Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

1973 Gran Torino Fastback on 2040-cars

Year:1973 Mileage:99999
Location:

Bakersfield, California, United States

Bakersfield, California, United States

73 Gran Torino Fastback, 351m/c6, 4 barrel Edelbrock Carburetor, Edelbrock camshaft, Weiland intake manifold, Hooker headers (not installed), HEI distributor, Moroso valve covers, Centerline rims. The car has been sitting for quite a while already, due to the fact that funds have run out.  I have a trunk full of parts and a mechanics manual that comes with it. This car's body looks straight I would spend the time to fix it considering it doesn't have any rust in or around the dreaded fender wells.  I have yet to decipher the VIN number, but it is a fastback.  It also runs and drives but it seems to idle too high, I have adjusted the carburetor and timing to no avail I believe it may be a vacuum leak.  The breaks also feel a little stiff when pressed down so it may eventually need a new brake booster.  The car is registered in California but the tags are expired, the car is not a daily driver but with a bit of love it will definitely turn heads not that it doesn't already.

 The Gran Torino Sport now featured its own unique emblem, which it displayed in the grille and on the trunk lock cover. The laser strip was still an option but was revised to a slightly different shape, and ran higher along on the body side. The Sport no longer featured a hood scoop, and the Ram Air induction option was also gone. Other than the above changes, the Sport was unchanged from the 1972 model year, and continued to be offered as a 2-door hardtop and 2-door SportsRoof. In the Car and Driver magazine road test of a 1973 Gran Torino Sport, the suspension received high marks for comfort and handling. Car and Driver wrote that the Torino was as "..quiet as a Jaguar, smooth as a Continental, the Torino's ride is exceptional...even with the competition suspension." Their test of a SportsRoof equipped with the 351 CJ, C-6 automatic, and 3.25:1 gears, resulted in a 0 - 60 mph (97 km/h) time of 7.7 seconds while the quarter mile went by in 16.0 seconds at 88.1 mph (141.8 km/h). The 0-60 time was 0.9 seconds slower than the 1972 model Car and Driver tested a year before; however, this can partially be attributed to differences in gear ratio, transmission type, and a weight increase. The 1973 Sport had a test weight of 4,308 lb (1,954 kg), while the 1972 had a test weight of 3,966 lb (1,799 kg)(an almost 350 lb (160 kg)increase). Performance was certainly no longer at the "Super Car" level, but still was respectable. For comparison, in a Motor Trend test of a 1970 Torino 2-door equipped with a 351-4V, Cruise-O-Matic, and 3.00:1 gears, they recorded a 0 - 60 mph (97 km/h) time of 8.7 seconds, and a quarter mile time of 16.5 seconds at 86 mph (138 km/h). However, the high compression 1970 motor required premium fuel, while the low compression 1973 motor could run on regular

Auto Services in California

Z Auto Sales & Leasing ★★★★★

New Car Dealers
Address: 225 E Broadway # 102D, South-Pasadena
Phone: (818) 730-4181

X-treme Auto Care ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Tire Dealers, Tire Recap, Retread & Repair
Address: 901 Grand Ave, Fair-Oaks
Phone: (916) 929-9813

Wrona`s Quality Auto Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Inspection Stations & Services, Automobile Consultants
Address: 109 South St, Shell-Beach
Phone: (805) 543-3180

Woody`s Truck & Auto Body ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Truck Body Repair & Painting
Address: 13124 Lakewood Blvd, Signal-Hill
Phone: (562) 529-6555

Winter Chevrolet - Honda ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers
Address: 3750 Century Ct, El-Sobrante
Phone: (510) 883-3895

Western Towing ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Towing
Address: 465 Peaceful Valley Ln, Atascadero
Phone: (805) 835-5943

Auto blog

Are we about to see a real SUV revival?

Wed, Mar 23 2016

Now that the marketplace has been oversaturated with cute-utes, crossovers, and CUV coupes, are we about to see a resurgence of real, honest-to-God SUVs? Ummm... maybe. The stars seem to be aligning in that direction, at least that's the sense I'm getting. We know an all-new Jeep Wrangler is only a few auto shows away; and that Jeep is about to introduce a new Grand Cherokee Trailhawk for 2017, in the same rugged spirit of the successful Cherokee and Renegade Trailhawks. Ford has hinted at a neo-Bronco, after showing the concept above in 2014 to wet the mouths of all those Duck Dynasty-types out there. And, and... wait for it... I recently learned that Subaru sent a questionnaire out to some Forester owners asking if they might be interested in an off-road package if it were offered. The items listed were pretty hardcore, serious stuff, such as: integrated tow/recovery hooks, additional ground clearance, more rugged wheels, skid plates, altimeter, front-view off-road camera, improved approach and departure angles, advanced differentials, Inclinometer, full-size spare tire, upgraded off-road suspension components, more aggressive tires, off-road driving mode (engine, transmission, throttle, and steering settings), more rugged styling, low-range gearing, and a more advanced traction management system. Folks that's not my wish list (well, actually it is), but those are words from Subaru, asking if that's what customers would like to see. Need proof? Go to the SubaruForester.org website. It's in a discussion there. So... no promises or guarantees here, and feel free to call me a rumormonger if you like; but the next few years could prove very interesting for those who actually do go off road. If this pans out, remember, you read it here first. Related Video: Image Credit: Ford Ford Jeep Subaru Crossover SUV Off-Road Vehicles open road

Ram 1500 bests new F-150 in MT pickup shootout

Tue, Nov 25 2014

Ford's 2015 Ford F-150 is a technological tour-de-force, what with its aluminum-intensive construction and its powerful and efficient new 2.7-liter EcoBoost engine option. But now that it's hit the market, it's time to get down to brass tacks and find out how just the latest F-150 actually stands up to its rivals in the hyper-competitive fullsize segment. Motor Trend is among the first to round up the Ford (in Lariat 2.7-liter 4X4 guise here) and put it up against the Ram 1500 Outdoorsman EcoDiesel 4x4 and 5.3-liter-equipped Silverado 1500 LTZ Z71 to find out how Dearborn's new-think truck measures up. The test put the trio through over 1,000 miles of tough driving in California and Arizona in a variety of conditions from just cruising around unladen to hauling a trailer. MT found all three trucks to be competent, but the most praise got heaped on the Ram and the Ford, with the Chevrolet falling a step behind its competitors in many tests. Among the Ford's most-liked features was its 2.7-liter, twin-turbo V6 that helped make the F-150 easily the quickest of the group, with some editors saying the engine felt about the same whether driving around with cargo in the bed or not. There was some minor turbo lag during acceleration while trailering, but that issue affected the Ram, too. The Ram's powertrain was lauded, as well. The EcoDiesel was torquey around town, and the 1500's combination of an eight-speed automatic and air suspension was judged to be the best of the lot. It was the most difficult to get into the bed, though. The Ram also won the fuel economy award by netting 20-miles-per-gallon city and 28-mpg highway in the test to beat its Environmental Protection Agency ratings of 19/27. The Ford's EcoBoost managed 17/22, one mpg off each from the EPA numbers, and using a lot of throttle really depleted its efficiency. As MT notes, however, it would take time for the diesel's mileage savings to pay off at the pump for these two trucks. In the end, the Ram just barely eked out the win, with the title partially earned because of "the Ford's unknown maintenance and aluminum repair costs," according to MT. Go check out the full comparison to read all of the details, then let us know what you think in Comments.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

Mon, Oct 10 2016

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.