2001 Ford F-250 Extended Cab 4x4 V10 Gasoline Black on 2040-cars
Columbia, Missouri, United States
Body Type:Truck
Engine:6.8L
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Interior Color: Medium Graphite Cloth
Make: Ford
Number of Cylinders: 10
Model: F-250
Trim: XLT
Drive Type: Four Wheel Drive
Mileage: 158822
Exterior Color: Black - (Black)
Ford F-250 for Sale
Calif truck factory 4x4 high boy daily driver 360 engine 4 speed nice condtion
2012 ford f-250 v8 6.7 diesel turbo
4x4 7.3 liter powerstroke diesel ext cab only 60,945 miles wont last l@@k!!!!!!!(US $21,900.00)
2006 ford f-250 super duty xl extended cab pickup 4-door 6.0l
2009 ford f-250 super duty lariat excelent conditon, manual 6 speed transmission(US $23,499.00)
2002 ford f-250 super duty xlt crew cab pickup 4-door 7.3l powerstroke!
Auto Services in Missouri
Wyatt`s Garage ★★★★★
Woodlawn Tire & Auto Center ★★★★★
West County Auto Body Repair ★★★★★
Tiger Towing ★★★★★
Straatmann Toyota ★★★★★
Scott`s Auto Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ken Block shows us around his Ford F-150 RaptorTrax
Thu, Jan 22 2015From his Fiesta HFHV to his '65 Mustang Hoonicorn, the inimitable Ken Block has some awesome machinery at his disposal. But arguably the coolest of the bunch is the RaptorTrax. Based on the previous-gen Ford F-150 SVT Raptor - the one with the steel frame and V8 engine - Block's back country snowmobile on steroids packs a set of tracks at each corner, a full roll cage, equipment rack, lighting, jump seats, survival gear... everything he could need for a trip off road. The Gymkhana master showcased the beast a couple of months ago on the slopes of Baldface in Nelson, BC, but now he's followed up with a less eye-popping but more informative clip in which he shows us everything his RaptorTrax has to offer. Related Video:
For EV drivers, realities may dampen the electric elation
Mon, Feb 20 2023The Atlantic, a decades-old monthly journal well-regarded for its intelligent essays on international news, American politics and cultural happenings, recently turned its attention to the car world. A piece that ran in The Atlantic in October examined the excesses of the GMC Hummer EV for compromising safety. And now in its latest edition, the magazine ran a compelling story about the challenges of driving an electric vehicle and how those experiences “mythologize the car as the great equalizer.” Titled “The Inconvenient Truth About Electric Vehicles,” the story addresses the economics of EVs, the stresses related to range anxiety, the social effects of owning an electric car — as in, affording one — and the overarching need for places to recharge that car. Basically, author Andrew Moseman says that EV life isn't so rosy: “On the eve of the long-promised electric-vehicle revolution, the myth is due for an update. Americans who take the plunge and buy their first EV will find a lot to love Â… they may also find that electric-vehicle ownership upends notions about driving, cost, and freedom, including how much car your money can buy. "No one spends an extra $5,000 to get a bigger gas tank in a Honda Civic, but with an EV, economic status is suddenly more connected to how much of the world you get to see — and how stressed out or annoyed youÂ’ll feel along the way.” Moseman charts how a basic Ford F-150 Lightning electric truck might start at $55,000, but an extended-range battery, which stretches the distance on a charge from 230 miles to 320, “raises the cost to at least $80,000. The trend holds true with all-electric brands such as Tesla, Rivian, and Lucid, and for many electric offerings from legacy automakers. The bigger battery option can add a four- or five-figure bump to an already accelerating sticker price.” As for the charging issue, the author details his anxiety driving a Telsa in Death Valley, with no charging stations in sight. “For those who never leave the comfort of the city, these concerns sound negligible," he says. "But so many of us want our cars to do everything, go everywhere, ferry us to the boundless life we imagine (or the one weÂ’re promised in car commercials),” he writes. His conclusions may raise some hackles among those of us who value automotive independence — not to mention fun — over practicalities.
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.