2010 Ford Transit Connect Van 46k 1owner Cln Car Fax Free Shipp East Coast W/byn on 2040-cars
Watertown, Connecticut, United States
Body Type:Mini Cargo Van
Engine:2.0L 121Cu. In. l4 GAS DOHC Naturally Aspirated
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Dealer
Number of Cylinders: 4
Make: Ford
Model: Transit Connect
Trim: XL Mini Cargo Van 4-Door
Warranty: Vehicle has an existing warranty
Drive Type: FWD
Power Options: Air Conditioning
Mileage: 46,419
Sub Model: 114.6" XL w/
Exterior Color: White
Vehicle Inspection: Inspected (include details in your description)
Interior Color: Blue
Ford Transit Connect for Sale
2010 ford transit xlt cargo van 1 owner fleet maintained carfax a/c auto racks !(US $11,775.01)
Xlt auto pass park sensors repairable rebuildable lot drives save(US $9,900.00)
2012 ford transit connect xl advancetrac rsc 8k miles clear\rebuilt(US $16,900.00)
2012 ford transit connect xlt mini passenger van 4-door 2.0l(US $15,900.00)
2011 ford transit cargo van 1 owner fleet maintained 26 mpg carfax a/c auto 4cyl(US $12,775.01)
2010 ford transit connect xlt cargo in virginia(US $11,980.00)
Auto Services in Connecticut
Tint Works/Sound Works ★★★★★
Spring Replacement Auto And Truck Center ★★★★★
S & S Transmission ★★★★★
Papa`s Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram SRT ★★★★★
Monro Muffler Brake & Service ★★★★★
Mickey`s Towing & Repair Station Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford announces bevy of recalls, 2 of which are recalls on recalls
Tue, 04 Nov 2014
Ford has announced five separate recalls, affecting 202,000 vehicles built between 2005 and 2014.
It's not been a great couple of weeks for Ford. On October 30, the company announced a 205,000-unit recall, and yesterday, it was revealed that the Ford brand's year-over-year sales were down over 5,000 units while the company itself was down 3,000 units over through October. Now, the company has announced five separate recalls affecting 202,000 vehicles built between 2005 and 2014.
Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota
Wed, Feb 25 2015It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study
EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate
Mon, 26 Aug 2013
The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.