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

2003 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor P71 on 2040-cars

Year:2003 Mileage:103000
Location:

Brook Park, Ohio, United States

Brook Park, Ohio, United States
Advertising:

 Police Interceptor, SEDAN 4-DR, 4.6L V8 SOHC 16V, rear wheel drive. Dual front air bags.
Engine is in peak mechanical condition, well maintained by city service garage. Brakes, transmission and suspension are all good to go. Goodyear "Eagle" series tires are new, with full size spare in trunk. Newer Interstate-brand battery. This car will make a reliable daily driver for many years to come. Very smooth ride.

Grey cloth interior, some scuffs but good condition.Police instrument cluster calibrated speedometer. Carpet is clean but shows mild wear. Police mods have been removed.

Color: Matador red metallic, new paint, NO RUST on the car. Repeat, car is rust free. Some chipped paint under hood/trunk lid and under door sills. Very clean body/undercarriage!

CLEAR TITLE. Has valid e-check for 2013. Can be registered without need for e-check this year.


Payment by paypal.

Local viewing, email to set a date/time. Ask for Ken

Details about car:

General Information Summary
MFR model code: P71
Body type: 4dr Car
Pass Doors: 4
Drivetrain: Rear Wheel Drive

Original Pricing
MSRP: $24,225.00
Invoice: $22,697.00
Destination Charge: $725.00

Engine & Powertrain
Type: 8 Cylinder Engine
Displacement L/CI: 4.6/281
Fuel Type: Gasoline Fuel
Horsepower: 239.0 @ 4900
Fuel Economy: 0.0 City / 0.0 Highway
Fuel Capacity: 19.0 gal
Net Torque: 287.0 @ 4100

Tech Specs
Manufactured By: Canada Ford
Suspension Type - Front: Short/Long Arm
Suspension Type - Rear: Watts Linkage
Front Tire Size: P225/60VR16
Rear Tire Size: P225/60VR16
Brake ABS System: 4-Wheel
Front Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness: 12.4 x 1.10 in
Rear Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness: 11.1 x 0.55 in
Wheelbase: 114.7 in (114.7 min/114.7max)

Style and Trim
Style: 4dr Sdn Police Prep Pkg
Trim: Police Prep Pkg

Equipment - Mechanical & Powertrain
-3.5" aluminum drive shaft
-Engine block heater *Std & only available on non-fleet vehicles in AK, MN, ND, SD, MT, WI & WY*
-Unique EEC calibration w/increased idle speed
-Brake-shift interlock
-Rear wheel drive
-HD 78-amp (750 CCA) maintenance-free battery
-Battery saver turns lights off after 30-minutes
-HD 135-amp alternator (82-amps at idle)
-Transmission oil cooler
-Pwr steering oil cooler
-HD frame/steering gear/body mounts/suspension
-SLA front suspension
-Watts linkage rear suspension
-Front/rear stabilizer bars
-Nitrogen pressurized shocks
-P225/60VR16 all-season SBR BSW Goodyear tires
-HD 16" x 7" steel wheels
-Conventional spare tire & wheel
-Rack & pinion pwr steering
-Manual parking brake release
-Scissor jack
-Primary plastic-head ignition key

Tech Specs
Vehicle Name: Ford Police Interceptor
Body Style: 4 Door Sedan, 4 Door Sedan
Drivetrain: Rear Wheel Drive
EPA Classification: Large
Passenger Capacity: 6, 5  (5.0 min/6.0max)
Passenger Volume: 111.4 ft^3 (111.4 min/111.4max)
Base Curb Weight: 3942 lbs (3942.0 min/3942.0max)
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Trailer Wt.: 2000 lbs (2000.0 min/2000.0max)
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Tongue Wt.: 200 lbs (200.0 min/200.0max)
Engine Type: Gas V8
Displacement: 4.6L/281
Fuel System: SEFI
SAE Net Horsepower @ RPM: 239 @ 4900
SAE Net Torque @ RPM: 287 @ 4100
Trans Type: 4  (4.0 min/4.0max)
Trans Description Cont.: Automatic w/OD
First Gear Ratio (:1): 2.84  (2.84 min/2.84max)
Second Gear Ratio (:1): 1.56  (1.56 min/1.56max)
Third Gear Ratio (:1): 1.00  (1.0 min/1.0max)
Fourth Gear Ratio (:1): 0.70  (0.7 min/0.7max)
Reverse Ratio (:1): 2.32  (2.32 min/2.32max)
Final Drive Axle Ratio (:1): 3.27  (3.27 min/3.27max)
Cold Cranking Amps @ 0° F (Primary): 750  (750.0 min/750.0max)
Maximum Alternator Capacity (amps): 135  (135.0 min/135.0max)
Total Cooling System Capacity: 13.6 qts (13.6 min/13.6max)
Suspension Type - Front: Short/Long Arm
Suspension Type - Rear: Watts Linkage
Suspension Type - Front (Cont.): w/HD Coil Springs
Suspension Type - Rear (Cont.): w/HD Coil Springs
Shock Absorber Diameter - Front: 30.0 mm (30.0 min/30.0max)
Shock Absorber Diameter - Rear: 30.0 mm (30.0 min/30.0max)
Stabilizer Bar Diameter - Front: 1.16 in (1.16 min/1.16max)
Stabilizer Bar Diameter - Rear: 0.67 in (0.67 min/0.67max)
Front Tire Size: P225/60VR16
Rear Tire Size: P225/60VR16
Spare Tire Size: P225/60VR16
Front Wheel Size: 16 x 7 in
Rear Wheel Size: 16 x 7 in
Spare Wheel Size: 16 x 7 in
Front Wheel Material: Steel
Rear Wheel Material: Steel
Spare Wheel Material: Steel
Steering Type: Pwr
Steering Ratio (:1), Overall: 16.4  (16.4 min/16.4max)
Lock to Lock Turns (Steering): 3.4  (3.4 min/3.4max)
Turning Diameter - Curb to Curb: 40.3 ft (40.3 min/40.3max)
Turning Diameter - Wall to Wall: 43.1 ft (43.1 min/43.1max)
Brake Type: Pwr
Brake ABS System: 4-Wheel
Disc - Front (Yes or ): Yes
Disc - Rear (Yes or ): Yes
Front Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness: 12.4 x 1.10 in
Rear Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness: 11.1 x 0.55 in
Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx: 19.0 gal (11.9 min/19.0max)
Front Head Room: 39.4 in (39.4 min/39.4max)
Front Leg Room: 42.5 in (42.5 min/42.5max)
Front Shoulder Room: 60.8 in (60.8 min/60.8max)
Front Hip Room: 57.1 in (57.1 min/57.1max)
Second Head Room: 37.9 in (37.9 min/37.9max)
Second Leg Room: 39.6 in (39.6 min/39.6max)
Second Shoulder Room: 60.3 in (60.3 min/60.3max)
Second Hip Room: 58.7 in (58.7 min/58.7max)
Wheelbase: 114.7 in (114.7 min/114.7max)
Length, Overall: 212.0 in (212.0 min/212.0max)
Width, Max w/o mirrors: 78.2 in (78.2 min/78.2max)
Height, Overall: 56.8 in (56.8 min/56.8max)
Track Width, Front: 63.4 in (63.4 min/63.4max)
Track Width, Rear: 65.3 in (65.3 min/65.3max)
Liftover Height: 26.6 in (26.6 min/26.6max)
Trunk Volume: 20.6 ft^3 (20.6 min/20.6max)

Auto Services in Ohio

Zehner`s Service Center ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Auto Oil & Lube, Truck Service & Repair
Address: 1543 Massillon Rd, Bath
Phone: (330) 784-1041

Westlake Auto Body & Frame ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 1370 Nagel Rd, Sheffield-Lake
Phone: (440) 937-6311

Wellington Auto Svc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Used Car Dealers, Automobile Parts & Supplies
Address: 144 E Herrick Ave, Sullivan
Phone: (440) 647-6727

Walt`s Auto Inc ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Used & Rebuilt Auto Parts, Automobile Salvage
Address: 3551 Springfield Xenia Rd, North-Hampton
Phone: (800) 325-7564

Waikem Mitsubishi ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers
Address: 3710 Lincoln Way E, North-Lawrence
Phone: (330) 478-0281

Vin Devers- Auto Haus of Sylvania ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 5570 Monroe St, Holland
Phone: (419) 885-5111

Auto blog

Enterprise customer billed $47k for Mustang stolen from rental lot

Sun, 05 Jan 2014

A weekend rental of a Ford Mustang GT Convertible sounds like a nice, relaxing way to burn some gas, but one Nova Scotia woman's two-day rental is turning into a months-long headache. In early October, Kristen Cockerill picked up the Mustang from Enterprise Rent-A-Car, and she returned it the following day as stipulated by the rental contract. Unfortunately, she dropped the car off on a Sunday - a day on which the particular Enterprise office is closed - and the car ended up being stolen overnight.
Now, two months later, CBC reports that Cockerill received a bill from Enterprise for the full replacement of the car totaling $47,271 (a base 2014 Mustang GT Convertible currently costs $40,349 in Canada). As it turns out, the fine print in the contract says that the renter is responsible for cars dropped off after hours until it can be inspected the next business day - this is also reflected on the key drop seen in the news report video, which states "vehicles returned after hours are the responsibility of the renter until inspected on the next business day."
It's not clear how much, if any, of that amount Cockerhill will be responsible for once her insurance company gets involved, but if the insurance company refuses to pay, Enterprise will bill the amount to the credit card she provided during her rental. While this ordeal is far over for Cockerhill, it's a good reminder for the rest of us to always read the fine print.

Consumer Reports no longer recommends Honda Civic

Mon, Oct 24 2016

Consumer Reports annual Car Reliability Survey is out, and yes, there are some big surprises. First and foremost? The venerable publication no longer recommends the Honda Civic. In fact, aside from the walking-dead CR-Z and limited-release Clarity fuel-cell car, the Civic is the only Honda to miss out on CR's prestigious nod. At the opposite end there's a surprise as well – Toyota and Lexus remain the most reliable brands on the market, but Buick cracked the top three. That's up from seventh last year, and the first time for an American brand to stand on the Consumer Reports podium. Mazda's entire lineup earned Recommended checks as well. Consumer Reports dinged the Civic for its "infuriating" touch-screen radio, lack of driver lumbar adjustability, the limited selection of cars on dealer lots fitted with Honda's popular Sensing system, and the company's decision to offer LaneWatch instead of a full-tilt blind-spot monitoring system. Its score? A lowly 58. The Civic isn't the only surprise drop from CR's Recommended ranks. The Audi A3, Ford F-150, Subaru WRX/STI, and Volkswagen Jetta, GTI, and Passat all lost the Consumer Reports' checkmark. On the flipside, a number of popular vehicles graduated to the Recommended ranks, including the BMW X5, Chevrolet Camaro, Corvette, and Cruze, Hyundai Santa Fe, Porsche Macan, and Tesla Model S. Perhaps the biggest surprise is the hilariously recall-prone Ford Escape getting a Recommended check – considering the popularity of Ford's small crossover, this is likely a coup for the brand, as it puts the Escape on a level playing field with the Recommended Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, and Nissan Rogue. While Ford is probably happy to see CR promote the Escape, the list wasn't as kind for every brand. For example, of the entire Fiat Chrysler Automobiles catalog, the ancient Chrysler 300 was the only car to score a check – there wasn't a single Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Maserati, or Ram on the list. That hurts. FCA isn't alone at the low end, either. GMC, Jaguar Land Rover, Mini, and Mitsubishi don't have a vehicle on CR's list between them, while brands like Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, Nissan, Lincoln, Infiniti, and Cadillac only have a few models each. You can check out Consumer Reports entire reliability roundup, even without a subscription, here.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Fri, Feb 13 2015

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.