2012 Ford F150 145 on 2040-cars
1180 W National Rd, Vandalia, Ohio, United States
Engine:3.7L V6 24V MPFI DOHC Flexible Fuel
Transmission:6-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1FTEX1EM7CFA94219
Stock Num: 92959
Make: Ford
Model: F150 145
Year: 2012
Exterior Color: Blue Flame Metallic
Interior Color: Steel Gray
Options: Drive Type: 4WD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 40777
**CERTIFIED YES PLAN WARRANTY FOR LIFE** With a heritage dating back to 1948, the F-150 is a tool built to last. Engineering excellence and superb design combined with efficiency, value, safety and performance of intended function garners the title of Motor Trend's 2012 Truck of the Year. Don't let the drumming of road noise wear you down. Bask in the quiet comfort of the cabin of this Ford F-150 XLT. We know that shopping for a pre-owned vehicle can be full of uncertainties. We are so confident in OUR pre-owned vehicles that we have covered them with our YES PLAN Certified program. With the YES PLAN you can BUY HERE and SERVICE ANYWHERE. Enjoy the peace of mind of a true NATIONWIDE powertrain warranty. Worry free ownership, Only from Joseph Airport. And because we appreciate your business, enjoy your first oil change on us! COMPLIMENTARY!.
Ford F-150 for Sale
2010 ford f150 fx4(US $28,615.00)
2010 ford f150 lariat(US $24,994.00)
2010 ford f150 lariat(US $25,995.00)
2012 ford f150 platinum(US $41,900.00)
2013 ford f150 stx(US $25,990.00)
2012 ford f150 xlt(US $26,200.00)
Auto Services in Ohio
Zig`s Auto Service Inc ★★★★★
World Auto Network ★★★★★
Woda Automotive ★★★★★
Wholesale Tire Co ★★★★★
Westway Body Shop ★★★★★
Toth Buick GMC Trucks ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford not backing down on MPG-based marketing strategy
Thu, Jun 26 2014The Blue Oval may have to back off a bit from the green messaging. Ford has had to lower fuel-economy ratings on a number of 2013 and 2014 model-year vehicles, namely its hybrids. And that may force the US automaker to rethink some of its marketing strategy, Automotive News reports. Ford has spent much of the year pushing its fuel-efficiency improvements, with everything from a Super Bowl ad saying its Fusion Hybrid gets "almost double" the fuel efficiency of an average vehicle (after the recalculation, it's now more like 75 percent better) to claiming the Fiesta is the most fuel-efficient non-hybrid in the US (it's actually the Mitsubishi Mirage) to stating the C-Max Hybrid gets better fuel economy than the Toyota Prius V (it doesn't). Nonetheless, Ford doesn't plan on changing its mpg marketing emphasis anytime soon, the company said in an e-mailed statement to AutoblogGreen. "Providing customers great fuel economy is a key part of our Ford vehicle DNA." "Providing customers great fuel economy is a key part of our Ford vehicle DNA," the company said. "We will continue to highlight our vehicles features and attributes in our advertising and marketing, which includes fuel economy and fuel-saving technologies like EcoBoost and hybrids." Earlier this month, Ford said it would lower the fuel-economy ratings of models such as the C-Max, Fusion and Lincoln MKZ Hybrids as well as most of the Fiesta line because of mistakes in the company's internal testing data. It was the second change for the C-Max Hybrid. The good news for Ford is that its fleetwide fuel economy is up almost 40 percent from a decade ago, compared to an improvement of around 23 percent for Toyota. Still, while sales of Ford hybrids and plug-ins are about even with last year through the first five months of 2014, C-Max Hybrid sales have plunged 49 percent from a year earlier. Earlier this year, Ford admitted that the first fuel economy downgrade had a negative effect on sales and we can find proof in the numbers. Before that the change was announced, in August 2013, Ford was consistently selling over 2,000 – and sometimes over 3,000 – C-Max Hybrids a month. In September, it dropped to 1,424, then to 1,438 in October. It didn't climb back above 2,000 until May 2014. The second mpg adjustment was announced in June.
U.S. auto sales in April expected to drop despite big discounts
Thu, Apr 26 2018DETROIT — U.S. auto sales in April likely fell nearly 8 percent from the same month in 2017 despite big discounts for consumers, industry consultants J.D. Power and LMC Automotive said on Thursday. For much of the past two years, the discounts offered by automakers have remained at levels that industry analysts say are unsustainable and unhealthy in the long term. April U.S. new vehicle sales will likely be about 1.31 million units, down from 1.42 million units a year earlier, the consultancies said. The forecast was based on the first 17 selling days of April. Automakers, including Ford and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, will release April U.S. sales results on May 1. Earlier this month, No. 1 U.S. automaker General Motors said it will stop reporting monthly U.S. sales because the 30-day snapshot does not accurately reflect the market. GM will instead issue quarterly sales reports. U.S. new vehicle sales fell 2 percent in 2017 to 17.23 million units after hitting a record high in 2016. Sales are expected to drop further in 2018 as interest rates rise and more late-model used cars return to dealer lots to compete with new ones. LMC expects full-year 2018 U.S. new vehicle sales to come in at around 17 million units. "Uncertainty and unfavorable factors appear to be mounting for autos, including a volatile stock market, rising interest rates, rising oil prices and potential trade roadblocks," Jeff Schuster, LMC's head of global vehicle forecasts, said in a statement. The seasonally adjusted annualized rate of sales for April will be 16.6 million vehicles, down more than 2 percent from 17 million units in April 2017, the consultancies said. Retail sales to consumers, excluding lower-margin fleet sales to rental agencies, businesses and government, were set to decline about 9 percent in April. The level of consumer discounts, which can erode profit margins and undercut resale values, "remains the larger concern," the consultancies said. The average discount was $3,698, up $187 from April 2017. Discounts on trucks and SUVs were up $426, but down $226 on passenger cars. Reporting by Nick CareyRelated Video: Image Credit: Reuters Earnings/Financials Chrysler Ford GM JD Power
Ford F-150 extended cab struggles in IIHS small overlap test
Thu, Jul 30 2015Update: Ford issued a statement to Autoblog to clarify the results of the test and dispute the IIHS repair cost estimates. A quote from a Ford representative has been added to the story. See the full statement below the IIHS press release. Of all the vehicles undergoing crash tests this year, few will be as closely watched as the new 2015 Ford F-150. That's not only because it remains the top-selling vehicle in America year after year, but also because it features an aluminum body instead of steel. While the F-150 performed well in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety test, one factor prompted the institute to undertake a second round of testing that uncovered a problem. Like most full-size pickups, the F-150 is available in several cab styles: the regular two-door, the extended SuperCab and the four-door SuperCrew. The IIHS typically takes the most popular version of a particular model for testing, and in the Ford truck's case that meant the SuperCrew. The F-150 performed well in all the tests the IIHS put it through, including the small overlap test in which the vehicle is driven 40 miles per hour into a five-foot-tall barrier impacting the front left corner of the vehicle. Its overall performance in the tests earned the F-150 a Top Safety Pick rating, missing out on the higher Top Safety Pick + rating only because it doesn't have an automatic braking system. But how do the other versions of Ford's best-seller hold up? Given that even less popular versions of the F-150 still sell more than many other vehicles on the market, the IIHS put an extended cab through the same battery of tests. It performed comparably except in one area: the small overlap test. In that case, the extended cab model's steering column was pushed eight inches into the cabin (dangerously close to the crash test dummy's chest), the dummy's head missed the airbag almost entirely and hit the instrument panel, and the dummy's legs would risk sustaining "moderate" injuries. The reason for the disparity is that "Ford added structural elements to the crew cab's front frame to earn a good small overlap rating and a Top Safety Pick award but didn't do the same for the extended cab," according to the Institute's chief research officer David Zuby. "That shortchanges buyers who might pick the extended cab thinking it offers the same protection in this type of crash as the crew cab.

