Jump to content

2020 Ford Explorer Spied


Recommended Posts

What I was originally asking is whether the 2020 will be longer or just use existing length with better proportions and that

better space efficiency, I used the Territory as an example of an Edge sized utility that had the interior space of Explorer

in no way was I suggesting the styling or otherwise was suitable for US tastes and preferences...

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging by the 2020 PIU, the overhangs have been reduced, so the wheelbase will be

significantly longer than the current 112" - maybe Ford is now covering the 116" WB Tahoe as well?.

but I digress...maybe the 2020 Explorer is aimed at covering more of the near full sized SUV buyers?

 

A longer wheelbase in the new Explorer will give it a different feel, more like Expedition without being as big of course.

That and the RWD power trains should play well to returning buyers. As we've said before a bigger Explorer gives

Edge more breathing space too..

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wheelbase is clearly longer but overall length appears similar but they've chopped the height down so it looks much less short and boxy. It's hard to tell you what interior spaciousness will be like but Explorer and Aviator look much less 'bulky' in their packaging than the current Explorer. You can tell the interior cabin 'box' has been pushed to the edges of the design with slimmer sidewalls, doors, etc.. It's definitely not as big as the Traverse and I would say it's not a big departure from the current Explorer but the rear overhang looks slightly longer so my guess is that there is going to be an increase in overall length.

 

2020 Explorer seems to split the difference between the low and sleek Durango and the the mainstream utilities.

Edited by Assimilator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wheelbase is clearly longer but overall length appears similar but they've chopped the height down so it looks much less short and boxy. It's hard to tell you what interior spaciousness will be like but Explorer and Aviator look much less 'bulky' in their packaging than the current Explorer. You can tell the interior cabin 'box' has been pushed to the edges of the design with slimmer sidewalls, doors, etc.. It's definitely not as big as the Traverse and I would say it's not a big departure from the current Explorer but the rear overhang looks slightly longer so my guess is that there is going to be an increase in overall length.

 

2020 Explorer seems to split the difference between the low and sleek Durango and the the mainstream utilities.

That may be a good thing if Ford is hunting for its own sweet spot, eliminating a lot of car sales

and going with Utilities that remind buyers of sedans without being cars but still clearly Utilities.

Clever..

 

Did a little checking up on CD6, there's a suggestion that it may be based on early 2000s RWD (DEW?)

but with significant changes - maybe it was just a starting point to get Ford into a premium RWD platform

more quickly from scratch?

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would expect that it carries some DEW98 DNA, but I doubt that you'd find much design carryover. DEW98 had some inherent flaws that you wouldn't want in a new platform.

I understand that and was thinking that it was just a starting point as inspiration

of what Ford wanted in a RWD platform, time will tell what really happened

behind the scenes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that and was thinking that it was just a starting point as inspiration

of what Ford wanted in a RWD platform, time will tell what really happened

behind the scenes.

That's kind of what I'm thinking in terms of DNA. I'd love to see features like its anti-dive/anti-lift suspension geometry return, just with the ability to accept corporate standard parts (engines, transmissions, rear punkin, etc).
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's kind of what I'm thinking in terms of DNA. I'd love to see features like its anti-dive/anti-lift suspension geometry return, just with the ability to accept corporate standard parts (engines, transmissions, rear punkin, etc).

Exactly, bundle in at the start all the great features the RWD platform is going to need across the whole product envelope,

get that framing right at get go so if things change, the platform has flexibility to adapt with changing customer needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes perfect sense that CD6 might have some DEW98 DNA, because I have read the DEW98 had some MN12 (1989 Thunderbird) DNA in it. This has long been Ford's philosophy. Even the 1964 Galaxie had some 1949 Ford DNA in it. The 1978 LTD had some 1965 Galaxie 500 DNA. The 2006 - 2012 Fusion had some Mazda6 DNA, and the Mazda6 had some 1994 Contour/Mondeo DNA. I have no first hand knowledge, but I have read these things over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's kind of what I'm thinking in terms of DNA. I'd love to see features like its anti-dive/anti-lift suspension geometry return, just with the ability to accept corporate standard parts (engines, transmissions, rear punkin, etc).

 

If I was doing it I'd take the CD4 chassis and electrical, add the mustang front clip and rear suspension and modify it to package the batteries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes perfect sense that CD6 might have some DEW98 DNA, because I have read the DEW98 had some MN12 (1989 Thunderbird) DNA in it. This has long been Ford's philosophy. Even the 1964 Galaxie had some 1949 Ford DNA in it. The 1978 LTD had some 1965 Galaxie 500 DNA. The 2006 - 2012 Fusion had some Mazda6 DNA, and the Mazda6 had some 1994 Contour/Mondeo DNA. I have no first hand knowledge, but I have read these things over the years.

 

DEW98 was co-developed with Jaguar. I doubt that it had any MN12 heritage but I guess it's possible. If you have parts that are proven and meet the new specs why not reuse them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Some people thought the 2005 Mustang was DEW98. It started that way but by the time it was done only the fuel tank and part of the floor pan remained.

My source is in Ford Eng...

 

There was a great story about what happened at Ford 2000 with all the respective groups

that Ford was trying to convince to use DEW. Long story short,

Ford Aust was out because it was too expensive

Panther large cars were out because it was BOF

Mustang was then encouraged to use it but only the trans tunnel and part of floor pan (and fuel tank) was used..

Ken Koors, then Chief of Large car group in Nth America had the good sense to listen to respective groups.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DEW98 was co-developed with Jaguar. I doubt that it had any MN12 heritage but I guess it's possible. If you have parts that are proven and meet the new specs why not reuse them.

Back around '96 or so, a friend was working as an EE for Ford. He said some of the engineers working on DEW98 stopped by his facility on their way back to Dearborn, and he got to see the prototype/mule and talk to the engineers. As I recall his description, it sounds like the relationship between MN-12 and DEW98 was about like the relationship between DEW98 and SN197: it was the starting point, but the new platform diverged so much that there really wasn't any direct lineage from one to the other.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While most large vehicle groups couldn't use DEW straight up, it gave them inspiraton

to do more with their own respective designs, that may be the case here with

Ford developing a new platform that covers all the bases from get go, no add ons.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DEW98 had 2 technical flaws: It could not use the corporate mod v8s because of the suspension components - could not load the engine from below. So it was restricted to the 3.9L Jag AJ V8 which was a fantastic engine - smooth as silk. But maxed out just below 300 hp. And Jag would not let Ford use the supercharged version.

 

The 2nd issue was suspension compliance. That all aluminum suspension was gorgeous and handled great but was not as smooth over bumps and irregular surfaces as other setups.

 

CD6 will be engineered from the get go to support the right drivetrains and to be PHEV capable and I think the current mustang suspension is a great starting point along with the CCD setup. All the components are available now - it's just a matter of putting them together.

  • Like 1
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...