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

2010 Mercury Mariner Premier Htd Leather Sunroof 48k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

US $16,980.00
Year:2010 Mileage:48259 Color: Black /
 Black
Location:

Stafford, Texas, United States

Stafford, Texas, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:3.0L 183Cu. In. V6 FLEX DOHC Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Sport Utility
Transmission:Automatic
Fuel Type:FLEX
VIN: 4M2CN8HG1AKJ14605 Year: 2010
Make: Mercury
Options: Sunroof, Leather
Model: Mariner
Power Options: Power Seats, Power Windows, Power Locks, Cruise Control
Trim: Premier Sport Utility 4-Door
Number Of Doors: 4
Drive Type: FWD
CALL NOW: 832-310-2228
Mileage: 48,259
Inspection: Vehicle has been inspected
Sub Model: WE FINANCE!!
Seller Rating: 5 STAR *****
Exterior Color: Black
Interior Color: Black
Number of Cylinders: 6
Warranty: Vehicle has an existing warranty
Condition: Certified pre-owned: To qualify for certified pre-owned status, vehicles must meet strict age, mileage, and inspection requirements established by their manufacturers. Certified pre-owned cars are often sold with warranty, financing and roadside assistance options similar to their new counterparts. See the seller's listing for full details. ... 

Auto Services in Texas

Zoil Lube ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 3321 Fondren Rd, Fresno
Phone: (713) 783-2050

Young Chevrolet ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers
Address: 9301 E R L Thornton Fwy, Seagoville
Phone: (214) 328-9111

Yhs Automotive Service Center ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 19831 Greenwind Chase Dr, Katy
Phone: (281) 944-9748

Woodlake Motors ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers
Address: 2416 N Frazier St, Dobbin
Phone: (936) 441-3500

Winwood Motor Co ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Gas Stations, Towing
Address: 4922 Graves Rd, Santa-Fe
Phone: (409) 925-2039

Wayne`s Car Care Inc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Accessories
Address: 2725 S Cooper St, Richland-Hills
Phone: (817) 795-8436

Auto blog

NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe

Mon, 17 Dec 2012

According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"

Car Stories: Owning the SHO station wagon that could've been

Fri, Oct 30 2015

A little over a year ago, I bought what could be the most interesting car I will ever own. It was a 1987 Mercury Sable LS station wagon. Don't worry – there's much more to this story. I've always had a soft spot for wagons, and I still remember just how revolutionary the Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable were back in the mid-1980s. As a teenager, I fell especially hard for the 220-horsepower 1989 Ford Taurus SHO – so much so that I'd go on to own a dozen over the next 20 years. And like many other quirky enthusiasts, I always wondered what a SHO station wagon would be like. That changed last year when I bought the aforementioned Sable LS wagon, festooned with the high-revving DOHC 3.0-liter V6 engine and five-speed manual transmission from a 1989 Taurus SHO. In addition, the wagon had SHO front seats, a SHO center console, and the 140-mph instrument cluster with mileage that matched the engine. When I bought it, that number was just under 60,000 – barely broken in for the overachieving Yamaha-sourced mill. The engine and transmission weren't the only upgrades. It wore dual-piston PBR brakes with the choice Eibach/Tokico suspension combo in front. The rear featured SHO disc brakes with MOOG cargo coils and Tokico shocks, resulting in a wagon that handled ridiculously well while still retaining a decent level of comfort and five-door functionality. I could attack the local switchbacks while rowing gears to a 7,000-rpm soundtrack just as easily as loading up on lumber at the hardware store. Over time I added a front tower brace to stiffen things a bit as well as a bigger, 73-mm mass airflow sensor for better breathing, and I sourced some inexpensive 2004 Taurus 16-inch five-spoke wheels, refinished in gunmetal to match the two-tone white/gunmetal finish on the car. That, along with some minor paint and body work, had me winning trophies at every car show in town. And yet, what I loved most about the car wasn't its looks or performance, but rather its history. And here's where things also get a little philosophical, because I absolutely, positively love old used cars. Don't get me wrong – new cars are great. Designers can sculpt a timeless automotive shape, and engineers can construct systems and subsystems to create an exquisite chassis with superb handling and plenty of horsepower. But it's the age and mileage that turn machines into something more than the sum of their parts.

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Thu, Apr 30 2020

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.