Jump to content
  • Custom Search


Sign in to follow this  
silvrsvt

2020 Explorer 2.3L EPA MPG Numbers

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Sevensecondsuv said:

Sure they'll move some of the higher end models on lease deals but I don't see the XLT as being priced right to be the volume trim it needs to be.

From the 2019 Explorer Order Guide, the "base" model was anticipated to be 5% of total model sales.  Not sure why you think that is the important range to be in?  You seem to want to compare the 2020 XLT to the 2019 Base, which doesn't make sense to me. Compare equivalent trims, with similar equipment.

HRG

 

 

2019 Explorer XLT %.JPG

2019 Explorer base %.JPG

Edited by HotRunrGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ford clearly knows exactly what they are selling now and for how much.   They're not guessing.  I'm sure you'll see some rebates on the XLTs once the initial demand is met to bring it in line with the competition if that's necessary.

But you're not going to find a $25K XL with bench seats and a column shifter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, akirby said:

There is ZERO reason to even do a hybrid if it only gets 1-2 mpg better than the non hybrid.

If the hybrid version is smoother or delivers better performance than than the non-hybrid, that's two good reasons to choose the hybrid right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

If the hybrid version is smoother or delivers better performance than than the non-hybrid, that's two good reasons to choose the hybrid right there.

If they were going for performance they would be using the 2.7LEB not the 3.3L.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, akirby said:

If they were going for performance they would be using the 2.7LEB not the 3.3L.

I'm interested to see the performance figures for 3.3L hybrid powertrain versus the 2.3L turbo in 2020 Explorer. The 2.3L turbo has a lot of pep, I'm impressed with how powerful that engine feels in my new '19 Ranger.

The hybrid should definitely be better in terms of smoothness though. Ford 4-cylinder engines including 2.3L turbo are coarse and loud when revved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sevensecondsuv said:

No argument with any of that. My point was that Ford also needs to have a solid entry in the meat and potatoes range of the segment. That's where I see a problem. The current explorer starts at $30ish and can be nicely optioned by $40k. The new one starts at $36500 with no options, goes over $40k as soon as you select awd, hits $45k by adding a few things, and doesn't have an optional powertrain available until $53k.

Sure they'll move some of the higher end models on lease deals but I don't see the XLT as being priced right to be the volume trim it needs to be.

I had a similar complaint when the build and price page first went live. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

Ford 4-cylinder engines including 2.3L turbo are coarse and loud when revved.

That's funny - I drove one for 7 years and never experienced that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, akirby said:

That's funny - I drove one for 7 years and never experienced that.

In comparison the 3.7L in our MKX is much louder and much coarser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, akirby said:

In comparison the 3.7L in our MKX is much louder and much coarser.

I agree. In my experience the 2.0 and 2.3 are smoother and quieter than any of the cyclone v-6's. I haven't driven a nano - I'm assuming they are a lot more refined than the Cyclone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Trader 10 said:

I agree. In my experience the 2.0 and 2.3 are smoother and quieter than any of the cyclone v-6's. I haven't driven a nano - I'm assuming they are a lot more refined than the Cyclone.

I actually had the dealer look for an exhaust leak on our MKX - it was that loud at idle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree.  My mother's 17 fusion 2.0 hums quietly... much more quiet refined then the 3.5 in my 11 Explorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, blwnsmoke said:

I agree.  My mother's 17 fusion 2.0 hums quietly... much more quiet refined then the 3.5 in my 11 Explorer.

It can get a little loud accelerating onto the freeway but I love the 2.5 in my Fusion. Not as quiet as my 2015 Focus was though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2019 at 3:39 PM, Deanh said:

note Hybrids advantage is mainly around town and stop and go...NOT at a constant highway speed....

My Fusion with 2.0L does better on the highway than my brother in-law's Mariner Hybrid....shoot, my Mustang with the 5.0L comes close to his Mariner. It it beats the crap out of everything in town*.

 

* Our "town" equals driving 10 miles to get to town since we're "out in the country". I also understand Mariner Hybrid is older technology as well.

 

Observed: 2013 Mustang GT = 18/26 2013 Fusion = 25/32 20?? Mariner = 43/29

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2.3L in my 2011 Ranger (same basic architecture as the current 2.0, 2.3 / ecoboost and previous 2.5L engines) has that distictive 4 cyl buzz which is due to the unavoidable secondary imbalance you get with an inline 4. It's especially noticeable at idle. The Rangers I've had with the cologn (4.0L) V6 were definitely smoother. I've been in a few a Cyclone V6 products (but never owned one) which seemed very ordinary in terms of engine smoothness.  The old 4.2 V6 F-150s (had two of them myself) did get really coarse above 3000 rpm, which I blame on the 90 degree block.

None of the 4s or V6s is anywhere near as smooth as the 4.6 modulars (or pretty much any other V8 I've tried) though. Also the 300 six in my old F250 is quite smooth despite the howling ps pump and lifter tick.  Smoothness is definitely the best attribute of the straight six design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So anyone know what the deal is with the Hybrid MPG numbers not being out yet? Fuel Economy.gov has everything but the Hybrid...and the regular 3.3L MPG numbers suck vs the 2.3L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

So anyone know what the deal is with the Hybrid MPG numbers not being out yet? Fuel Economy.gov has everything but the Hybrid...and the regular 3.3L MPG numbers suck vs the 2.3L

Must still be tweaking them.

The 3.3L ICE is only available on fleet orders and even there it's an option.  I can't imagine why anyone would order that even for fleet use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×