2011 Explorer Powertrain

[Hydro]

Old Edge 3.5L = 265 hp.

 

New Explorer = 290 hp (not 285).

 

That's 25 more hp.

I quoted the New Edge 3.5L power ratings, I thought that's what atvman was referring to, but meant his current model. I still think the current Edge will still perform better.

[RichardJensen]

This explains why I have seen many camouflaged Fords testing here on I-70 in Colorado over the years.

 

Eisenhower is not a pass but a twin mile long bore through the Continental Divide at about 11,000 Ft above sea level. The approaches, from both the east and west become exceptionally steep just before you enter the tunnel.

 

Need to make sure the next time I drive to Grand Junction I go when I can plan on taking the Eisenhower tunnel. Last trip out was late October, and there was a forecast of 3-5" snowfall in the higher elevations, so I went up 13 through Meeker & Craig and crossed on I-80. Sure, that's hardly any snow to speak of, but when there was no snow at all in Wyoming.........

[rkisler]

Probably because the 2.0L EcoBoost is not capable of putting out max torque for sustained periods of time. Like driving up Eisenhower Pass with a loaded trailer.

 

Cresting Eisenhower Pass at nothing less posted minimum speed, with maximum Gross Vehicle COMBINED Weight is at least an "unofficial" test for Ford vehicles.

 

Sure, sounds reasonable. There could have been a number of issues:

 

1. Ability to maintain speed under the conditions you mentioned.

2. Durability -- Cooling, transmission, etc., particularly over sustained stress

3. NVH -- What gear would you be in over Eisenhower?

 

Or more likely some combination of the above.

 

I don't have any issue with the EB I4 arrangement on the Explorer. If you are using your SUV as an all-around vehicle to carry people and stuff and also for light towing (motorcycles, snowmobiles), then a FWD EBI4 would work and give you good fuel economy. If not, choose the V6.

[theoldwizard]

My guess is that the EcoBoost I4 will get the 6F35 transmission and the V6 will get the 6F50. They will probably have to "torque limit" the EcoBoost while shifting to make that transmission live.

 

If they ever put a V6 EcoBoost in the Explorer (likely when the PI version shows up) it will get the 6F55 transmission (same as Taurus SHO).

[jpd80]

Probably because the 2.0L EcoBoost is not capable of putting out max torque for sustained periods of time. Like driving up Eisenhower Pass with a loaded trailer.

 

Cresting Eisenhower Pass at nothing less posted minimum speed, with maximum Gross Vehicle COMBINED Weight is at least an "unofficial" test for Ford vehicles.

I looked up the RWD 4x2 4.0 Explorer and it has a 3500 lb tow rating even though

that engine has less torque, so something is going on with the FWD Vs RWD or

continuous available torque....

 

You would think that a turbo would behave better than a NA at higher altitude,

maybe as you said sustainable boost (with regular gas?) or the combination

of that with FWD and steep grade may put that tow rating back to 2,000.

 

Maybe it works better with premium in the tank?

Edited July 31, 2010 by jpd80

[theoldwizard]

I looked up the RWD 4x2 4.0 Explorer and it has a 3500 lb tow rating even though

that engine has less torque, so something is going on with the FWD Vs RWD or

continuous available torque....

Probably because the 2.0L EcoBoost is not capable of putting out max torque for sustained periods of time.

Maybe it works better with premium in the tank?

Definitely true, but cooling for engine/turbo and the transmission are major issues when towing.