Ford F150 Super Crew Cab 4x4 Lariat Dual Exhaust Hard Tourneau Clean Fl Truck on 2040-cars
Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Transmission:Automatic
Make: Ford
Cab Type (For Trucks Only): Crew Cab
Model: F-150
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Mileage: 101,417
Sub Model: 4WD SuperCre
Options: Sunroof
Exterior Color: Black
Power Options: Power Locks
Interior Color: Tan
Number of Cylinders: 8
Ford F-150 for Sale
2012 crew cab short box heated leather tint tow running boards 866-428-9374
2013 fx4 3.5 v6 ecoboost super cab 4x4 trailer brake extended cab msrp 43,540(US $35,433.00)
2001 ford f-150 xlt lariat with 4x4 and quad cab with no reserve
2006 ford f-150 king ranch crew cab pickup 4-door 5.4l(US $14,000.00)
F150 lariat 4x4 rear camera sync trailer brk tailgate step a/c heated seat 4wd(US $29,888.00)
2011 ford f150 platinum crew 4x4 ecoboost v6 nav 27k mi texas direct auto(US $39,780.00)
Auto Services in Florida
Zych Certified Auto Repair ★★★★★
Xtreme Automotive Repairs Inc ★★★★★
World Auto Spot Inc ★★★★★
Winter Haven Honda ★★★★★
Wing Motors Inc ★★★★★
Walton`s Auto Repair Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford reports 58% drop in Q2 profits on European losses
Wed, 25 Jul 2012
Ford Motor Company announced Wednesday that it has posted a $1 billion profit for the second quarter of 2012. That sounds like good news for the Blue Oval, until you take into account that Ford posted a $2.4 billion profit for Q2 a year ago. That is a substantial 58 percent loss.
Ford also posted $465 million in international losses, with $404 million of those losses coming directly from Europe. The automaker also increased its European loss projections to $1 billion for 2012, due in large part to the economic crisis overseas, which has resulted in increased unemployment and decreased consumer confidence.
Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT
Tue, Feb 21 2023When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.
Junkyard Gem: 1971 Mercury Comet 2-Door Sedan
Sat, Sep 10 2022When Ford introduced the original Maverick for the 1970 model year, Dearborn tradition required that a Mercury-badged version be created. That car ended up being the Comet, built from the 1971 through 1977 model years. Here's one of those first-year Comets in rough but recognizable condition, found in a Denver self-service yard not long ago. The Comet name had spent the 1960s affixed to the flanks of Mercurized Ford Falcons (1960-1965) and Fairlanes (1966-1969). Since the Maverick was the successor of the Falcon — sales of which went into an irrecoverable downward spiral once its sportier Mustang first cousin hit the streets — it made sense to move the Comet name over to the Mercury version. Nearly every American Mercury model ever sold was a U.S.-market Ford model with a different name and some gingerbread slapped on. Notable exceptions to this tradition include the 1999-2002 Mercury Cougar (mechanically based on the Contour but with a unique body) and the 1991-1994 Mercury Capri (an Australian-built mashup of Mazda components borrowed from the Ford Laser). The Comet was by far the cheapest Mercury model available in 1971, though it was considered more prestigious than its Maverick counterpart. The price tag on the '71 Comet two-door sedan started at $2,217 (about $16,505 in 2022 dollars), while the '71 Maverick two-door sedan cost $2,175 ($16,193 today). Meanwhile, AMC would sell you a new Hornet two-door sedan for one dollar less than a Maverick, Chevrolet had the Nova coupe for a dollar more than the Maverick, and Plymouth offered the Valiant Duster for $2,313 ($17,220 now). Toyota had a Maverick competitor as well that year, with the Corona at $2,150 for the sedan and $2,310 for the coupe. Having driven every one of the aforementioned models, I'd take the Duster if I went back in time and had to choose one (as a 1969 Corona owner, I'm not a fan of the 1971 facelift, though the Corona's build quality beats the Duster's). The build sticker on this car tells us that it was built at the Kansas City Assembly Plant (where Transits and F-150s are made today) and sold through the Los Angeles district sales office (there was a DSO in Denver, so it's a near-certainty that this car didn't start out in Colorado). The paint started out as Bright Blue Metallic (it's neither bright nor metallic 51 years down the road) and the interior was done up in Medium Blue Cloth & Vinyl.