73 Mustang Mach 1 351 Cleveland on 2040-cars
East Flat Rock, North Carolina, United States
Body Type:flashback mach 1
Engine:351 cleveland
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Interior Color: Black
Make: Ford
Number of Cylinders: 8
Model: Mustang
Trim: Mach 1 2-door
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Drive Type: 2 wheel drive
Mileage: 5,000
Options: Leather Seats
Sub Model: mach 1
Exterior Color: primer gray
73 mustang mach 1 351 Cleveland engine less than 5K back glass broken seats needs leather seats needs paint
Ford Mustang for Sale
2005 ford mustang gt premium(US $15,500.00)
2010 mustang 2d coupe kona blue w/ sport appearance package(US $16,800.00)
Beautiful 1966 mustang convertible 289 4-speed!
1990 ford mustang gt convertible 2-door 5.0l
2003 ford mustang gt coupe 2-door 4.6l(US $7,995.00)
2009 lee iacocca 45th anniversary edition ford mustang silver 11 of 45
Auto Services in North Carolina
Ward`s Automotive Ctr ★★★★★
Usa Auto Body ★★★★★
Unique Auto Sales ★★★★★
True2Form Collision Repair Centers ★★★★★
Triple A Automotive Towing & Recovery Services Inc. ★★★★★
Triangle Automotive Repair, Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
From Expedition to Navigator: our predictions for Lincoln's SUV
Tue, Feb 7 2017In the midst of all the buzz surrounding the new aluminum Ford Expedition and Expedition Max, we remembered the other large SUV the Ford Motor Company showed last year, the Lincoln Navigator concept. And since the Navigator has historically been built on the Expedition platform, we figured there's no better time to focus some of our predictions for the big Lincoln. First off, let's take a look at design. Having seen the new Expedition, we're fairly confident that the Navigator will look almost exactly like its concept. The strong similarities between two mean the Expedition serves as a preview of what a production Navigator will look like. For example, both vehicles' greenhouses we can see that the shape of the C-pillars are nearly identical. The only difference is that the Expedition's are painted body color, while the Navigator's are painted black. Additionally, the character line running along the top of the doors on both vehicles is roughly the same height. The same goes for the more subtle crease near the bottom of the doors. We also see no reason why Lincoln wouldn't use the full width taillights, fender vent, and grille treatment it used on the concept. Those are all easy design changes to create differentiation, and they're all right inline with the cues set by the Continental. View 15 Photos For powertrain, we're pretty certain the 400-horsepower 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 previewed on the concept is a certainty now. The Expedition and Expedition Max will be offered with a 3.5-liter EcoBoost as well, so we know it will fit. We expect the Expedition's engine will produce 375 horsepower and 470 lb-ft of torque as it does in the F-150. That's less power than the Navigator concept, but it would be reasonable to make the production Navigator a bit more powerful than its lowly Ford brethren to help justify the increased price tag. Towing capacity will probably be about the same between the Ford and Lincoln, which should be something over 9,000 pounds. The Navigator will probably use the same two-wheel-drive and all-wheel-drive drivetrains, too. Inside is where the Expedition and Navigator will likely differ the most, particularly in seating. The Expedition offers seating for up to eight with an available second-row bench seat, and the Navigator concept had captain's chairs for every row. We're expecting the Navigator will only offer second-row captain's chairs since the cramped third row would be a waste of nice buckets.
2015 Ford F-150 to get up to 26 miles per gallon
Fri, Nov 21 2014The 2015 Ford F-150 is one of the most important US vehicle debuts in years, be it in the pickup segment or the entire marketplace. While we've already known about the truck's engine lineup, its payload ratings and we've even learned a bit about how it drives, the truck's EPA-estimated fuel economy ratings have remained a mystery. The wait is finally over. Ford has announced numbers that put the latest F-150 as the mileage leader among gasoline-powered, full-size pickups in the US, with its new 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6 topping the charts. Starting with the entry-level naturally aspirated 3.5-liter V6, the rear-wheel-drive F-150 is rated at 18-miles-per-gallon city, 25-mpg highway and 20-mpg combined. Opting for four-wheel drive drops those numbers slightly to 17/23/19. If fuel economy is your absolute priority, then upgrading to the 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6 is the hot ticket. It improves things further to 19/26/22 in rear-wheel drive trim or 18/23/20 with four-wheel drive. The carryover naturally aspirated 5.0-liter V8 is rated at 15/22/18 as a 4X2 or 15/21/17 as a 4X4. Finally, the flagship 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 tops the range in available torque and offers buyers 17/24/20 ratings with rear-wheel drive or 17/23/19 with four-wheel drive. "We are delivering with the toughest, smartest and most capable F-150 ever – and now the highest EPA-estimated fuel economy ratings of any full-size gas-powered pickup in America," said Raj Nair, Ford group vice president, Global Product Development, in the company's announcement. Depending on engine and drivetrain configuration, Ford contends that the 2.7-liter EcoBoost's top rating puts fuel economy up between 5 and 29 percent over the current generation, thanks in large part to the truck's lighter aluminum construction. Obviously, these are EPA estimates, and your mileage may vary – ours has. Recently, Autoblog team members have had real difficulty even approximating government mpg estimates on many EcoBoost models, including the new F-150. Scroll down to read Ford's full announcement, including comparisons to rival models.
Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT
Tue, Feb 21 2023When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.







