Ford Ranger Xlt Super Cab With Oversize Cover on 2040-cars
Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, United States
This truck was used in our company to clean carpets in our cleaning firm. It was kept clean and maintenance was kept when required. We purchase this truck in January 2008 and it was only used for local carpet cleaning. We are looking for a Van at this time to add to our fleet. It is in very good shape with the exception of the driver rear panel. See pictures. The letters were removed and the truck was buffed out. Some decals can be seen on the cover of the truck. The truck has lot of years left. It blows very cold air and the heat works just fine. No other problems with the truck. It has three sets of keys. Two sets have some trouble getting into the driver side. These were the extra keys that were made and all three keys work with the ignition. The top cover of this truck is over size. This is a customer cap and would cost at least $2,000.00 or more new. Please call if you have any questions about the truck at 724-624-1254. Or just email me. Thanks for looking. |
Ford Ranger for Sale
1999 ford ranger xlt (31044b) ~ absolute sale ~ no reserve ~
2006 ford ranger super cab v-6 auto sport only 7,000 miles!(US $9,800.00)
Nice clean fleet lease from southern utility company! save thou$and$!! 3.0 auto(US $5,490.00)
2002 ford ranger edge extended cab pickup 4-door 4.0l
Ford ranger xl 4 cyl 5 speeed 107k miles bad timing belt good truck great price(US $2,100.00)
2000 ford ranger mint condition(US $4,000.00)
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Yardy`s Auto Body ★★★★★
Xtreme Auto Collision ★★★★★
Warwick Auto Park ★★★★★
Walter`s General Repair ★★★★★
Tire Consultants Inc ★★★★★
Tim`s Auto ★★★★★
Auto blog
We compare 2021 Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport specifications to their ritzy Land Rover competiton
Tue, Jul 14 2020The 2021 Bronco and Bronco Sport are the spearheads for Ford's new 4x4 sub-brand, with the former taking the fight directly to the Jeep Wrangler and the latter providing Ford with a more rugged alternative to the Escape. We've already looked at how the new Bronco and Bronco Sport compare to their mainstream competition, but we'd like to see how the Bronco stacks up to another hotly anticipated returning nameplate: the Land Rover Defender. Not to leave its little sibling in the cold, I decided to browse Land Rover's lineup and see what might be a suitable counterpoint to the Bronco Sport. For better or worse, I found an almost-perfect fit in the Range Rover Evoque. So, how do these new American 4x4s compare to the Old Country's more-expensive alternatives? Let's dig in, starting with the big boys. As you might expect from the Bronco's robust credentials, it holds its own here against the more-expensive Brit. The Defender's higher price point brings along a good bit of power advantage with both engines, but that's to be expected. The Defender also has that trick adjustable-height suspension that the Bronco lacks, giving it an edge in practicality, and it can also tow quite a bit more. On the flip side, there are quite a few advantages to going with the Ford, including a greater number of choices in terms of powertrain. The available manual transmission on four-cylinder Broncos is a nice bonus, for instance, as is the option of getting either the base 2.3-liter or the optional 2.7-liter engine with either wheelbase. The Defender is a bit more restrictive in this regard offering only the inline-six on the short-wheelbase model. As an added bonus, the Bronco is a convertible. That may not necessarily be a "plus" for all shoppers, but it's certainly an added bit of versatility (and potential appeal) the Defender lacks. And of course, the Bronco can be had for as little as $30,000, whereas the Land Rover starts at $50,000. Now, on to the less-rugged siblings. The specs here are actually a little tighter in most respects, but the powertrain story is almost identical. The Evoque checks in where the Bronco Sport tops out, and the Range Rover gets an optional high-output variant of the 2.0-liter turbocharged four.
Ford also working on 200-mile EV to compete with Bolt, Model 3
Fri, Mar 6 2015The Chevrolet Bolt is on a lot of people's radars. You may have even noticed friends and colleagues who harbor very little interest in the automotive world, or anything labeled as "green," who have taken notice of a 200-mile electric vehicle coming out of Detroit. Mass appeal is the idea, after all. You can include Ford in the list of interested parties, in this case with the intention of taking direct aim at the Bolt – and, by proxy, the Tesla Model 3 – with an affordable, long-range EV of its own. Ford will unveil its own long-range EV, positioned to compete with Chevrolet, later this year, according to Automobile. Details are very scarce about Ford's plans, but we do know that the Bolt (or whatever the Chevy all-electric hatchback will end up being called) is expected to offer over 200 miles of driving between charges, with a sticker price around $30,000. The other major player, of course, is Tesla's smaller, more affordable sibling to the Model S. The Model 3, also slated to go on sale in 2017, should cost less than $40,000. While Tesla has established itself in the EV world, another long-range EV out of Detroit would win some customers from the California-based startup. For now, though, we'll just have to wait, as Ford remains tight-lipped about its plans for the car. Automobile predicts a possible unveiling at the Los Angeles Auto Show in November, what with California's EV mandate being a driver of strategy for various automakers. Most can agree, though, that a larger field of options – while not ideal for backers of the Bolt or Model 3 – will only benefit the car-buying public. Related Video: Featured Gallery Chevrolet Bolt EV Concept: Detroit 2015 Related Gallery Chevrolet Bolt EV Concept News Source: AutomobileImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Sebastian Blanco / AOL Green Rumormill Chevrolet Ford Tesla Electric Future Vehicles Chevy Bolt ford ev
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.