2000 Ford F-450 7.3 Diesel Boom Truck Man Lift Model Altec At200a 30.6 Feet on 2040-cars
Fresno, California, United States
|
Ford F-450 for Sale
- 2009 ford f-450 king ranch diesel drw 4x4 sunroof nav! texas direct auto(US $38,980.00)
- 2006 ford f-550 lariat western hauler bed crew cab air ride suspension gooseneck
- Ford f-450 7.3l diesel engine dually utility latter rack auto no reserve
- 2003 ford f-450 lariat
- Ford f550 4x4
- 2003 ford f450 with flat bed
Auto Services in California
Zenith Wire Wheel Co ★★★★★
Yucca Auto Body ★★★★★
World Famous 4x4 ★★★★★
Woody`s & Auto Body ★★★★★
Williams Auto Care Center ★★★★★
Wheels N Motion ★★★★★
Auto blog
NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe
Mon, 17 Dec 2012According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"
NHTSA advances investigation of Ford Crown Victoria headlights
Sat, Aug 15 2015The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening a preliminary evaluation into reports of suddenly failing headlights on 517,945 examples of the 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis. The government started looking into this problem in April when the North Carolina Consumers Council filed a defect petition with the agency. Now, the inquiry has moved to the next step. According to NHTSA's documentation (as a PDF), it examined its own database and worked with Ford to come up with a total of 3,609 complaints of the front lighting control module suddenly failing. When this happens, drivers lose the low-beam headlights, but the high-beams can be used by holding the stalk. Sometimes turning the switch off and on fixes the issue. Additionally, there are 15 allegations of crashes, and one reported shoulder injury. NHTSA's preliminary evaluations "evaluate the scope, frequency, and consequence of the alleged defect" and don't necessarily lead to a recall. NHTSA looked into this problem once before in 2008 and 2009 and decided that a recall wasn't necessary. Ford also extended the warranty on the front lighting control module for these vehicles. INVESTIGATION Subject : Loss of headlights Date Investigation Opened: AUG 10, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15028 Component(s): EXTERIOR LIGHTING All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2003-2005 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 2003-2005 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: After receiving a defect petition (DP15002) concerning the loss of headlights and other exterior lighting in model year (MY) 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) analyzed Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) complaints received from consumers and identified a total of 605 reports (for all submission dates) alleging headlight failure. The complaints indicate failures of both low beam headlights typically while driving, a defect condition that was evaluated under a prior ODI investigation (PE08066). Most consumer VOQs indicate that the headlights failed suddenly and without warning leaving the driver with no forward lighting, however some report the headlights flickered or dimmed prior to turning off. In some cases drivers were able to turn the headlights back on after a period of time while others reported the headlights would not come back on at all.
Enterprise customer billed $47k for Mustang stolen from rental lot
Sun, 05 Jan 2014A weekend rental of a Ford Mustang GT Convertible sounds like a nice, relaxing way to burn some gas, but one Nova Scotia woman's two-day rental is turning into a months-long headache. In early October, Kristen Cockerill picked up the Mustang from Enterprise Rent-A-Car, and she returned it the following day as stipulated by the rental contract. Unfortunately, she dropped the car off on a Sunday - a day on which the particular Enterprise office is closed - and the car ended up being stolen overnight.
Now, two months later, CBC reports that Cockerill received a bill from Enterprise for the full replacement of the car totaling $47,271 (a base 2014 Mustang GT Convertible currently costs $40,349 in Canada). As it turns out, the fine print in the contract says that the renter is responsible for cars dropped off after hours until it can be inspected the next business day - this is also reflected on the key drop seen in the news report video, which states "vehicles returned after hours are the responsibility of the renter until inspected on the next business day."
It's not clear how much, if any, of that amount Cockerhill will be responsible for once her insurance company gets involved, but if the insurance company refuses to pay, Enterprise will bill the amount to the credit card she provided during her rental. While this ordeal is far over for Cockerhill, it's a good reminder for the rest of us to always read the fine print.