Ford: Mustang Svt Cobra on 2040-cars
New Port Richey, Florida, United States
Car was completely gone thru by the dealer's mustang specialist. BONE STOCK 2003 cobra. The car has a little over 63,000 miles. (I do drive it some weekends). Pretty clean interior with the exception of the shift knob which is a little worn. Outside is very decent and original paint. Of course it has some chips and a couple of minor scratches because the car has been driven on the street.
If you have any questions feel free to ask : flv9aalonzareda@isonews2.com
Ford Mustang for Sale
2015 ford mustang gt premium(US $12,155.00)
Ford: mustang lx(US $7,000.00)
Ford: mustang full race or por street(US $19,999.00)
Ford: mustang 7up limited edition(US $18,600.00)
Ford: mustang saleen(US $16,999.00)
Ford: mustang leather trim sports seats(US $8,400.00)
Auto Services in Florida
Xtreme Auto Upholstery ★★★★★
Volvo Of Tampa ★★★★★
Value Tire Loxahatchee ★★★★★
Upholstery Solutions ★★★★★
Transmission Physician ★★★★★
Town & Country Golf Cars ★★★★★
Auto blog
Next Ford Mustang to drop 400 pounds
Thu, 15 Aug 2013The Ford Mustang is already the lightest of the current crop of muscle cars, at around 3,600 pounds for a GT coupe with the six-speed manual transmission. That's almost 260 pounds less than a Chevrolet Camaro SS and about 450 pounds less than a Dodge Challenger R/T, which means the Mustang has a pretty big advantage when it comes to handling, braking, accelerating and economy. More good news: The next Mustang will be even lighter.
According to a report from Edmunds, the sixth-generation Mustang, which is set to debut at the 2014 North American International Auto Show, will shed an additional 400 pounds of body fat. That 11-percent weight reduction will be thanks to lightweight materials, with a particular focus on using stronger, but less material in construction. Aluminum will feature heavily, but Edmunds' inside source warns that there is "nothing terribly exotic" coming to the original pony car.
The other big news is that the new Mustang will be smaller overall. It's going to be 15-inches shorter than the 188.5-inch Mustang on sale today, while it'll also be 6.5 inches narrower. Shorter overhangs, both in the front and rear, are also good signs for those that want an agile Mustang.
Ford says C-Max mpg reduction has hurt sales
Tue, 22 Apr 2014The Ford C-Max is having a rough time. Sales for the five-door hybrid hatchback were down 39.1 percent in March to 2,295 cars, and sales from January through March were down 42.5 percent to 5,566 units. In an interview with The Detroit News, Ford Americas boss Joe Hinrichs places the blame on lowering the model's fuel economy rating.
"We're definitely seeing consideration on C-Max decline over time. We need to reinvest in the product because it's a great car," said Hinrichs to The Detroit News.
The company was hit with bad publicity over the C-Max when owners in multiple states filed class action lawsuits that alleged the cars weren't able to meet the stated fuel economy. Ford eventually re-rated the model from 47 miles per gallon city, highway and combined to 40 mpg city, 45 mpg highway and 43 mpg combined. To soften the blow of the change, the automaker sent checks to the owners to make up some of the difference. Initially, Ford claimed that demand remained strong for the hybrid. However, the latest sales figures and Hinrichs' statement seem to show the opposite.
EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate
Mon, 26 Aug 2013
The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.