Ford and the 2020 Explorer

Unrelated, but another good SG video:


G-Bus said:
SG is the best car reviewer out there. ONLY one that lifts a car up on the lift to look underneath. He's got less subs than everyone else probably because he's too blunt.

As for the Explorer, those panel gaps and interior issues are quite flagrant. The 10 speed auto, I haven't driven but the 6 speed they have in the Fusion is also a mixed bag. It really shifts weird, sometimes it just dumps gears on you as if you had solid engine mounts and other times its buttery smooth. So not sure how a firmware would change the inconsistency. If they kept the same TCU and just added 4 more speeds, then I sort of see how it could be dangerous, especially on a RWD biased platform, when you don't expect it to by violent but it just drops the gear and the back end comes out, like in their video.

The V6TT, is somewhere like 400hp & 400tq so it definitely can go sideways quite quickly.
Click to expand...

The 10 Speed Longitudinal transmission in the Explorer / trucks (10R80) and the 6 speed transaxle in the Fusion (6F35) likely don't share a single part. Way different designs/platforms. The comparison you're making is similar to saying that the Cherokee's early 9 speed was iffy, therefore the 8 speeds in trucks must be a hot mess too.

I guess manufacturers have their quirks and idiosyncrasies in programming but I think it's mechanically sound. It was co-developed with GM and has seen service in Camaros, Cadillacs and hi-powered trucks like the Raptor. Sure, it's "different" in some ways and has seen it's share of complaints, but it's the first time I hear it referred to as "dangerous".
 
kahos said:
I guess manufacturers have their quirks and idiosyncrasies in programming but I think it's mechanically sound. It was co-developed with GM and has seen service in Camaros, Cadillacs and hi-powered trucks like the Raptor. Sure, it's "different" in some ways and has seen it's share of complaints, but it's the first time I hear it referred to as "dangerous".
Click to expand...

I was going to post this earlier today. Besides the Co Development the electronics and what not found in cars these days are pretty much off the shelf.

That being said I like the active engine noise
 
kahos said:
The 10 Speed Longitudinal transmission in the Explorer / trucks (10R80) and the 6 speed transaxle in the Fusion (6F35) likely don't share a single part. Way different designs/platforms. The comparison you're making is similar to saying that the Cherokee's early 9 speed was iffy, therefore the 8 speeds in trucks must be a hot mess too.
Click to expand...

You are right, it wouldn't make sense that both of there would be related, however, in terms of behavior, based on what some other people have also said they seem to behave similarly so it's most probably programming that is causing the issues.

Also, to give you perspective of the dangerous behavior; say you floor the car while going already 40 - 50 kms/h. One time it could down shift smoothly and go. Sometimes it just SLAMS into a lower gear and gives a heck of shock in the cabin and the Fusion being FWD based, you feel the torque steer.

If it behaves the same way, meaning it's not predictable from shift to shift, I can see how on a RWD platform, the soccer moms would potentially lose control on wet surfaces.

Having said all this, I find the new Explorer to be good looking none the less. Wet dreams of having a lowered one with the V6TT. But WAYYYY too much money, at that point might as well get the Aviator.
 
G-Bus said:
You are right, it wouldn't make sense that both of there would be related, however, in terms of behavior, based on what some other people have also said they seem to behave similarly so it's most probably programming that is causing the issues.

Also, to give you perspective of the dangerous behavior; say you floor the car while going already 40 - 50 kms/h. One time it could down shift smoothly and go. Sometimes it just SLAMS into a lower gear and gives a heck of shock in the cabin and the Fusion being FWD based, you feel the torque steer.

If it behaves the same way, meaning it's not predictable from shift to shift, I can see how on a RWD platform, the soccer moms would potentially lose control on wet surfaces.

Having said all this, I find the new Explorer to be good looking none the less. Wet dreams of having a lowered one with the V6TT. But WAYYYY too much money, at that point might as well get the Aviator.
Click to expand...

I owned an escape with the 6F35/2.0T and I've never experienced that. There was some torque management going on in lower gears but it's never been harsh or unpredictable. I've also gotten significant seat time in Explorers and while they were programmed differently, they were never a reason for concern.

I'm not disputing that it's happened, but I'm thinking there might be something else off with these cars to cause that behavior?

My experience with the 10R80 has shown it to be a little "harsher" than the ZF 8HP at times, but to be a smooth operator generally speaking. I'm keen to avoid wastegate "stickyness" and "carbon deposit" problems in the future so I ensure the powertrain puts in an honest day's work every so often. We've obviously have come a long way from the kickdown rods! These modern transmissions are pretty neat bits of engineering.
 
The worst was the DCT in the Fiesta/Focus.

That is a flaming pile of garbage. You could smell the clutches burning just by flooring the car

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 
El pibe said:
The worst was the DCT in the Fiesta/Focus.

That is a flaming pile of garbage. You could smell the clutches burning just by flooring the car

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I wonder how they were able to sell even one of those cars. I drove it for 30 seconds and I'm still traumatized.
 
Broody said:
I wonder how they were able to sell even one of those cars. I drove it for 30 seconds and I'm still traumatized.
Click to expand...
Had one as a loaner for a week. I was so depressed by it that I actually prefer walking than having to drive that piece of shit should the opportunity arrive again.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 
Have you seen how thin the new F150 frame are ?! we have the HDPP with the thickest frame and it's still sub 1/8 thick, a shame.

I was going to go on a complete Ford rant because the only good thing they do are 6.2L F250/350 that drink over 30L/100km, but i did not want to break some fanboys heart.
 
SRT-What? said:
You are aware that most aircraft frames and fuselage are not far from 0.080 to 0.200" thick, right?
Click to expand...

Plane needs to fly thus they are weak as fuck just like birds bone are hollow, what is your point ? I hope there frame is very rust resistant because, the thinner, the faster it will rust thru. planes don't live in salt like our vehicules do.
 
22REpower said:
Plane needs to fly thus they are weak as fuck just like birds bone are hollow, what is your point ? I hope there frame is very rust resistant because, the thinner, the faster it will rust thru. planes don't live in salt like our vehicules do.
Click to expand...
Lololol planes corrode hardcore as well hence the huge push to composites . What are you talking about ???

You don't need stupid thick frames on pick ups these days with modern steels. Funny frame thickness and corrosion prevention coming from someone with 22RE in their name

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk
 
22REpower said:
Have you seen how thin the new F150 frame are ?! we have the HDPP with the thickest frame and it's still sub 1/8 thick, a shame.

I was going to go on a complete Ford rant because the only good thing they do are 6.2L F250/350 that drink over 30L/100km, but i did not want to break some fanboys heart.
Click to expand...

The F150's body panels are made of aluminium. The frame is high strength steel.

It's a competitive product in a competitive market. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make as the F-150 is not meant to be everything to everybody. It has more capability in some configuration than yesterday's 3/4 tons while also being a comfortable family vehicle type of vehicle for light duty users. Making the frame any thicker or heavier than it needs to be will carry penalties in initial purchase price, fuel mileage and might present some challenges in ride and handling and crash testing. What exactly would the point of that be? I've got the thinner frame and smaller rear end and truly couldn't care less. Going "beefier" would have no benefits in my use case.

If you need more payload of capability than what an F-150 is designed for, ford will be more than happy to sell you an F-250, F350, F-450, F-550 or even an F-650 or F-750 super duty.

The new 7.3 V8 in super duties should be a winner. Less high strung then even the 6.2 could be at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top