I received my truck trend in the mail the other day and as always around this time, they had the SUV of the year contest.

The new Range Rover Evoque (sp) ended up taking the top honors. If you look closely at the Rangey, you'll notice a hint of Ford styling which could be similar to the Explorer / Edge.

Anyway, the 2.0L was in the test Explorer and the judges found it to be very disappointing in the heavy Explorer. This isn't the first time that read this.

It's a shame as the 3.5L has had nothing but rave reviews since it's existence. I'm thinking that the Ex is way too heavy for the 2.0L especially if the little engine that could isn't achieving better MPG's and overall power than the n/a 3.5l.

Thoughts?

 

There is a fine line between not enough motor and you end up working it to death.

Better to have a bigger motor that does not work so hard.

Probably the case here.

 

I drove the Evoque, and was not impressed with the power. I thought it was enough for the 4,000# vehicle, but it didn't inspire me. I can assume that the 500# heavier Explorer with a 2.0 will feel underpowered. I think it will be a real good engine for the new Escape at 3500#, and should fly in the Focus ST which should weigh about 3,000#.

 

x2 well said, If Ford would work on reducing weight of these vehicles

 

I'm still trying to figure out why exactly Ford even has the new Explorer in their lineup. It doesn't sell nearly as well as the Edge and is only slightly larger. The Edge is available with the 3.5l, 2.0l EB and 3.7l but the Explorer is only available with the 3.5l and 2.0l EB. The Edge should be tweaked to maximize interior room and the Explorer should be axed. You want something more roomy buy the Flex or Expedition.

When you think about it 240hp is not exactly a lot these days. If the 2.0l didn't have a nice flat torque curve mpg would probably be worse. Add the extra power robbing AWD system and the engine has to work even harder which will result in reduced gas mileage and feel more down on power. The Explorer could probably do pretty well mpg wise with the 3.5l EB.

 

I agree with the statements made here about use of the 2.0 GTDI in the Explorer. I test Explorer and Edge with this plant before the Escape's hit the ground.

In the Explorer it moved, but did not appear to have adequate power for passing or merging at highway speeds. In the Edge it felt adequate and well suited for the weight of this vehicle. In the Escape it feels perfect! I purchased an Escape 2 weeks ago and it moves along effortlessly and when pushed a little it moves without high RPM's. I am still in the break in period at 560 miles but look forward to a full throttle highway test when I get to 1K. Mileage is averaging 22-23 at this point however I have spent quite a bit of time idling setting up nav, phone and playing with feature settings.

D

 

Sounds great! I can't wait to get some read feedback on this one.

 

Agree completely on engine size. The Explorer with a couple people in it is gonna be over 5,000 lbs. 2 liters simply is NOT enough engine, turbo or not.

I remember buying a 1979 SAAB 900 back in 1983 and was concerned that the 2 liter engine in it was tiny for a 2600 lb car. (It was not a turbo, but the engine was fine in the end.)

I recall Ford making a big deal about making the Explorer lighter with the redesign. In fact it is bigger, but the weight reduction was, as I recall, about 100 lbs. With a clean sheet redesign, I sure would have expected a bigger weight reduction.

George

 

Previous gen Explorers didn't have the full air bag canopy like this one has. The roof line had to be raised to accommodate the extra safety equipment. You raise the roof, you raise everything else proportionately so it looks right and that adds weight.

Right from the launch date the new Explorer should have come with your choice of 3.5L engines, only.

 

Thanks, Tim...plus the new Explorer is 10 inches longer and a few inches wider as I recall, so there are size reasons for it to have picked up some weight. It is startlingly large, actually. The 2 liter turbo makes a lot of sense in the Escape. I know Ford can't make 50 different engines, but a good size for the Explorer might have been something like a 3 liter V6 Ecoboost based on the original Duratec size.

Still, I really like the new Explorer, and if someone were to give me one (or sell me one at half price) with the 2 liter turbo, I would definitely drive and enjoy it. I focus more on fuel economy than performance in daily driver type cars these days. Actually a 2 liter turbo Edge would suit me very nicely as a daily driver.

Problem is that my next vehicle is gonna have to be a replacement for my E150, and I have no clue what that will be. Maybe the new 2014 Transit Connect, or a short version of the 2014 big Transit. We shall see what engines will go in those.... I think the TC is going to have the 2 liter turbo.

Thanks,
George

 

Just bought a new escape last week with the 1.6 ecoboost. Was the only one on the lot with 4X4 drive in a color we wanted. Test drove it and bought it. They ask if we wanted to drive one with the 2.0 Eco and we said no. Probably would of wanted the bigger engin if we had driven one. The 1.6 was very spunky and will run 80+ mph with the cruse on very easy. FTE needs to add the 1.6 to the Eco lineup as I didn't see one here so I just jumped on the big ecoboost site. We need a 5.0 Eco for the SD line. Maybe mustangs some 150s and expeditions. Just saying, or asking!

 

Truly the real test will be when we see 100,000+ miles on these engines. 240 HP is plenty for an Explorer 4x4, The problem is the Cubic Inches. I question that with the 3.5 EB in the F150 4x4. That is where I hold out judgement until I hear what people are saying when they have 100-150 thousand miles on them. Ford has had some impressive diesels when new but down the road the real issues popped up. Ford is betting the ranch on the EB. I hope it works for them.
Craig

 

Excellent point sir, I'll bring this up to the powers that be.

 

You're right Craig, Ford has jumped in with both feet. Every Ford vehicle except the E-series van, superduty, Fiesta and the Mustang offers an EB engine. When the T-series vans come to stable, the base engine will be the 3.5L EB engine with a Euro diesel as an option.

I've read t hat the next gen Mustang will offer an EB engine as well, most likely a small but spirited and fuel sipping I-4.

 

Speaking of the 1.6 EB, I'm on the lead vehicle team for the upcoming Detroit Marathon, and we pre-drove the course--I rode with a woman who had a new 1.6 EB Escape. There were 4 of us in the car, I had good rear seat legroom (behind the woman, who is admittedly pretty short), and the engine seemed to pull nicely (up a few long rises), and was quiet, smooth, and unobtrusive. As a gearhead, I would actually prefer more turbo whine I suppose if I was driving I would have more of a chance to get the engine to whine a bit. NICE Escape, 2WD SEL(?) with leather, a HUGE glass sunroof, etc.

George