1969 Ford Thunderbird Hardtop 2-door 429 Thunderjet W/9 Inch Posi. on 2040-cars
Fort Lupton, Colorado, United States
Body Type:Hardtop
Engine:7.0L 429Cu. In. V8 GAS Naturally Aspirated
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Private Seller
Number of Cylinders: 8
Make: Ford
Model: Thunderbird
Trim: Base Hardtop 2-Door
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Drive Type: U/K
Options: Bucket Seats & console, origonal AM/FM Radio
Mileage: 99,262
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Exterior Color: White
Interior Color: Tan
Ford Thunderbird for Sale
- 1962 ford thunderbird california car restored(US $14,500.00)
- !964 thunderbird convertible
- Lx coupe 4.6l rear wheel drive tires - front all-season tires - rear all-season
- 1966 classic thunderbird 390 ci original car 3-speed
- Red 2002 ford thunderbird base convertible 2-door 3.9l used w hardtop 85k miles(US $10,500.00)
Auto Services in Colorado
Unlimited Auto Sales ★★★★★
Toyota of Colorado Springs ★★★★★
Shock Glass ★★★★★
Sauder`s Automotive ★★★★★
Performance Wise Service Center ★★★★★
Northglenn Auto Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
Feds open investigation into Chevy Express, Ford Freestar rust issues
Wed, 28 Dec 2011'Tis the season... for road salt. And with that, comes rust. And what does rust bring? Well, for Ford and General Motors, a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration investigation. According to The Detroit News, NHTSA is looking into potential recalls issues with Chevrolet Express vans and Ford Freestar minivans.
The feds have received five complaints that rust has caused leaking fuel filler pipes on 2003 Express vans. Separately, seven complaints have been filed over excessive rust in the rear wheel wells of 2004 Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey minivans. The Freestar and Monterey went out of production in 2007. Neither issue has resulted in any crashes or injuries, according to the report.
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.
Jaguar design boss admits X-Type was a mistake
Thu, 19 Sep 2013History has a way of repeating itself, especially in the auto industry. When Jaguar was owned by Ford, the British brand attempted to field a competitor for the BMW 3 Series, called the X-Type. Based on the bones of a Ford Mondeo, it aped the styling of Jaguar's flagship model, the XJ, while borrowing liberally from the Ford parts bin. That was 2001.
Now, in 2013, Jaguar is planning a new 3 Series challenger based on the platform previewed by the C-X17 Concept, while Ford is attempting to take the latest Mondeo upmarket. The moves have both brands recognizing where, why, and how the X-Type failed. "It didn't look mature or powerful or anything. It was just a car," Jaguar's current head of advanced design, Julian Thomson, told PistonHeads. Basing the X-Type on a front-drive car while giving it styling that was meant for a rear-driver lead to proportions that "were plainly wrong," Thomson told PH. Ford's European head of quality, Gunnar Herrmann, added that the X-Type was "a fake Jaguar, because every piece I touch is Ford."
For what it's worth, the X-Type's successor in the segment will sport rear-drive, with plenty of input from Ian Callum. Thomson described the new model, which would challenge the 3 Series as having, "Big wheels right to the ends of the car, low bonnet, short overhangs, very low cabins." Sounds good to us.