2001 Ford Windstar Sel Mini Passenger Van 4-door 3.8l on 2040-cars
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Engine:3.8L 232Cu. In. V6 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Transmission:Automatic
Vehicle Title:Clear
Body Type:Mini Passenger Van
Used
Year: 2001
Make: Ford
Mileage: 80,400
Model: Windstar
Exterior Color: White
Trim: SEL Mini Passenger Van 4-Door
Interior Color: Tan
Drive Type: FWD
Number of Cylinders: 6
Options: Leather Seats, CD Player
Ford Windstar for Sale
2002 ford windstar lx mini passenger van 4-door 3.8l
1996 ford windstar gl mini passenger van 4-door 3.8l(US $1,500.00)
1998 ford windstar base mini cargo van 3-door 3.0l
2001 ford windstar lx mini passenger van 4-door 3.8l(US $1,100.00)
2000 ford windstar sel 104k low original miles automatic 6 cylinder no reserve
1998 ford windstar cargo van(US $3,500.00)
Auto Services in Nevada
T C Auto ★★★★★
Royalty Auto Svc ★★★★★
Roadrunner Engine Parts ★★★★★
Rich Lathers Auto Spa ★★★★★
Platinum Kustomz ★★★★★
Planet Nissan ★★★★★
Auto blog
Wrap up some fun with Ford's commercial vehicle configurator
Tue, 27 Aug 2013Ford has combined multiple steps into one with its commercial vehicle configurator, which allows users to choose, design and place orders for the Transit, Transit Connect, E-Series vans and F-Series Super Duty trucks.
The most interesting part of the new configurator is a fairly robust design tool. Users are able to choose paint color and wrap the vehicle, and then create their own graphics. No materials are needed - Ford provides numerous background textures, text boxes, plenty of shapes and 20 categories of images including floral, construction, plumbing and skylines. Self-created designs or images can be uploaded to the system as well.
We played around with the design tool a bit and uploaded our own image to create the Autoblog Podcast Live van you see here. Feel free to check out the configurator and make your own design.
Ford Mustang Mach-E fails Sweden's moose test
Wed, Sep 29 2021The infamous moose test has claimed another casualty. This time it's the Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD Long Range, which was tested in an electric four-way alongside the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Skoda Enyaq iV (an electric utility vehicle closely related to the Volkswagen ID.4 that is sold in the United States). According to the Swedish testers at Teknikens Varld, Ford's electric car not only failed to hit the speed necessary for a passing grade, it didn't perform well at slower speeds, either. To pass the outlet's moose test, a car has to complete a rapid left-right-straight S-shaped pattern marked by cones at a speed of at least 72 km/h (44.7 miles per hour). The test is designed to mimic the type of avoidance maneuver a driver would have to take in order to avoid hitting something that wandered into the road, which in Sweden may be a moose but could just as easily be a deer or some other member of the animal kingdom elsewhere in the world, or possibly a child or car backing into the motorway. Not only is the maneuver very aggressive, it's also performed with weights belted into each seat and more weight added to the cargo area to hit the vehicle's maximum allowable carrying capacity. The Mustang Mach-E only managed to complete the moose test at 68 km/h (42.3 mph), well below the passing-grade threshold. Even at much lower speeds, Teknikens Varld says the Mach-E (which boasts the highest carrying capacity and was therefore loaded with more weight than the rest of the vehicles tested in this quartet) is "too soft in the chassis" and suffers from "too slow steering." Proving that it is indeed possible to pass the test, the Hyundai and Skoda completed the maneuver at the 44.7-mph figure required for a passing grade and the Tesla did it at 46.6 mph, albeit with less weight in the cargo area. It's not clear whether other versions of the Mustang Mach-E would pass the test. It's also unknown if Ford will make any changes to its chassis tuning or electronic stability control software, as some other automakers have done after a poor performance from Teknikens Varld, to improve its performance in the moose test. Related video:
10 of 18 midsize SUVs earn 'good' IIHS side impact safety rating
Wed, May 18 2022It's not terribly surprising that midsize SUVs earned better safety ratings than small SUVs in the latest side-impact tests performed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Just how much better they scored, on the other hand, certainly raises an eyebrow. Ten out of 18 midsize SUVs earned the highest rating of 'good' in the stringent new test, altered for vehicles starting with the 2020 model year with a heavier barrier (4,200 pounds) that moves at a higher speed (37 miles per hour) and is fitted with a hard honeycomb frontal structure. By way of contrast, just one out of of 20 small SUVs earned a 'good' score. SUVs that receiving 'good' scores were the Ford Explorer, Infiniti QX60, Lincoln Aviator, Mazda CX-9, Nissan Pathfinder, Subaru Ascent, Toyota Highlander, Volkswagen Atlas, Volkswagen Atlas Cross Sport and Volkswagen ID.4. For EV fans, it's worth noting the ID.4 was the only electric vehicle included in the test. The Buick Enclave and Chevrolet Traverse scraped away with 'acceptable' ratings while the Honda Passport, Honda Pilot, Hyundai Palisade, Jeep Wrangler 4-door, Kia Telluride and Nissan Murano were deemed merely 'marginal' in the tough new test. Only two models — the Mazda CX-9 and Volkswagen ID.4 — earned a "Good" rating in every test category. Interestingly, the Jeep Wrangler would have scored a 'good' rating if it were equipped with side airbags for the rear seating positions. It would likely be an engineering challenge to equip its removable top and/or doors with airbags, but the lack of that safety feature allowed the head of the rear passenger dummy to hit the vertical support of the top. Otherwise, the Wrangler scored good ratings across the board. The new Ford Bronco, which makes more allowances for side-impact safety, has not yet been tested. The popular Hyundai Palisade and Kia Telluride SUVs stand out in the test with 'poor' ratings for driver pelvis injuries. The Nissan Murano, a vehicle last redesigned for the 2015 model year, was the only vehicle tested that received a 'poor' rating for its structure and safety cage. Videos of the tests of 12 of these 18 SUVs can be found on the IIHS' YouTube page. Related video: Green Buick Chevrolet Ford Honda Hyundai Infiniti Jeep Kia Mazda Nissan Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Safety Crossover SUV IIHS Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
2040Cars.com © 2012-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.371 s, 7902 u