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

2002 Ford F350 7.3 Powerstroke Diesel Clean Service Bed on 2040-cars

Year:2002 Mileage:234222 Color: Silver
Location:

Greenville, Texas, United States

Greenville, Texas, United States
Transmission:Manual
Engine:7.3 powerstroke
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Diesel
VIN: 1FDSX34F12EA41176 Year: 2002
Exterior Color: Silver
Make: Ford
Number of Cylinders: 8
Model: F-350
Trim: XLT
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Drive Type: RWD
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control
Mileage: 234,222
Condition: Used: A vehicle is considered used if it has been registered and issued a title. Used vehicles have had at least one previous owner. The condition of the exterior, interior and engine can vary depending on the vehicle's history. See the seller's listing for full details and description of any imperfections. ... 

Auto Services in Texas

WorldPac ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Parts, Supplies & Accessories-Wholesale & Manufacturers
Address: 2100 Handley Ederville Rd, Euless
Phone: (817) 590-8332

VICTORY AUTO BODY ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Automobile Parts & Supplies
Address: 3841 Apollo Rd, Portland
Phone: (361) 334-5775

US 90 Motors ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers, Wholesale Used Car Dealers
Address: 641 W Old US Highway 90, Balcones-Heights
Phone: (210) 438-9090

Unlimited PowerSports Inc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Storage, Boat Storage
Address: 12024 W Highway 290, Bula
Phone: (512) 894-4792

Twist`d Steel Paint and Body, LLC ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 457A W Hufsmith Rd, Jersey-Village
Phone: (281) 640-1273

Transco Transmission ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Auto Transmission Parts
Address: 2109 Avenue H, Fulshear
Phone: (281) 342-8772

Auto blog

Detroit 3 to implement delayed unified towing standards for 2015

Tue, Feb 11 2014

Car buyers have a responsibility to be well-informed consumers. That's not always a very simple task, but some guidelines are self-evident. If you live in a very snowy climate, you generally know a Ford Mustang or Chevrolet Camaro might not be as viable a vehicle choice as an all-wheel drive Explorer or Traverse, for example. If you want a fuel-efficient car, it's generally a good idea to know the difference between a diesel and a hybrid. But what if it's kind of tough to be an informed consumer? What if the information you need is more difficult to come by, or worse, based on different standards for each vehicle? Well, in that case, you might be a truck shopper. For years, customers of light-duty pickups have had to suffer through different ratings of towing capacities for each brand. For 2015 model year trucks, though, that will no longer be a problem. According to Automotive News, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler Group have announced that starting with next year's models, a common standard will be used to measure towing capacity. The Detroit Three will join Toyota, which adopted the Society of Automotive Engineers' so-called SAE J2807 standards way back in 2011. The standard was originally supposed to be in place for MY2013, but concerns that it would lower the overall stated capacity for trucks led Detroit automakers to pass. Ford originally passed, claiming it'd wait until its new F-150 was launched to adopt the new standards, leading GM and Ram to follow suit. Nissan, meanwhile, has said it will adopt the new standards as its vehicles are updated, meaning the company's next-generation Titan should adhere to the same tow ratings as its competitors. While the adoption of SAE J2807 will be helpful for light-duty customers, those interested in bigger trucks will still be left with differing standards. There is no sign of the new tow standards being adopted for the heavy-duty market.

Formula Drift kicks off 11th season on Streets of Long Beach

Tue, 08 Apr 2014

The 2014 Formula Drift series kicked off last weekend in Long Beach, and saw Chris Forsberg, who you'll recall went mad and drifted around a warehouse in an Infiniti M, take the title behind the wheel of his Hankook Tire Nissan 370Z (shown above).
Forsberg really ran away with the first round of competition, outscoring his closest opponent, second-place finisher Kenneth Moen and his Bridges Racing Nissan 240SX, by 20 points. Third place was 2013 championship winner Michael Essa and his Yokohama BMW M3, 30.5 points behind Forsberg.
In the manufacturers' title, Nissan took an early lead with 122 points, which isn't a huge surprise considering five of the top ten drifters were piloting either a Z or a product of the brand's S platform. Ford, which had two drivers (Justin Pawlak and Vaughn Gittin, Jr.) in the top ten, took home second place, while BMW is currently third in the manufacturers' standings.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

Tue, Jun 17 2014

It'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.