Ford E-series Van Conversion Van on 2040-cars
Fogelsville, Pennsylvania, United States
This Beauty was Custom made for a local man, Complete top of the line with custom Walnut accents.
Ford Windstar for Sale
- Ford other deluxe coupe(US $14,000.00)
- Ford other hi boy roadster(US $12,000.00)
- Ford other none(US $16,000.00)
- Ford f-550 crew cab 4wd drw(US $2,000.00)
- Ford custom pickups(US $18,000.00)
- Ford torino cobra(US $19,000.00)
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Young`s Auto Body Inc ★★★★★
Van Gorden`s Tire & Lube ★★★★★
Valley Seat Cover Center ★★★★★
Tony`s Transmission ★★★★★
Tire Ranch Auto Service Center ★★★★★
Thomas Automotive ★★★★★
Auto blog
2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost loses big power on 87 octane
Mon, Jan 5 2015The 2015 Ford Mustang with the 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder is a pretty potent package on paper. With 310 horsepower and 320 pound-feet of torque, it boasts better performance numbers than the 3.7-liter V6, but with better fuel economy as an added benefit. However, if you're in the market for one of these boosted 'Stangs, you should probably keep in mind that it really prefers to gulp premium, 93-octane fuel. It can drink 87-octane swill in a pinch, but you're going to find significantly less power underfoot when pulling away. While it's not shocking that the ponies are dialed back with a lower grade of gasoline, an alleged page from a Ford training manual obtained by Mustang 6G purports to show just how much power is lost, though. According to this document, the 2.3-liter EcoBoost makes 275 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque when running on lower octane fuel. That's a substantial reduction of about 11.3 percent compared to when the engine drinks 93 octane. Interestingly, according to Mustang 6G, that finding was a bit better than expected, because a Ford engineer reportedly said power would be down about 13 percent without altering peak torque. In speaking with Autoblog, Paul Seredynski of Ford powertrain communications, objected to part of this document. While he couldn't confirm the specific losses listed for the Mustang EcoBoost, "torque remains unchanged" with lower octane gasoline, Seredynski said. He speculated this training manual page was "possibly from before the engine was certified" and therefore showed incorrect figures. Serendynski did confirm that the automaker recommends using 93 octane, and like all modern engines, the software adapts if it's lower. "Peak power would be reduced" by using a lesser grade, he confirmed. Featured Gallery 2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost: First Ride View 20 Photos News Source: Mustang 6GImage Credit: Copyright 2015 AOL, Ford, Mustang 6G Ford Technology Convertible Coupe Performance ecoboost ford mustang ecoboost
Here's the new face of the Ford Ranger
Thu, Nov 27 2014Ford Asia Pacific has put a teaser video on YouTube showing off details on the 2015 Ranger pickup, and at the end we get a quick glimpse of the whole truck. This is the T6 Ranger that we still don't get in North America, but that shares its underpinnings with the Everest SUV recently introduced at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. The Ranger gets a chunkier front end than the Everest, identified by its grille with three floating slats, reminiscent of designs on the previous F-150, and a less-stylized lower front bumper. Ford says it will be smarter, safer, smoother and stronger, but we'll have to wait for its reveal to find out what that means. Meanwhile, you can admire its new looks in the video below.
Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age
Thu, 17 Jul 2014In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.