Ford Mustang Mustang Fastback on 2040-cars
Plainfield, New Jersey, United States
![Ford Mustang MUSTANG FASTBACK, US $2,000.00, image 1](/back/370x277-back.png)
PROJECT CAR WITH CLEAN TITLE. FARM FOUND.
Ford Mustang for Sale
Ford mustang mach 1(US $2,000.00)
Ford mustang gt(US $7,000.00)
Ford mustang(US $14,000.00)
Ford mustang svo(US $2,000.00)
Ford mustang cobra(US $10,000.00)
Ford mustang saleen s-281(US $10,000.00)
Auto Services in New Jersey
West Automotive & Tire ★★★★★
Tire World ★★★★★
Tech Automotive ★★★★★
Surf Auto Brokers ★★★★★
Star Loan Auto Center ★★★★★
Somers Point Body Shop ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford Shelby GT350 Mustang to cost $52,995?
Mon, Dec 1 2014The 2015 Ford Shelby GT350 Mustang was one of the shining stars of this year's Los Angeles Auto Show. And the Blue Oval's latest muscle car might even have reason to burn a little brighter if a recent rumor about its price proves true. Best of all are rumors that an even more potent version of the Shelby is potentially on the way. According to Horsepower Kings citing unnamed Ford sources at the LA Auto Show, the 2015 GT350 carries a starting price of $52,995, and the Tech package adds a further $2,995 on top of that. There's also the claim of a Track package for an undisclosed price. However, it doesn't look like LA is the last we'll see of the newest Shelby because the source also alleges that a top-rung GT350R is under development with bigger brakes, modified aerodynamics and sportier tires. This rubber-burner is reported to be unveiled at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit in January. Assuming these claims are correct, it puts the Shelby in fighting form against its two Chevrolet Camaro rivals. Ford reports that the GT350's 5.2-liter V8 pumps out over 500 horsepower and more than 400 pound-feet of torque. At $52,995, it would undercut by a couple of grand the $55,505 (before destination) base price of the 580-hp 2015 ZL1. The super 'Stang might also beat the 505-hp Z/28 with its power rating, while being vastly cheaper than the track-focused Camaro's $72,305 price. This could be quite the performance shoot-out.
2015 Ford Mustang Convertible makes inappropriate appearance in Detroit [w/video]
Tue, 14 Jan 2014With the polar vortex fresh in the minds of Autoblog's Detroit-based staff, we're finding it funny that any manufacturer would choose January in the Motor City to show off a new and highly anticipated convertible to the general media and public for the first time. But Ford has done just that, giving us our first real peek at the new Mustang Convertible in the flesh.
The new Mustang Convertible is more or less unchanged from the standard coupe, with some subtle styling tweaks to accommodate the retractable soft top. Engine and transmission choices are identical to the hardtop, although we should expect slightly lower performance due to the hardware for the roof. Like the coupe, neither prices nor performance metrics have been published yet for the convertible.
Hop up top for our live gallery of images from the floor of the Detroit Auto Show.
Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy
Thu, Jan 8 2015With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.