2013 Ford Taurus Limited (14k) Loaded! on 2040-cars
Waverly, Nebraska, United States
I bought this car brand new in January of 2013.
It is loaded with nothing wrong with it. The reason I am selling it is because I need to get into an SUV or truck that is able to tow. It has had all of the protection plans installed from the dealer possible. It is a nice reliable car with factory warranty still |
Ford Taurus for Sale
- 2014 fordtaurus limited/heated-cooled leather/camera/rear sensor/navi/sync/clean
- 13 ford taurus 4dr sdn sel fwd heated leather seeats remote start
- 13 limited used 3.5 v6 remote start heated/cooled leather sync sony audio
- 1991 ford taurus sho sedan 4-door 3.0l
- 2013 ford taurus sel awd black(US $18,900.00)
- 2010 taurus sho excellent condition
Auto Services in Nebraska
Sid Dillon Hyundai ★★★★★
Orscheln Farm & Home ★★★★★
Langel Auto Sales Inc ★★★★★
Caseys Aircraft Detailing ★★★★★
A To Z Auto Glass ★★★★★
Safelite AutoGlass ★★★★
Auto blog
We spy the Ford Mustang King Cobra early at SEMA
Tue, 04 Nov 2014As is the case with most auto shows, waiting for the reveal of hot new models is the worst part. So, while our own Drew Phillips has been wandering the halls here in Las Vegas since they unlocked the doors for SEMA 2014, we didn't expect him to come back with any big reveals until later in the day. Until this happened.
Meandering by the Ford stand, Phillips eagle-eyed a trunk lid that caught his attention. Popping out from an otherwise draped 2015 Mustang, the matte black lid clearly has the name King Cobra embossed on the rear.
That name is interesting for a few reasons: to start, Ford hasn't used the Cobra name (without "Jet" attached) since way back in 2004, so a new snake is certainly something to take note of. Second, the King Cobra name dates all the way back to the ill-remembered Mustang II, meaning there is a clear link to Blue Oval history here.
American automakers fall in latest Fortune 500 rankings
Fri, 10 May 2013Not that it means anything beyond bragging rights, but if you're fixated on the positions of domestic automakers on the annual Fortune 500 list, both General Motors and Ford are still on it but they've slipped a couple of notches. The list ranks American companies and they're ordered solely by revenue. GM, fifth last year, came in seventh, while Ford fell from ninth to tenth even though both companies saw small gains in annual revenue.
GM's $152.3 billion in revenue was less than a third of that of the first company on the list: Wal-Mart, which regained the title from Exxon Mobil. Berkshire Hathaway and Apple are the firms that moved GM down. Ford, displaced by energy company Valero, had $134.3 billion in revenue.
On a side note, profitability isn't a factor, but both GM and Ford were down in this year's list compared to last year's: GM declined from $9.2 billion to $6.2 billion, Ford fell from $20.2 billion to $5.6 billion. If profits were included, Exxon Mobil would probably still be king: although the energy company made almost $20 billion less in revenue than Wal-Mart's $469.2 billion, it posted $44.9 billion in profit compared to Wal-Mart's $17 billion.
Ford faces class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles without brake override systems
Fri, 29 Mar 2013A total of 20 Ford customers are suing the automaker in a class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles "vulnerable to unintended acceleration." According to Reuters, the suit names 30 models built between 2002 and 2010 with electronic throttle control systems but without a brake override system. Those include the 2004-2012 F-Series pickups and the 2005-2009 Lincoln Town Car. Adam Levitt, a partner with the law firm of Grant & Eisenhofer says the plaintiffs in the case want "to be compensated for their economic losses by having overpaid for cars that contained defects." Levitt contends that the plaintiffs would not have bought their vehicles or paid less for them had they known there was no brake override system in place.
Ford began installing brake override systems in its vehicles beginning in 2010. In response to the lawsuit, Ford has pointed to research by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that indicated that unintended acceleration is mostly caused by driver error, saying in a statement that, "NHTSA's work is far more scientific and trustworthy than work done by personal injury lawyers and their paid experts."
Belville et al v. Ford Motor Co. will be heard in US District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia.