NickF1011 Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Why are there attachments in my post at the top of page 2? For the record, I didn't put those in there. Been happening for months. No one seems to know how or have any desire to fix it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Okay, I didn't know. Its the first time I've seen it happen to one of my posts. Anyway, I did email them to let them know. Thanks, Nick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el norte Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Have you sat in a Mustang? Looks are only half of the equation. It feels like Ford had about $1.28 to spend on materials. yes i have! about 10 hrs a day while i test roll them, and then about 65k miles on my 06 gt. i think the interior is pretty sweet! i'm sitting here trying to figure what car doesnt have plastic in it! have you ever been in a pontiac? g6, grand prix? you would have thought batman designed it! the old stang interior was horrible, espeacially the center console and the shifter placement. i've had super duty's,linc continental,taurus,montego,new explorer, drove fusion's, and i think the mustang has still one of the best rides. dont believe all the squeak and rattle issues, and road noise. my mustang is quiter than my montego ever dreamed to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 my mustang is quiter than my montego ever dreamed to be. Okay...you had me until here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SysEng Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 settle for an 08 or wait for an 09 mustang? p.s. I'm sold on panthers don't you worry. I'm bringing a 95 towncar executive back to showroom condition. Trick question. Are you going stick or auto? If stick, it probably doesn't matter that much ( although the new Italian styling might grab you ). If auto, it looks like a 5R55 in there right now If correct, I'd stay away from that! :burnout: I suspect the '09 may have the 6R75 or 6R80 ( I'm lobbying for the 6R80 autottranny myself ) in which cases thats definitely a strong BUY signal to me! Reading some of your comments, if your new endeavors entail wowing the customers, I guess I don't have to explain "panthers" to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el norte Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Okay...you had me until here. i was actually being serious. the engine noise and road noise was a little too much for what i expected. the six speed was always downshifting, and racing at high rpm's. i really liked the montego and would consider again, but i do believe my mustang is much quiter and better built than my old montego, and the ride in the stang is much more solid. i drove the stang last winter and didnt have any problem's, but would prefer fwd or 4x4 though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Stay away from the Explorer. From my experience the 90's were good years for these, but anything past 2000 is a crap shoot. I don't agree with this statement at all. Today's Explorer is so much better then the one they were building in the 90's it's not even funny. The old Explorer was a modified Ranger chassis which was too narrow with a flexing frame that sat too high not to mention an engine that sat perched up on top of it all. Things got a little better after they dumped the Twin-I Beam (no more jacking in turns) but ride handling and vehicle dynamics were poor. Today's Explorer has a very stiff low riding frame. The engine is mounted lower. The wheelbase is longer. The track width is wider. It has IRS not to mention a better IFS. AdvanceTrac with RSC. Build quality has improved and powertrains are much better. The only place the old Explorer might have been better was for off-road use or for suspension modification. At the time it was one of the better midsize SUV's, but that's not saying much. Other then that today's Explorer is a much safer and improved vehicle. Notice how the roll-over problem went away after the 2002 model year??? There is a reason for that and it has more to do with the design then Firestone tires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I don't agree with this statement at all. Today's Explorer is so much better then the one they were building in the 90's it's not even funny. The old Explorer was a modified Ranger chassis which was too narrow with a flexing frame that sat too high not to mention an engine that sat perched up on top of it all. Things got a little better after they dumped the Twin-I Beam (no more jacking in turns) but ride handling and vehicle dynamics were poor. Today's Explorer has a very stiff low riding frame. The engine is mounted lower. The wheelbase is longer. The track width is wider. It has IRS not to mention a better IFS. AdvanceTrac with RSC. Build quality has improved and powertrains are much better. The only place the old Explorer might have been better was for off-road use or for suspension modification. At the time it was one of the better midsize SUV's, but that's not saying much. Other then that today's Explorer is a much safer and improved vehicle. Notice how the roll-over problem went away after the 2002 model year??? There is a reason for that and it has more to do with the design then Firestone tires. Biggest issue with the 02+ Explorers are the Transmission...my parents Explorer has had Tranny problems the past two years (full replacement 2 years ago and a torque converter this past summer)...they are planning on getting rid of it and getting a new Sable instead...which I plan on fully test driving Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 (edited) Biggest issue with the 02+ Explorers are the Transmission...my parents Explorer has had Tranny problems the past two years (full replacement 2 years ago and a torque converter this past summer)...they are planning on getting rid of it and getting a new Sable instead...which I plan on fully test driving Exactly. My step mother is on her second full tranny and it still has the rear-diff hum-vibration thing on her 02 Explorer. Third person I know of personally who has had transmission/rear-end issues with their 2002+ Explorer. I'm not saying all Explorers have this problem, but the rear-end hum issue is well-known and documented. Personal experiences with vehicles have an impact on how we formulate our opinions of them. I still cross-shopped the Explorer when I bought my Xterra, but those transmission problems were certainly a factor in my decision. I did prefer the Explorer's interior and color choices, but after a test drive, the Xterra powertrain had me sold. (BTW, I use my SUV's for utility) She's been so put off by the transmission issues, she's looking at a CRV (ugh) to replace it. And yeah, that sucks, as she's in her 60's and only driven domestics her entire life. That being said my brother's 1995 Explorer? 260K miles and not one problem, just gas and oil. He's just about ready to pick up a new one. Edited October 23, 2007 by the_spaniard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Exactly. My step mother is on her second full tranny and it still has the rear-diff hum-vibration thing on her 02 Explorer. Third person I know of personally who has had transmission/rear-end issues with their 2000+ Explorer. I'm not saying all Explorers have this problem, but the rear-end hum issue is well-known and documented. Personal experiences with vehicles have an impact on how we formulate our opinions of them. I still cross-shopped the Explorer when I bought my Xterra, but those transmission problems were certainly a factor in my decision. I did prefer the Explorer's interior and color choices, but after a test drive, the Xterra powertrain had me sold. (BTW, I use my SUV's for utility) That being said my brother's 1995 Explorer? 260K miles and not one problem, just gas and oil. I have had none of the issues you talk about on my 2005 Explorer. Is is possible they have fixed the problem since then? The new V8 Explorers have a completely different transmission. I am not saying your wrong, because I owned a used 2002 Explorer V8 myself and had the rear end hum and a tranny that would jerk at times. When I got back from Iraq in 2005 the Ford Family Plan came out and I traded on a brand new 2005 model. It is a V6 because I did not really need the V8 and saved money. I have 29,000 miles on it now, which is not a lot, however the transmission is very smooth with perfect shifts and the rear end is completely silent. I guess as you say personal experience does formulate our opinions on vehicles and with that said I really like my '05 Explorer and have had zero issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I have had none of the issues you talk about on my 2005 Explorer. Is is possible they have fixed the problem since then? The new V8 Explorers have a completely different transmission. I am not saying your wrong, because I owned a used 2002 Explorer V8 myself and had the rear end hum and a tranny that would jerk at times. When I got back from Iraq in 2005 the Ford Family Plan came out and I traded on a brand new 2005 model. It is a V6 because I did not really need the V8 and saved money. I have 29,000 miles on it now, which is not a lot, however the transmission is very smooth with perfect shifts and the rear end is completely silent. I guess as you say personal experience does formulate our opinions on vehicles and with that said I really like my '05 Explorer and have had zero issues. As I said, it's hit or miss (but you can probably say that about any car). The V-8's may be better, but the 4.0L 3.73 LS combo seemed to be the culprit. There are several TSB's on it, including * TSB #0537 -- DRIVELINE 1ST ORDER VIBRATION/BOOM/DRONE. *TT (NHTSA ID #10012952, JUNE 07 2005) * TSB #17107 -- DRIVELINE VIBRATION ON DRONE/BOOM AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. *TT (NHTSA ID #10004046, SEPTEMBER 01 2003) If you are happy with your Explorer, please recommend it. The poster is probably looking for all opinions in the vehicles in his group. Just so you know, I'm not saying I wouldn't go back to Ford again. If they had put out a revised Bronco for 06, I'd probably have one of those now. :happy feet: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 2008 Edge SEL Plus AWD 2008 Explorer Eddie Bauer V-8 2008/09 Mustang GT 2008/09 Lincoln MKZ 2008 Grand Marquis LS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 2008 Grand Marquis LS Why doesn't he just go all the way and buy a hearse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Why doesn't he just go all the way and buy a hearse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 LEDs are not that bright and can't produce a full spectrum light. The MKS is suppose to have adaptive LED turning lights, but the prototypes don't have 'em. I have LED back-up lights on the MKX which are nifty but not very bright. I'm sure they will be gone in the next update when people start complaining that they are running over their trash cans because the back-up lights are useless (especially with all the tinted glass in the rear of the car). Rumour has it that the MKS also does not have HID headlights because it features adaptive lighting (note the concept only had halogen headlights). The Ford adaptive lights do not support HID for some reason. Keep in mind this is technology borrowed from the Lexus RX which does have them in HID :P The LED lights look good though. LEDs can be pretty bright, the ones on the police light bars are extremely bright, especially at night, they pretty much blind you. I'm not sure if they can really be 'directed' in a certain direction though, they just kinda make light. I'm not sure though, I could be wrong. Thats stupid that b/c a vehicle has adaptive lighting, it doesnt have HIDs. It's amazing how everybody else can manage to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 A benchmark that I still personally don't think has been met by anyone. Ford's about to raise the bar in that segment again next year. Tundra? The truck that changes everything?? I agree, I still think the F-150 (and Super Duty) are the benchmarks for truck interiors. (and exteriors) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Oh you know I'm just bugging you. Truth, I like panthers, but I like other cars more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Oh you know I'm just bugging you. Truth, I like panthers, but I like other cars more. Oh I know, that's why I posted the pic. :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 (edited) That's about $1.26 more than it feels like they spent on the interior of the Crown Vic. Heck, personally, I still think the interior on the SN95 Mustangs is pretty darn good for its age. The S197 is certainly a step above that (though perhaps a bit more hollow-feeling). No shit Sherlock. And that still does not negate the fact that the 35 year old looking Mustang has a 35 year old interior. Edited October 23, 2007 by P71_CrownVic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 As I said, it's hit or miss (but you can probably say that about any car). The V-8's may be better, but the 4.0L 3.73 LS combo seemed to be the culprit. There are several TSB's on it, including * TSB #0537 -- DRIVELINE 1ST ORDER VIBRATION/BOOM/DRONE. *TT (NHTSA ID #10012952, JUNE 07 2005) * TSB #17107 -- DRIVELINE VIBRATION ON DRONE/BOOM AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS. *TT (NHTSA ID #10004046, SEPTEMBER 01 2003) If you are happy with your Explorer, please recommend it. The poster is probably looking for all opinions in the vehicles in his group. Just so you know, I'm not saying I wouldn't go back to Ford again. If they had put out a revised Bronco for 06, I'd probably have one of those now. :happy feet: Well I have the 4.0L and the 3.55 rear so maybe that is why mine is fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 The LED lights look good though. LEDs can be pretty bright, the ones on the police light bars are extremely bright, especially at night, they pretty much blind you. I'm not sure if they can really be 'directed' in a certain direction though, they just kinda make light. I'm not sure though, I could be wrong. Thats stupid that b/c a vehicle has adaptive lighting, it doesnt have HIDs. It's amazing how everybody else can manage to do it. Indeed, directing LED light is the biggest problem since LEDs are flat semi-conductors. They try to put diffusers on LEDs to disperse the light at more angles, but it's still not adequate for general high-intensity lighting. LEDs are brighter to the eye but bleed less light so they are perfect for most non-directed applications. Leave it to Ford to use them in back-up lights but not brake lights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 No shit Sherlock. And that still does not negate the fact that the 35 year old looking Mustang has a 35 year old interior. In your opinion. I think it's pretty nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphy Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 No shit Sherlock. And that still does not negate the fact that the 35 year old looking Mustang has a 35 year old interior. This is from a Crown Vic owner! :hysterical: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 This is from a Crown Vic owner! :hysterical: . Well, I guess if anybody were to know what an old interior looked like, he should . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 (edited) Leave it to Ford to use them in back-up lights but not brake lights I would like to see Ford get rid of filament bulbs everywhere, so that bulb burn-out is a thing of the past, everywhere on the automobile. Check out the step-by-step process to get to the instrument cluster to change bulbs on a TC; LED's would make that problem largely disappear. THAT IS NOT MY PICTURE Edited October 23, 2007 by Edstock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.