ScapeTom

I have to agree - if a Caravan was chasing me, I might consider evading!

I haven't had the code since the repair. I wonder if they performed what's described in TSB 13-7-5. Car has preformed flawlessly since they fixed it.

Download was nearly flawless, as was installation. Reporting the upgrade back to Ford has been unsuccessful so far. Not sure what the issue is there.

That's why I have a Garmin mounted on the window. That and I didn't get the navigation option.

I don't think it's necessarily too complicated, but there is a learning curve and a lot of functions remain hidden unless you know how to find them. It seems to me that learning the system while driving is potentially a problem, as it can be a distraction from the task at hand - piloting the vehicle. A very uniform, very simple interface for basic controls is desirable. For example, I make use of the radio controls on the steering wheel a great deal. That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be some depth in the system, but maybe some of the deeper functions should be unavailable when the vehicle is under way.

Ha! Sure doesn't look like the '63 Galaxy that my brother used to own. A long time ago, I might add! Had a 240 cubic inch inline 6 with "3 on the tree" manual transmission. I don't remember a lot about it, but I do remember him having to downshift every time someone mentioned the word "hill".

I'm thinking that that old-fashioned mechanical transfer case in my truck is pretty rugged, as was the one in the Explorer. My guess is that if you're a serious off-roader, you want the sturdiest stuff that you can get in the drive train because you WILL be in situations where one wheel is pushing/pulling the weight of the vehicle up and over a big rock while the other three have minimal traction and/or are grabbing air. I'm not really in the off-road frame of mind these days, and the little bit that I do around the yard isn't all that intense. The closest thing I've done to trail driving is carrying a truckload of mulch up the steep hill that is my yard.

This brings up the question - in practical terms, for driving on sand (or in snow for that matter), what difference would it make as to whether one has 4WD versus AWD? I suppose I probably need to read up on each system a bit more. My 99 Explorer and my 2004 Dodge truck were/are both true 4WD systems with the ability to solidly lock the front and rear drive trains together, whereas, I 'think' that the AWD system generally doesn't allow a full lock. Is that correct? I know that the 4WD systems on both my truck and my former Explorer were pretty rugged. The Dodge is a fully manual transfer case with the old-fashioned floor shifter for putting it into and out of 4WD. There are no manual locking hubs up front though, like the old days. The front drive train is always turning with the wheels whether it's engaged to the rest of the drive train or not (which partly explains the 13 mpg that thing gets).

Any trouble codes or warnings showing up at startup? Did you just fill up with gas in the last several miles? Don't think it's a transmission issue - the transmission is just reacting to the increased throttle position and "perceived" need for a gear change based on engine loading. If the engine isn't putting out what it should, the pedal gets closer to the metal (so to speak) and the logic calls for a downshift. Watch for trouble codes and warnings. Run this tank of gas down, and fill up with a good, known brand. Maybe use high-test gas this time (not necessary always, but might help in this case).

Finally took care of this today (you can tell that it really wasn't bothering me as much as it should have been). Anyway, the culprit - A bad splice "S182". Dealer replaced same, should resolve the issue.

Heh heh - Friends don't let friends borrow Foresters!

The moral of the story - don't hit unmovable objects head-on, and if you do, make sure that you get at least half of your front surface squarely on the object.

I really wish they'd get back to racing something that at least remotely resembles a factory-made product of the same brand. Yes, I understand the need for safety features, but at least they could use stock engines and drive trains as their base, along with suspension geometry and such. No, I don't expect them to be out there running 1.6L ecoboost engines (unless there's an engine size limit of 1.6L), but it would be nice to see the 5.4L or the new 5.0L block out there. Are any of the NASCAR engines actually based on present production engines? Racing used to be full of innovation, but now, it's become more of a show.

My highway mileage is similar, 26-ish, but I'm getting 23-25 around town, depending on driving conditions. I do enjoy some very light traffic when I head in for day shift though. Light enough that I may only have 4 or 5 stops in my 12 mile commute, and can hold a steady 45-48 mph most of the way. That nets some good numbers. Driving home in the afternoon isn't so nice, though. A great deal more traffic, some stop-and-go issues, and the traffic lights are downright cruel!

First video shows the virtue of the traction control system on the AWD. Pretty nice though for it to be a serious off-roader, it would need a few more inches of ground clearance, several more inches of suspension travel, skid plates, and some gnarly tires. Still, it'll get you up the trail to a camping or hunting spot. Not sure what they were doing in the snow there, but those were definitely the wrong tires.