1993 Ford E-150 Econoline Wheel Chair Lift No Reserve on 2040-cars
Terre Hill, Pennsylvania, United States
Body Type:Standard Cargo Van
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:4.9L 300Cu. In. l6 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Private Seller
Make: Ford
Model: E-150 Econoline
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Trim: XL Standard Cargo Van 2-Door
Options: Cassette Player
Drive Type: RWD
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Mileage: 138,000
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows
Exterior Color: Red
Interior Color: Gray
Disability Equipped: Yes
Number of Cylinders: 6
here is a good 1993 ford van with wheel chair lift every thing works as it should any questions feel free to ask selling with no reserve
Ford E-Series Van for Sale
1992 e 350 ford with mccoy miller ambulance pkg.(US $7,000.00)
1997 fprd conversion van.loaded with 68000 original miles la west conversion
2003 ford e-series e-250 cargo van
2005 ford e250 cargo van for sale~white~port hole window~4.6l v8~salvage title
2001 ford e150 6 door cargo van
2012 ford e350 econoline cargo van aux audio remote start warranty
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Zirkle`s Garage ★★★★★
Young`s Auto Transit ★★★★★
Wolbert Auto Body and Repair ★★★★★
Wilkie Lexus ★★★★★
Vo Automotive ★★★★★
Vince`s Auto Service ★★★★★
Auto blog
Weekly Recap: 2016 CTS-V gives Cadillac new momentum for the new year
Sat, Dec 27 2014It's been a rough year for Cadillac. The historic luxury carmaker been in the news for all of the wrong reasons: Declining sales, ditching its advertising agency and the relocation of its headquarters from Detroit to New York. But in late December, Cadillac reminded everyone what it does best: Build some of the rawest and most compelling luxury sedans in the world, as evidenced by the 2016 CTS-V. This monster churns out 640 horsepower from a supercharged 6.2-liter V8. Sound familiar? That's the Corvette Z06 engine, and it makes this CTS the most powerful production Cadillac ever. It also puts the sporting divisions of the Germans on notice. The new CTS-V easily overpowers the Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S 4Matic and its 5.5-liter biturbo V8 rated at 577 hp, and the BMW M5 (with the competition pack) and its 4.4-liter twin-turbo V8 that pushes out 575 hp. The rear-wheel drive Cadillac can sprint to 60 miles per hour in 3.7 seconds, which is close to the 3.5-second time turned in by the 4Matic-driven E63 S, and a bit quicker than the 4.1 seconds posted by the M5. With Magnetic Ride Control, General Motors' stout eight-speed automatic transmission (also used in the Corvette), Brembo brakes and a carbon-fiber option package that pretty much builds your car out of carbon fiber – it's clear this Cadillac means business. Truth be told, we expected this CTS-V to deliver. It's been a serious sports sedan for a decade, and the recent generation and its 556-hp arrogance have been particularly memorable. But notice what we're doing here? We're talking about product. Not who makes Cadillac's ads, or if the brand's headquarters has a mailing address in NYC. Like the 2016 ATS-V that's due in the spring, the debut of the 2016 CTS-V (on sale in late summer) is a shot in the arm for Cadillac, and its arrival comes during time of transition. The brand is trying to reinvent itself as a modern luxury maker. It wants new customers, a different image and obviously more sales. Those things are going to take time, but with a 640-hp sledgehammer of a sports sedan on tap for next year, Cadillac can still maintain some of its swagger through all of the change. Other News And Views 1984 Audi Sport Quattro heads for the auction block If you're into '80s rally cars, you're really a car person. But if you're into that stuff – and we are – this 1984 Audi Sport Quattro is sure to get your blood flowing.
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.
Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]
Tue, 05 Feb 2013Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.