1967 Mustang Coupe Selling At No Reserve 2 Owner Project on 2040-cars
Henderson, Maryland, United States
Body Type:Coupe
Engine:200
Vehicle Title:Clear
For Sale By:Private Seller
Interior Color: Blue
Make: Ford
Number of Cylinders: 6
Model: Mustang
Trim: 2 DR. COUPE
Drive Type: RWD
Mileage: 60,000
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Exterior Color: Blue
Ford Mustang for Sale
2007 parnelli jones saleen mustang
2006 ford mustang stampede edition 4.0 l v6
69 1 owner 351 mach 1 auto candyapple red low miles
1965 ford mustang fastback a code p/s a/c 289 at no reserve 1966 1967 1968 1964
65 ford mustang convertible low miles 3rd owner garage kept
1992 ford mustang gt convertible 2-door 5.0l
Auto Services in Maryland
V & R Towing ★★★★★
Tom Knox Auto Service ★★★★★
TNT Auto Repair & Towing Service ★★★★★
Tint and Sound Customizing ★★★★★
Thompson Toyota Scion ★★★★★
Somco Machine Co ★★★★★
Auto blog
We compare 2021 Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport specifications to their ritzy Land Rover competiton
Tue, Jul 14 2020The 2021 Bronco and Bronco Sport are the spearheads for Ford's new 4x4 sub-brand, with the former taking the fight directly to the Jeep Wrangler and the latter providing Ford with a more rugged alternative to the Escape. We've already looked at how the new Bronco and Bronco Sport compare to their mainstream competition, but we'd like to see how the Bronco stacks up to another hotly anticipated returning nameplate: the Land Rover Defender. Not to leave its little sibling in the cold, I decided to browse Land Rover's lineup and see what might be a suitable counterpoint to the Bronco Sport. For better or worse, I found an almost-perfect fit in the Range Rover Evoque. So, how do these new American 4x4s compare to the Old Country's more-expensive alternatives? Let's dig in, starting with the big boys. As you might expect from the Bronco's robust credentials, it holds its own here against the more-expensive Brit. The Defender's higher price point brings along a good bit of power advantage with both engines, but that's to be expected. The Defender also has that trick adjustable-height suspension that the Bronco lacks, giving it an edge in practicality, and it can also tow quite a bit more. On the flip side, there are quite a few advantages to going with the Ford, including a greater number of choices in terms of powertrain. The available manual transmission on four-cylinder Broncos is a nice bonus, for instance, as is the option of getting either the base 2.3-liter or the optional 2.7-liter engine with either wheelbase. The Defender is a bit more restrictive in this regard offering only the inline-six on the short-wheelbase model. As an added bonus, the Bronco is a convertible. That may not necessarily be a "plus" for all shoppers, but it's certainly an added bit of versatility (and potential appeal) the Defender lacks. And of course, the Bronco can be had for as little as $30,000, whereas the Land Rover starts at $50,000. Now, on to the less-rugged siblings. The specs here are actually a little tighter in most respects, but the powertrain story is almost identical. The Evoque checks in where the Bronco Sport tops out, and the Range Rover gets an optional high-output variant of the 2.0-liter turbocharged four.
Preposed class-action lawsuit targets 'defective' MyFord Touch
Tue, 16 Jul 2013A national law firm, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, has filed a proposed class action lawsuit whose presupposition is that MyFord Touch is defective. Specifically, the complaint states that the system - as well as the MyLincoln Touch and MyMercury Touch clones - often freeze, fail to respond to voice or touch commands and have issues connecting to mobile phones.
According to Hagens Berman managing partner Steve Berman, MyFord Touch is a theoretically "brilliant idea" that falls short in actual execution. Said Berman in a press release, "In reality, the system is fundamentally flawed, failing to reliably provide functionality, amounting to an inconvenience at best, and a serious safety issue at worst."
Other MFT issues enumerated within the 41-page filing include problems controlling the window defroster, rear-view camera and navigation system. The suit maintains that Ford is aware of the problem but has yet to submit a workable and acceptable solution to MFT customers. Scroll down if you'd like to read the full press release.
2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid recalled over lack of roof padding
Mon, 29 Jul 2013Ford is recalling 33,021 units of its 2013 C-Max Hybrid not equipped with optional panoramic roof panels. During testing, the model in question returned testing results for occupant head injuries that fell outside of criteria laid out in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. The issue puts occupants at greater risk of injury in the event of a crash if they are in an affected car.
The recall will begin August 19, at which time C-Max Hybrid owners can take their cars to dealers to have energy-absorbent material installed between the headliner and roof. The bulletin below from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has more information.