ClutchTime

Here is the only incentive I've seen in central VA. If you want a $43,000 BOSS, you get to pay an extra $7,000 over MSRP.

Pull the fuse for a few minutes like akirby mentioned. It's #29. As far as getting the a pillar seals replaced on the same day, I wouldn't count on it. Most people I've heard from have had to take it in so they can verify that it is rattling and IF they can hear it, they'll order the parts for you to get on a second visit. If you do get them replaced under the new TSB for it, let me know if the seal still ends as soon as it meets the cowl trim (making it a pointless repair) or if it has some overlap now. My passenger side has been buzzing lightly at times for the past 13K miles but, I've read too many stories about it being worse after the dealer replaced it. Until I am sure of a real fix, I'll turn the radio up.

No, it shouldn't. Of course, I shouldn't be able to swap a 3.73 into an '88 LX with 200K miles and see every factory Timken bearing in the rear end look new while they're all toast in nearly every '99-'04 after 10K miles. A friend in a county police garage said the same thing was still happening just a few years ago with the Crown Vics every time they take a new one out to the test track for high speed training. It came back needing every junk KOYO bearing in the rear end replaced. Cheap parts = higher profits My guess would be because that equals the lowest, S rated, P metric tire. Lots of people cheap out on tires and buy the lower speed rated ones instead of what the factory installed.

You may want to double check the air pressure in the tires to be sure it's not excessively high. I've seen brand new vehicles with the pressures all over the place. If they are really high, it will turn much quicker at speed.

The local news report here stated that bluetooths are part of the ban but, GPS devices are not. Clearly touching your ear and talking while looking at the road is more dangerous than staring at a 3.5" screen on your dashboard and typing in an address while going down a busy street.

The salesman is either a liar or ignorant. There is no "4 wheel setting". The Explorer has a modified version of the AWD setup used in the Flex, Edge, and Taurus. The computer decides when and how much torque to send to the rear wheels via a clutch and whether to allow wheel spin based on what terrain setting you are using. "Normal" will send most of the power to the front wheels, but it does send a small amount to the rear, and traction control is on. "Sand" sends more power to the rear wheels and traction control is turned off. Throttle response is also increased. "Mud" is similar to the sand setting with traction control still off and differences in throttle response. The vehicle feels like it's in a lower gear. "Snow" naturally turns traction control back on and I assume it splits power more evenly than the normal setting. As far as the vehicle being able to raise, how? Mine has normal coil springs and struts. There's no air bags or lines going to the struts, no compressor under the hood, no height switches anywhere on the suspension, and the Explorer is far too cheap to have any sort of magnetic ride shocks on it. The knob may look like the one on a Land Rover but, that doesn't mean it does the same thing as an LR3. I'm sure the tow button turns the trailer sway control on as well as dealing with overdrive and possibly shift points As far as the tongue weight, I'd have to refer to the manual. I wouldn't imagine you would have to use a weight distributing hitch for less than 500 pounds.

This sounds like an ignorant and/or extremely lazy dealership. If they greased something, get a grease gun and find the fittings. Very few things under there will have one from the factory. Tie rod ends have been known to squeak badly in other models. It could also be the ball joints or any of the bushings for the I-beams or radius arms. It's not a mystery science that requires a "frame specialist". It's just a matter of shaking the van and having someone under it looking and listening. Whatever is squeaking can then be replaced.

I was planning on buying an Edge. I wanted a Flex because of the extra room but, my wife felt the same way. Then the Explorer came out and hit all the marks for us. Ours is the AWD model and the lowest average tank we've had was 23 mpg. We no longer have "her car" and "my car". We just switch between the Explorer and the '12 Focus.

It was a Mustang with a different front end, fenders and quarter panels, and hatch but, the last Capri here was a FWD two seater convertible that looked like a cross between a Probe and a '91-'96 Escort. http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=A0PDoX_ekHZOtjAAzhOJzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBlMTQ4cGxyBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1n?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dmercury%2Bcapri%26fr2%3Dpiv-web%26b%3D1%26tab%3Dorganic&w=640&h=480&imgurl=images.gtcarlot.com%2Fgtgallery%2F11397387-640.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fgtcarlot.com%2Fcar%2F11349350&size=82+KB&name=1994+Mercury+Capri+XR2+Convertible+in+Magenta+Metallic.+Click+to+see+...&p=mercury+capri&oid=d6d6fa3e78521511e87c53fb25ce2e01&fr2=piv-web&fr=&tt=1994+Mercury+Capri+XR2+Convertible+in+Magenta+Metallic.+Click+to+see+...&b=0&ni=28&no=27&tab=organic&sigr=110j03m2o&sigb=12olm07pf&sigi=11etggqfl&.crumb=.EMJuEHdA7.

Newport News went out and bought BMWs with heated grips in '99-'00. Although, they're still probably cheaper than the stupid horses.

Actually, the biggest reason the CV became the go to police car was because the Caprice ceased production. Most of the cops around my area preferred the Caprice just for the fact that it had more room than the CV. I don't mean to start an argument over the interior volume and cargo space of either car. That's the argument straight out of their mouths. "The Crown Vic doesn't have enough room to carry all the gear we have to haul." I heard this when I was working in my first auto shop and performing the routine services on a pair of state troopers' Caprices that regularly came in. If the Charger has less room than the CV, I'm sure the Taurus PI won't please anyone either. I would expect most to opt for the Explorer PI if room was their concern. One of the main reasons departments here want to keep the CV is because it's not unibody. Frames can be straightened and the vehicle can be back in service in much less time and for much less money than a unibody. And yes, some of the local departments here have a habit of wrecking cars quite often. The first new Charger that one county received had the entire passenger side destroyed during training at the driving test track. That car hadn't even been on patrol yet. The same county had another Charger totaled when an officer missed a stop sign while "in pursuit". Disciplinary action was supposed to be taken against that officer because there wasn't any evidence, publicly anyway, of what he was pursuing. A big deal was made to point out that if the same thing had happened in a Crown Vic, the car would have been fixed and returned to service. About getting an F-250 as a patrol vehicle, I'd be willing to bet that the sheriff wanted a 250 for the one thing you can't get in an F-150, a diesel. Maybe I'm wrong but, that's the only reason I'd want to ride around all day in an unloaded, kidney bashing, 3/4 or 1 ton truck. Either way, those stupid signs that show how fast you are going don't pull themselves around. Yeah, I know a CV could probably pull one of those but when you need a truck, you need a truck and if you want a diesel, Ford only has one option. The state police here have an unmarked, electric blue Dodge Dakota with a painted camper shell with black windows on it that they run up and down the interstate with to hand out speeding tickets. I also know of riced out(yes I mean coffee can exhaust and ground effects) and lowered Civics, and even an Oldsmobile Aurora V8 in local departments. Tax dollars hard at work! A new diesel Excursion for my local sheriff seemed to make more sense when considering what the next county had. This was especially true when considering how often some areas flooded. Now for the turn key cop cars. Most of my knowledge about what local sheriff's offices do with their cars comes from a cousin on the force in one department or a friend that works in the county garage for another department. According to the friend in the garage, that department had the option of Ford outfitting most of the equipment on their newer CVs. When those particular cars had a problem, the county mechanics told them to take the cars back to whoever did the install to get them fixed because they didn't like the way they installed and/or wired the car's accessories and they weren't going to touch them. If you doubt that garage's ability to tell the sheriff just how to deal with his assets, the same department almost canned a deputy because the garage was putting brake pads on his patrol car every 4-5K miles as opposed to the rest's average of 10K. His next set of pads lasted 8K. I think the Segways are a bigger waste of money than whatever cruiser or van combo they decide to use. Have you seen the cost on these things? There is something already in use that is much cheaper. A bicycle.

It says Blue Oval at the top of the page not Shiny Boxed H. Did you expect everyone to run in here and say YAY HONDA THEY'RE OUR BRAND, IF THEY CAN'T DO IT NO ONE CAN!!!? :cheerleader: I've had entirely too much coffee today.

Aye lads. I've heard the next Ranger will be the most wicked and foul tempered rodent you've ever laid eyes on! . :hide: It shall have a bi-turbocharged ten cylinder diesel with enough power :flexing: to pull hell right out of the ground. :devil2: Either a six speed manual or an eight speed twin clutch automatic gearbox shall reside beneath ye foot. It'll weigh over 438 stone, be seven feet tall, and shoot fireballs out of it's arse!

Anybody remember these Explorer spy shots? http://www.carnewsbreak.com/image/100169330_2011-ford-explorer-spy-shots I'll believe what it looks like when Ford says, "This is it".

I think Honda has the advantage. If old Ugly, Sr. up there isn't enough, they have little Ugly, Jr. as the Element to back it up.

Ah, so if I need an ugly box that can hold seven embarrassed people, I'll know what is top of the line in that category. :barf:

My friend's father bought a 4x4 extended cab with an automatic in the early 2000's. He drove conservatively and I remember him telling me he never got more than 15 mpg out of it. He bought an F-150 and gave the Ranger to his son who lifted it and put 32" tires on it and a high flow air filter. The mileage went up a little after that but I'm pretty sure he never got better than 17 mpg.

By Husky mats, I'm pretty sure the original poster means the Husky Weather Beater floor liners. They are custom molded to fit the shape of the floor pan and cover more area than the OEM mats. They have sides to hold in any spills, dirt, etc. to prevent them from running anywhere else. They, as well as Weathertech liners, offer much better protection than just a plain floor mat.

About all the shifting and power opinions, I think it basically boils down to the big T word that I haven't seen anyone else mention. That would be torque. Low RPM pulling power. Twisting force. Sizable V8s are known for it and DOHC V6s aren't. Sure the Explorer's 3.5 isn't completely gutless but, 4,700-4,800 lbs. needs a considerable amount of torque to get moving from a stop or to pull a grade without downshifting. The same downshifting comparison has been made between F-250's with a Powerstroke and the F-150 EcoBoost. Someone who owns both says the Ecoboost didn't have to shift as much as the diesel did on the same hills and I highly doubt anyone in this conversation is going to say the big diesel doesn't have enough power. A new V6 Mustang has more horsepower than the last 7.3L Powerstroke but I still don't want the Mustang If I have to pull something. A Ferrari 458 Italia's engine may be absolutely amazing in that car but, it would be worthless in a SVT Raptor because it has to be revved to the moon to make any power. That's an overblown example but, it does indicate what some see as a problem with the new Explorer. It has an engine with a higher rpm power band and its a heavy vehicle. No, there is nothing wrong with 290 horsepower but, only 255 lb-ft of torque at a high rpm may be a problem for some people. After seeing the numbers on the EcoBoost model, I'm interested in test driving one myself. I know I can't get it with AWD but, the extra torque at a lower rpm has got to feel at least as good as the V6. I'm sure I could hit 30 mpg in it as well since I've gotten 27.5 mpg tanks out of my 23 mpg rated V6 model. Now I own one myself so obviously, I can live with it as it is. I don't live in the mountains but, I do manually shift whatever I drive when I do venture north in altitude. Would I rather have the power and, more importantly, the torque of a V8? Absolutely. Do I think the 3.5 instead of the 3.7 as the base engine was a mistake? Yes I do. To me, it is senseless to put the same engine that you use in a 5 passenger FWD sedan, or CUV, in a seven passenger AWD SUV that you put a 5K lb. tow rating on. Obviously, the 3.5 was improved with a tune. I'm glad they squeezed something more out of it but, it still can't make the torque or horsepower of the bigger 3.7L. I know fuel economy was a concern but look at what happened when an M3 was run against a Prius. The hybrid was run as hard as it could go around a road course and the M3 just had to ride along behind it. The M3 got considerably better mileage because it wasn't working nearly as hard. I'll tell you why I did buy an Explorer. I wanted an Edge and the Explorer was cheaper. It was a more versatile vehicle and my base model AWD Explorer listed for $2K less than an AWD Edge. I added the towing package just so I could have the SelectShift option for the transmission for $1500 less than buying an XLT. Instead of optioning one out to almost 50 grand, I chose to buy a base Explorer and a new Focus for roughly the same money. If you like all the bells and whistles they come with, that's great. I see half of it as something that's going to break or piss me off so it's junk to me. Just my opinion. I am also pleased with the fuel mileage that I get in such a large vehicle. For me, a 2011 Explorer was a much better option. I wanted the Flex's third row but my wife preferred the look of the Edge. The Explorer hit the mark for both of us. I did toy with the idea of buying a 2010 V8 model. However, the last time I did the build and price on a Sport Trac before it disappeared from the website, the entry fee for the V8 stared at $40K. That's more than I wanted to spend for one daily driver. I believe GaryG mentioned the '92 4.0 being a POS and a gas hog. Well, my opinion is that the '10 4.0L is just as much of a gutless, gas hogging, POS as the older engine. I'd prefer the pushrod model since you have to pull the engine to do anything with the timing chain in the back of the SOHC models. Good riddance to both of them. That Cologne V6 had long since overstayed it's welcome. That's just my opinion but, the fact is the 3 valve 4.6 got better fuel mileage than the 4.0. That's why Ford listed the V8 4x4 numbers next the the V6 4x2 fuel ratings. Despite the V8's advantage on mileage, it still wasn't worth bragging about considering my 100 mile commute. As far as handling, I tried 51 PSI in the tires. It made a world of difference. I have 7300 miles on mine and the tires are worn dead even at 9/32 all the way across. Yes, it did make it louder as far as road noise and its slightly harsher on bumps but, not to the point that I want to drain the tires back down. Mine came with 40 PSI and I can tell you I will never put them at 35 like the placard says. I have driven mine like I stole the thing a couple of times. There is no way the old Explorer can handle like this new one. If I had to put 5K lbs. behind it, I would probably tell you different. But, when I tow something, I'd rather have a long wheelbase truck than any short wheelbase SUV. If the new one doesn't feel solid to someone, maybe they are missing the feeling of riding in a truck. It does ride like a car because it basically is. Again, that's just someone's preference. Some people like riding around in an unloaded F-350 with 80 psi in the rear tires and getting their kidneys pounded on every bump. That's something a truck can give you but a car can't. Maybe Ford will make some engine changes. Maybe they won't. I've already had the seed of trading in planted in my mind so, years down the road, if a more powerful model comes out I may go for it. But, I do have a Mustang and a truck that I can stick a 331 stroker in so maybe I won't. The important thing is, that someone finds a vehicle that does hit all the boxes they need. If that's a '10 or '11 Explorer, great. If it's not even a Ford, that was something they had to decide and nobody here knows their situation better than them. Although, If Ford does offer an orange model with a purple leather interior, I'll petition congress to make it illegal.

I have a base model which only comes with the Medium Light Stone interior but the carpet is black.

The way I take it is "all the way up" being against the roof and "all the way down" being against the windshield while they have to hold it somewhere in the middle which actually puts the visor in a vertical position and blocks more of the view. If I was told that's how they're supposed to be, I'd get some visors from another vehicle and mount them in my car. Either way, I want to see this foolishness in person.

You'll need a SpeedCal box or a tuner now.

I've always thought the Sport Trac COULD BE the next Ranger as long as it came in different cab and bed configurations, the bed was at least a foot longer and had better engine choices. I'm all for leaving a V8 as an option but when the price tag hit 40K just to get one and the only other option got worse mileage, it stopped being competitive. I'd be very happy to have something that size that was an extended or crew cab with as much rear seat room as a '12 Focus, had at least a six foot bed with four between the wheel wells, and came with the 2.0 EcoBoost. Your opening statement is exactly why I purchased an Explorer over an Edge. I had wanted an Edge ever since they came out and I was waiting for the newest body style to come out when I heard about the Explorer so I waited to see it. I wanted an AWD Edge but it only came in the SE trim which was nearly 2K more than a base Explorer AWD. After seeing the EB Explorer's fuel and power ratings, I would consider trading my '11 Explorer V6 for one. If a crew cab Ranger existed with the 2.0L EcoBoost or the 3.7 V6 and a six or 6.5 foot bed, I probably wouldn't own an Explorer right now. My mother had an '03 Tacoma Prerunner with a 2.7L 4 cylinder and she complained about the mileage in that. I thought Ford should have turned the old 200 hp 3.0 Duratech for RWD use and put it in the Ranger ten years ago instead of the gutless Vulcan 3.0 or the gas guzzling 4.0.

The Powershift transmission may take some getting used to. It doesn't feel like most automatics at times. If you're easy with your right foot, you can get tanks that average 40 mpg without the SFE package. If you can't keep your foot out of it, I can understand. It still gets better mileage than babying a 2011. I've felt it spin a tire in a turn while shifting from 1st to 2nd. It's a fun little car and much better than the outgoing model. Just keep the oil changed with a quality filter and it should last a while. Best of all, there's no timing belt to worry about since it's chain driven!

Makes that 10K FRPP crate motor look good doesn't it?