Jump to content

2020 Ford Explorer


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

I'd lay money on the new Explorer hanging close to that Ranger due to the transmission and power curve.  It's not all about peak numbers.

It's certainly possible due to twice as many gears and it shifts faster than I can with the clunker M5OD, but there's still no reason the 2.7 couldn't be offered. The engineering and parts are already there since the 3.0 is identical besides displacement.

I guess I'm just kinda surprised there's no engine option until you get to the highest trims. Seems odd for a high volume model in the upper half of the Ford lineup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Sevensecondsuv said:

It's certainly possible due to twice as many gears and it shifts faster than I can with the clunker M5OD, but there's still no reason the 2.7 couldn't be offered. The engineering and parts are already there since the 3.0 is identical besides displacement.

I guess I'm just kinda surprised there's no engine option until you get to the highest trims. Seems odd for a high volume model in the upper half of the Ford lineup.

It probably costs the same to make the 2.7 and 3.0 which is probably why the 2.7 is not offered.  I wouldn't be surprised to see the 3.0EB replace the 3.5EB and the 2.3EB replace the 2.7EB in the F150.  Of course they'll keep the 3.5EB HO for the Raptor, Limited, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NLPRacing said:

It probably costs the same to make the 2.7 and 3.0 which is probably why the 2.7 is not offered.  I wouldn't be surprised to see the 3.0EB replace the 3.5EB and the 2.3EB replace the 2.7EB in the F150.  Of course they'll keep the 3.5EB HO for the Raptor, Limited, etc. 

Why would they drop the 3.5EB to save money and then keep offering it only in low-volume (comparatively speaking) trims?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NLPRacing said:

It probably costs the same to make the 2.7 and 3.0 which is probably why the 2.7 is not offered.  I wouldn't be surprised to see the 3.0EB replace the 3.5EB and the 2.3EB replace the 2.7EB in the F150.  Of course they'll keep the 3.5EB HO for the Raptor, Limited, etc. 

I don't see the 3.5 or 2.7 going away in the F150 any time soon.  The 2.7L is the perfect engine for those who don't tow much or often while the 3.5L is built for heavier towing.  They each have their place, and I don't think you can replace both with the 3.0L.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the 2.3 Eco (or maybe a slightly bigger version of it) replace the 3.3 as the base engine in the next generation F150.

I would say the 2.3EB is highly likely to replace the 3.3 in the next gen F150.  If not, we could see a 3.3 hybrid as the low/mid tier model slotting below the 5.0.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2.3 EB replaces base NA V6, the 3.0 EB V6 replaces 3.5 EB, it's probably a bit more fuel efficient and allows Ford to dedicate more 2.7 EB and 3.5 EB production to F150 and Large SUVs. 3.3 Hybrid will be a nice additional touch over a 3.0 V6 Powerstroke.

I don't think we'll see the 2.3 EB in F150, there's no need to change 3.3 V6 bottom feeder option save for a 10-speed auto.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2019 at 5:50 PM, rmc523 said:

 

 

That vertical screen looks like a complete afterthought.

They all pretty much look that way, but they've been out long enough that I've gotten used to them. The vertical screen should be easier to follow maps without the need to lean over and squint at the current sized screen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2019 at 8:06 PM, Assimilator said:

It looks like the 3rd row gained some roominess.

2019 vs 2020

Headroom: 37.8" vs 38.9"

Legroom: 32" vs 32.2"

Shoulder Room: 50.8" vs 54.6"

Hip-Room: 40.7" vs 40.9"

Interestingly, the only exterior dimension that changes significantly is the wheelbase, otherwise the width, height, and length are nearly identical.  

 

I think they took about 3 inches from the rear area  to give more room in the 2nd row. The 2nd row seats are now easier to operate as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

2.3 EB replaces base NA V6, the 3.0 EB V6 replaces 3.5 EB, it's probably a bit more fuel efficient and allows Ford to dedicate more 2.7 EB and 3.5 EB production to F150 and Large SUVs. 3.3 Hybrid will be a nice additional touch over a 3.0 V6 Powerstroke.

I don't think we'll see the 2.3 EB in F150, there's no need to change 3.3 V6 bottom feeder option save for a 10-speed auto.

At this point, offering the 2.3EB in the F150 would look like Ford was copying GM, and I think the Silverado actually hit the point of diminishing returns when it comes to engine downsizing in a fullsize pickup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, papilgee4evaeva said:

At this point, offering the 2.3EB in the F150 would look like Ford was copying GM, and I think the Silverado actually hit the point of diminishing returns when it comes to engine downsizing in a fullsize pickup.

The Silverado 2.7 I-4 has gotten pretty good reviews. The 2.3 Eco would provide better performance and fuel economy than the 3.3 with similar numbers to the Ranger given the F150 isn’t much heavier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Trader 10 said:

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the 2.3 Eco (or maybe a slightly bigger version of it) replace the 3.3 as the base engine in the next generation F150.

I don't see that at all. The whole point of the 3.3 is to be a cheap, robust (fleet) engine. I don't see any EB filling that particular niche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, SoonerLS said:

I don't see that at all. The whole point of the 3.3 is to be a cheap, robust (fleet) engine. I don't see any EB filling that particular niche.

I think it makes sense to have a "low tech" engine in the line up in particular when you have one available. Not everyone buys into the "more is better" school.

I'm watching Mecom now-and just saw a 327 "Vette go through-amazing they could build an engine at one time with less then 5 miles of plumbing and wiring under the hood?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Trader 10 said:

The Silverado 2.7 I-4 has gotten pretty good reviews. The 2.3 Eco would provide better performance and fuel economy than the 3.3 with similar numbers to the Ranger given the F150 isn’t much heavier.

It's gotten good reviews in isolation, but I haven't yet seen it compared favorably to the 3.3 in the Ford or the 3.6 in the Ram.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Chevys 2.7L I-4 is compared to the 4.3L as a viable alternative, then yes it's amazing considering the age, and rough NVH of the 4.3L, but publications I have read with the usage of the 2.7L I-4 in a Silverado have been lack luster.  I think one of them even said they didn't see any fuel savings that couldn't be already achieved through other current engines.  Not sure if Toyota's 2.7L I-4 was their inspiration, of Fords 2.7L but cut off 2 cylinders to make it rock...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • silvrsvt changed the title to 2020 Ford Explorer

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...