Jump to content

2020 Explorer


Recommended Posts

 

The only problem is the Explorer would be quite a bit wider then the Everest/Ranger/Bronco

 

Everest is 73.3 Inches and the current Explorer is 76 inches. Wheelbase is roughly the same though.

Not saying that Everest mule is an Explorer in disguise, but its definitely 100% not a Bronco. Edited by fuzzymoomoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Observations that may be coincidence and un related

 

1. Expedition and D4 Explorer are similar outside width

 

2. Expedition was made longer wheelbase - 122" and 210" long

 

Would it be more advantageous to make NG Explorer:

1. BOF alloy body share with F150 and Expedition - a shorter wheelbase version?

 

2. Unitary RWD platform all steel same width as D4 version?

 

3. Some sort of shared platform with T6 Everest...?

 

 

Not knowing much here but it is interesting that Ford has left plenty of gap between Edge and Expedition.

 

An Expedition based Explorer with say, 116" wheelbase becomes kinda like a Chevrolet Tahoe,

I know this could be way out there wrong direction thinking....

 

It might be a great way for Ford to get itself back into the game with GM's full sized SUVs without actually

having to build more Expeditions and Navigators....

 

Thoughts?

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Observations that may be coincidence and un related

 

1. Expedition and D4 Explorer are similar outside width

 

2. Expedition was made longer wheelbase - 122" and 210" long

 

Would it be more advantageous to make NG Explorer:

1. BOF alloy body share with F150 and Expedition - a shorter wheelbase version?

 

2. Unitary RWD platform all steel same width as D4 version?

 

3. Some sort of shared platform with T6 Everest...?

 

 

Not knowing much here but it is interesting that Ford has left plenty of gap between Edge and Expedition.

 

An Expedition based Explorer with say, 116" wheelbase becomes kinda like a Chevrolet Tahoe,

I know this could be way out there wrong direction thinking....

 

It might be a great way for Ford to get itself back into the game with GM's full sized SUVs without actually

having to build more Expeditions and Navigators....

 

Thoughts?

These things seem to be getting absurdly larger each generation, so I wouldn't be too surprised if the next-gen GM twins caught up with the Expedition in size. I'm sure the piggish middle class debtors they appeal to will be thrilled. Codpiece Fever.

 

Personally, I'd be thrilled if the Explorer was a proper midsize BOF SUV again. Same size as the 4Runner. Nothing bigger.

 

A return to normalcy would be even better....

Edited by The Handler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These things seem to be getting absurdly larger each generation, so I wouldn't be too surprised if the next-gen GM twins caught up with the Expedition in size. I'm sure the piggish middle class debtors they appeal to will be thrilled. Codpiece Fever.

 

Personally, I'd be thrilled if the Explorer was a proper midsize BOF SUV again. Same size as the 4Runner. Nothing bigger.

 

A return to normalcy would be even better....

Thats what the new Bronco is for
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yet they did the same thing with "Mach 1" this year....and F-150/Mustang hybrids too for that matter.

 

 

It better not be. With the RWD proportions we've seen on the mules, I'd be really surprised if it is.

 

---

 

Is anyone else's multi-quote function not working all of the sudden?

 

Maybe it is Explorerest?

Edited by SteelyD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Observations that may be coincidence and un related

 

1. Expedition and D4 Explorer are similar outside width

 

2. Expedition was made longer wheelbase - 122" and 210" long

 

Would it be more advantageous to make NG Explorer:

1. BOF alloy body share with F150 and Expedition - a shorter wheelbase version?

 

2. Unitary RWD platform all steel same width as D4 version?

 

3. Some sort of shared platform with T6 Everest...?

 

 

Not knowing much here but it is interesting that Ford has left plenty of gap between Edge and Expedition.

 

An Expedition based Explorer with say, 116" wheelbase becomes kinda like a Chevrolet Tahoe,

I know this could be way out there wrong direction thinking....

 

It might be a great way for Ford to get itself back into the game with GM's full sized SUVs without actually

having to build more Expeditions and Navigators....

 

Thoughts?

 

Are you thinking that Ford is going to build BOF vehicles in Chicago? There isn't any capacity at the other BOF plants, is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would Ford go back to building a BOF RWD Explorer when the 2011-present model is by far the best selling three-row crossover in its clsss. Dont mess with success, just try and continually improve it (we really should have had a next-hen Exploer for 2016/2017, but...).

 

If Ford wants a small or midsize BOF/RWD SUV...that is what a 2dr/4dr Bronco would be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would RWD help the Aviator? Yes, many of its rivals are/would be RWD...but the Audi Q7 isnt. I would hope Ford doesnt jeopardize the success of the next gen Explorer just for the that.

 

Dont misunderstand, I acknowledge the incredible importance of a three-row CUV Flr Lincoln...but the Explorers success is necessary for the success of the company as a whole.

 

I believe that F/AWD crossovers would be more that capable of competing in the luxury field...just look at Cadillac, Audi, Lexus, Volvo, and Acura. If Lincoln needed/wanted a R/AWD part of its lineup it would be for a next gen Continental and MKZ successor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you guys not been paying attention? Explorer and Aviator are unibody RWD on CD6.

 

The Audi Q7 uses a longitudinal drivetrain which allows for larger engines and more power including a V8 and a V12 Diesel.

 

You can’t get that kind of power/performance out of a transverse FWD based drivetrain.

 

There is plenty of room for a 3 row Edge between the 2 row Edge and the new Explorer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The only problem is the Explorer would be quite a bit wider then the Everest/Ranger/Bronco

 

Everest is 73.3 Inches and the current Explorer is 76 inches. Wheelbase is roughly the same though.

Well one of the things I don't like about the Explorer is it seems like the doors are very "thick"-that is rest your arm on the window sill-to me it is very uncomfortable-like its too far away from your seating position. that 2.7" comes out to a little over 1" on each side.

 

Is there an internal seat dimension published? Like external edge to external edge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is plenty of room for a 3 row Edge between the 2 row Edge and the new Explorer.

 

 

I currently own a 2016 Explorer Sport and noticed even then the Explorer and Edge are similar, even though the Explorer is larger and has the third row. A larger Edge with a third row can fill the current position the Explorer holds. The only downside I see right now with he current Explorer, is that even though Ford markets it as an SUV, it still looks and feels like a crossover and not a true SUV. Not knocking the vehicle, I love my Explorer, but it still feels like a crossover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The only problem is the Explorer would be quite a bit wider then the Everest/Ranger/Bronco

 

Everest is 73.3 Inches and the current Explorer is 76 inches. Wheelbase is roughly the same though.

According to Ford's website, the width of Explorer excluding mirrors is 78.9" mostly due to

the thicker doors of the D4 platform... I read that Taurus as 76" wide so easy to get confused..

 

Everest is a little too narrow to give the expected hip and shoulder room (~57" but not far off)

 

If Ford kept the current 78.9" width, just imagine what the interior room could be with the right engineering,

you could lots of hip and shoulder room like an Expedition or reduce the vehicles external width and still

keep better than Edge internal dimensions....

 

Either way, any change is going to be for the better. ;)

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would RWD help the Aviator? Yes, many of its rivals are/would be RWD...but the Audi Q7 isnt. I would hope Ford doesnt jeopardize the success of the next gen Explorer just for the that.

 

Dont misunderstand, I acknowledge the incredible importance of a three-row CUV Flr Lincoln...but the Explorers success is necessary for the success of the company as a whole.

 

I believe that F/AWD crossovers would be more that capable of competing in the luxury field...just look at Cadillac, Audi, Lexus, Volvo, and Acura. If Lincoln needed/wanted a R/AWD part of its lineup it would be for a next gen Continental and MKZ successor.

 

That's because it rides on CD6, which will also underpin the next-gen MKZ and Conti. So yes, they'll be RWD/AWD too.

 

Well one of the things I don't like about the Explorer is it seems like the doors are very "thick"-that is rest your arm on the window sill-to me it is very uncomfortable-like its too far away from your seating position. that 2.7" comes out to a little over 1" on each side.

 

Is there an internal seat dimension published? Like external edge to external edge?

 

Yes, I've noticed that as well. And it's strange, because the Flex - which rides on the same platform - does not have this issue at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hoping that Ford's rethink on more Utilities means that Ford looks at all possibilities,

maybe the market is now big enough to allow Ford to widen its gaze and product envelope.

 

Ford now diverting money away from cars to more Utilities could mean a few unexpected surprises

are thrown up compared to what was originally proposed under Fields and predictions of a slowing economy.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...