s Auto Collision Center ★★★★★
Transmissions R US ★★★★★
The Autobarn Nissan ★★★★★
Tech Auto Svc ★★★★★
T Boe Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
Autocar pits Formula Ford against Germany's finest
Wed, 25 Sep 2013Ford has quite the racing pedigree, but usually, its racers are relegated to the track. Not the new Formula Ford EcoBoost, though. It's a turbocharged, open-wheeled racer complete with a 200-horsepower, 1.0-liter, three-cylinder engine... and it's legal on the roads of the UK.
That's stressed in this video from Autocar, with the mag going so far as to show the car's tax disc and license plates. Being a road-legal offering, it's tempting to see just how well an open-wheeler that delivers racecar-like performance while also netting over 100 miles per gallon (assume this is on the British cycle, for obvious reasons) stacks up against modern performance cars.
Autocar lined up the Formula Ford against an Audi R8 V10, a BMW M6 Gran Coupe and a Mercedes-Benz A45 AMG in a number of situations to see which would come out on top. Take a look below for the full video.
Detroit 3 to implement delayed unified towing standards for 2015
Tue, Feb 11 2014Car buyers have a responsibility to be well-informed consumers. That's not always a very simple task, but some guidelines are self-evident. If you live in a very snowy climate, you generally know a Ford Mustang or Chevrolet Camaro might not be as viable a vehicle choice as an all-wheel drive Explorer or Traverse, for example. If you want a fuel-efficient car, it's generally a good idea to know the difference between a diesel and a hybrid. But what if it's kind of tough to be an informed consumer? What if the information you need is more difficult to come by, or worse, based on different standards for each vehicle? Well, in that case, you might be a truck shopper. For years, customers of light-duty pickups have had to suffer through different ratings of towing capacities for each brand. For 2015 model year trucks, though, that will no longer be a problem. According to Automotive News, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler Group have announced that starting with next year's models, a common standard will be used to measure towing capacity. The Detroit Three will join Toyota, which adopted the Society of Automotive Engineers' so-called SAE J2807 standards way back in 2011. The standard was originally supposed to be in place for MY2013, but concerns that it would lower the overall stated capacity for trucks led Detroit automakers to pass. Ford originally passed, claiming it'd wait until its new F-150 was launched to adopt the new standards, leading GM and Ram to follow suit. Nissan, meanwhile, has said it will adopt the new standards as its vehicles are updated, meaning the company's next-generation Titan should adhere to the same tow ratings as its competitors. While the adoption of SAE J2807 will be helpful for light-duty customers, those interested in bigger trucks will still be left with differing standards. There is no sign of the new tow standards being adopted for the heavy-duty market.
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.