1999 Ford Windstar Lx Mini Passenger Van 3-door 3.0l on 2040-cars
Bristol, Tennessee, United States
Engine:3.0L 182Cu. In. V6 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Vehicle Title:Clear
Body Type:Mini Passenger Van
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Private Seller
Sub Model: LX
Make: Ford
Exterior Color: White
Model: Windstar
Interior Color: Gray
Trim: LX Mini Passenger Van 3-Door
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Drive Type: FWD
Number of Cylinders: 6
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Power Locks, Power Windows
Mileage: 81,953
YOU ARE BIDDING ON A
1999 FORD WINDSTAR WITH LOW MILES
2 BENCH SEATS
PAINT FAIR
CHIPS AND SURFACE SCRATCHES
INTERIOR IN GOOD CONDITION
COULD USE A DETAILED CLEANING
VEHICLE HAS LOW MILES AND RUNS WELL
HAS NEW BATTERY
GOOD TIRES
FOR THE YEAR~~~VAN IS IN GOOD SHAPE
PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS
Ford Windstar for Sale
- 2002' ford windstar sel passenger van, v6, 3.8 l, auto, 4 dr, runs excellent(US $3,850.00)
- 1998 ford windstar gl mini van 3-door 3.8l
- 2003 ford windstar se mini passenger van 4-door 3.8l ohv efi engine
- '98 ford windstar gl minivan, one owner, 3.8l v6, automatic, no reserve
- 2002 ford windstar limited mini passenger van 4-door 3.8l limeted adition(US $2,400.00)
Auto Services in Tennessee
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Usa Auto Repair ★★★★★
Underhill Motors ★★★★★
Tint On Wheels ★★★★★
Timmy`s Auto Sales ★★★★★
Auto blog
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.
NHTSA closes investigations into Ford Taurus, Hyundai Santa Fe
Wed, 03 Jul 2013Ford and Hyundai are out from under the scrutinizing eyes of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration after the government agency said it was closing investigations against both automakers over vehicle safety concerns.
Ford was being investigated for reported damaged speed control cables on Ford Taurus (shown above) and Mercury Sable models, both built between 2000 and 2003. Vehicles with the company's Duratec engines allegedly failed to allow owners to brake as expected. Owners lodged 100 complaints and were involved in five accidents, according to NHTSA records. The American automaker responded to the reports, and on June 21 of this year, said that it would inspect and repair all affected vehicles, regardless of the mileage.
Hyundai was under investigation for a reported loose fastener on the steering shaft of its 2011 Santa Fe (shown in the gallery below). After NHTSA launched its inquiry, the Korean automaker responded with its own investigation that yielded four affected vehicles. Following the inspection of 680 vehicles at its assembly plant, Hyundai said the issue was due to employee error and that no further defects have been found.
Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy
Thu, Jan 8 2015With 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.