Jump to content

2020 Ford Explorer


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I just realized if those numbers turn out to be accurate,  the 2.3 in the Explorer 4WD gets better fuel economy than the Ranger 4x4 with basically the same drivetrain despite being bigger and (I think) heavier

Explorer is more aerodynamic and probably has a numerically lower axle ratio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I just realized if those numbers turn out to be accurate,  the 2.3 in the Explorer 4WD gets better fuel economy than the Ranger 4x4 with basically the same drivetrain despite being bigger and (I think) heavier.

 

Thats incredible. 

I wonder if that's a function of the gear ratio?  The 2020 Explorer is listed as using a 3.58, the 2019 Ranger uses a 3.73.

HRG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, blwnsmoke said:

So here is a Platinum sticker courtesy of the same member that found the 2.3.   18/24/20 combined. 

windowsticker.pdf?vin=1FM5K8HC3LGA13040

 

And the ST which has the same mpg rating

windowsticker.pdf?vin=1FM5K8GC0LGA13191

Thats pretty impressive considering the 3.5TT Sport is rated at 16/22/18

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's interesting now is trying to figure out the gas tank size.  The order guide states 20.2 gallons on the base and with all higher models, it is the Base + etc.  Nowhere does it mention anything different.

If you look at the Ford manual for the 2020 Explorer, it says 20.2 gallons for all models.

http://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owner_information/2020-Ford-Explorer-GasHEV-Owners-Manual-version-2_om_EN-US_06_2019.pdf

If you go to Ford.com and look at the specs, it says the XLT and Limited have a 17.9 gallon tank and the ST/Platinum have a 20.2 gallon tank.  

One of the biggest complaints on the Explorer Forum is the 18.6 gallon tank (or right about that) and everyone wishes it was bigger.  A couple extra gallons will certainly help.  Now I'd think with the 2.3 having better fuel economy as well as the Hybrid, maybe they went smaller to save on weight being they will be able to go almost as far as the Platinum/ST with the larger tank??

 

Edited by blwnsmoke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, blwnsmoke said:

So here is a Platinum sticker courtesy of the same member that found the 2.3.   18/24/20 combined. 

windowsticker.pdf?vin=1FM5K8HC3LGA13040

 

And the ST which has the same mpg rating

windowsticker.pdf?vin=1FM5K8GC0LGA13191

Hm.  Those links aren't working, but still good numbers!

3 hours ago, blwnsmoke said:

What's interesting now is trying to figure out the gas tank size.  The order guide states 20.2 gallons on the base and with all higher models, it is the Base + etc.  Nowhere does it mention anything different.

If you look at the Ford manual for the 2020 Explorer, it says 20.2 gallons for all models.

http://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owner_information/2020-Ford-Explorer-GasHEV-Owners-Manual-version-2_om_EN-US_06_2019.pdf

If you go to Ford.com and look at the specs, it says the XLT and Limited have a 17.9 gallon tank and the ST/Platinum have a 20.2 gallon tank.  

One of the biggest complaints on the Explorer Forum is the 18.6 gallon tank (or right about that) and everyone wishes it was bigger.  A couple extra gallons will certainly help.  Now I'd think with the 2.3 having better fuel economy as well as the Hybrid, maybe they went smaller to save on weight being they will be able to go almost as far as the Platinum/ST with the larger tank??

 

I can't imagine they'd have different size tanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

I can't imagine they'd have different size tanks.

AWD and FWD Fusion and Edge had different size tanks in the past.  Not sure about the current ones.

 

Sometimes it's just about not having enough space.

Edited by akirby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, akirby said:

AWD and FWD Fusion and Edge had different size tanks in the past.  Not sure about the current ones.

 

Sometimes it's just about not having enough space.

Really?  Didn't realize that.

I know my Flex's is somewhere in the 18-20 range, it's AWD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may have been addressed but just wondering about interior seating position.  One thing I don't like about the current one is the door thickness seems so thick-and distant from the seat-same with my SHO.  If you like to drive with your arm resting on the window sill, not exactly comfortable IMO.

Any opinions from those who have seen the new one-or are building it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

This may have been addressed but just wondering about interior seating position.  One thing I don't like about the current one is the door thickness seems so thick-and distant from the seat-same with my SHO.  If you like to drive with your arm resting on the window sill, not exactly comfortable IMO.

Any opinions from those who have seen the new one-or are building it?

Not since my 98 Escort have I been able to drive like that. Window sills are too high for that to me comfortable to me. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

This may have been addressed but just wondering about interior seating position.  One thing I don't like about the current one is the door thickness seems so thick-and distant from the seat-same with my SHO.  If you like to drive with your arm resting on the window sill, not exactly comfortable IMO.

Any opinions from those who have seen the new one-or are building it?

 

Completely agree with you.  And try reaching out the window when at an ATM or drivethru.  I sure hope this one is improved.  There have only been a select few that have been able to sit in them, most are locked at the auto shows.

 

TFL is getting one next week to test so I am looking forward to reading their review.  I sure hope they get the ST to test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

This may have been addressed but just wondering about interior seating position.  One thing I don't like about the current one is the door thickness seems so thick-and distant from the seat-same with my SHO.  If you like to drive with your arm resting on the window sill, not exactly comfortable IMO.

Any opinions from those who have seen the new one-or are building it?

Yeah, I never understood how Explorers got that bad inside, as the Flex was closer to the door panels (unless it was just a thicker door panel?), but interior space utilization was a notorious problem with the D4 platform, so I'm sure it's been fixed with an all new platform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, blwnsmoke said:

 

Completely agree with you.  And try reaching out the window when at an ATM or drivethru.  I sure hope this one is improved.  There have only been a select few that have been able to sit in them, most are locked at the auto shows.

 

TFL is getting one next week to test so I am looking forward to reading their review.  I sure hope they get the ST to test.

For sure-your ATM comment nails it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rmc523 said:

Yeah, I never understood how Explorers got that bad inside, as the Flex was closer to the door panels (unless it was just a thicker door panel?), but interior space utilization was a notorious problem with the D4 platform, so I'm sure it's been fixed with an all new platform.

Let's hope- and hopefully rear vision is improved-at least from my wife's perspective.  As I've posted before, she was on her 3rd Explorer and when it came time for a 4th, she claimed she couldn't see out of new ones.  I solved that by finding a CPO 2010 with 27,000 miles.  that is not going to happen again.

  • 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...