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

07 Ford Escape Hybrid, Comfortable Leather Seats, Sunroof, Low Miles! on 2040-cars

Year:2007 Mileage:85068 Color: SILVER METALLIC
Location:

Austin, Texas, United States

Austin, Texas, United States

Auto Services in Texas

Yos Auto Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Auto Engine Rebuilding
Address: 3601 W Parmer Ln, Cedar-Park
Phone: (512) 873-9354

Yarubb Enterprise ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers
Address: 2640 Northaven Rd, Richardson
Phone: (972) 243-3100

WEW Auto Repair Inc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 13807 Candleshade Ln, Pearland
Phone: (866) 595-6470

Welsh Collision Center ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 4201 Center St, Deer-Park
Phone: (281) 479-3030

Ward`s Mobile Auto Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Diagnostic Service, Automotive Roadside Service
Address: Liverpool
Phone: (832) 738-3228

Walnut Automotive ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Auto Oil & Lube, Brake Repair
Address: 4401 W Walnut St, Murphy
Phone: (972) 272-5522

Auto blog

Ford recalling nearly 700k Escape CUVs, C-Max hybrids over two separate safety issues

Fri, 09 May 2014

Poor Escape. Ever since its launch in 2012, Ford's small CUV has been the subject of many, many, many recalls. And today, The Detroit News is reporting that Ford is adding two more recalls to the 2013-14 model year Escape's permanent record, one of them also involves the C-Max hybrid hatchback.
The first recall, covering 692,500 Escape and C-Max vehicles, is due to a software glitch that could cause the airbags - specifically, the safety canopy - to not deploy in a timely fashion during rollover crashes. According to the News, Ford says no crashes or injuries have been reported in relation to this problem.
The second recall, covering 692,700 Escapes, is related to the door handles. The News reports that the exterior door handles could open while the vehicle is in motion, and could also fail to latch properly. Once again, no crashes or injuries have occurred because of this. The National Highway Safety Traffic Administration has not issued an official notice on either recall as of this writing.

Next Lincoln Navigator to drop V8 in favor of V6, but Ford Expedition might get both

Tue, 12 Mar 2013

A great many buyers fled from full-size body-on-frame SUVs to car-based crossovers in large measure to save fuel. But that doesn't mean there's still not a buying audience for more traditional truck-based utility vehicles, and those consumers doubtlessly wouldn't mind saving some dollars at the pump, too. According to Motor Trend, those shoppers might be in luck.
That's because the magazine has confirmed that Ford isn't walking away from the full-size SUV segment, and it's poised to do something about its offerings' economy ratings, too. According to MT, global Lincoln director Matt VanDyke has hinted that the next Navigator may drop two cylinders and go with a V6 model - the current model gets just 14 miles per gallon in the city and 20 on the highway from its 5.4-liter V8. The obvious fitment would be Ford's 3.5-liter twin-turbo EcoBoost V6, an engine that has spread like kudzu throughout the rest of the Blue Oval's large vehicle lineup.
Downsized turbocharged engines like Ford's EcoBoost franchise have come under fire as of late for not delivering their EPA fuel economy ratings, but their benefits extend beyond consumption - the 3.5L offers superior power and a better torque curve than the naturally aspirated V8. MT also suggests that Ford's 3.7-liter V6 could form the base engine for the next Navi - it has similar horsepower but a lot less torque than the current 5.4L. That may be less of a problem with the next generation tipped to go on a diet, which could level the playing field somewhat.

Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel

Mon, Apr 14 2014

When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).