2013 Ford E250 3/4 Ton V8 Xlt 12 14 Cargo Van G2500 Divider Chrome Pkg~8oo Miles on 2040-cars
Englewood, Colorado, United States
Ford E-Series Van for Sale
2006 ford e-150 cargo van--great work truck(US $5,999.99)
2003 ford e-350 base extended cargo van 2-door 5.4l(US $5,000.00)
2008 ford econoline commercial cutaway e-450 super duty(US $16,995.00)
2010 econoline wagon wheelchair lift, 49,886 miles we have 7 other vans on ebay(US $19,998.00)
2000 ford e-350 econoline base extended cargo van 2-door 6.8l
2013 ford e-150 cargo van v8 partition shelving 47k mi texas direct auto(US $18,780.00)
Auto Services in Colorado
Unlimited Auto Sales ★★★★★
Toyota of Colorado Springs ★★★★★
Shock Glass ★★★★★
Sauder`s Automotive ★★★★★
Performance Wise Service Center ★★★★★
Northglenn Auto Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
Junkyard Gem: 1991 Mercury Capri
Mon, Sep 19 2016Ford has gotten a lot of use out of the Capri name in the United States. First, there was the Lincoln Capri in the 1950s, followed by the Ford Capri Mk1 (which was sold by Mercury dealers in the USA but never actually badged as a Mercury). Then came the 1979-1986 Mercury Capri, built on the very successful Fox Platform and essentially a clone of the Mustang. Finally, in 1991, the Australian Ford Capri came to the United States. Here is an example of this rare car that I spotted in a Northern California self-service yard not long ago. Mechanically speaking, the 1991-1994 Capri was a Mazda 323 under the skin, complete with a member of the same B-series engine family that went into such cars as the Miata and Ford Escort. So, for a few years in the early 1990s, car shoppers who wanted a sporty Mazda convertible could choose between a Miata and a Capri. The Capri had front-wheel-drive, but could be had with factory turbocharging. These cars were reliable and fun, but had a tough time competing with the Miata in the showroom battles. You'll see the occasional example now and then, but most of the 1991-1994 Capris have met the same fate that awaits this one. Related Video:
Ford family keeps special voting rights
Fri, 10 May 2013Ford Motor Company has a dual-class stock structure of Class A and Class B shares. The roughly three billion Class A shares are for the general public like you and me, while the roughly 71 million Class B shares are all owned by the Ford family. Each Class A share gets the shareholder one vote, each Class B share is worth 16 votes, the result being that Common Stock holders control about 60 percent of the company while the Ford family controls 40 percent even though it holds far fewer shares. The only way that could ever change would be if the Fords sell their Class B shares, but even so, Class B shares revert to Class A when sold outside the family, so they'd have to sell a whole bunch of them.
A contingent of Class A shareholders think the dual-class system is unfair, and for the past few years a vote's been held during the annual shareholders meeting to end it. It has failed every time, as it just did again during the meeting held this week. A smidge over 33 percent voted to end the dual system, outvoted by the 67 percent who are happy with the way Ford is going - unsurprising in view of a corporate turnaround that will be part of business-class curricula for years to come.
On the sidelines, Ford elected Ellen R. Marram to the post of independent director, the first woman to hold the job. The former Tropicana CEO and 20-year Ford board member replaces retiring board member Irvine Hockaday who helped bring Alan Mulally to the CEO position.
Ford, Volvo, Google, Uber and Lyft form self-driving alliance
Tue, Apr 26 2016Five companies arguably leading the worldwide effort to develop autonomous cars said Tuesday they're forming an organization to lobby the federal government to better prepare America's roads for self-driving technology. The founding members include some of the biggest companies in the automotive, autonomous, and ride-sharing realms – Ford, Google, Lyft, Uber and Volvo. Operating as the "Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets," they aim to work with lawmakers and regulators to clarify a disparate set of rules and regulations at both the state and federal levels that could hinder the deployment of autonomous cars. "The U.S. risks losing its leading position due to the lack of federal guidelines for the testing and certification of autonomous vehicles." – Hakan Samuelsson David Strickland, a former administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration who issued the first set of autonomous-related policies in that role (pictured below), will serve as the group's counsel and spokesperson. "The best path for this innovation is to have one clear set of federal standards, and the Coalition will work with policymakers to find the right solutions that will facilitate the deployment of self-driving vehicles," he said in a written statement. In January, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said his department would accelerate efforts to craft such federal standards. Those efforts include holding two public hearings on standards, the second of which is scheduled to be held Wednesday in Palo Alto, California. Foxx signaled the intent to deliver them by June. Google has been leading the efforts to ensure such standards are national in scope, warning their cars could run afoul of state-specific laws should they cross state borders or if standards varies between the federal efforts and regional ones. The complexity of such efforts was underscored recently, when NHTSA agreed that Google's software could be considered the driver of a vehicle for the purpose of meeting federal motor vehicle standards, an interpretation that would conflict with preliminary California rules that mandate a licensed driver operate a self-driving car that comes equipped with human controls like a steering wheel and brakes. At South By Southwest last month, Jennifer Haroon, Google's self-driving car business leader, said the company couldn't accomplish its goals under those regulations.