2008 Ford Mustang Roush on 2040-cars
Brisbane, California, United States
No call please. e-Mail : kermitsaintpetersburgk@yahoo.com This is #8 of 146 made!Stage 3 Roush, comes with 2 additional pulleys 2.8 and 2.57, Sebon carbon fiber hood, Brimbro brakes, Jack Roush signature stitched seats, Saleen Watts link kit on rear end, iboc pro street adjustable coil overs, Roush cold air kit with recalibrated pcm, full Roush exhaust with ceramic headers, brand new Nito tires, touch screen JVC DVD/CD bluetooth deck, upgraded 4 channel amp.EXTREMELY fast, handles even better! Corvettes look great, in my rear view mirror! Garaged its entire life. 475HP with upgrades.
Ford Mustang for Sale
- 1991 ford mustang(US $14,000.00)
- 1967 ford mustang(US $25,200.00)
- 1995 ford mustang svt(US $22,400.00)
- 1993 ford mustang cobra(US $14,000.00)
- 1993 ford mustang cobra(US $14,000.00)
- 1968 ford mustang(US $14,420.00)
Auto Services in California
Zube`s Import Auto Sales ★★★★★
Yosemite Machine ★★★★★
Woodland Smog ★★★★★
Woodland Motors Chevrolet Buick Cadillac GMC ★★★★★
Willy`s Auto Service ★★★★★
Western Brake & Tire ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 has a bit of a dyno issue
Tue, 28 May 2013We're of the mind that each and every dyno should come with Murphy's Law painted in big, visible letters down the side. For every ten successful dyno runs out there, it seems there's one where events to horribly wrong. Take, for example, the video below. The clip shows what happens when a Ford Shelby GT500 and a mobile dyno have a bit of a disagreement at the Performance Expo 24 in Sherbrooke, Quebec. We won't spoil the results for you, but we will say there's some substantial carnage involved.
It's unclear just how much damage ensues from the dust up or whether anyone was harmed in the incident, but from the looks of things, everyone made it out without serious injury. If only we could say the same for the machines involved. Check out the video below.
Child cobalt miners: Automakers pledge ethical minerals sourcing for EVs
Wed, Nov 29 2017BERLIN - Leading carmakers including Volkswagen and Toyota pledged on Wednesday to uphold ethical and socially responsible standards in their purchases of minerals for an expected boom in electric vehicle production. Demand for minerals such as cobalt, graphite and lithium is forecast to soar in the coming years as governments crack down on vehicle pollution and carmakers step up their investments in electric models. To cover its plans for more than 80 new models by 2025, Volkswagen alone is looking for partners in China, Europe and North America to provide battery cells and related technology worth more than 50 billion euros ($59 billion). Talks with major cobalt producers, including Glencore, at VW's Wolfsburg headquarters last week ended without a deal. More than half of the world's cobalt comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo, a country racked by political instability and legal opacity, and where child labor is used in mines. On Wednesday, a group of 10 leading passenger-car and truck manufacturers announced an initiative to jointly identify and address ethical, environmental, human and labor rights issues in raw materials sourcing. The partnership dubbed "Drive Sustainability" consists of VW, Toyota Motor Europe, Ford, Daimler, BMW, Honda, Jaguar Land Rover, Volvo Cars and truckmakers Scania and Volvo. The alliance "will assess the risks posed by the top raw materials (such as mica, cobalt, rubber and leather) in the automotive sector," said Stefan Crets of the CSR Europe business network. "This will allow Drive Sustainability to identify the most impactful activities to pursue" to address issues within the supply chain.Reporting by Andreas Cremer.Related Video: Image Credit: Michael Robinson Chavez/The Washington Post via Getty Images Green BMW Ford Honda Jaguar Land Rover Mercedes-Benz Automakers Toyota Volkswagen Volvo Green Automakers Green Culture Electric Scania ethics mining
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.