Cng & Gasoline Model 7700 Xl Long Bed Regular Cab 5.4 V8 on 2040-cars
Otsego, Michigan, United States
|
Ford F-150 for Sale
1978 ford f-150 ranger xlt standard cab pickup 2-door 5.8l(US $5,495.00)
2013 f150 4x4 stx(US $26,400.00)
2002 ford f150 xlt extended cab 4 door pickup truck includes cap towing package(US $2,500.00)
Ford f150 supercrew xlt ecoboost texas edition low miles 15k tow step bars(US $27,995.00)
2007 4wd texas auto power navigation leather interior tan sunroof trailer hitch(US $21,988.00)
2006 f150 fx4 crew cab loaded(US $14,200.00)
Auto Services in Michigan
Xpert Automotive Repair ★★★★★
White`s Muffler & Brakes ★★★★★
Westwood Auto Parts ★★★★★
West Michigan Collision ★★★★★
Wells-Car-Go ★★★★★
Ward Eaton Towing ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford doubling 1.0L EcoBoost engine production
Fri, 06 Sep 2013Ford's 1.0-liter EcoBoost three-cylinder engine hasn't been around that long, but it sounds like the engine is getting to be fairly popular in the automaker's global car lineup. The Detroit News is reporting that Ford has add a second shift that will allow its German engine plant to double daily output from 500 engines to 1,000.
The increased capacity is part of a plan to sell more than 300,000 vehicles a year with this engine in Europe by 2015. Europe is currently the only market where the smallest of the EcoBoost engines is offered (including in the Focus pictured above), but US-spec Fiesta models will be getting this mill for 2014.
Three-cylinder engines are expected to continue to grow in popularity in coming years with the report indicating that global production of these engines will double by 2018 to 9.8 million units. General Motors, BMW and Mitsubishi are all expected to introduce three-cylinder engines in the near term, as well.
Ford ST Octane Academy [w/video]
Wed, 04 Jun 2014
The ST school is about more than just handbrake turns, hot laps, and sliding into parking spaces.
I felt like such a rock star. On my second pass around the UrbanCross course (read: fancy autocross) at the Ford ST Octane Academy, I absolutely nailed the exit, sliding the bright-yellow Focus ST sideways into a box the size of a parking space, all four wheels in line.
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.