2011 Ford Taurus Limited 'no Reserve' Fusion Flex 300 200 Impala Malibu Charger on 2040-cars
Cleveland, Ohio, United States
|
Ford Taurus for Sale
2013 black sho!$47,300 window sticker*loaded*1 owner*2500 miles*perfect*save $$$(US $34,900.00)
1999 ford taurus 4d used no reserve
2007 ford taurus se loaded highway miles runs great easy on gas no reserve
1999 ford taurus doch(US $1,800.00)
2013 taurus sho.no reserve.leather/navi/heat/cool/self-park/camera/20's/perf pkg
2006 ford taurus sel,loaded,cd,great running car,no reserve!!!
Auto Services in Ohio
Walt`s Auto Inc ★★★★★
Verity Auto & Cycle Repair ★★★★★
Vaughn`s Auto Svc ★★★★★
Truechoice ★★★★★
The Mobile Mechanic of Cleveland ★★★★★
The Car Guy ★★★★★
Auto blog
Weekly Recap: Auto execs face life in prison for recall delays under proposed legislation
Sat, 09 Aug 2014
The stiff punishments are part of broader transportation legislation, but clearly McCaskill has automakers in her sights.
Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill threw down the gauntlet this week, proposing a bill that could send auto executives to prison for life if they were found to have delayed a recall. She also wants to eliminate the limit for fines for auto safety violations, which are currently capped at $35 million.
Ford hit by lawsuit over hybrid technology from, surprise, Paice
Fri, Feb 28 2014The name Paice will be familiar to anyone who's been deep in the weeds of hybrid history, but it will probably be new to anyone who simply drives one. The key part of the story is something called "HyperDrive," which is the name given to a gas-electric powertrain technology developed by Alex Severinsky and patented in 1994. HyperDrive is a way to get the energy from both the electric battery and the engine into the wheels, seamlessly. The patents are held by Paice, which is an unusual company (its HQ is a house in a retirement community, right by a golf course) that does nothing but litigate. You can read more on Paice here. The latest case targets Ford and the hybrid and plug-in versions of the C-Max and Fusion models as well as the Lincoln MKZ. Paice claims that it held "over 100 meetings and interactions with Ford" between 1999 and 2004, and gave the automaker, "detailed information about the hybrid technology that Paice had developed." The suit also alleges that: For more than five years, Paice answered inquiries from multiple departments within Ford, believing in good faith that a business relationship between Paice and Ford would be mutually beneficial and advance the acceptance of Paice's technology. ... After years of Ford learning the details of Paice's hybrid drivetrain technology, Ford elected not to enter into a business relationship with Paice. The suit is officially known as, "Paice LLC v. The Ford Motor Co., 14-492, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (Baltimore)" and you can read the PDF here. Ford told AutoblogGreen, "we do not comment on pending litigation." Toyota settled a similar patent-infringement case in 2010 and now pays Paice almost $100 for every hybrid it sells. Paice is still in court against Hyundai and Kia. In 2010, Ford also settled with Paice but they agreed to keep negotiating on other issues until at least January 1, 2014. With that date now in the past, it didn't take long for Paice to file papers to get the two sides back before a judge. That's where it appears to be most comfortable.
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.