2013 Ford Fusion Titanium on 2040-cars
9700 Dorchester Road, Summerville, South Carolina, United States
Engine:2.0L I4 16V GDI DOHC Turbo
Transmission:6-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 3FA6P0K99DR264363
Stock Num: F6278
Make: Ford
Model: Fusion Titanium
Year: 2013
Exterior Color: Red
Interior Color: Black
Options: Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 31238
!!TO VALIDATE THIS ADVERTISED PRICE SAVINGS, PRINT THIS PAGE AND ASK FOR BRIAN SMITH OR SAL RIGOROSO!! #866-485-0311
Ford Fusion for Sale
- 2014 ford fusion se(US $30,590.00)
- 2014 ford fusion se(US $27,825.00)
- 2014 ford fusion se(US $29,595.00)
- 2014 ford fusion se(US $25,850.00)
- 2014 ford fusion se(US $27,720.00)
- 2014 ford fusion hybrid se(US $37,085.00)
Auto Services in South Carolina
Village Motors Inc ★★★★★
Shell Rapid Lube & Service Center ★★★★★
Santee Lake Service Center Inc ★★★★★
S & S Tire Inc ★★★★★
Richbourg`s Auto Electric Service ★★★★★
Randy`s Automotive ★★★★★
Auto blog
2014 Ford Fiesta Titanium
Mon, 28 Oct 2013You might not be interested in owning a subcompact (B-segment) hatchback for $20,000. Let's be clear from the get go here: there are any number of reasonable arguments for staying away from the highest-content versions of these small cars. Ford's player in the B-segment arena is the newly updated 2014 Fiesta, and the Titanium trim represents the most luxurious instantiation of the model. We recently were loaned a Fiesta Titanium for a week, whose final sticker price hit $20,390, with navigation being the only standalone option added to the bottom line. By way of comparison, the most basic version of the all new, one-segment-up Mazda3 hatchback costs $19,740 with delivery and destination accounted for, and no options added on.
Hold on to that thought for a moment, we'll get back to it.
Ford Announces Four Recalls, 1.4M Vehicles Affected
Thu, May 29 2014Ford is taking a bit of the spotlight away from General Motors, announcing a major group of recall campaigns, covering a total of 1.4 million vehicles built between 2006 and 2013. Let's start with the big one, which covers the Ford Escape, Mercury Mariner and, according to The Detroit News, Ford-built Mazda Tribute CUVs. 915,216 vehicles are covered, all of which were built in model years 2008 to 2011. 736,000 vehicles are in the US, while Canada then Mexico make up the vast majority of the remainder. The problem is due to an issue with the torque sensor in the steering column, which could lead to sudden power steering failure. Manual steering would still be available, though. "Dealers will perform one of three service fixes, depending upon what diagnostic codes are shown when the vehicle is taken to the dealer," Ford spokeswoman Kelli Felker wrote to Autoblog in an email. "They will either update software for the power steering control module and the instrument cluster module; replace the torque sensor; or replace the steering column, which includes upgraded power steering control module software." The most recent generation of the Ford Explorer is suffering from a similar malady, thanks to an intermittent electrical connection (we think that means short circuit) in the steering column. Like the Escape and Mariner, manual steering would still be available in the event of a power failure. Ford will recall 195,527 examples of its Explorer, 177,500 of which are in the US. This recall covers model years 2011 to 2013. According to Automotive News, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has stated that Ford will inform owners of affected vehicles by July 25. Ford is also recalling 200,000 Taurus sedans, over a corrosion issue in the license plate lamp. This particular recall, which covers vehicles from model years 2010 to 2014, is limited to drivers in northern climes. Vehicle owners in southern states are free to pass on the recall. Finally, 82,576 Fusion, Mercury Milan and Lincoln Zephyr/MKZ sedans from 2006 to 2011 are being recalled because of floormats that can interfere with the accelerator pedal. Dealers will replace the offensive floormats with newer examples. "Ford is committed to providing our customers with top quality vehicles. We are equally committed to addressing potential issues and responding quickly for our customers," Felker wrote.
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.