1950 Ford Other Pickups Pickup on 2040-cars
Norman, Oklahoma, United States
Transmission:Manual
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Vehicle Title:Clean
Year: 1950
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 98rc45567
Mileage: 50000
Interior Color: Brown
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Trim: Pickup
Make: Ford
Drive Type: --
Model: Other Pickups
Exterior Color: Brown
Car Type: Classic Cars
Features: --
Power Options: --
Ford Other Pickups for Sale
1941 ford pickup(US $8,698.50)
1936 ford other pickups(US $24,000.00)
1929 ford other pickups(US $21,500.00)
2015 ford f-250 platinum 4wd lifted 6.7l diesel gps camera sunroof 24in wheels(US $10,105.00)
1951 ford other pickups(US $10,600.00)
1955 ford ute ute very unique and rare hot street rod. show(US $20,420.00)
Auto Services in Oklahoma
Valley Body Shop ★★★★★
Shade-Makers ★★★★★
Safelite AutoGlass ★★★★★
Precision Auto ★★★★★
Owasso Automotive Care ★★★★★
Nicoma Park Muffler ★★★★★
Auto blog
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.
Swedish car mag says Ford Mondeo is dangerously, illegally overweight [w/video]
Thu, Dec 18 2014Sweden's Teknikens Varld has a reputation for being very persnickety when it comes to auto safety testing, and its latest catch is the Mondeo Titanium Estate 2.0 TDCi 150 bhp S6 MPS (basically a station wagon variant of the Fusion). In addition to the model's mile-long name, it has another problem according to the Swedes, because its weight on the scales does not equal the official numbers for the vehicle. Teknikens Varld claims the wagon is dangerously overweight because it weighs in 4,145 pounds, while Ford officially lists its weight at 3,530 pounds. That 615-pound disparity means that if a family loads it to what they think is the model's gross vehicle weight, it will actually be too heavy, and therefore illegal to drive in Sweden. According to the magazine, when it tried doing this, the rear wheels scraped against the wells, and the estate failed the mag's legendary moose test. However, at 220 pounds over the limit, it passed the test. When reached for comment by Autoblog, Jay Ward, Senior Manager at Ford of Europe Product Communications, explained the reason for the deviation between the official numbers and the magazine's test: "We are aware of this, but this is not an issue that relates specifically to the safety of the Mondeo, but is in fact related to the way in which the cars are tested by the authorities. We provided an Ambiente model for the testing but the car that featured in the magazine test was a Titanium model which has a different weight. We are in discussion with the Swedish Transport Agency to change the framework so the real weight of the Titanium model is reported instead of the Ambiente model which will resolve the issue." Teknikens Varld is well-known for calling out automakers for perceived transgressions. Most recently it leveled criticisms against the all-wheel drive system in the Honda CR-V, and both the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Porsche Macan failed its moose test. Scroll down for the magazine's video of weighing the Mondeo Estate and the model's test results. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. The new Ford Mondeo is dangerously overweight The new Ford Mondeo is a great car, which Teknikens Varld's test shows, but there is one problem – the weight. Mondeo weighs 279 kg more than Ford claims. With big load (ie family plus luggage) the car therefore becomes illegal to drive.
Should heavy-duty pickup trucks have window stickers with fuel mileage estimates?
Sat, Sep 23 2017If you were to stroll into your nearest Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Nissan, or Ram dealership, you'd find a bunch of pickup trucks. Most of those would have proper window stickers labeled with things like base prices, options prices, location of manufacture, and, crucially, fuel economy estimates. But you'd also run across a number of heavy-duty trucks with no such fuel mileage data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA doesn't require automakers to publish the valuable miles-per-gallon measurement for vehicles with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. That makes it difficult for consumers to compare behemoths powered by turbocharged diesel engines – between one another, and between smaller, gasoline-fueled trucks. Consumer Reports doesn't think it should be this way, and it's spearheading an effort (PDF link) to get the government to require manufacturers to publish fuel economy estimates. In its own testing, CR found that heavy-duty pickups powered by Ford's Power Stroke, GM's Duramax, and FCA's Cummins diesel engines (which doesn't include the Ram's EcoDiesel) get worse fuel mileage than their lighter-duty gas-powered siblings. We're not so sure HD-truck buyers are unaware of this fact – big diesels don't really come into their own until big loads are placed in their beds or attached to their trailer hitches. Under heavy workloads, the diesel trucks will almost certainly return greater efficiency than a similar gas-powered truck. What's more, HD trucks with lumbering diesels in general make the driver feel more confident while towing due to greater torque at low engine RPM than gas trucks. They also offer greater max-weight limits. Still, we agree EPA fuel mileage estimates should be offered for heavy-duty pickups. And we think the comparisons provided by Consumer Reports might be interesting to potential buyers. Click here to see the results of CR's tests, and let us know what you think using the poll below. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Ford F-Series Super Duty: First Drive View 22 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Read This Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan RAM Fuel Efficiency Truck Commercial Vehicles Diesel Vehicles poll gmc sierra hd chevy silverado hd