1994 Ford Mustang Cobra Coupe 2-door 5.0l, 5 Speed, 1 Owner, 6,300 Miles on 2040-cars
Boyertown, Pennsylvania, United States
Body Type:Coupe
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:5 litre
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Dealer
Make: Ford
Model: Mustang
Trim: COBRA PKG
Options: Leather Seats
Power Options: Air Conditioning
Drive Type: REAR WHEEL DRIVE
Mileage: 6,300
Interior Color: saddle
Exterior Color: Red
Number of Cylinders: 8
One owner, low milage, excellent condition, garage kept by previous owner
Ford Mustang for Sale
1992 ford mustang gt convertible 2-door 5.0l
Super low miles! one florida owner! garage kept cream puff! rare! don't miss!!!(US $10,800.00)
1965 ford mustang 6 cylinder classic(US $6,500.00)
1965 no reserve ford mustang convertible automatic transmission power top
2013 ford mustang shelby gt500(US $69,990.00)
1969 mustang mach 1 fastback h code four speed power disc brakes(US $13,500.00)
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Wayne Carl Garage ★★★★★
Union Fuel Co ★★★★★
Tint It Is Incorporated ★★★★★
Terry`s Auto Glass ★★★★★
Terry`s Auto Glass ★★★★★
Syrena International Ltd ★★★★★
Auto blog
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.
Why the Detroit Three should merge their engine operations
Tue, Dec 22 2015GM and FCA should consider a smaller merger that could still save them billions of dollars, and maybe lure Ford into the deal. Fiat-Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne would love to see his company merge with General Motors. But GM's board of directors essentially told him to go pound sand. So now what? The boardroom battle started when Mr. Marchionne published a study called Confessions of a Capital Junkie. In it, Sergio detailed the amount of capital the auto industry wastes every year with duplicate investments. And he documented how other industries provide superior returns. He's right, of course. Other industries earn much better returns on their invested capital. And there's a danger that one day the investors will turn their backs on the auto industry and look to other business sectors where they can make more money. But even with powerful arguments Marchionne couldn't convince GM to take over FCA. And while that fight may now be over, GM and FCA should consider a smaller merger that could still save them billions of dollars, and maybe lure Ford into the deal. No doubt this suggestion will send purists into convulsions, but so be it. The Detroit Three should seriously consider merging their powertrain operations, even though that's a sacrilege in an industry that still considers the engine the "heart" of the car. These automakers have built up considerable brand equity in some of their engines. But the vast majority of American car buyers could not tell you what kind of engine they have under the hood. More importantly, most car buyers really don't care what kind of engine or transmission they have as long as it's reliable, durable, and efficient. Combining that production would give the Detroit Three the kind of scale that no one else could match. There are exceptions, of course. Hardcore enthusiasts care deeply about the powertrains in their cars. So do most diesel, plug-in, and hybrid owners. But all of them account for maybe 15 percent of the car-buying public. So that means about 85 percent of car buyers don't care where their engine and transmission came from, just as they don't know or care who supplied the steel, who made the headlamps, or who delivered the seats on a just-in-time basis. It's immaterial to them. And that presents the automakers with an opportunity to achieve a staggering level of manufacturing scale. In the NAFTA market alone, GM, Ford, and FCA will build nearly nine million engines and nine million transmissions this year.
Ford, Volvo join Redwood in EV battery recycling push in California
Mon, Feb 21 2022Ford and Volvo will join battery recycling startup Redwood Materials in developing processes, starting in California, to collect end-of-life batteries from electric and hybrid vehicles and recover the materials for use in new batteries, the companies said Thursday. Redwood Materials, co-founded by former Tesla executive JB Straubel, formed an earlier partnership last fall with Ford to develop a “closed loop” or circular supply chain for electric vehicle (EV) batteries, from raw materials to recycling. On Thursday, Redwood Materials said it would work directly with dealers and dismantlers in California to identify and recover end-of-life battery packs. The materials in those packs will be recovered and recycled at Redwood Materials facilities in northern Nevada. U.S. automakers Ford and General Motors Co (GM) have said the battery recycling effort is crucial in efforts to develop a domestic supply chain to meet increasing EV demand. GM and battery partner LG Energy Solution last year announced a partnership with startup Li-Cycle to recycle battery scrap material from Ultium Cells, the GM-LG joint venture that is building battery plants in Ohio, Tennessee and Michigan. Redwood Materials has similar partnerships with battery makers Panasonic in Nevada and Envision AESC in Tennessee, as well as with Amazon. Ford and Amazon are among the investors in Redwood Materials. Reporting by Paul Lienert in Detroit; Editing by Mark Potter Green Ford Volvo Green Automakers Electric