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

Nice! Auto, Sport, Clean Carfax! on 2040-cars

US $12,950.00
Year:2005 Mileage:81013
Location:

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Fort Worth, Texas, United States
Advertising:
Vehicle Title:Clear
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:1.6L 1600CC l4 GAS SOHC Supercharged
Body Type:Convertible
Transmission:Automatic
Fuel Type:GAS
VIN: WMWRH33445TK55172 Year: 2005
Make: Mini
Model: Cooper
Disability Equipped: No
Trim: S Convertible 2-Door
Doors: 2
Drive Train: Front Wheel Drive
Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 2
Mileage: 81,013
Sub Model: S Sport Auto
Number of Cylinders: 4
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
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. ... 

Auto Services in Texas

Z Rated Automotive Sales & Service ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Accessories
Address: 316 County Road 266, Leander
Phone: (512) 355-3715

Xtreme Tinting & Alarms ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Window Tinting, Industrial Equipment & Supplies
Address: 6700 Louetta Rd, The-Woodlands
Phone: (866) 595-6470

Wayne`s World of Cars ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 2124 Picadilly Dr, Leander
Phone: (512) 388-2052

Vaughan`s Auto Glass ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Glass-Auto, Plate, Window, Etc, Windshield Repair
Address: 6404 W Highway 80, Verhalen
Phone: (866) 595-6470

Vandergriff Honda ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers
Address: 1104 W Interstate 20, Kennedale
Phone: (877) 371-8471

Trade Lane Motors ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers
Address: 6375 Richmond Ave, Alief
Phone: (713) 782-1544

Auto blog

Psychology can wipe out 20-25% of your EV's range

Tue, Feb 25 2014

There are two primary takeaways from a recent study of electric-vehicle driving habits in Germany. One: an electric vehicle with 25 percent of its battery charge left creates the same reaction in drivers as the fuel needle on "E" in a gas-powered car. Two: familiarity breeds comfort. The study, conducted by Germany's Technische Universitat Chemnitz and funded by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, put some real numbers on the concept of "range anxiety." According to Green Car Congress, that anxiety truly kicks in when there's less than a quarter of the driving range left on an EV's battery and the study found that a typical car's range is "shortened" by a 20 to 25 percent "psychological safety buffer." If we take the popular Nissan Leaf as an example, the official 84-mile single-charge range is really closer to 63 miles in the head of the driver. The longer the driver spent in the EV, the shorter his mental buffer became. The study was culled from data involving just 79 drivers who tooled around Berlin in Mini E EVs for about six months, collectively putting a quarter-million miles on the electric vehicles. The good news is that the longer the driver spent using the EV, the shorter his mental buffer became, which meant he could comfortably get more miles from the car. So, to all you EV advocates out there, know that once drivers spend some time with an EV, they get more and more used to what the car can do. It's a lesson we've learned before. Just remember that to new EV drivers, the single-charge range is a lot smaller than the one old-timers see.

2014 Mini Cooper

Mon, 10 Feb 2014

If I had a dollar for every time I heard someone from Mini refer to 'go-kart-like handling,' I'd be retired, living on a beautiful piece of coastline somewhere in the Caribbean. Perhaps even on the shores of Puerto Rico, where Mini chose to launch its latest Cooper and Cooper S hatchbacks. As with so many frequently used phrases, though, there is indeed some truth to the cliché - while the Mini Cooper has never actually handled quite like a go kart, it has always had a certain directness in its movements, reacting to steering inputs with an immediacy and fervor unlike most any other automobile meant primarily for the street.
Combine those unique driving dynamics with a sense of fun that permeates the entire brand from pre-sales marketing to the actual sales process itself and you end up with a marketplace success. As an ex-Mini owner myself (a 2009 Cooper S Convertible), I can attest to the kinship felt between fellow Mini drivers who share in the knowledge that they are having more fun than the poor appliance-driving masses sharing the highways and byways of these United States. It's no surprise that the style-conscious US continues to be the marque's single largest market year after year.
This enviable brand perception hasn't been attained without its own fair share of flaws, however. Though the quirky design and massively customizable bits and pieces that have made up the Mini brand's interior philosophy since it was reborn in 2001 have proven somewhat endearing, the Cooper Hardtop's ergonomics have always been an unmitigated disaster. Plus, this is a very small car, with a rear seat that's practically uninhabitable by adult-size occupants. While that adjective seemingly goes hand-in-hand with the brand's name, the modern Cooper has never been as ingeniously packaged as its 1959 forbearer, which offered up as much interior space as possible through innovative engineering and minimalist design. Further, parent company BMW has positioned Mini as a premium brand, so the Cooper's diminutive size has never equated to low prices. And for being such a small car, the Cooper historically hasn't been well-known for its fuel efficiency.

Did BMW drag its feet on Mini recall?

Mon, Sep 28 2015

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening an investigation into BMW's reporting of a recall for 30,456 examples of the 2014-2015 Mini Cooper Hardtop, Cooper S, and the 2015 John Cooper Works. According to the government, "it appears from a review of NHTSA's databases that BMW may have failed to submit recall communications to NHTSA in a timely manner." The automaker issued the recall in July because crash tests showed the models didn't meet side impact requirements for passengers in the back seat. While there were no reported injuries at the time, the company decided to install energy-absorbing material in the space between the rear interior panels and the exterior. However, NHTSA has decided to investigate whether this campaign should have started much earlier, given the evidence the company had. According to the government's report, the Cooper Hardtop failed side-impact tests in 2014, although one of these tests was five-miles-per-hour faster than the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. The agency claims: "In January 2015 BMW verbally committed that it would conduct a service campaign to add padding to the rear side panels of MY 2015 Mini 2 Door Hardtop Cooper models. However, BMW did not initiate the service campaign and failed to inform NHTSA of its failure to do so." A subsequent crash test of an example with this fix showed it to make the vehicle compliant with the rules. Mini spokesperson Mariella Kapsaskis told Autoblog: "Regarding the NHTSA audit query, BMW Group is evaluating the request and will respond to NHTSA as appropriate." INVESTIGATION Subject : BMW Reporting & Timely Recall Execution Date Investigation Opened: SEP 24, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: AQ15004 Component(s): STRUCTURE All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) MINI COOPER 2014-2015 MINI COOPER S 2014-2015 MINI JOHN COOPER WORKS 2015 Details Manufacturer: BMW of North America, LLC SUMMARY: NHTSA is opening this AQ to better understand and evaluate BMW's process(es) for its notification procedures and for timely and efficient execution of its safety recall campaigns. In mid-2014, NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) had side impact moving deformable barrier (MDB) tests performed on two model year (MY) 2014 Mini 2 Door Hardtop Coopers. These two tests were performed at a speed 5 mph higher than required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 214, Side impact protection.