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

1998 Ford Conversion Van - Explorer Conversion - No Reserve on 2040-cars

Year:1998 Mileage:102619 Color: Green /
 Tan
Location:

Cincinnati, Ohio, United States

Cincinnati, Ohio, United States
Advertising:
Transmission:Automatic
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:Triton V8 engine
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
VIN: 1FDRE146XWHB29415 Year: 1998
Number of Cylinders: 8
Make: Ford
Model: E-Series Van
Trim: EXPLORER CONVERSION VAN
Options: Cassette Player
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes
Drive Type: Rear wheel drive
Power Options: Power driver's seat, Rear Air Conditioning, Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows
Mileage: 102,619
Exterior Color: Green
Interior Color: Tan
Condition: UsedA vehicle is considered used if it has been registered and issued a title. Used vehicles have had at least one previous owner. The condition of the exterior, interior and engine can vary depending on the vehicle's history. See the seller's listing for full details and description of any imperfections.Seller Notes:"One owner, Good driving condition, Non-Smoking Owner, Low Miles (102,619 miles). Tires have 75% tread remaining. AC/Heat working well, Transmission and Brakes in good condition. Cassette player & AM/FM radio. The van has some dents (see photos) and scrapes but overall in great driving shape for a 1998 model van. Anti-lock Brake light lighted on dash all the time. Does not have TV or rear entertainment center. The electric rear seat/sofa motor does not work. VEHICLE SOLD AS IS, WHERE IS. NO WARRANTY.BUYER MUST PICK VAN UP IN CINCINNATI, OHIO AFTER PURCHASE."

Auto Services in Ohio

Zerolift ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Accessories, Automobile Parts & Supplies-Used & Rebuilt-Wholesale & Manufacturers
Address: 3195 Homeward Way, N-College-Hl
Phone: (513) 874-2508

Worthington Towing & Auto Care Inc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Towing
Address: Whitehall
Phone: (614) 888-5999

Why Pay More Motors ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers, Wholesale Used Car Dealers
Address: 1200 W 4th St, North-Robinson
Phone: (419) 529-5557

Wayne`s Auto Repair ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Electric Service
Address: 5995 Westerville Rd, Galena
Phone: (614) 423-6164

Walt`s Auto Inc ★★★★★

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

Voss Collision Centre ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 94 Loop Rd, New-Lebanon
Phone: (937) 254-8589

Auto blog

Ford recalling 2015 Mustang for fuel line leak, 20K Transit Connects for plastic panel

Fri, Dec 5 2014

Ford is recalling 738 examples of the 2015 2015 Mustang with the 2.3-liter EcoBoost engine – 712 in the US, 16 in Canada. A fuel pressure sensor might have been installed incorrectly on the affected cars, and that could result in a fuel leak. At the time of writing the company hasn't heard any reports of any incidents related to the issue, and parties with affected vehicles can take them to the dealer to have the fuel tube assembly replaced free of charge. The 2014 Transit Connect Cargo Van is also the subject of a safety recall, due to a possible problem with adhesive used on the exterior plastic panel on the sliding doors. There are 19,825 units covered by that recall, which dealers will also repair free of charge. You can find more information on both bulletins in the press releases below. Ford Issues Safety Recall for Certain 2015 Mustang Vehicles in North America for Fuel Pressure Sensor Issue Dec 4, 2014 | DEARBORN, Mich. - Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 730 2015 Ford Mustang vehicles in North America (actual 728) for a potential fuel line leak. A fuel pressure sensor, which is part of the fuel supply tube assembly, may have been installed incorrectly, potentially resulting in a pressurized fuel leak. A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source may result in a fire. Ford is not aware of any fires, accidents or injuries related to this condition. Affected vehicles include certain 2015 Ford Mustangs equipped with 2.3-liter engines built at Flat Rock Assembly Plant, Sept. 25, 2014 to Oct. 9, 2014. Ford is aware of 712 vehicles in the United States and federalized territories and 16 in Canada. These totals are as of Dec. 3, 2014. Dealers will replace the fuel supply tube assembly at no cost to the customer. *** Ford Issues Safety Recall for Certain 2014 Transit Connect Cargo Van Vehicles in North America for Issue with the Plastic Panel on the Sliding Doors Dec 4, 2014 | DEARBORN, Mich. - Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 20,000 2014 Transit Connect cargo van vehicles in North America (actual 19,825) for an issue with adhesion of an exterior plastic panel to the sliding doors. This issue may result in noise, a water leak, a loose panel, or separation of the plastic panel from the vehicle while driving, potentially increasing the risk of an accident or injury. Ford is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this condition.

We compare 2021 Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport specifications to their ritzy Land Rover competiton

Tue, Jul 14 2020

The 2021 Bronco and Bronco Sport are the spearheads for Ford's new 4x4 sub-brand, with the former taking the fight directly to the Jeep Wrangler and the latter providing Ford with a more rugged alternative to the Escape. We've already looked at how the new Bronco and Bronco Sport compare to their mainstream competition, but we'd like to see how the Bronco stacks up to another hotly anticipated returning nameplate: the Land Rover Defender.  Not to leave its little sibling in the cold, I decided to browse Land Rover's lineup and see what might be a suitable counterpoint to the Bronco Sport. For better or worse, I found an almost-perfect fit in the Range Rover Evoque. So, how do these new American 4x4s compare to the Old Country's more-expensive alternatives? Let's dig in, starting with the big boys.  As you might expect from the Bronco's robust credentials, it holds its own here against the more-expensive Brit. The Defender's higher price point brings along a good bit of power advantage with both engines, but that's to be expected. The Defender also has that trick adjustable-height suspension that the Bronco lacks, giving it an edge in practicality, and it can also tow quite a bit more.  On the flip side, there are quite a few advantages to going with the Ford, including a greater number of choices in terms of powertrain. The available manual transmission on four-cylinder Broncos is a nice bonus, for instance, as is the option of getting either the base 2.3-liter or the optional 2.7-liter engine with either wheelbase. The Defender is a bit more restrictive in this regard offering only the inline-six on the short-wheelbase model. As an added bonus, the Bronco is a convertible. That may not necessarily be a "plus" for all shoppers, but it's certainly an added bit of versatility (and potential appeal) the Defender lacks. And of course, the Bronco can be had for as little as $30,000, whereas the Land Rover starts at $50,000. Now, on to the less-rugged siblings. The specs here are actually a little tighter in most respects, but the powertrain story is almost identical. The Evoque checks in where the Bronco Sport tops out, and the Range Rover gets an optional high-output variant of the 2.0-liter turbocharged four.

Porsche, Jaguar continue dominance in 2015 JD Power APEAL study

Wed, Jul 22 2015

The top of JD Power's 2015 APEAL Study has not changed much in the last year. Porsche remains No. 1 with Jaguar nipping at its heels, although both premium brands saw their overall score fall compared to 2014. For those that need a refresher, the APEAL Study looks at how "gratifying" a vehicle is to own and drive, rating cars and brands on a 1,000-point scale. The industry average for 2015 has increased from 794 to 798, while the total number of automakers that finished above the curve increased from 16 to 20. While Porsche and Jaguar finished at the top, their scores dropped eight and seven points, respectively, to 874 and 855. The top "non-premium" brand was Mini, which scored an impressive 825, up from 795. If the BMW-owned British marque is still a bit too premium for your tastes, last year's non-premium winner, Hyundai, did climb five points and is this year's runner up. At the opposite end of the scale, Smart sits at the very bottom of the rankings, with a score of 683 (it didn't appear on the 2014 rankings). Fiat also dropped, from fourth worst in 2014 to second worst in 2015, despite the 500 being named most appealing city car. Subaru made an impressive climb, from third worst to seventh, falling just 10 points shy of the industry average and two points south of the non-premium average. In the individual vehicle segments, eight brands earned multiple awards, with Ford, Chevrolet, and Porsche earning three apiece. Surprise segment victories included the new Ford Expedition, which beat out Chevy's popular Suburban. The Infiniti QX80 bested the likes of the Cadillac Escalade and Range Rover for best large luxury SUV, and the Dodge Challenger beat its muscle car rivals from Ford and Chevy. Most of the victories, though, were quite predictable. The Mazda6 and CX-5 took wins for the midsize sedan and compact SUV categories respectively, while the Volkswagen Golf captured the compact car win. The Ford F-150 won the large pickup category, while the Porsche Cayman was named most appealing compact premium sporty car. Check out the official release on the 2015 APEAL Study, available below, from JD Power. 2015 U.S. APEAL Study Results The latest safety-related technologies are among the drivers of customer satisfaction with new vehicles, according to the J.D. Power 2015 U.S.