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

2015 Ford F-350 Platinum on 2040-cars

US $21,700.00
Year:2015 Mileage:46118 Color: Burgundy /
 Black
Location:

Hopedale, Massachusetts, United States

Hopedale, Massachusetts, United States
Advertising:

Nice clean 2015 Platinum 46118 miles all the platinum options except no sun roof Ordered with out for the extra
head room. Love the truck But I purchased a larger camper and would like to up grade to a dual wheel F350. A 9 ft
Boss V plow is included

Auto Services in Massachusetts

Tremont Auto Body ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 90 Tremont St, Waltham
Phone: (617) 387-2150

Toy Town Auto Salvage ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Accessories
Address: 800 Spring St, Ashby
Phone: (978) 297-0350

Town Fair Tire ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Tire Dealers, Wheels-Aligning & Balancing
Address: 121 Endicott St, Glendale
Phone: (978) 777-8350

Teta`s Automotive ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automotive Tune Up Service
Address: 640 Springfield St, Southampton
Phone: (413) 592-9546

T N T Repairs ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 59 Wilson St, Paxton
Phone: (508) 885-2193

Salem Auto Body Company ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Body Repairing & Painting, Automobile Body Shop Equipment & Supplies
Address: 25 Boston St, Glendale
Phone: (978) 744-3927

Auto blog

Ford to pay $17.35 million over Escape recall

Thu, 01 Aug 2013

Ford had a bit of a recall spree around this time last year, with a pair of issues on the then-new 2013 Escape, followed by a recall of 423,000 2001 to 2004 Escapes because they might accelerate of their own accord. Accordingly, Uncle Sam pasted Ford with a $17.35 million fine because it took too long to inform customers, according to a report from Automotive News.
Ford agreed to settle with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, accepting the fine but not admitting fault. The recall, which afflicted Escapes with the 3.0-liter V-6 along with 217,000 Mazda Tributes from 2001 to 2006 and 2008, was due to faulty gas pedals that could stay down after a driver removed their foot.
Ford issued a statement regarding the fine, saying, "We take the safety of our customers seriously and continuously evaluate our processes for improvements. While we are confident in our current processes for quickly identifying and addressing potential vehicle issues, Ford agreed to this settlement to avoid a lengthy dispute with the government."

Chevy Silverado frame twist test a marketing victory versus Ford

Thu, 16 Oct 2014

The pickup market is so competitive that all three major American makers are constantly trying to find a way to prove their product is the best. The new 2015 Ford F-150 is grabbing headlines at the moment by winning awards and posting segment best numbers. But in a new video, Chevrolet is taking aim squarely at the 2015 F-250 Super Duty in a battle of heavy-duty truck supremacy against the 2015 Chevy Silverado 2500HD... well, in a single metric anyway.
The big numbers from pickups often come down to payload, towing rating and fuel economy, but for this test, Chevy and Howie Long are challenging the torsional rigidity of the trucks' frames, specifically which one flexes less. Long plays the everyman here having the Chevy engineer explain what's going on in the tests. Unsurprisingly for a video on Chevy's official YouTube page, the 2500HD wins out by a good margin. The company also reports that similar results as shown here have been certified in third-party testing.
Check out the video to see the full test. While this might seem like a marketing win for Chevy, Ford isn't immune to it, either. In 2009, the Blue Oval uploaded a similar video comparing the flex under 225 pounds of weight from the bare frames of the F-150, Chevy Silverado, Dodge Ram (as it was still called at the time) and the Toyota Tundra. The results fell in the Blue Oval's favor, as you can see here.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

Tue, Jun 17 2014

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.