2012(12)fusion Se Fact W-ty Only 24k Red/beige Cruise Aux Sirius Save Huge!!! on 2040-cars
Bedford, Ohio, United States
Body Type:Sedan
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Flex Fuel Vehicle
For Sale By:Dealer
Make: Ford
Model: Fusion
Warranty: Vehicle has an existing warranty
Mileage: 24,644
Sub Model: 4dr Sdn SE FWD
Exterior Color: Red
Interior Color: Tan
Doors: 4
Number of Cylinders: 6
Engine Description: 3.0L V6 FI DOHC 24V
Ford Fusion for Sale
2010 ford fusion se sap package, 4 cyl, 6 spd, one owner
We finance 2006 ford fusion sel prempkg 6cd kylssentry 3.0l v6 htdmrrs lthr(US $5,800.00)
2011 ford fusion sel sedan 4-door 3.0l(US $16,500.00)
2010 ford fusion se no reserve not hybrid se model
2010 ford fusion sport sel awd v6 36k wrnty navi cam mroof htd leather call(US $16,995.00)
2012 ford fusion se, 1k like new
Auto Services in Ohio
Yonkers Auto Body ★★★★★
Western Reserve Battery Corp ★★★★★
Walt`s Auto Inc ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Tritex Corporation ★★★★★
Auto blog
After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality
Fri, Jan 3 2014Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.
2014 Saleen George Follmer Edition Mustang debuts at Lagun Seca
Sat, 17 Aug 2013Saleen used the occasion of the race-fueled Rolex Monterey Motorsports Reunion at Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca to announce its new Heritage Collection Lineup. The event was punctuated with the debut of the collection's first member, the 2014 Saleen George Follmer Edition Mustang.
Follmer's name will likely sound familiar to fans of American racing in the 1960s and '70s. The driver competed in Formula One with the Shadow team in 1973, ran the Indianapolis 500, was the Can-Am champion in 1972 and drove stock cars in NASCAR's Winston Cup as well. The multi-disciplined driver is now one of three -the other two being Mark Donohue and Swede Savage - with the honor of upcoming, limited edition Saleen-tuned vehicles..
Follmer's name will likely sound familiar to fans of American racing in the 1960s and '70s.
Ford fights back against patent trolls
Fri, Feb 13 2015Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.