1992 Ford Bronco Custom 4x4 5.0l V8 Automatic Clean Carfax Suv Gasoline 5.0l V8 on 2040-cars
Pompano Beach, Florida, United States
Ford Bronco for Sale
- Clean
(US $3,000.00) - 1972 ford bronco 4x4(US $5,000.00)
- 1974 ford bronco early fi mustang engine 5.0 arb lockers winch rock crawler(US $12,000.00)
- 1968 ford bronco classic 4x4 5.0l v8 efi 302 frame off restoration project(US $20,000.00)
- 1996 ford bronco 5.0 5 speed(US $4,500.00)
- 1989 ford bronco xlt elx 1000 full size regatta blue and white
Auto Services in Florida
Xtreme Car Installation ★★★★★
White Ford Company Inc ★★★★★
Wheel Innovations & Wheel Repair ★★★★★
West Orange Automotive ★★★★★
Wally`s Garage ★★★★★
VIP Car Wash ★★★★★
Auto blog
Your official Ford Transit specs are here, $29,565* to start
Wed, 04 Jun 2014Ford has released the full list of pricing and specs on its new Transit, the replacement for the long-lived E-Series cargo van. Prices are set to start at $29,565 and can increase rapidly from there, depending on length, engine and wheelbase, among other options.
Let's talk first about those new engines. The base is the familiar 3.7-liter, naturally aspirated V6. It boasts 275 horsepower and 260 pound-feet of torque and can return up to 14 miles per gallon in the city and 19 mpg on the highway. This engine can also be adapted to run on LPG or compressed natural gas. Of course, there are better alternatives, for a price, the first of which is Ford's well-received, 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6. It packs 310 hp and a best-in-class 400 lb-ft of torque (available at just 2,500 rpm) while matching the naturally aspirated engine in both city and highway fuel economy.
Then, there's the diesel. With a 3.2-liter, five-cylinder diesel mill at its disposal, the Transit generates 350 lb-ft between 1,500 and 2,500 rpm, along with 185 hp. This engine hasn't been rated by the EPA, although we'd be really, really surprised if it didn't handily best either of the gas-powered engines in fuel efficiency. A six-speed automatic is standard, regardless of engine.
Detroit Three autoworkers could get huge bonuses
Mon, 06 Jan 2014For a long time, being a line worker for one of the Detroit Three has meant living with an uncertain future. With the health of American automakers on the rise, though, things are also starting to look up for the men and women building the cars. The latest sign that things aren't bad? Big profit-sharing checks.
According to The Detroit News, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler could end up paying over $800 million to 130,000 workers as part of a profit-sharing plan. According to The News, the economic impact of these profits in Michigan alone could exceed $400 million, besting the NFL's Super Bowl, MLB's All-Star Game and the NHL's Winter Classic for their economic impact.
This is the third straight year the Detroit Three have issued profit-sharing checks to UAW employees, and for many workers, the checks are as close as they'll get to a raise, due to the most recent contract between the union and the manufacturers. On average, employees at GM and Ford receive $1 for every $1 million in North American (not just the US) pre-tax profits. Chrysler, meanwhile, gets a similar deal, although the Auburn Hills-based company calculates profit sharing using 85 percent of the brand's global profits.
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.