2008 Ford F-450 Diesel Crew Cab 4x4 Utility Body on 2040-cars
Memphis, Tennessee, United States

Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:6.4L OHV V8 POWER STROKE DIESEL ENGINE
Fuel Type:Diesel
For Sale By:Dealer
Transmission:Automatic
Make: Ford
Cab Type (For Trucks Only): Crew Cab
Model: F-450
Trim: XL
Options: 4-Wheel Drive, CD Player
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control
Mileage: 162,738
Sub Model: XL
Exterior Color: White
Warranty: As is
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Doors: 4
Number of Cylinders: 8
Drivetrain: 4 Wheel Drive
Ford F-450 for Sale
2008 ford f-450 crew cab lariat 4x4 diesel(US $29,990.00)
2000 ford f450 super duty xl dump truck(US $15,000.00)
No reserve 2008 ford f450 f550 diesel crew 4x4 flatbed w/ rack & wench low miles
No reserve low miles 4wd leather navigation backup camera 1-owner clean carfax
7.3 turbo diesel runs great!! no smoke .no blow bye. f-450 new trans ambulance(US $7,900.00)
Auto Services in Tennessee
Wholesale Inc ★★★★★
White & Peels Auto Center ★★★★★
West Broad Auto Sales ★★★★★
Topside Auto Sales ★★★★★
Tire Barn Warehouse ★★★★★
Stout`s Riverside Auto Center ★★★★★
Auto blog
Polestar 3 and 5 updates, and a compact Toyota pickup? | Autoblog Podcast #733
Fri, Jun 10 2022In this episode of the Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by Senior Editor, Green, John Beltz Snyder. First, they discuss the news, including the possibility of a compact Toyota pickup, new details about the Polestar 3 and Polestar 5, whether Tesla needs a PR department and fresh info about the 2023 Honda HR-V. They also review the GMC Sierra, Kia EV6, Hyundai Kona Electric and Buick Enclave Avenir. Next, Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski reports from the ground at the first drive of the Ford Bronco Raptor, and Multimedia Producer Erik Maier joins in to talk about Autoblog's Father's Day gift guide and other deals. Send us your questions for the Mailbag and Spend My Money at: Podcast@Autoblog.com. Autoblog Podcast #733 Get The Podcast Apple Podcasts – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes Spotify – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast on Spotify RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown Toyota looking hard at compact pickup market Polestar 3 shows itself and looks good Polestar 5 electric sedan outed in EU patent images (and now we have spy shots) Does Tesla need a PR department? (via Automotive News) 2023 Honda HR-V pricing and specs revealed Cars we're driving: 2022 GMC Sierra 1500 Denali Ultimate 2022 Kia EV6 2022 Hyundai Kona Electric 2022 Buick Enclave Avenir Dispatch: 2022 Ford Bronco Raptor Father's Day gift ideas straight from the Autoblog staff Five excellent Father's Day deals for dads Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on Apple Podcasts Autoblog is now live on your smart speakers and voice assistants with the audio Autoblog Daily Digest. Say “Hey Google, play the news from Autoblog” or "Alexa, open Autoblog" to get your favorite car website in audio form every day. A narrator will take you through the biggest stories or break down one of our comprehensive test drives. Related video:
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.
180,000 new vehicles are sitting, derailed by lack of transport trains
Wed, 21 May 2014If you're planning on buying a new car in the next month or so, you might want to pick from what's on the lot, because there could be a long wait for new vehicles from the factory. Locomotives continue to be in short supply in North America, and that's causing major delays for automakers trying to move assembled cars.
According to The Detroit News, there are about 180,000 new vehicles waiting to be transported by rail in North America at the moment. In a normal year, it would be about 69,000. The complications have been industry-wide. Toyota, General Motors, Honda and Ford all reported experiencing some delays, and Chrysler recently had hundreds of minivans sitting on the Detroit waterfront waiting to be shipped out.
The problem is twofold for automakers. First, the fracking boom in the Bakken oil field in the Plains and Canada is monopolizing many locomotives. Second, the long, harsh winter is still causing major delays in freight train travel. The bad weather forced trains to slow down and carry less weight, which caused a backup of goods to transport. The auto companies resorted to moving some vehicles by truck, which was a less efficient but necessary option.