E-250 Hd 138 5.8l Am/fm Stereo Air Conditioning Bucket Seats Floor Mats-front on 2040-cars
Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, United States
Body Type:Other
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Make: Ford
Model: E-Series Van
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Mileage: 213,942
Sub Model: E-250 HD 138
Power Options: Air Conditioning
Exterior Color: Green
Interior Color: Other
Number of Cylinders: 8
Ford E-Series Van for Sale
- 2004 ford e250 cargo/wheelchair 11 passenger van/bus v10 braun lift alloy clean(US $10,995.00)
- 1975 ford e-150 econoline custom 70s shag retro van show 1970s
- 08 ford handicap wheelchair accessible van a+ cond! no reserve absolute sale!!!!
- 2013 ford e-350 e350 xlt 12 passenger van back up camera cd clean history 11 12(US $23,990.00)
- 2006 ford e-450 shuttle bus diesel 12 passenger+ van with 108k original miles!!(US $9,450.00)
- 2004 ford e-450 ambulance diesel only 45,818 miles no reserve
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Walburn Auto Svc ★★★★★
Vans Auto Repair ★★★★★
United Automotive Service Center LLC ★★★★★
Tomsic Motor Co ★★★★★
Team One Auto Group ★★★★★
Suburban Collision Specs Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford looks back on 50 years of the Mustang in Detroit
Tue, 14 Jan 2014Ford has something special sitting in its booth here at the 2014 Detroit Auto Show. In fact, it brought two special somethings in the form of the Ford Mustang 1 Concept that first saw the light of day in 1962 and the very first production Mustang that rolled off the production line in 1964.
These classic creations are sharing floor space with the brand-new 2014 Mustang in honor of the pony car's 50th Anniversary. Since Ford's latest 'Stang already made its auto show debut (at a number of locations, including Los Angeles), we think it's pretty cool that the Blue Oval did something special for its home-town show.
Check out both the Mustang 1 Concept and first production 1964.5 Mustang above and below.
NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe
Mon, 17 Dec 2012According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"
Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT
Tue, Feb 21 2023When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.