Sevensecondsuv

It's actually funny how Ford had an actual real off-roader in the early 90s Explorer. Every bit as capable as the Bronco and non-wrangler Jeeps. But then the soccer moms got ahold of them and started complaining that they rode like trucks to the point that Ford is now on it's third platform change with lowered ride height each time in an effort to chase driving dynamics and continue to appeal to that demographic with Explorer to the point that they're going to bring the Bronco back to be the real off-roader! Nothing at all wrong with that strategy and I'm excited to get a proper RWD utility but it's kind of ironic when you think about model names, sales trends, and how old is new again.

He's the one who's worried

Now you're worried? But it was ok in 2011 when they nuertered what little actual off-road utility cred it had left?

That was a nice system they had back then. I just wonder if the 6.2 isn't a little too much for a base engine. Now that the 7.3 will be available, the 6.2 doesn't need to cover the entire gas engine spectrum. Seems like there could be some fuel efficiency / cost of ownership savings with a base engine more in the 5.5-5.8L displacement range. It's not worth developing a new engine, but it might be worth either a tall-deck, iron block coyote (they already have the parts and tooling in the corporate mod motor bin) or simply just cutting a little stroke or bore out of the 6.2L.

White Space!

Thanks. Any word on what the base engine will be? Does the 6.2L continue on or do we see a different (smaller) base engine now that the 7.3L is available?

Those in the know: can you at least confirm the number of cylinders? Most everyone is assuming it's a V8, but an upgraded big-bore V10 isn't entirely unbelievable. A six cylinder also seems highly improbable, but possible given a specific set of requirements for medium duty service....

I have a hard time understanding how having a big chunk of hard plastic right next to ones leg could possibly be an advantage in a collision, but you might be on to something. In any case, while that might be true with the current D4 Explorer, going to CD6 offers a great chance to get rid of that limitation. As for Expedition, it uses the same basic cab structure as F Series, so I doubt that's it. To me, it smacks of cutting less-than-wildly-popular options in an effort to reduce the number of build variations (i.e. decontenting). While that approach certainly has a place on Fusion on down, I don't think it makes a lot of sense on higher-MSRP, big volume, family-oriented products like Explorer/Expedition/F Series.

Apparently that's not the case with F Series. The split bench w/o console is available at least up through the Lariat trim (I didn't check KR or Limited). There are obviously enough buyers who want that if Ford is offering it. I suspect the lack of that option on Explorer/Expedition is more just a product of decontenting than anything else.

Let's face it - it's higher than 0.01%. Not saying it's anywhere near a majority, but there are plenty of big guys out there who'd like more room. It seems like Ford could do some more market research of the issue to ensure their product has maximum appeal to the largest cross section of buyers possible. I'm guessing the new Explorer is going to be shift-by-wire (the dial), so it's not like there's any real engineering to do to move the shifter out of the console. At that point offering a console delete / split bench option wouldn't cost much at all. The split bench with a fold down armrest/ middle seat back that also doubles as a center console with built in cup holders as featured on the panthers, most F-150s (I looked and even the 2019 Lariats have a leather 40/20/40 split bench available), and the old Ranger is a very welcome design with some buyers. It'd be nice to see it in Explorer and Expedition due to their target audience. Do it like the current F Series: Leather captains chairs and full-length console standard, but a leather 40/20/40 split bench available at no extra cost.

Looks like GM now knows where to start with those layoffs.

Most states have provisions in the law for replicas. That's how the cobra kit cars work. Although on those they're titled as a "home built" 1965 and the kit is just considered parts like any other auto parts you buy. It's a little confusing but obviously there's a way.

Have the latest F150s gone to a dial shifter like the cars? Once they do that there is no need to design two different cable shift systems for column and floor shift.

Around here you can't hardly find a 10 year Ford where the oval is still blue. It's extremely common. My guess is that they switched suppliers (for whatever reason, but probably a $$$ issue). What's shocking is that it's gone on for long as it has. There were skads of 05-08 F series running around with faded out ovals in 2014 when Ford was putting them on new Edges. Now those 2014s are faded out. I'm not even sure the problem is fixed on '18s or if they're just not old enough yet. It should be an extremely easy problem to fix and you know Ford has been aware of it for at least a decade now.

No, I get what they're doing. But at such limited numbers and crazy prices, I don't understand all the fanfare and buzz about being licensed by Ford. At 12/year it may as well not exist. That's barely enough to even bother with forming an owners club. I'd like to see someone like Factory Five do an Early Bronco. There's definitely a market for that right now. People love Early Broncos but it'd be nice if there was a way to get one without starting with a rusted out pile of scrap.