2014 Ford Explorer Xlt on 2040-cars
1300 US Highway 31 S., Greenwood, Indiana, United States
Engine:3.5L V6 24V MPFI DOHC
Transmission:6-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1FM5K7D89EGC56415
Stock Num: 41915
Make: Ford
Model: Explorer XLT
Year: 2014
Exterior Color: Tuxedo Black Metallic
Interior Color: Charcoal Black
Options: Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Please call 888-795-5835 and ask to speak with the Internet Sales Department for the BEST SERVICE!!!
Ford Explorer Sport for Sale
Auto Services in Indiana
Vawter`s Automotive Service ★★★★★
Usa Muffler Shops ★★★★★
USA Muffler & Brakes ★★★★★
Twin City Upholstery Ltd. ★★★★★
Tire Central Avon ★★★★★
Taylorsville Tire Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
2015 Ford Mustang Convertible makes inappropriate appearance in Detroit [w/video]
Tue, 14 Jan 2014With the polar vortex fresh in the minds of Autoblog's Detroit-based staff, we're finding it funny that any manufacturer would choose January in the Motor City to show off a new and highly anticipated convertible to the general media and public for the first time. But Ford has done just that, giving us our first real peek at the new Mustang Convertible in the flesh.
The new Mustang Convertible is more or less unchanged from the standard coupe, with some subtle styling tweaks to accommodate the retractable soft top. Engine and transmission choices are identical to the hardtop, although we should expect slightly lower performance due to the hardware for the roof. Like the coupe, neither prices nor performance metrics have been published yet for the convertible.
Hop up top for our live gallery of images from the floor of the Detroit Auto Show.
Ford recalls Explorer and Lincoln MKC for fire hazard
Thu, Mar 31 2016The Basics: Ford will recall 5,536 examples of the 2016 Explorer and 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC. The Explorers have build dates between October 20, 2014, and January 28, 2016, at the Chicago Assembly Plant. The MKCs are from between November 25, 2013, and January 25, 2016, at the Louisville Assembly Plant. In total, there are 3,129 total affected examples of the 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2,407 examples of the 2016 Ford Explorer. Of these, 1,543 are in the US and 3,993 are in Canada. The Problem: The combination of the engine block design and the block heater in these vehicles can cause the part to overheat when plugged in. Injuries/Deaths: None reported, but there are two cases of underhood fires in Canada. If you own one: Ford will begin notifying owners during the week of May 16, company spokesperson John Cangany tells Autoblog. Related Video: Ford issues safety recall for certain 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles to replace engine block heaters Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 5,500 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles to remove the heaters and replace them with an updated design. The engine block design, coupled with the particular block heater installed in these vehicles, causes the unit to be susceptible to overheating when the vehicle is parked and the block heater is plugged in –increasing the risk of an underhood fire. Ford is aware of two reports of underhood fires in Canada, but is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this issue. Affected vehicles include certain 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC vehicles built at Louisville Assembly Plant, Nov. 25, 2013 through Jan. 25, 2016 and certain 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 20, 2014 through Jan. 28, 2016. There are 5,536 vehicles affected by the issue, including 3,129 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2,407 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles, with 1,543 of the affected vehicles in the United States and federalized territories and 3,993 in Canada. Dealers will remove and replace the engine block heater with an updated design and, if needed, replace the cord at no cost to the customer.
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.