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

1929 Ford Model A Cabriolet on 2040-cars

Year:1929 Mileage:0 Color: Brown /
 Mocha
Location:

Glendora, California, United States

Glendora, California, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:Model A
Year: 1929
Mileage: 0
Make: Ford
Exterior Color: Brown
Model: Model A
Interior Color: Mocha
Trim: 2 door
Options: Rumble seat
Drive Type: FWD
Condition: Used: A vehicle is considered used if it has been registered and issued a title. Used vehicles have had at least one previous owner. The condition of the exterior, interior and engine can vary depending on the vehicle's history. See the seller's listing for full details and description of any imperfections. ... 

If you are looking for a Barn find here you go.

This is a all steel. All original 1929 Ford Model A. Nothing missing on this car, everything works !!!!

This car will start up and run. I drive it for my dad from time to time just to keep fluids flowing.

• Original motor Runs well.
• 3 speed transmission.
• Top restored excellent condition.
• Interior excellent condition no rips.
• Windows all roll down smoothly.
• Rumble seat great condition.
• Tires Brand New.

This Model A is a garage kept car. So if your looking for a driver and not a project this is the car for u. Give me a call.  626-625-7171

Auto Services in California

Zoe Design Inc ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Tire Dealers, Automobile Accessories
Address: 730 Salem St, Temple-City
Phone: (818) 549-9700

Zee`s Smog Test Only Station ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Inspection Stations & Services, Automotive Tune Up Service
Address: 143 E 16th St Ste A, Newport-Beach
Phone: (949) 650-2332

World Class Collision Ctr ★★★★★

Automobile Body Repairing & Painting
Address: 12228 6th St, Rancho-Cucamonga
Phone: (909) 944-2777

WOOPY`S Auto Parts ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Auto Body Parts
Address: 501 e. Sixth St, Woodcrest
Phone: (951) 340-0001

William Michael Automotive ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Inspection Stations & Services, Automobile Electric Service
Address: 1800 Richard Ave, Monte-Vista
Phone: (408) 970-0466

Will Tiesiera Ford Inc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers
Address: 2101 E Cross Ave, Goshen
Phone: (888) 221-4938

Auto blog

Ford Focus was best-selling nameplate in 2012

Tue, 09 Apr 2013

Last August, Ford made a few waves by claiming that the Ford Focus was, at that point, the top-selling car in the world. The automaker failed to account for variations of the Toyota Corolla wearing a different name (such as the Auris and Matrix), however. With official data from Polk coming in now, Ford is able to say that the Focus was, in fact, the best-selling nameplate in the world last year.
Using new-car registrations (which doesn't factor in fleet sales), the Polk data shows that a total of more than one million Focus models around the world. Strong sales in the US and China have led to a 16 percent increase in year-over-year Focus sales from 2011 that helped to create even more of a gap between it and the second-best global seller, the Corolla.
Ford also had the Fiesta and F-Series listed in the top 10 for worldwide nameplates, but what's even more impressive is the fact that the F-Series is only sold in North America. Scroll down to see the list (compiled by Ford using Polk data) of the top global sellers last year and a press release from Ford.

Should heavy-duty pickup trucks have window stickers with fuel mileage estimates?

Sat, Sep 23 2017

If you were to stroll into your nearest Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Nissan, or Ram dealership, you'd find a bunch of pickup trucks. Most of those would have proper window stickers labeled with things like base prices, options prices, location of manufacture, and, crucially, fuel economy estimates. But you'd also run across a number of heavy-duty trucks with no such fuel mileage data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA doesn't require automakers to publish the valuable miles-per-gallon measurement for vehicles with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. That makes it difficult for consumers to compare behemoths powered by turbocharged diesel engines – between one another, and between smaller, gasoline-fueled trucks. Consumer Reports doesn't think it should be this way, and it's spearheading an effort (PDF link) to get the government to require manufacturers to publish fuel economy estimates. In its own testing, CR found that heavy-duty pickups powered by Ford's Power Stroke, GM's Duramax, and FCA's Cummins diesel engines (which doesn't include the Ram's EcoDiesel) get worse fuel mileage than their lighter-duty gas-powered siblings. We're not so sure HD-truck buyers are unaware of this fact – big diesels don't really come into their own until big loads are placed in their beds or attached to their trailer hitches. Under heavy workloads, the diesel trucks will almost certainly return greater efficiency than a similar gas-powered truck. What's more, HD trucks with lumbering diesels in general make the driver feel more confident while towing due to greater torque at low engine RPM than gas trucks. They also offer greater max-weight limits. Still, we agree EPA fuel mileage estimates should be offered for heavy-duty pickups. And we think the comparisons provided by Consumer Reports might be interesting to potential buyers. Click here to see the results of CR's tests, and let us know what you think using the poll below. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Ford F-Series Super Duty: First Drive View 22 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Read This Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan RAM Fuel Efficiency Truck Commercial Vehicles Diesel Vehicles poll gmc sierra hd chevy silverado hd

After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality

Fri, Jan 3 2014

Regulations 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.