Very Nice 2010 Model Xlt Package Ford Transit Connect!.......unit# 3786t on 2040-cars
Charlotte, North Carolina, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:2.0L 121Cu. In. l4 GAS DOHC Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Mini Passenger Van
Fuel Type:GAS
Year: 2010
Make: Ford
Model: Transit Connect
Trim: XLT Mini Passenger Van 4-Door
Transmission Description: 4-SPEED AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION W/OD
Number of Doors: 4
Drive Type: FWD
Drivetrain: Front Wheel Drive
Mileage: 68,802
Sub Model: XLT
Number of Cylinders: 4
Exterior Color: Silver
Interior Color: Gray
Ford Transit Connect for Sale
2010 ford transit connect runs and drive excellent very handy these things
2011 ford transit connect xlt mini cargo van 4-door 2.0l(US $1,999.00)
2010 ford transit connect xlt ~divider~shelves~ladder rack ~cd/i-pod *low miles*(US $14,895.00)
Factory warranty sync system usb port low miles cd player off lease only(US $19,999.00)
Ford transit connect 2013 xlt 7000 miles red van upgrades 255 sync fs by owner(US $22,500.00)
Excellent condition. ready to go. warranty available(US $9,995.00)
Auto Services in North Carolina
Wheel Works ★★★★★
Vintage & Modern European Service ★★★★★
Victory Lane Quick Oil Change ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
University Ford North ★★★★★
University Auto Imports Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid
Tue, Jun 17 2014It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.
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.
2013 Ford F-150 Limited
Mon, 28 Jan 2013The Ford F-150 received yet another new model for the 2013 model year, the Limited trim, bringing the ways you can order this country's most popular vehicle to a grand total of 10. There really is an F-150 to suit any need now, and the Limited variant slots in at the very top of the range, above the already pampering Platinum model.
While normally I would admit that I'm the least-appropriate person to test a pickup, the fact that this particular trim places a much higher premium on luxury than anything with a bed and Blue Oval badge before it means that I don't need the workman chops of a skilled tradesman to judge how well this truck meets its true aim.
Driving Notes
2040Cars.com © 2012-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.059 s, 7841 u