92merc

Someone had posted the specs on the new 2.3 in the Mustang. I could have sworn they showed the bore and stroke changed. NVM, I think I read that post wrong. Don't think they meant bore/stroke changed...

Here's my take away. The only way to get a good change in the quality of the product coming out of Ford to increase in reliability is for it to start with the CEO. If he isn't publicly banging on the drum, it isn't likely to change dramatically. No Farley isn't going to do it himself. He'll need his middle managers and production chiefs to do the work. But Farley has made his way up the chain of command. He has a fair idea of how to get it done. He'll put the people in charge on notice and start working on this.

I would hope they put that same 2.3 in the upcoming Ranger. That may be why they dropped it from Corsair too. Whittle that engine down to 2 vehicles basically.

Can you disable traction control? I'm wondering if that is linked. I don't have your Escape, so I'm just guessing here.

I recently drove an Explorer for my work. State Government fleet vehicle. When I didn't see the Ecoboost badge on the back lid, of course I had to pop the hood. I counted 6 spark plugs. Since no EB badging, I'm guessing fleet vehicles get the 3.3 NA engine. But it was smooth and quick. I got in the low 20's for FE. I think I had about 430 miles of range according to the computer. For a fleet vehicle, it was decent. All it would have needed is remote start and I would have been happy with it for a personal vehicle.

This one is painted Arcadian Blue. Looking at F100 paint charts, that seems to be a 65-66 color. And those dog dishes are from 65-66 also. But I'm fine with that. From factory, this truck was actually Rangoon red. The guy that restored it changed it to Arcadian Blue. I'm guessing he didn't like the '67 Turquoise Frost color? I would have liked a white top as well. But he did put some white in the interior. So that looks good.

My dad had a 1967 F100 2WD in turqouis frost. I tracked down the guy my dad sold it to. But the trail went cold from there after he sold it. That was sold 20 years ago. So I'm guessing it's gone. Found this one, similar color same year. Had to buy it. Missed dad's old truck. Now I have my own.

I didn't see this one posted anywhere. Looks like Ford is ditching Argo AI. Going its own way on L3 instead of L4 driving. https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/26/tech/ford-self-driving-argo-shutdown

Someone had made remarks that Ford was going back to a shifter lever instead of the dial wheel. I see that didn't happen. I drove a company fleet Explorer last week with the dial. I didn't mind it. I adapted quickly. Doesn't take up as much space, so I like it.

The new seat stitching on the higher trims looks a lot more like the Vignale line of Europe. I like it.

It could be the coolant intrusion issue. Have your dealer check it. If it is that, the block cracked and coolant is getting into the cylinders.

I would be surprised if it does. They had it on the Escape and now dropped it.

He does look a bit pissed off.

I'm sure this has been beat to death in the previous 14 pages. But maybe the 7.3 was pared down to 6.8 to give it more strength to handle the PSI of a turbo? A dual turbo V8 gasser. Now that could haul some ass! Outside of that, no reason for a 6.8.

I just don't see the reason for the 6.8 in the SD. I doubt the engine will be any cheaper to build. It might save 1-2 mpg at best.

The 2.5 Atkinson shows 162HP and 155 ft lbs or torque from what I Googled. 1.0EB shows much lower HP at 125HP. But torque is at 170 ft lbs. I'm sure it does come down to cost primarily.

I love mine on my 2013 Escape. Wouldn't want one without it.

I kinda dig the front hood. Aggressive looking. Back end appears a bit like the Macan to me. Power wise, it's a nice bump over what the Escape has. I noticed the hybrid has rear electric only. Wish Ford would just change the Escape to be the same setup like it's already doing in the Corsair. Interior is typical Dodge. Not bad, but not great either.

Both those interiors are nice. I sure hope Ford ups the game with next Ranger interior wise. But I think if Ford comes out of the gate with the 2.3EB in a hybrid, it'll end up selling more than the GM twins.

Outside of the door handles, it's absolutely blandtastic.

I'm betting the ability to line item add features will be greatly reduced. You want BO Sound system? You pick that trim and above. You want 2.0LEB? Pick that item and above. So you're only options are FWD/AWD,/hybrid color, and trim. That will help reduce the time on the line to build.

So drop the 2.3L because it doesn't sell enough. But keep the GT Hybrid's unique rear only electric motor setup? Which is different than the Escape... Doesn't make sense to me. Pretty much dropped any reason I would have gone for the Corsair. I'll just get an Escape Hybrid. They will have 5 trims to choose from.

I'd think the 1.5EB would have to stay for now too. I think the 3.3 NA wasn't needed to begin with.

Maverick wasn't designed for towing much. A small trailer really at best. It's based on the Escape platform, so no amount of engine is going to handle it well on that platform. What you're describing is a Ranger. Maverick is smaller than a Ridgeline. Maverick isn't a mid-ized truck either. It's a compact. Santa Cruz you initially mentioned isn't doing 300HP either. Ridgeline is only 280hp, so short of your wish for 300, and that's a true mid-sized. You're trying to put 8lbs of shit into a 5 lb bag. Go up to a Ranger.

I'm betting Ford won't even bother with the 2.7EB in the Ranger. Just 2.3 Ecoboost, 2.3 Powerboost, and Raptor with the 3.0EB. My reasoning is I think Ford wants to push it's hybrid/plug in options. If they can get enough batteries for that strategy. I'll take a PowerBoost BTW. ?