2002 Ford F-150 King Ranch Crew Cab 4wd Remote Starter Low Miles No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Ford F-150 gets CNG option

Ford is toiling away, installing heavy-duty engine components into select 3.7-liter V6s to allow them to run on compressed natural gas (CNG) and liquid petroleum gas (LPG) in addition to gasoline. That's nothing new, but now, Ford has announced that it will offer the 2014 F-150 with this engine configuration, bringing the Blue Oval's total number of CNG/LPG-friendly vehicles up to eight. The F-150 will be the only half-ton pickup on the market that can run on these gases.
Ford will charge $315 per vehicle to equip the optional engine, but the trucks won't be ready to run on the alternative fuels straight from the factory and must be upfitted with additional equipment. A Ford Qualified Vehicle Modifier will install a separate fuel system for the compressed gases at a cost of $7,500 to $9,500, depending on fuel tank size. With the right-size tank, the F-150 equipped with the CNG/LPG-prepped engine can go 750 miles on one tank of gas, according to Ford, averaging 23 miles per gallon.
The practice of offering flex-fuel vehicles is gaining momentum as businesses take advantage of cheap gas. CNG can be bought for $2.11/gallon on average (per gasoline equivalent), and sometimes for as little as $1.00 in some parts of the US, Ford states. "With the money saved using CNG, customers could start to see payback on their investment in as little as 24 to 36 months," says Jon Coleman, Ford's fleet sustainability and technology manager. The automaker expects to sell a total of 15,000 CNG/LPG-prepped vehicles in the 2014 model year.

Ford recalling 450,000 Fusion, Mercury Milan sedans

Ford has announced a pair of recalls, and both are critical safety issues. The exponentially larger of the two recall campaigns affects over 450,000 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan sedans manufactured at the Hermosillo plant between July 21, 2008, and March 4, 2011. The canister purge valve in the fuel tank could malfunction and could cause the top of the tank to crack and leak fuel. That could cause a fire, although Ford "is not aware of any accidents, injuries or fires" resulting from the issue. Affected vehicles will have their ECU software updated and their fuel tanks inspected for potential replacement. The company estimates there are 411,205 affected units in the United States (and its federalized territories), plus another 33,605 in Canada, and 7,055 in Mexico. The second recall affects 13 F-650 trucks. The column shifter's park position mechanism may fracture and let the truck roll away unexpectedly. Those 2016 models built in Ohio between July 29 and September 3, 2015 are all located in the US. Fixing the problem will require replacing the steering column and reconfiguring the instrument panel. FORD ISSUES TWO SAFETY RECALLS IN NORTH AMERICA DEARBORN, Mich., Nov. 23, 2015 – Ford Motor Company is issuing two safety recalls in North America. Ford is not aware of any accidents, injuries or fires related to these conditions. Details are as follows: Ford issues safety recall for certain 2010-2011 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles in North America for potential fuel tank issue Ford Motor Company is issuing a safety recall for approximately 450,000 2010-2011 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles for a potential issue with the fuel tank. Some of these vehicles might have a canister purge valve that does not work properly, causing internal pressure changes inside the fuel tank. Repeated pressure changes inside the tank could result in a crack on the top of the tank, possibly allowing fuel to leak. A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source can lead to a fire. Ford is not aware of any accidents, injuries or fires related to this condition. Affected vehicles include certain 2010-2011 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles built at Hermosillo Assembly Plant from July 21, 2008 through March 4, 2011. There are a total of approximately 451,865 vehicles that might be affected in North America, including 411,205 vehicles in the United States and federalized territories, 33,605 in Canada and 7,055 in Mexico.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study