rmc523 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 I could understand if the 3.5 EB was the only engine available, that would help to minimize costs.... Needless to say, the info on the website is not clear. So it does appear the 3.5EB is the only engine available. Makes you wonder if the Expy will get the same engine (for costs as you mention), or if it'll receive a "lesser" engine instead of or in addition to the (optional) 3.5EB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 (edited) Needless to say, the info on the website is not clear. So it does appear the 3.5EB is the only engine available. Makes you wonder if the Expy will get the same engine (for costs as you mention), or if it'll receive a "lesser" engine instead of or in addition to the (optional) 3.5EB? Something has me intrigued though, Ford is saying that the '15 Navigator will have class leading fuel economy, towing and storage room. Can they get there with just the one engine or do they need a second like EB 27 for that class leading economy ... Now that would piss GM off, aceing their brand new SUVs without using a Aluminum body.. Edited January 24, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Ford already confirmed that the 5.0L will be available in the new Expedition. So it would make sense that the 5.0L will be standard in the Navigator and the 3.5L EB will be optional. I doubt the 2.7L makes it in at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 (edited) I could understand if the 3.5 EB was the only engine available, that would help to minimize costs.... If they've done the work to fit the EB35, they've likely done almost all of the work it would take to fit the Coyote, so it shouldn't be that much of an incremental cost--and if there's one vehicle in the lineup that could absorb that hit, it would be the Navigator. And it's not like we're talking about a bunch of mills--they're just skimming a bit off the top of the F150's supply. Heck, the cost savings from discontinuing the 5.4 are probably enough to justify the cost of putting the Coyote in the Navigator... Edited January 24, 2014 by SoonerLS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Remember the MKC launch only talked about the 2.3L, but it also got the 2.0L. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Remember the MKC launch only talked about the 2.3L, but it also got the 2.0L. Yup. There's no reason for them to talk about everything right now. It's going to be a long time before this "new" Navigator hits the lots, so there's plenty of time to fill in the details. And It's not like you have a choice of engines in the current Navigator--you can have any engine you want, as long as it's the 5.4 SOHC. Would anyone care if the only mill they offered was the Coyote, or is there just wailing and gnashing of teeth because the EB35 is short two cylinders? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Yup. There's no reason for them to talk about everything right now. It's going to be a long time before this "new" Navigator hits the lots, so there's plenty of time to fill in the details. And It's not like you have a choice of engines in the current Navigator--you can have any engine you want, as long as it's the 5.4 SOHC. Would anyone care if the only mill they offered was the Coyote, or is there just wailing and gnashing of teeth because the EB35 is short two cylinders? Would be nice to see the 6.2L popped in there as well as 3.2L Powerstroke...but Navi needs to go on a similar diet akin to what F-150 just went through... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Would be nice to see the 6.2L popped in there as well as 3.2L Powerstroke...but Navi needs to go on a similar diet akin to what F-150 just went through... It would be nice, but if the 6.2 isn't going back in the F150, I wouldn't expect to see it in the Navigator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 It would be nice, but if the 6.2 isn't going back in the F150, I wouldn't expect to see it in the Navigator. Especially at the limited volume of the Navigator. Doubt they'd want to bother to go through the EPA certification regimen for a vehicle that might only sell a couple thousand copies a year. Even the GT500 and Raptor have more volume justification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Would anyone care if the only mill they offered was the Coyote, or is there just wailing and gnashing of teeth because the EB35 is short two cylinders? Some people think it's still 1985 and that turbos self-destruct after 50K miles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Some people think it's still 1985 and that turbos self-destruct after 50K miles. So you're saying there won't be any former Saab owners lining up for them? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
03 LS Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 I'm guessing the 5.0L is standard, and the 3.5L is optional.I'm guessing not. EB35 will be standard in Navi, and maybe the only choice. The reason, 5.0 will be std in Expedition and current Lincoln practice is to have unique engine or only take the top engine from its Ford platform mates. As for 6.2 BOSS, they can add it if they want to, but probably choose not to, IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBirdStangSkyliner Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 It kind of appears that people think that the number of engine options should roughly equal sales volume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 If they've done the work to fit the EB35, they've likely done almost all of the work it would take to fit the Coyote, so it shouldn't be that much of an incremental cost--and if there's one vehicle in the lineup that could absorb that hit, it would be the Navigator. And it's not like we're talking about a bunch of mills--they're just skimming a bit off the top of the F150's supply. Heck, the cost savings from discontinuing the 5.4 are probably enough to justify the cost of putting the Coyote in the Navigator... The cost is not in fitting engines, it's all the calibration and validation work that needs to be done for what is a short run until the new vehicle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 The cost is not in fitting engines, it's all the calibration and validation work that needs to be done for what is a short run until the new vehicle. True, but if, as has been reported above, they're using it in the Expedition, most of that work will already be done, as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddysystem Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 I'm very curious now what the new Expy will look like and what Ford nose they will graft onto the front end. It looks like they are preserving the current model quarter panels in the Lincoln so I expect trhe same with the Ford. I'm not a big fan of the current nose. While I like the new F150/Atlas nose, I hope if they use the same headlight concept they pull it off better than the new Suburban version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 It's all opinion, and mine is that it should do quite well. The rear lights are excellent, compared to the competition, where the stylists have gone into excessive curves, IMHO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 (edited) ^ I like those lights too. The thing is, though? I like them on the '14 Durango as well. Edited January 26, 2014 by papilgee4evaeva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 The thing is, though? I like them on the '14 Durango as well. There was a black 2014 Durango next to me at the gas pump today and I had the exact same thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I think the 'dot dot dot" LED light is getting old. Its more about light-bars now. Ford was progressive with the Edge (fangs) light bars in the front, same with Fiesta, but this on the NAVI doesnt help things. And the belt-line in the rear looks kinda low and odd looking from rear quarter views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I'm not a fan, but then i don't like anything in this segment so I'm probably not relevant to the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I think the 'dot dot dot" LED light is getting old. Its more about light-bars now. Ford was progressive with the Edge (fangs) light bars in the front, same with Fiesta, but this on the NAVI doesnt help things. And the belt-line in the rear looks kinda low and odd looking from rear quarter views. I think I have to agree.....a diffused LED or LED tube looks better to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 I think the 'dot dot dot" LED light is getting old. Its more about light-bars now. Ford was progressive with the Edge (fangs) light bars in the front, same with Fiesta, but this on the NAVI doesnt help things. And the belt-line in the rear looks kinda low and odd looking from rear quarter views. Yep, I'm surprised someone is still coming out with a new "dot" type LED light array for 2015 model. It's moment in the sun has definitely passed. The reason for the "dots" was because it was significantly cheaper to implement but solid LED light arrays prices have plummeted and even Toyota is using it on cars like Corolla. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbalek Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6licT8RkQY For b-roll video of the Navi in motion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Maybe at the time of purhasing parts, the LED 'dot' style was easier for an MCE opposed to a solid bar. Maybe they're saving that for the all new NAVI? 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.