Snow Plow - 4x4 - Powerstroke Turbo Diesel - Low Miles - No Reserve on 2040-cars
Waterbury, Connecticut, United States
Body Type:Pickup Truck
Engine:6.0
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Diesel
For Sale By:Dealer
Used
Make: Ford
Model: F-350
Year: 2007
Cab Type (For Trucks Only): Regular Cab
Trim: XLT
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Drive Type: 4x4
Options: Cassette Player, 4-Wheel Drive, CD Player
Mileage: 84,570
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Sub Model: F-350 Snow Plow
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Exterior Color: Red
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Cylinders: 8
Ford F-350 for Sale
Lariat, drw, fx4, tow pkg., gooseneck, adj rear airbags, 6.0 td auto
Ford crew cab 4x4 king ranch powerstroke diesel navigation sunroof leather auto
06 f-350 lariat powerstroke diesel truck 4wd crew cab leather sunroof tow packag
1997 ford f350 7.3l powerstroke turbo diesel lifted manual transmission(US $13,500.00)
2004 ford f350 xlt extentded cab 4 dr 8ft bed 4x4 looks/runs great no reserve
1999 ford f-350
Auto Services in Connecticut
Wrb Auto Sales ★★★★★
Windsor Wheels ★★★★★
Turnpike Tire & Auto Service ★★★★★
Toyota Motor Sales ★★★★★
Tire Clinic Plus ★★★★★
Superior Transmission Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
The biggest gas-guzzlers of 2024: 'The Meanest List' is the opposite of greenest cars
Thu, Mar 14 2024In some circles — especially some automotive circles — bigger is better. This explains the Hummer, for example. In its so-called “Meanest List” of a dozen models, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) makes no apologies for berating “the worst-performing mass market automobiles” sold in 2024 in the U.S. The most diminutive car on the list is a Chevy Corvette Z06. At the top of this particular heap is the Mercedes-Benz AMG G63, a gas-powered SUV that the environmental agency says was “the worst-performing vehicle of the more than 1,200 models assessed by Greener Cars and has an annual fuel cost over $4,000.” Not to mention its MSRP of around $184,000. Rank Make & Model Powertrain Green Score MSRP Estimated Annual Fuel Cost* 1 Mercedes-Benz AMG G63 Gas 20 $184,000 $4,242 2 Ram 1500 TRX 4x4 Gas 22 $98,335 $3,819 3 Ford F150 Raptor R Gas 24 $79,975 $3,777 4 Cadillac Escalade V Gas 26 $152,295 $3,388 5 Dodge Durango SRT Gas 26 $74,995 $3,332 6 Jeep Wrangler 4dr 4X4 Gas 27 $35,895 $3,260 7 Jeep Grand Wagoneer 4x4 Gas 28 $91,945 $3,058 8 Mercedes-Benz G550 Gas 28 $143,000 $3,186 9 GMC Hummer EV SUV EV 29 $98,845 $1,746 10 GMC Sierra Gas 29 $37,700 $3,069 11 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Gas 30 $114,395 $3,169 12 Mercedes-Benz Maybach S680 Gas 30 $234,300 $3,031 *ACEEE analysis using EIA data of the annual cost of driving 15,000 miles In terms of numbers, the dirty dozen of the meanest includes seven SUVs and three trucks. Lonely at the middle of the list is the sole electric, the GMC Hummer EV, which weighs in at 9,000 pounds. The council notes that “though EVs have lower emissions than similarly sized gasoline models, the Hummer demonstrates that size and efficiency, not just fuel source, are important factors in a carÂ’s environmental impact.” ItÂ’s also worth reminding prospective buyers that the average fuel cost of a vehicle on the “Greenest List” eats up only a fifth of the fuel cost of a vehicle on the Meanest List, “showing that greener options can also be more affordable.” The ACEEE also put out a "Greener List" of efficient gasoline and hybrid cars that don't require plugging in. By the Numbers Green Cadillac Chevrolet Dodge Ford GMC Hummer Jeep Maybach Mercedes-Benz RAM Emissions Fuel Efficiency Green Automakers Truck SUV Electric Hybrid
2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise
Mon, Jan 2 2017About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.
Ford opens the doors on its Swedish rally skunkworks
Fri, 19 Sep 2014It's always amazing to see how different kinds of racecars are made. Formula One racers are often constructed in modern architectural marvels that hint at some of the cutting-edge technology going into the racing. Conversely, rallying is all about sliding around on a varied course as fast as possible, but it often leaves a vehicle caked in mud. So it makes some sense Olsbergs MSE, or simply (OMSE) rally car shop in Nynashamn, Sweden, shows technological sophistication in a more down-to-earth setting. It builds Ford Fiesta ST racers for Global Rallycross there, and this new video gives viewers a tour through the work.
Former rally driver Andreas Eriksson runs OMSE. These days instead of racing, he and the company's 46 employees are building Ford racers from scratch. A ton of work goes into constructing each one, and according to Eriksson, it takes 400 hours to complete each body. At times, things are so busy that some of the technicians live in the shop in apartments that are on premises. There's even a restaurant to keep them fed. Sadly the dyno room is empty during this visit, though.
By the time OMSE is done, a rallycross car might resemble a Fiesta ST on the outside, but as you see in the video, it's a completely different beast underneath. Check out the work it takes to build one of them, and scroll down to read more about it in the official release.
2040Cars.com © 2012-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.049 s, 7882 u