PREMiERdrum Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The 2011 Ford Explorer's currently only available with a naturally aspirated 3.5-liter V6, with a 2.0-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder engine on the way. But a page on Ford's website is hinting at a Ford Explorer SHO with the 3.5-liter turbocharged EcoBoost engine. Vehicles listed on the page advertising the availability of the EcoBoost V6 include the Ford Taurus SHO and Ford Flex, which both sport the engine. Missing is the EcoBoost F-150, but present is the mysterious Explorer SHO. "I've never heard of it, either it's a major massive typo or someone's let the cat out of the bag years in advance," said Richard Truett, Ford's Powertrain Communications Manager. "As far as I know there is no Explorer SHO." The idea of a high-powered SHO-branded Explorer to fight the upcoming 2012 Grand Cherokee SRT8 is appealing for enthusiasts, but ultimately inconsistent with the aim of the Explorer as leader in fuel economy. Truett repeatedly expressed his belief this was a complete mistake in a tone stronger than Ford PR's response to our query about turbocharged EcoBoost Mustang. Ford also denied it was planning to put a 3.5-liter V6 EcoBoost engine, mid-mounted in a Transit Connect to create a SHOnnect. Granted, we have no intelligence this is going to happen, but figured while we had Ford on the phone it was worth an ask. LINK - Jalopnik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) LINK - Jalopnik A SHOnnect...REALLY?????? I would doubt the sanity of ANYONE capable of asking THAT question or even subliminally suggesting its plausibility.... Edited February 22, 2011 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I remember years ago they had a SHOstar minivan concept. Would have bought that instead of my current Explorer in a heartbeat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 Has the TT3.5 been confirmed for the Interceptor Utility yet? That would make perfect sense... If true, this further solidifies the Explorer for our next sled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 It makes more sense in the Explorer than it does in the Flex. People are looking at the Explorer as a true SUV replacement, so a V8 replacement makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 I remember years ago they had a SHOstar minivan concept. Would have bought that instead of my current Explorer in a heartbeat. I remember reading about that in Motor Trend's Autoshow preview... Ford ShostarWhen You Wish Upon A 'Star... Conventional wisdom cautions against wishing too hard for something, lest you get it-although, we could do much worse than this hot family machine, my friends. The impact made by the ultra-high-performance Ford SHOstar on the Detroit show's assembled multitudes apparently far surpassed the company's expectations. Many in both the crowd and the press gallery openly and fervently wished that the blue oval would one day grace a production version of Ford's 220-horsepower concept "midivan." There's a NASCAR spec-series here. The obvious centerpoint of Ford's labor is the van's fresh engine. As its moniker implies, the SHOstar is ignited by the DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter SHO V-6 powerplant pulled whole from the Taurus high-po sedan, with all 220 horses chompin' at the bit. Cosmetically, modest exterior cladding deepens the front fascia, alters the center grille, and supplies small driving lamps. It wraps around the long-wheelbase midivan to provide bolder wheel opening demi-flares and some rocker-panel ground effects; fiber optics are used for taillights and to illuminate the Ford oval in the grille. Firmer suspension tuning stiffens the ride quality, but better manages the bread-box's roll characteristics. Chrome yellow is awkward for stealth, but imagine black cherry.... The Shostar even has a five-speed stick! Get out 'o the way, Bubba, I'm grocery-gettin'. -Daniel Charles Ross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I remember reading about that in Motor Trend's Autoshow preview... WOW...220 horsepower...AWESOME.....oh wait.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 WOW...220 horsepower...AWESOME.....oh wait.... Laugh all you want, but I had that same engine in my '95 SHO and I was eating stock Mustang GT's for lunch. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted February 23, 2011 Author Share Posted February 23, 2011 WOW...220 horsepower...AWESOME.....oh wait.... Laugh all you want, but I had that same engine in my '95 SHO and I was eating stock Mustang GT's for lunch. 220HP in the mid-90's was nothing to sneeze at. The '96 Mustang GT had 215HP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 This was a ridiculously good idea: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I would figure the EB 3.5L would be phased in. The current 3.5L accelerates 'decently', but they have to kick it up a notch and be competitive in that regard. If the Flex can have it, I expect the Explorer to have it as well. And it's not as fuel economy will suffer much either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) Has the TT3.5 been confirmed for the Interceptor Utility yet? That would make perfect sense... If true, this further solidifies the Explorer for our next sled. so what would you think of adapting the Raptor grille? < click for bigger tho it should just say " S H O " with maybe EXPLORER on the front of the hood like the Flex or does that one say " F O R D "? Edited February 23, 2011 by 2b2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I still think they should do a Fusion SHO and they would get a lot more traction out of that effort than an Explorer SHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betaiota Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I still think they should do a Fusion SHO and they would get a lot more traction out of that effort than an Explorer SHO. I completely agree. And I hope, if they do, they don't make it look as comical/flashy/boy-racerish as the Focus ST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 but ultimately inconsistent with the aim of the Explorer as leader in fuel economy The F-150 is the leader in fuel economy too. That doesn't mean there isn't room for the SVT Raptor. I'd say go for it. It has to be little more than a plug-and-play operation considering the EB's use in other D3's already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) I sure hope this was a slip and that it's more a sporty model then just an engine option like on the Flex. Calling it an "Explorer SHO" is a step in the right direction! Edited February 23, 2011 by NLPRacing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I still think they should do a Fusion SHO and they would get a lot more traction out of that effort than an Explorer SHO. Fusion platform can't handle the EB 3.5L - it would have to wait for CD4. The Explorer platform should be capable already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I certainly like the idea, and I am a big believer in using the SHO moniker for performance-oriented EBV6 models (cough cough Fusion cough), but that's a pretty strong pushback. Sadly, this really could be a typo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I certainly like the idea, and I am a big believer in using the SHO moniker for performance-oriented EBV6 models (cough cough Fusion cough), but that's a pretty strong pushback. Sadly, this really could be a typo. I don't get how SHO can be a typo....its a huge difference from SEL LOL Not to mention it was all in caps :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 220HP in the mid-90's was nothing to sneeze at. The '96 Mustang GT had 215HP. and would be TOTALLY unacceptable today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I still think they should do a Fusion SHO and they would get a lot more traction out of that effort than an Explorer SHO. If anything, it should be the Lincoln MkZ that gets it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) It makes more sense in the Explorer than it does in the Flex. People are looking at the Explorer as a true SUV replacement, so a V8 replacement makes sense. And why would a sporty TT V6 make more sense in the Explorer than the Flex? Personally, I think it's the exact opposite. And I'm sorry, most people I speak with are catching on that the Explorer is not a replacement for a true SUV. The service and sales people at my local dealer even admit so. I still think they should do a Fusion SHO and they would get a lot more traction out of that effort than an Explorer SHO. Let's see how the Explorer sells before we slap a SHO tag on the name. And also, don't dilute the SHO name. Any manufacturer can slap an emblem on the side and say it's a sports version. The Flex isn't called the Flex SHO, because it's just the motor. If all they do is drop the motor into the Explorer, without any suspension, brake and other updates, it should not get the SHO name. To me, there is more to a vehicle getting the SHO name than just dropping the EB 3.5L under the hood. And I spent a good hour with a Black 2011 Explorer Limited last week (Wednesday, 2/16/11). My thoughts are the interior is very well executed and of good quality materials. Disliked the gauge cluster and cheap looking sony cd player, but did like the Vista Roof and comfortable seats. Also, the floorboard is very similar to my father-in-laws Taurus and I couldn't find a comfortable position to rest my left foot. The exterior had good fit/finish. But this thing is a BIG. It is nearly as wide as my F150, and it looks much heavier and bigger in person than it does in pictures. Even makes the Gen III Explorer look small, and that was a pig compared to the Gen I & Gen II models. Also, the exterior while many here seem to find it as aggressive or unique, the more and more I got into the details, the more dull it became and the more it looked like other CUV's on the market such as the Acadia, Equinox and so on. The best exterior style aspect I found, and practically only item I like on the outside, is the design of the hood. Now that was unique. This is clearly not your fathers Explorer, and that's a bad thing in my opinion. Too big, too heavy, too wide, no true 4WD/2-spd transfer case. This Explorer was clearly made to be a street queen. I had my thoughts prior to spending time around it, but now that I have, my thoughts are even worse. Sure, it may sell to the masses, but this is surely not a vehicle that will be on my radar when we replace the wife's car. Below is the vehicle: http://dealernet.homenetinc.com/omearaford/details2.asp?path-taken=new&vehicle_id=BGA15588#tippytop Edited February 23, 2011 by V8-X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 And why would a sporty TT V6 make more sense in the Explorer than the Flex? Personally, I think it's the exact opposite. And I'm sorry, most people I speak with are catching on that the Explorer is not a replacement for a true SUV. The service and sales people at my local dealer even admit so. Let's see how the Explorer sells before we slap a SHO tag on the name. And also, don't dilute the SHO name. Any manufacturer can slap an emblem on the side and say it's a sports version. The Flex isn't called the Flex SHO, because it's just the motor. If all they do is drop the motor into the Explorer, without any suspension, brake and other updates, it should not get the SHO name. To me, there is more to a vehicle getting the SHO name than just dropping the EB 3.5L under the hood. And I spent a good hour with a Black 2011 Explorer Limited last week (Wednesday, 2/16/11). My thoughts are the interior is very well executed and of good quality materials. Disliked the gauge cluster and cheap looking sony cd player, but did like the Vista Roof and comfortable seats. Also, the floorboard is very similar to my father-in-laws Taurus and I couldn't find a comfortable position to rest my left foot. The exterior had good fit/finish. But this thing is a BIG. It is nearly as wide as my F150, and it looks much heavier and bigger in person than it does in pictures. Even makes the Gen III Explorer look small, and that was a pig compared to the Gen I & Gen II models. Also, the exterior while many here seem to find it as aggressive or unique, the more and more I got into the details, the more dull it became and the more it looked like other CUV's on the market such as the Acadia, Equinox and so on. The best exterior style aspect I found, and practically only item I like on the outside, is the design of the hood. Now that was unique. This is clearly not your fathers Explorer, and that's a bad thing in my opinion. Too big, too heavy, too wide, no true 4WD/2-spd transfer case. This Explorer was clearly made to be a street queen. I had my thoughts prior to spending time around it, but now that I have, my thoughts are even worse. Sure, it may sell to the masses, but this is surely not a vehicle that will be on my radar when we replace the wife's car. Below is the vehicle: http://dealernet.homenetinc.com/omearaford/details2.asp?path-taken=new&vehicle_id=BGA15588#tippytop and your wifes car is.....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) and your wifes car is.....? The wife currently drives a '04 Altima 3.5L. She wants AWD, which the Explorer would work, but she too dislikes the Explorer style. She much prefers the style of the Flex. And many of my thoughts on the Explorer, are coming from a family that has owned at least one of each Generation Explorer. (1 Gen I, 2 Gen II, 1 Gen III models) Edited February 23, 2011 by V8-X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 This is clearly not your fathers Explorer Whew, thank God! My father's Explorer was the '94 in my signature that was passed down to me. It was an ill-mannered rattling pig of a vehicle. 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.