2012 Ford Explorer Xlt, Leather, Rear Cam., Myford Touch, Cpo 7yr/100k Warranty on 2040-cars
Katy, Texas, United States
Engine:3.5
Body Type:SUV
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Interior Color: Tan
Make: Ford
Number of Cylinders: 6
Model: Explorer
Drive Type: FWD
Warranty: Yes
Mileage: 41,331
Sub Model: XLT, LEATHER, RR CAM, SYNC, TOUCH, CPO Certified
Exterior Color: Gray
Ford Explorer for Sale
2000 ford explorer xlt sport utility 4-door 4.0l
1999 ford explorer sport sport utility 2-door 4.0l(US $2,850.00)
2011 ford explorer xlt, leather, v6, ford certified,4x4(US $31,780.00)
2013 ford explorer leather 3rd row(US $28,995.00)
2001 ford explorer 4x4 runs and drives no reserve aucti
2010 ford explorer xlt sport utility 4-door 4.0l(US $16,500.00)
Auto Services in Texas
Yescas Brothers Auto Sales ★★★★★
Whitney Motor Cars ★★★★★
Two-Day Auto Painting & Body Shop ★★★★★
Transmission Masters ★★★★★
Top Cash for Cars & Trucks : Running or Not ★★★★★
Tommy`s Auto Service ★★★★★
Auto blog
Volvo to shake off Ford ties with new platforms, engines
Sat, 23 Feb 2013
It would seem Volvo is finally getting around to throwing all of Ford's things out of the apartment. Automotive News reports the Swedish automaker is preparing to unleash a range of new engines as well as a fresh platform designed entirely in house. The powerplants include an all-new four-cylinder engine set to bow before the end of this year before arriving in the US by 2014. Shortly thereafter, the world should get its first glimpse at the next-generation XC60, which will the company's first model to make use of the Volvo scalable platform architecture (SPA). US buyers can expect to see that machine on their roads by early 2015.
The next V70 and S80 will also use the SPA, though those models will carry V90 and S90 designations when they hit dealer floors. But that doesn't mean Volvo has completely weened itself off of Ford technology. The V40 will continue to ride on Ford bones until the model's next chassis can be co-developed between Volvo and Geely.
Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy
Thu, Jan 8 2015With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.
2020 Ford Escape, Lincoln Corsair ace crash tests, earn Top Safety Pick from IIHS
Fri, Nov 15 2019The redesigned 2020 Ford Escape and its platform-mate, the 2020 Lincoln Corsair, have both just completed their bout of crash tests at the hands of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, and while they did not emerge unscathed, they did come away with the agency's Top Safety Pick Award. One caveat: The rating only applies to the Escape equipped with the available LED headlights, which were deemed Acceptable. Similarly, the Corsair needs the available curve-adaptive LED headlights, also rated Acceptable, in order to achieve Top Safety Pick. The Escape's standard halogen headlights scored only a Marginal rating, while the Corsair's base LED headlights were deemed Poor due to glare. Those low headlight ratings knock the vehicles out of contention for Top Safety Pick. Had either vehicle offered headlights able to achieve a Good rating, that would have been enough to get them the agency's Top Safety Pick+ rating. Outside of their headlights, the 2020 Escape and Corsair acquitted themselves well. The Escape saw a big improvement in the difficult small-overlap front crash test, going from a Poor result in the previous generation to Good with the new one. The Corsair performed identically, and both achieved Good ratings in all six crash tests. The IIHS also tests automatic emergency-braking systems, and the standard and optional systems in the Escape and the Corsair both earned Superior ratings.