Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

3rd Row, V6, Cd Changer, Alloy Wheels, Power Driver Seat, Roof Rack. Trades? on 2040-cars

US $3,995.00
Year:2005 Mileage:167406 Color: Windveil Blue Metallic
Location:

Raleigh, North Carolina, United States

Raleigh, North Carolina, United States
Advertising:

Auto Services in North Carolina

Whitey`s German Automotive ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Machine Shops
Address: 6042 Asheville Hwy, Horseshoe
Phone: (828) 684-0684

Transmission Center ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Auto Transmission
Address: 1309 Cotton Grove Rd Ste D, Salisbury
Phone: (336) 249-8769

Tow-N-Go LLC ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automotive Roadside Service, Towing
Address: Proctorville
Phone: (910) 286-3745

Terry Labonte Chevrolet ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, New Car Dealers, Automobile Parts & Supplies
Address: 1401 Bridford Pkwy, High-Point
Phone: (888) 440-1432

Sun City Automotive ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Brake Repair, Tire Changing Equipment
Address: 409 Featherson Rd, Wesley-Chapel
Phone: (803) 548-3227

Show & Pro Paint & Body ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 1779 Bingham Dr, Pope-Afb
Phone: (910) 423-2963

Auto blog

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

Thu, Jan 8 2015

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.

Ford partnering with MIT, Stanford on autonomous vehicle research

Fri, 24 Jan 2014

Ask any car engineer what's the biggest variable in achieving fuel economy targets, and he'll tell you "the driver." If one human can't understand human driving behavior enough to be certain about an innocuous number like miles per gallon, how is an autonomous car supposed to figure out what hundreds of other drivers are going to do in the course of a day? Ford has enlisted the help of Stanford and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to find out.
Starting with the automated Fusion Hybrid introduced in December, MIT will be developing algorithms that driverless cars can use to "predict actions of other vehicles and pedestrians" and objects within the three-dimensional map provided by its four LIDAR sensors.
The Stanford team will research how to extend the 'vision' of that LIDAR array beyond obstructions while driving, analogous to the way a driver uses the entire width of a lane to see what's ahead of a larger vehicle in front. Ford says it wants to "provide the vehicle with common sense" as part of its Blueprint for Mobility, preparing for an autonomous world from 2025 and beyond.

NHTSA investigating Ford's solution to May 2014 power steering recall

Tue, Apr 7 2015

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating a complaint that Ford's response to a May 2014 recall of the 2008 to 2011 Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner doesn't quite go far enough to solve a troubling power-steering problem. Roughly a year ago, Ford recalled nearly a million vehicles after it was found that a problem with the torque sensor's communication with the power steering control module could cut steering assistance for drivers. While manual steering would still be available, the problem was enough to ask drivers to report in to have the PSCM inspected, and if necessary, replaced (along with the torque sensor, or in dramatic cases, the entire steering column). That would only happen, though, if trouble codes were being thrown. If there weren't any problems, dealers were told to simply update the PSCM's software so that any issues between it and the torque sensor would simply throw a visual and audio warning – power steering would still be maintained. The petitioner claimed that following the recall work, he still experienced a problem with the torque sensor. According to NHTSA, a claim was made that Ford didn't go far enough in its solution to the problem, and that "the software update itself may in fact cause further issues with the affected vehicle's power steering, causing it to fail, and ultimately requiring replacement of the torque sensor or entire steering column." The petition was filed in early February and is now officially being looked into by NHTSA.