2014 Ford F250 on 2040-cars
1300 US Highway 31 S., Greenwood, Indiana, United States
Engine:6.7L V8 32V DDI OHV Turbo Diesel
Transmission:6-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1FT7W2BTXEEA46753
Stock Num: 41576
Make: Ford
Model: F250
Year: 2014
Options: Drive Type: 4WD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Please call 888-795-5835 and ask to speak with the Internet Sales Department for the BEST SERVICE!!!
Ford F-250 for Sale
2014 ford f250(US $66,600.00)
2014 ford f250(US $67,065.00)
2014 ford f250(US $67,664.00)
2015 ford f250(US $67,765.00)
2015 ford f250 super duty(US $53,230.00)
2014 ford f250(US $67,195.00)
Auto Services in Indiana
western metals ★★★★★
Webb Ford Inc ★★★★★
Weatherford Auto & Truck Service ★★★★★
Watson Automotive ★★★★★
Wagner`s Auto Service ★★★★★
Tom O`Brien Chrysler Jeep Dodge -Greenwood ★★★★★
Auto blog
Bonhams to auction Carroll Shelby's prototypes and personal cars
Fri, Apr 6 2018Fans of Carroll Shelby will want to make their way to Greenwich, Conn., this June, because Bonhams will be selling a great many cars from the man's personal collection. And many of them are the first of their kind, marking important milestones in Shelby's career. One of those important cars is a 1982 Dodge Charger prototype, which might not look as impressive as a Cobra, but it was important in that it was the first car on which Shelby collaborated with Chrysler. That car led to the first Shelby Charger, as well as other special small Chryslers including the GLH Omnis and Chargers (GLH standing for "Goes Like Hell"). In fact, the first Charger GLH-S (Goes Like Hell S'more) is also part of this collection. There are even some prototypes up for auction that never resulted in a production car, such as a Shelby modified Dodge Ram. That one is probably our favorite: the gold ram hood ornament, the huge pentastar in the grille, the double-barrel truck horn on the roof. It's wonderful nonsense. Of course it isn't just Chryslers going up for sale. There are a couple of GT500 and GT350 Mustangs in the mix from a variety of years. Perhaps most interesting is the very first Shelby Series I, Shelby's ill-fated roadster designed from the ground-up by the Texan's company. Unlike the other early Series I models, Shelby's had a supercharger, which led to a supercharger option being offered later. You can check out the full list of cars below, and pictures of each one in the gallery at the top. The auction will happen on June 3, and every vehicle offered has no reserve, so they'll all be sold for whatever price is shown at the drop of the gavel. 1927 Ford Model T 1931 Ford Model A 1935 Chrysler Airflow Sedan 1955 DeSoto Hard Top 1966 Shelby GT350 Convertible 1967 Lincoln Continental Convertible 1968 Shelby GT350 1969 Shelby GT 500 previously owned by Jackie Cooper Jr. 1969 Shelby GT 500 1982 Shelby Charger Prototype 1983 De Tomaso Pantera 1983 Dodge/Shelby Pickup Concept 1987 DeTomaso GT5-S 1987 Dodge CSX Serial #1 1987 Shelby Charger GLH-S Serial #1 1987 Dodge Shelby Lancer Serial #1 1988 Dodge Shelby Dakota Prototype 1989 Dodge CSX VNT Serial #1 1965 Shelby Cobra 427 Continuation 1999 Shelby Series 1 Serial #1 2008 Shelby GT 500 KR 2011 Shelby GT 500 Super Snake Aurora Race Car Related Video: Featured Gallery Shelby Collection View 72 Photos Image Credit: Bonhams Chrysler Dodge Ford Auctions Performance Classics shelby
Top horsepower-per-dollar cars in 2017
Tue, Feb 17 2015Bang for the buck. That quasi-scientific statistic is bandied about by motor heads everywhere from classrooms to barrooms, though the truth of the matter is that it's exceedingly complex to measure. A fair performance-per-dollar index would include something like cross-referencing MSRP (Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price) with point-to-point times on a track or driving route, which is obviously hard to do comprehensively. But, for the sheer joy of talking about cars and playing with a big spreadsheet, there's always the horsepower-per-dollar index, which is more straightforward, albeit hilariously flawed. There are vagaries even with this simple formula, of course: MSRP for vehicles can change at a moment's notice, to say nothing of the bottom-line shifting that happens with local deals or showroom negotiation. For this list we're running with the straight MSRP wherever possible, and as recently reported as we can get it. All the vehicles on this list are 2017 models, and all trims are reported where the lowest price and differing power levels intersect. Some choices were made for personal preference and some for sanity, avoiding things like all 48 trim levels of the Ford Transit, all with the same horsepower). If this list were a simple top ten, or even a top fifty, you'd be bored to tears with all the red, white and blue that is represented. Following perfectly with conventional wisdom, American cars really do lead the world where hp/$ is concerned. So, for the sake of variety (and the sheer joy of seeing a minivan 'win' one round of this thing) I've sorted out some top five and bottom five lists for broad power categories. Let's dive in. Less Than 100 Horsepower Okay, okay, this is hardly a category we'll grant you. But we've often tried to click off all the sub-100-hp cars on sale in the US, and making this list gave us an excuse. It also illustrates that none of these smallish vehicles bring cheap horsepower to the table - for that you'll need a motorcycle. The segment-leading Chevy Spark (above) asks just over $139 for each hp, and that Smart Fortwo Electric Drive has hp on sale for about the same price as its very distant family cousin, the Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG (insert your favorite Smart joke here... we know you want to).
After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality
Fri, Jan 3 2014Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.





























