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

2011 Ford Escape Limited Leather Moon Roof Fwd Save Low Reserve Ford Suv on 2040-cars

Year:2011 Mileage:76849 Color: Red
Location:

Davenport, Iowa, United States

Davenport, Iowa, United States

Auto Services in Iowa

Sternquist Garage INC ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Auto Transmission
Address: 1823 W 3rd Extension St, Luther
Phone: (515) 432-4175

Ryan Collision Ctr ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Automobile Restoration-Antique & Classic, Dent Removal
Address: 8901 F St, Carter-Lake
Phone: (402) 592-3344

Ron & Rob`s Auto Repair & Customs ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: Honey-Creek
Phone: (402) 885-3737

Pierce Brothers Repair ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Welders, Automobile Accessories
Address: 110 E Boston Ave, Spring-Hill
Phone: (515) 961-4924

Pepper`s Auto Body & More ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 13033 S 13th St, Carter-Lake
Phone: (402) 502-5220

Midas Auto Service Experts ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Brake Repair
Address: 1111 E Army Post Rd, Norwalk
Phone: (515) 285-4905

Auto blog

James Franco and tiger tease Ford Super Bowl commercial

Sat, 01 Feb 2014

Ford has just released a teaser for its Super Bowl ad, and unlike just about every other automaker, it seems that the Blue Oval is going to make us wait until Sunday to see the full spot. The teaser is, um, strange.
It stars James Franco, who believes he is Ron Riggle, the comedian, Fox NFL Sunday host and retired Marine lieutenant colonel. There's also a tiger. The vague spot has Franco claiming that "this is no ordinary commercial." You'll note on the bottom right, there's a Ford logo and the hashtag #nearlydouble.
According to Automotive News, it's part of a massive viral effort being pushed forward by Ford and its dealerships. Ford sent different teasers and "vignettes" to dealership employees and asked them to share them on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, in the hopes of creating a viral effect.

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

Mon, Jan 6 2014

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

Thu, 17 Jul 2014

In 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.