2014 Ford Focus Titanium on 2040-cars
9555 Kings Auto Mall Rd, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States
Engine:Regular Unleaded I-4 2.0 L/122
Transmission:6-Speed Auto-Shift Manual w/OD
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1FADP3N27EL284571
Stock Num: C140514
Make: Ford
Model: Focus Titanium
Year: 2014
Exterior Color: Sterling Gray Metallic
Interior Color: Charcoal Black
Options: Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 8
Kings Ford The FUTURE of FORD TODAY!
Ford Focus for Sale
2014 ford focus se(US $20,660.00)
2014 ford focus se(US $20,800.00)
2014 ford focus se(US $22,110.00)
2014 ford focus se(US $20,300.00)
2014 ford focus se(US $21,055.00)
2014 ford focus titanium(US $27,690.00)
Auto Services in Ohio
Xenia Radiator & Auto Service ★★★★★
West Main Auto Repair ★★★★★
Top Knotch Automotive ★★★★★
Tom Hatem Automotive ★★★★★
Stanford Allen Chevrolet Cadillac ★★★★★
Soft Touch Car Wash Systems ★★★★★
Auto blog
Jaguar design boss admits X-Type was a mistake
Thu, 19 Sep 2013History has a way of repeating itself, especially in the auto industry. When Jaguar was owned by Ford, the British brand attempted to field a competitor for the BMW 3 Series, called the X-Type. Based on the bones of a Ford Mondeo, it aped the styling of Jaguar's flagship model, the XJ, while borrowing liberally from the Ford parts bin. That was 2001.
Now, in 2013, Jaguar is planning a new 3 Series challenger based on the platform previewed by the C-X17 Concept, while Ford is attempting to take the latest Mondeo upmarket. The moves have both brands recognizing where, why, and how the X-Type failed. "It didn't look mature or powerful or anything. It was just a car," Jaguar's current head of advanced design, Julian Thomson, told PistonHeads. Basing the X-Type on a front-drive car while giving it styling that was meant for a rear-driver lead to proportions that "were plainly wrong," Thomson told PH. Ford's European head of quality, Gunnar Herrmann, added that the X-Type was "a fake Jaguar, because every piece I touch is Ford."
For what it's worth, the X-Type's successor in the segment will sport rear-drive, with plenty of input from Ian Callum. Thomson described the new model, which would challenge the 3 Series as having, "Big wheels right to the ends of the car, low bonnet, short overhangs, very low cabins." Sounds good to us.
Ford Edge Concept previews new look, can park itself remotely
Wed, 20 Nov 2013It turns out the image we saw back in February did, in fact, reveal the next-generation Ford Edge - at least in concept form. We still have to wait to see what the design will look like in production guise, but until then, Ford is giving us a good idea thanks to the Edge Concept being introduced at the LA Auto Show.
The new styling is an evolution of the current crossover's face with narrow headlights and a prominently slatted grille, while the rest of the design adds a more dynamic appearance with interesting body creases and horizontal taillights. We haven't gotten a look inside the Edge Concept just yet, but Ford is promising a suite of advanced driver-assist technologies including a new self-park system that allows activation from inside or outside the vehicle along with obstacle avoidance and an adaptive electric power steering system.
Ford will continue to offer an EcoBoost engine option in the upcoming Edge, and it will get active grille shutters to help maximize fuel efficiency. No word yet on when we'll be seeing the next-gen Edge in production form, but as we reported recently, it will become a global model in markets including Europe, China and South America. Ford's press release is posted below, but we'll have more information and images up later today.
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.