2010 Ford Mustang 4.0l V6 Automatic Spoiler Only 65k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars
Stafford, Texas, United States
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:4.0L 245Cu. In. V6 GAS SOHC Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Coupe
Transmission:Automatic
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Ford
Options: CD Player
Model: Mustang
Power Options: Power Windows, Power Locks, Cruise Control
Trim: Base Coupe 2-Door
Number Of Doors: 2
Drive Type: RWD
CALL NOW: 832-947-9941
Mileage: 65,893
Inspection: Vehicle has been inspected
Sub Model: WE FINANCE!!
Seller Rating: 5 STAR *****
Exterior Color: Black
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Cylinders: 6
Warranty: Vehicle has an existing warranty
Ford Mustang for Sale
1966 ford mustang no reserve
1965 ford mustang fastback
1966 ford mustang 289 factory 4 barrel 4 spd top loader must see
2002 ford mustang gt supercharged convertible **no reserve**
1984 mustang gt convertible white black accents new top w/glass window(US $5,500.00)
1987 mustang gt hatchback(US $10,500.00)
Auto Services in Texas
Your Mechanic ★★★★★
Yale Auto ★★★★★
Wyatt`s Discount Muffler & Brake ★★★★★
Wright Auto Glass ★★★★★
Wise Alignments ★★★★★
Wilkerson`s Automotive & Front End Service ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford, Ram in heavy-duty towing spat
Mon, 28 Jul 2014Every pickup truck commercial has the brand trying to convince us that its model is the biggest, brawniest vehicle on the block. But Ford and Ram appear ready to really throw down the gauntlet and scrap over the towing figures for their heavy-duty models, and it could potentially end up in court.
The issue revolves around what it means to be best in class. Ford claims that its 2015 F-450 (pictured above) has a max tow rating of 31,200 pounds, compared to 30,000 pounds for the Ram 3500 (right). However, both companies market these heavy haulers as having the top towing in their class. According to Automotive News, Ford is threatening legal action if Ram doesn't back down.
The situation isn't as simple as just comparing the numbers, though. First, the two companies calculate their towing capacities differently. Ram adheres to the SAE J2807 rating, while Ford uses its own internal system. Although, as the company introduces new models, they are certified using the SAE standard. "When an all-new F-Series Super Duty is introduced, it also will use SAE J2807," said Ford to Autoblog in an emailed statement.
Car and Driver shows off awesome 1960s ads
Fri, Sep 11 2015Someone must have recently rediscovered the keys to the archives at Car and Driver, and the access has been put to good use. Following last month's fantastic look at automotive ads from the '50s, there's now a new gallery running from March 1960 through December 1969. This collection provides a great overview of a decade full of iconic cars. If you're a fan of Carroll Shelby, particularly his Mustangs, then there's a lot to love among this group. One ad from July 1965 aimed to sell the GT350, but with an ocean of text and a tiny picture, it probably could've used a once-over by Don Draper's team. By December '65, the copywriters ironed out the problems with a spot proclaiming boldly "Shelby GT350 is 'Son of Cobra.'" The company offered some great accessories, too. For those into European motoring, there's a humorous attempt to sell the Alfa Romeo Giulia as both a racecar and family hauler. Toyota also boasts about the winning record for the 2000GT. Among the best text comes from BMW for lines like: "What's BMW got? The most advanced high-performance engine in any production car, for a cruising speed of 100 mph." Of course, Volkswagen's famous "Lemon" ad for the Beetle also gets its due here. Separately, each of these ads is fascinating, but taken together they tell the story of a great decade of motoring. Go give them all a read at Car and Driver. Related Video: News Source: Car and DriverImage Credit: GM Heritage Center Marketing/Advertising Read This Alfa Romeo BMW Ford Toyota Volkswagen shelby alfa romeo giulia shelby gt350 toyota 2000gt
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.