2005Explorer Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 (edited) V6 in cars and small SUVs will go the way of V8s, first they become an option , then an expensive one followed by not available. Oh I know... I was just thinking if that 2.7 V6 really exists it might be a nice engine, however if it is Lincoln only I'll never own it unless I start buying used. The EcoBoost 2.0 should work great in the Escape since it is a light enough vehicle for it. Ford is working hard on cutting weight so there is a chance that the new Escape might even be slightly lighter then the current one. Edited October 9, 2011 by 2005Explorer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Oh I know... I was just thinking if that 2.7 V6 really exists it might be a nice engine, however if it is Lincoln only I'll never own it unless I start buying used. The EcoBoost 2.0 should work great in the Escape since it is a light enough vehicle for it. Ford is working hard on cutting weight so there is a chance that the new Escape might even be slightly lighter then the current one. An I agree too, I think Ford is starting to over sell ecoboost 2.0, chiefs are buying into one engine fits all. IMO, in heavy vehicles, they are trading customer happiness for beautiful CAFE numbers... A NA 2.7 and EB 2.7 in Escape would make wonderful additions but we cannot have the modern Escape being compared to the early smaller V8 Explorer can we, people would be way too pleased with easy performance.. If Ford are true to their customers the new Nano will be going into a lot more vehicles, I hope demand pushes it too.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 IMO, in heavy vehicles, they are trading customer happiness for beautiful CAFE numbers... Well if they don't meet CAFE numbers they pay fines or just don't get to sell cars. Look at Washington for CAFE, not the Manufactures for having to pull rabbits out of hats to meet them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Well if they don't meet CAFE numbers they pay fines or just don't get to sell cars. Look at Washington for CAFE, not the Manufactures for having to pull rabbits out of hats to meet them. I think the Taurus 2.0 EcoBoost will be mismatched almost as bad as the Explorer 2.0 EcoBoost. The 2.0 EcoBoost seems to me to be more of a small to midsize car or SUV engine. It seems a bit on the small size for some of the big a** vehicles they are trying to install it in. They really need a larger EcoBoost 4 or a small EcoBoost V6 for those full sizers. You can blow all the air you want into it, but your still trying to pull around those big vehicles with some pretty small cylinders. Even a larger 4 cylinder or a small V6 would still be able to post very good fuel economy numbers. Who knows the MPG could be even better if the engine didn't have to work so hard to pull around 4000+ pounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted October 9, 2011 Author Share Posted October 9, 2011 I think the Taurus 2.0 EcoBoost will be mismatched almost as bad as the Explorer 2.0 EcoBoost. The 2.0 EcoBoost seems to me to be more of a small to midsize car or SUV engine. It seems a bit on the small size for some of the big a** vehicles they are trying to install it in. They really need a larger EcoBoost 4 or a small EcoBoost V6 for those full sizers. You can blow all the air you want into it, but your still trying to pull around those big vehicles with some pretty small cylinders. Even a larger 4 cylinder or a small V6 would still be able to post very good fuel economy numbers. Who knows the MPG could be even better if the engine didn't have to work so hard to pull around 4000+ pounds. I agree with what you're saying. I'm thinking of the past Five Hundred owners who were happy with the 203hp D30 and 6A (Not the CVT which had mixed reviews). Yes power was 'adequate' but they were not in the market for power. It was size and FE. I remember mixed reviews of the D35 install to say nothing of the name change but I digress. I will wait and see the long-term tests and overall performance. I remember a Turbo 2.0L I4 in a Passat seemed underwhelming at first in a mid-size. How things can change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 I think the Taurus 2.0 EcoBoost will be mismatched almost as bad as the Explorer 2.0 EcoBoost. On the contrary, Taurus and Edge weigh around 4,000 lbs, that's around 300-400 lbs lighter than Explorer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 On the contrary, Taurus and Edge weigh around 4,000 lbs, that's around 300-400 lbs lighter than Explorer. I agree. I think 2.0 Ecoboost Taurus will be fine. Edge too. Audi Q5 is heavier than Edge and scoots just fine with 2.0T. Explorer is really about the worst car Ford can launch the 2.0 Ecoboost in the US. It really should have gone first in the Edge and Taurus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 It really should have gone first in the Edge and Taurus. That was the plan (to launch in the Edge), but something obviously got snagged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I agree. I think 2.0 Ecoboost Taurus will be fine. Edge too. Audi Q5 is heavier than Edge and scoots just fine with 2.0T. Explorer is really about the worst car Ford can launch the 2.0 Ecoboost in the US. It really should have gone first in the Edge and Taurus. eco Edges are readily avail....from our standpoint as a dealer, we have no issues ordering them with the 6 as well, the Explorer will remain predominantly 6 cylinder... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I agree. I think 2.0 Ecoboost Taurus will be fine. Edge too. Audi Q5 is heavier than Edge and scoots just fine with 2.0T. Explorer is really about the worst car Ford can launch the 2.0 Ecoboost in the US. It really should have gone first in the Edge and Taurus. Ecoboost Falcon will be even better because it's 300 lbs lighter than Taurus and offers more hip/shoulder room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I agree with what you're saying. I'm thinking of the past Five Hundred owners who were happy with the 203hp D30 and 6A (Not the CVT which had mixed reviews). Yes power was 'adequate' but they were not in the market for power. It was size and FE. I remember mixed reviews of the D35 install to say nothing of the name change but I digress. I will wait and see the long-term tests and overall performance. I remember a Turbo 2.0L I4 in a Passat seemed underwhelming at first in a mid-size. How things can change. http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/10/2012-ford-explorer-xlt-ecoboost-is-enough.html 2012 Ford Explorer XLT: Ecoboost is Enough By Ed Hellwig | October 6, 2011 The idea of turbocharging a big ol' family SUV would have been unthinkable in the early days of the Explorer. All that technology and cost for nothing more than some extra fuel mileage? And whoever heard of turbocharged truck anyway? Well, now these days turbos are the wave of the future, or at least the near future and our Explorer is on the front end of the wave. After a good chunk of miles behind the wheel I'm liking it more than I thought I would. It is not a quick crossover by any means. There are times on the freeway when it struggles to build speed and your average family sedan will smoke you away from a light every time. Then again, most of that doesn't matter. In most driving situations our Explorer feels adequately powered without any noticeable peaks or valleys in the delivery. The engine is pretty smooth, too, so it doesn't feel or sound like a typical four-cylinder either. I'm guessing it would be just fine for the average family, although I don't see the average buyer paying up for it. That little badge on the back isn't that cool. Ed Hellwig, Editor, Inside Line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) my 2c, and I sell em, if it were me, id save a grand and get the V6, its smoother, doesnt lose its breath after the MPHs rise, and really doesnt suffer that much in mileage. and so far the people buying the explorer have mirrored my sentiments...it is DEFITELY an easier sell in the Edge....I will also add its the 3.7 that should be in the Explorer.... Edited October 10, 2011 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted October 11, 2011 Author Share Posted October 11, 2011 your average family sedan will smoke you away from a light every time I assume Mid-size Sedans which is a huge market so no real surprise there. I was referring to full-size former Five Hundred sedan owners which were pretty vocal at the time. Now the Taurus is lighter then an Explorer so maybe you MIGHT find some buyers of the EB20. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted October 11, 2011 Author Share Posted October 11, 2011 my 2c, and I sell em, if it were me, id save a grand and get the V6, its smoother, doesnt lose its breath after the MPHs rise, and really doesnt suffer that much in mileage. and so far the people buying the explorer have mirrored my sentiments...it is DEFITELY an easier sell in the Edge....I will also add its the 3.7 that should be in the Explorer.... So I wonder why the D37 didn't make the cut to the Explorer? It would have made sense but the current D35 is ample. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 So I wonder why the D37 didn't make the cut to the Explorer? It would have made sense but the current D35 is ample. The real odd thing is that the PIU gets the 3.7. I wonder if it's not being held out for a Lincoln. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantor Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 So, what will be the exact output of the 2.0 EB? it's 240HP/270TQ in the Edge/Explorer but will they use the previously quoted 237HP/250TQ, or does the 237HP/250TQ even exist anymore? The lower output numbers were in the Explorer glossy brochure that was mailed to me 6 or so months ago but it ended up being bumped up. What's the deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 So I wonder why the D37 didn't make the cut to the Explorer? It would have made sense but the current D35 is ample. Alignment of PI sedan performance with PI Ute. IMO, D35 was chosen for Explorer based on best balance of power, torque and fuel economy. D37 gives more power/torque but at the cost of less impressive fuel economy figures.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Isn't this about the 2013 Escape? I think it will sell fine, after all, doesnt it need a new greenhouse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 So, what will be the exact output of the 2.0 EB? it's 240HP/270TQ in the Edge/Explorer but will they use the previously quoted 237HP/250TQ, or does the 237HP/250TQ even exist anymore? The lower output numbers were in the Explorer glossy brochure that was mailed to me 6 or so months ago but it ended up being bumped up. What's the deal? The EU Uses the Term transient Over-boost to Describe the torque increase. FNA has Either Decided to use the Full 270 in it's torque figures, or they modified the engine to develop 270ft'lbs continuously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) The EU Uses the Term transient Over-boost to Describe the torque increase. FNA has Either Decided to use the Full 270 in it's torque figures, or they modified the engine to develop 270ft'lbs continuously. interestingly sidebar Biker, I heard with the ST Focus they are undecided whether to go the cast in head manifold or slap on a good set of Headers....they have slapped some on and the HP number was 271......got me curious to see what actually sees production.... Edited October 12, 2011 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 interestingly sidebar Biker, I heard with the ST Focus they are undecided whether to go the cast in head manifold or slap on a good set of Headers....they have slapped some on and the HP number was 271......got me curious to see what actually sees production.... if a pwoer increase was going to be annouced they would have done it at frankfurt. The New head has to be more than the cast in manifold, it must address the positioning of the injectors, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 if a pwoer increase was going to be annouced they would have done it at frankfurt. The New head has to be more than the cast in manifold, it must address the positioning of the injectors, too. cant wait for that ST....from what I have been told, ALL of Fords HP numbers are conservative..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKII Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 if a pwoer increase was going to be annouced they would have done it at frankfurt. The New head has to be more than the cast in manifold, it must address the positioning of the injectors, too. Cylinder head All-new Aluminium High Flow with Integrated Exhaust Manifold Cylinder block All-new Aluminium with Glass Core Technology and Cast-in Liners Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Cylinder head All-new Aluminium High Flow with Integrated Exhaust Manifold Cylinder block All-new Aluminium with Glass Core Technology and Cast-in Liners which engine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 I'm sure the Focus ST will please but I'm sure Ford will have a Focus RS as well with a hi-po EB20. I'm sure the 237-240hp EB20 in the Escape will be more then capable with a flat and fat torque-band. 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.