Wednesday night, Ford pulled the wraps off its all-new 2020 Explorer at an event held, quite appropriately, at Detroit’s Ford Field. The model is a complete redesign of America’s all-time best-selling SUV.
Since the introduction of the original, Ranger-based Explorer, over eight million units have found American homes. With that heritage in mind, the 2020 Explorer adopts a rear-wheel drive platform for the first time in a decade, with more attention paid to power, space, and capability. At the same time, Ford added new technology to assist owners who’ve managed to escape the daily grind.
The theme of Ford’s 2020 Explorer reveal was the “Great American Road Trip” (and fulfilling one’s #wanderlust). One of Ford Field’s end zones, normally occupied by Bears and Vikings, was turned into a high tech video screen full of 3D wizardry.
A video of various Ford families discussing what road trips mean to them was the lead-in to a new Explorer driving on a graphical representation of America the Beautiful. Cue Ford CEO Jim Hackett and Executive Vice President Jim Farley…
While Ford redesigned the 2020 Ford Explorer from the ground up, you might not know it after just a passing glance. The design is clearly more evolutionary than revolutionary. If you were to place the new Explorer next to the previous generation, the average consumer would have no idea which one is rear-wheel drive. The new model features carryover design cues like angled C-pillars, blacked out A-pillars and D-pillars, plus that Land Rover-like look America seems to love. The grille is now bigger and more pronounced, while the longer wheelbase and longitudinally mounted engine improves the Explorer’s proportions.
Underneath, the 2020 Explorer’s new architecture led to a more athletic stance and what Ford claims is improved on- and off-road handling. A new engine lineup features a pair of EcoBoost entries – a 2.3-liter turbocharged four-cylinder that’s standard kit on base, XLT and Limited models, and a 3.0-liter twin-turbocharged V6 powering the Explorer Platinum. These engines send their power through Ford’s soon-to-be-ubiquitous 10-speed automatic transmission. The 2.3-liter engine is projected to produce 300 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque, while the 3.0-liter engine is estimated at 365 horsepower and 380 lb-ft. Two other powertrains, earmarked for Explorer Hybrid and Explorer ST, will be announced at a later date.
In terms of capability, the new Explorer sees an increase in tow ratings. Vehicles equipped with a 3.0-liter EcoBoost can tow up to 5,600 pounds, a 12 percent increase over outgoing models with the 3.5-liter EcoBoost. New models outfitted with a 2.3-liter EcoBoost and Class III Trailer Tow Package can tow up to 5,300 pounds (versus the 3,000 pounds in today’s similarly equipped model).
Inside, Ford recrafted the Explorer’s cabin with more space and technology. The first thing you’ll notice is the available 10.1-inch touch screen mounted in portrait configuration. This screen uses capacitive glass, like most smartphones, providing quicker response times and features like pinch zoom and screen customization. A more traditional 8-inch touchscreen comes standard on lesser trims. Both feature the Ford Sync3 infotainment system.
The tech onslaught doesn’t stop there. An available wireless charging pad allows customers to juice up compatible mobile devices, while up to four USB ports, including new type-C outlets, provide power for next-generation mobile devices. Up to three 12-volt outlets and a 110-volt outlet are also available. 2020 Explorers also offer an available 980-watt, 14-speaker B&O premium audio system.
One of the biggest additions to the new SUV is Ford’s Co-Pilot 360 suite, offered as standard equipment. This bundle of safety technologies includes Pre-Collision Assists with Automatic Emergency Braking, Blind Spot Information System with Cross Traffic Alerts, a lane keeping system, a rear-view camera with built-in lens cleaner, and auto headlamps with auto high-beams. Despite all of this being standard, the base Explorer’s price only increases around $400.
Ford’s betting on utilities and trucks in a big way. The Explorer is Ford’s first completely revamped utility since the company announced the cull of all cars not bearing the Mustang name, and it’s hard to image the 2020 Explorer not continuing the historic nameplate’s sales success. It’s a new product in a familiar package, packed with features SUV buyers want.
Manufactured at Ford’s Chicago Assembly Plant, the 2020 Explorer appears in showrooms this summer. While pricing won’t be be announced until a later date, the company wanted everyone to know the model’s starting point: $32,765.
[Images: Adam Tonge/TTAC]
Why did it have to look the same? The current one is a beluga whale in appearance and frequently piloted by manatees.
Also, nice piece Adam.
BECAUSE MANATEES HAVE GOOD CREDIT
I think Ford be hatin’ on narwhals.
I’m sorry, I can’t think of one shady thing to say about manatees.
They do tend to bend propellers.
Holy shit my coffee is everywhere now.
Agree.
Ford takes a page from GM s style book. Make the new one look like the old one.
Jeezzzz
“Meet the new boss, same as the old boss…”
This is disappointing, good thing the Aviator looks good
There are better pics online https://cdn.gearpatrol.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2020-Ford-Explorer-gear-patrol-slide-3-1940×1300.jpg
I would say rather from LR, MB, Audi and BMW book, Not a bad company to be in.
Ford is going to sell an unbelievable number of these.
It looks great in and out. White hot segment. Will probably drive very well.
Only thing I saw I didn’t particularly like was lack of a non turbo V6. Personally I still prefer this engine setup for smoothness and reliability. A non turbo 3.5 or 3.7L would be just right.
Why would an NA engine of a given configuration be more smooth than a turbocharged one?
Ford’s NA 3.7 is coarse and needs to be wound up to go. Turbo motors make more sense for applications like this.
As far as I know they will offer a 3.3 V6 with the hybrid on Police only as standard. 3.3 V6 without hybrid for the really cheap departments.
This is the first new Ford dash design in years, as well, not counting Mustang.
And it looks like they stuck a Kindle Fire on a dock in the dash. Why can’t they design it to look like it was meant to be there and not stuck on after the design was finished?
I mean if we were talking an NA v8, or an inline 6, sure…but a v6 is a v6 regardless of what you bolt on to the exhaust manifolds. Ford turbos tend to spool really quick and have great bottom end so I think the turbo fits this perfectly.
Now the fuzz can do proper donuts
In the parking lot of the donut shop.
Unchanged at the back, and a bit o’ Toyota at the front.
And still FWD-looking, even though now they don’t have to.
And that N-S orientation tablet looks too big, and like it would be quite the distraction while driving. It’s pretty high up in the line of sight, seems like.
Yet another vehicle with an iPad perched on the dash. Zzzzzzzzz…
Designer 1: “Oh shit, we forgot to implement infotainment… ”
Designer 2: “… what if I place my iPad right about here, will that work?”
Mark Fields: “Genius, give this man a raise!”
No worse then my mom’s Mercedes GLS450, ughh that Pad stands out, looks like it should be detachable like on my Dell Lap Top.
Naa, that Benz one will get dead pixels twice as fast and cost twice as much to replace.
Not bad looking at all, nothing special though either. I think it might have been a good thing to give this vehicle something though, anything really…. that would distinguish it from the previous model a bit more. New car buyers appreciate newness. I think there will definitely be people who dont readily see the update between the two generations unless they were right next to eachother.
The interior is new and flashy which will probably be what stands out to potential buyers
Farley in hipster skinny jeans…bwahahahahahahahahahahahaaaahahahahahahahaha.
(Nice piece, Adam.)
And wearing non puffy – puffyvest.
How hip.
(just wear the sport coat OK????)
Agreed. The other guy might want to shake up his JosBanks travelers style a bit too.
They look like a couple of dorks. “Hello, fellow outdoor adventurers…”
Haha.
LOL. Thanks Mike.
Is the 3.0L available on the lower trims or is it behind the Platinum-badge paywall?
Gotta get that Platinum. I think the ST will have a similar engine but more horsepower.
400 on ST badge units.
Am I the only one who hates the ever increasing screen sizes in vehicles. I’m thinking of starting a gofundme for a business that designs and installs more classic interiors – with small, maybe 4×6 screens.
no, you are not.
its the latest in tech bling.
The worst is the Tesla Model 3. I see them pretty regularly, and when I’m sitting next to one at a light (or even moving), I glance over at that giant screen, and it looks like there’s nothing remotely related to driving on it – usually whatever music they’re listening to, messages, weather, etc.
But they’ve got Autopilot, right? So no worries! :-|
It is what it is. I’m just happy when I get real, logically placed knobs and buttons to accompany them
I think there’s a useful limit, but I would love a ~10″ portrait screen in my car.
Looking forward to the ‘Ace of Base’ article on this one.
It should actually be a really well equipped base model. Quick Ace of Base facts:
10-speed automatic transmission
Rear-wheel drive
2.3-liter EcoBoost® engine with Auto Start-Stop
Power liftgate
Dual-Zone Electronic Automatic Temperature Control
40/20/40 second-row seats, with split, fold-flat and reclining outboard seats
FordPass ConnectTM 4G LTE Wi-Fi hotspot
SiriusXMTM satellite radio
SYNC® 3
8-inch capacitive touchscreen
Apple CarPlayTM and Android AutoTM compatibility
Ford Co-Pilot360TM driver-assist technology
18-inch painted aluminum wheels
Not bad…
Does the 2.3EB require premium? I’m also curious is the 2.3EB based on a Mazda engine?
The Ecoboost 2.3 may have its roots in the Mazda L engine, but it is pretty far from it at this point. It is also not the Mazda 2.3 DISI, which was another DI turbo engine derived from the L engine.
You do not have to use premium. However, pretty much all 2.3T applications say (*use premium for best engine performance.”
I have some information that shows a naturally aspirated 3.3L V6, a version of which is already available in the F150, as one of the engine options, though I don’t see it mentioned in any of today’s new articles.
Ford only discussed the 2.3T and 3.0TT. The media guide spec sheet shows the 2.3T as the only engine for the base, XLT, and Limited. Could the 3.3L be for police duty?
The naturally-aspirated 3.3L is offered on the new Police Explorer.
The 3.0L for the police CUV is also rated at 400/415 instead of 365/380 for the Platinum. I have a feeling that higher-output version is going in the ST trim.
Two 3.3 units will be offered, one with hybrid and one without for police duty.
Not a bad looking rig, but if they insist on pushing the “Explorer can go offroad meme”, they should at least make one trim level with better ground clearance and possibly a skid plate or two. As it sits, it looks like more of a Durango-esque approach: on road dynamics as the priority with better-than-FWD-crossover towing ability, zero emphasis on rough road use (despite what Ford is crowing about with the terrain management gadgetry).
On the topic of the current generation of Explorers, I’ve had two recent second hand anecdotal cases (interpret them how you will): 3.5L NA Explorer has a leaky water pump by 70k, with how the wp is buried inside of the motor, it leaks into and contaminates the oil. This can and has wiped the bearings out on the crank/cams if not detected in time, and a big job to replace that wp. Second story: bro’s company has a ’16 Explorer Limited in their fleet. Folding third row has physically broken as well as some plastic covers and such on the interior.
Water pump replacement on the cyclone engine family is a nightmare. It is buried in V6 valley. The timing chain replacement is also terrible. The 3.0TT engine does not have its water pump hidden inside the engine. It is much more easily accessible.
I had the water pump and timing chain done on my MKT at the same time. The timing chain was covered under warranty and I had them do the water pump since they were in there. The part isn’t that expensive and the labor hours were much lower.
You had to get chains replaced? At how many miles? Seems to be a very common trend among modern OHC chain driven motors to have them stretch.
65,000 miles. Not ideal.
Yeesh! What’s the ownership history on it before you owned it? Good old timing belts that are designed to be replaced are sounding better and better. Then again my friend’s shop had a ’10-ish Pilot with 80k miles on the clock that threw the t-belt on the highway unexpectedly, bent a bunch of valves. That’s less than the replacement interval on miles, although it may have been right at the age-limit for most belt (7 years).
To toot my old Toyota’s horn here a bit, the 5VZ-FE has a non-interference design with a really beefy belt that seems to have no problem running to 200k and beyond, although I changed mine at 100k. Likewise both my ’94 and ’97 Ranger 2.3 Limas had their original belts at 106 and 129k respectively, non interference, although when I looked at the ’97’s it was pretty well cracked and a bit scary looking.
It was a Ford executive lease vehicle. I actually found out which one, based on stuff left in the glove box, but I won’t name names here. I thought that would be a good thing, but I don’t know how well they took care of it. That’s why you buy one with the CPO warranty. 2-3 years of coverage can pay for the sins of the previous owners.
@gtem
Chain all day long over a belt which can just go at any time.
If I were buying a new car to keep long term, I would prefer a chain. Then I would change the oil every three to four thousand miles no matter what people who don’t own my car opine. If I were buying a used car, I might not reject a belt. Changing a belt is a hell of a lot cheaper than changing a chain because someone fell for six thousand mile plus oil change intervals on cars that have higher underhood temperatures than ever. Lots of those chains look like Shimano stuff that I used to change every couple thousand miles on my bicycles.
Todd from what I’ve read, the trend has been towards minimizing rotating mass/friction of the valve-drive and leaning on better mettalurgy to deal with the higher stresses. We’re seeing the results. And yes these newer VVT OHC chain driven motors are VERY sensitive to good quality oil.
Typical Ford rolling dumpster fire parts quality/design.
Ford makes a few good vehicles, and I will defer to people such as Tres to identify those (which will probably line up with my own), but the majority of the vehicles are poorly built (assembly quality is horrid – not line workers’ fault, but fault of parts procurement and design and metallurgy), poorly designed, waaaay overpriced rolling dumpster fires.
And this thing is okay looking, will be laughably overpriced, suffer from Ford quality control and durability woes, and has a ridiculous 4-banger wound motor in all but police vehicles and the highest trim ones – asinine.
Ford buyers, for the most part, given Ford’s sleazy dealers, poor quality, awful corporate/warranty treatment/support, are:
F*cked
Over
Really
Diligently
Now, let John83Taurus94Tempo’03Amanti330postsPerDay come along and tell us how this new Ford Explorer is A GAME CHANGER!
28 days, the short sturdy chains you’re used to on old OHV mills and the modern lightweight, very long chain drives on modern OHC V6s/V8s are too vastly different things. I’ve seen enough to be scared straight back to belt drive motors (although Toyota has had good luck with their 1/2GR and UR motors).
Why did you have to replace the timing chain, Adam?
It threw a code and I took it in. They said the timing chain was beginning to stretch. They then replaced it under the CPO warranty.
Yep the typical way it goes is once the chain is stretched past a certain point, the tensioner might even still be able to maintain reasonable tension, but the cam and crank sensors are out of phase to the point that the VVT cam phaser can’t even fudge it to keep things in range.
A common failure and common diagnosis in the auto-diagnostics field currently.
This water pump design is identical to the infamous 2.7 Chrysler V6. The bill was almost $2K to get the WP and the timing chains/tensioners replaced on my wife’s 2002 Sebring convertible @ 97K miles. When I found out that our 2009 Taurus had the same design in the 3.5 NA motor, I sold it very quickly.
FWIW, the 4.6L Modular in my 2008 Bullitt was still running strong at 135K miles when I traded it in on a 2019. That engine was known for breaking timing chain tensioners; esp. if you used thicker-than-recommended oil (took too long to pump up the tensioners).
The Explorer is for the ‘can get to the ski resort without chains’ crowd (unless you call the road from the highway to the resort parking lot ‘offroad’).
Isn’t water pump supposed to be replaced every 60k miles (or km). I remember that every time you replace timing belt you replace water pump as well.
That’s generally the recommendation from the factory on cam-belt driven motors. A lot of these modern V6s with chains and water pumps buried deep in the engine (it is 12 hours book time IIRC), it’s supposed to be a lifetime part.
I’ve generally found that if the water pump bearing feels good, just do the belt and tensioner. Sad to say but unless you go strictly OEM, chances are the new water pump is Chinese junk. Even go-to brands, first Gates, then even Aisin started to outsource tensioners and bearings to China, with predictable results.
My friend had 2001 VW Jetta. Water pump disintegrated at 70K miles – impeller was made from plastic and it cracked and broke into small pieces. It cost him over $1000 to replace it. That is the only pump failure I witnessed in real life. I had 5 Ford vehicles and none had issue with pump. On Vulcan engine on old Taurus there was a weep hole on the water pump. I checked it regularly to detect early any issues with pump (because I could not believe that pump can last over 100K miles).
I’m fine with the minor evolutionary design. Previous one looked good and this looks even better. Nice specs so far. Looking forward to the ST reveal and fuel economy specs for all models
Create a RWD Taurus from the Explorer platform. C’mon Ford God, remove a rib from the Explorer and build RWD Taurus on same line as Explorer.
AMC engineers could turn one platform and a box of parts into a full product line. You can do it Ford. And it does not need to sell 200K or 100K per year. Because flexible line, right.
It does need to sell, say, 10k a year, though.
And I don’t see “hey, it’s another Taurus and it’s RWD because reasons” as something that a realistic market exists for.
Who’s the target market for a RWD Taurus, exactly?
Exactly, people who want a full size RWD sedan are the type of people who want a Charger and nothing else, or something a premium badge. A RWD Taurus would only be bought by people who had no idea it was RWD.
The primary target market for a RWD car would be law enforcement and the livery market. An A7 style liftback version seems to be the wise move for the consumer market, and I highly doubt such a car would wear a Taurus badge. Just the liftback body style could satisfy both segments if priced appropriately.
You’d have to kind of squeeze it in as a niche though like the Ridgeline at Honda. That works because Truck margins are better and because Honda. The Charger has got to be fairly cheap for FCA to build at this point. I like it and would be a likely buyer, either in Ford or Lincoln guise…but I doubt there are enough of me to make it a profitable endeavor.
It would make more sense just to bring the Continental that they were already developing to market. Better margins. We’re they to do a Ford variant it would compete with the Charger so would need to convey something more muscular than the Taurus name evokes. Galaxie or Fairlane come to mind as no brainers.
Why Taurus? You can do a proper Thunderbird and sell it for more than Taurus. Besides Taurus was always FWD family sedan.
You could sell it for more, but nobody would buy it.
I can’t see this RWD Taurus getting any Coyote variation either.
Whole exercise would be pointless. Ford would do better to make a HEV/BEV sedan.
“Ford would do better to make a HEV/BEV sedan.”
That’s true esp about BEV. So Ford managed to destroy any value that Thunderbird had in the past or it never was popular or anything special? I thought it was an American icon like Mustang.
Is it just me and that picture, or does it … look a lot like the Flex got renamed “Explorer”?
(I approve; I loved the Flex.)
It does not look anything like Flex (just ask EBFlex:). If anything it reminds me is the original Explorer of 90s.
i like the looks.
always have, other than the age of the old car. and always felt it was just a taurus or mks.every ford looked the same from the rear underneath at red lights.
I ve noticed a good deal of Farley dislike on this site.
Never understood it. I didnt have an opinion. Until….
This morning on WJR with Paul W. – Farley said, ‘the improvements on the new Explorer are great.’ ‘We ve moved to rear drive and that makes for all kind of good things namely, better turning radius.’
HUH?
Using a longitudinal engine/transmission layout allowed for more steering angle, this also meant they could increase the wheelbase length while not adversely affecting turning radius.
While I am sure that the turning radius can be improved by the move to RWD, I am not sure that is the first thing that would come to mind as one of the benefits. I don’t have a problem with the turning radius of my wife’s 2018 Explorer Sport, so I am not sure this was a problem in the first place.
Regarding the looks, there just seems to be so many problems to me:
1) not enough differentiation from the 2019, especially on the side profile
2) I don’t get the shape of the grill. It seems a little ungainly at the bumper/grill/headlight interface
3) the tacked on iPad
4) the miniature HVAC controls when there appears to be additional real estate they could have used for larger buttons (yes, I am old!)
5) left center air vent blocked by both the cruise control stalk and the steering wheel – I like a nice stream of cool air hitting me right in the grill, not blowing directly on my hands
6) stupid looking gauge cluster seems like an electronic version of my old Flex IP (but maybe the user reconfigurability solves this??)
7) the tacked on iPad
8) C-pillar thickness change from bottom to top looks weird to me…maybe they were going for sporty??
9) the tacked on iPad, seriously. Just look at the new Ram to see how this should be done.
I’m sure steering radius won’t be the first thing that comes to mind, but it will be noticed by many during the test drive. It’s something that is frequently overlooked when debating the pros and cons of longitudinal layouts.
Rocket
That s my point. It s far from the first thing come to mind. He must be a buzz word guy – not a real car guy.
RWD vs FWD Major points are:
-Lack of Torque steer and torque tightening.
-Much more predictable and linear corning with steering input angle changes and concurrent power changes.
-NVH isolation is easier to achieve.
-and other points
Plenty of equal size RWD cars have as tight turning circles compared to equal size FWD.
Turning radius is BS issue. I use max turning once a year or so. Hardly an important factor in my car buying.
Lol, nice back tracking. That wasn’t your point, your point was you didnt see how the two were related, then it was shown that they are, now its suddenly that it just isnt the first thing to come to mind.
And, yeah, nobody needs turning radius, it’s a BS issue because you only use it once a year. A back-track troll worthy of deadbeat himself. Congrats, sir.
Some people do have to park in tight spots, and going from a 5-point turn to a 3-point is a big deal. Even bigger is the ability to make a U-turn instead of a 3-point turn on a standard sized road!
Yeah, try park a big SUV at e.g. Trader Joe’s parking to understand how important turning radius is.
Adam, will the new one have IRS, like the previous RWD generation (2002-2010)?
I’m not Adam, but yes, it will. Unlike that Explorer, this one is unibody and not BOF. If they had went to a solid rear axle, that would have severely decreased room for the third row, with no practical benefit since this will never be a rock-hopping off-roader.
The Bronco will be BOF with a solid rear axle.
The Bronco should have solid front and rear.
Sounds awesome. I had assumed they’d go with IFS borrowed from the Ranger to save money.
With the 7 speed manual, it sure sounds like a serious off-road contender. I hope the 7MT makes it’s way into the Ranger eventually.
If this is true then you have given me my first real hope that it will be a real Jeep competetior. Honestly with this Explorer on the street I don’t know why they wouldn’t make the Bronco more hard core in many respects. I think if it brings real axles and off-road chops to the table it will print money for them.
WTF are they wearing?
German Casual
Jim Farley built a “van” to live in “down by the river” for Chris :)
Yawn boring. Perfect for the vehicle-as-sweatpants crowd who buy these type of things. It makes VW’s Atlas look groundbreaking.
Umm, no, it doesn’t. Nothing in the segment makes the Atlas look groundbreaking.
Is it just me or does the front end, specifically the grille design with the headlights, look awfully VW-ish?
Do I see a re-badged for “other markets” on the horizon? I’m only kidding.
Because no other Ford has had a trapezoidal grille, and certainly no other Ford has headlights that point in more at the top, except of course the Escape, Edge, Ecosport, Taurus, Fusion, etc.
Vw has the Atlas that they sell globally, although with different badges in some places. There would be absolutely no reason for Ford to attempt to make this look like a VW. Where would VW sell it that Ford wouldn’t? Front facia is one of the easiest things to change when you’re sharing a common car between two different brands.
@JohnTaurus
I was only kidding in regards to the badge engineering. I did say: “I’m only kidding.”
The reference to the grille is because of how deep the headlights merge into it, with the grille sweeping under the head lights.
Don’t worry. John gets his undies in a bundle if A) someone’s opinion is different than his or B) someone has a criticism with the mighty Ford Blue Oval on it. I was waiting to see long it would take for him to lose his marbles over someone NOT giving two full thumbs up to this.
Well, VW will just end up owning Ford anyway, so why not. Oops, “merger of equals”, isn’t it. ;)
I guess VW started make their designs to look like Fords in advance thanks to their praised Germanic long term planning.
Wow. This thing looks fantastic. Ford really has really outdone themselves and I’m sure they will have no problem selling every one they make!!!! Did I do that right? Not far off though. Despite what the usual haters will say not only is this back to form with rear drive, but continues a traditional Explorer look. Why mess with success? The tacked on tablet trend has to stop though. Please. MMMM I can smell the jealousy from the haters now.
Looks pretty good, other than the distracting huge screen.
Not very interested in owning it, but look forward to getting one at the rental counter from time to time.
Unless Ford offers an option with better ground clearance (i.e. removal of lower air dam/valence) and make all terrain tires available, the claim to better off road capability is a fallacy. The low front valence acts like a snow plow in winter and the all season tires do nothing to enhance the four wheel drive capability.
This really is a nice adult design (what the immature call “Boring”)…and with proper RWD utility.
Why RWD in one of the icons of “normal people” (as opposed to enthusiast) vehicles?
How is this step backwards really a step forward? Is there some manufacturing advantage for what is becoming basically a truck and van company?
I think it’s a way to consolidate platforms. If I’m not mistaken the Mustang will ride on this architecture. Isn’t the current one Taurus based? No new Taurus to put it on. Saves them from developing 2 platforms.
There is alot of complaining about the bland styling, but I think it is tasteful and looks great compared to the overstyled Asian competitors. I really like this way more than I thought I would.
I hate that Ford has killed their cars, but if this is indicative of where they are going I could learn to live with it. Big, powerful, upright, and RWD…this is a 21st century Brougham!
Just saw all the standard safety stuff too, but prices by in large hold the line on the outgoing model. This thing is going to be a winner.
What a shame. I was very interested in the 2020 Explorer, then I noticed the turbo problem. I will not purchase a vehicle with a turbo. It creates reliability problems when the miles get high. Next.
Nice minivan.
What timing! My sister is looking to replace her 2011 Explorer, and we didn’t add the current Explorer as it was “too much of the same” as what she has, but the new one may make the list, which currently includes the Ascent, Highlander, Edge(ST) and “maybe” sneaking in the RDX.
While I’m sure the fancy turbochargers do a fine job of getting this overstuffed whale through the EPA testing process, much like in the F150, I’d wager a simple N/A V8 (possibly with cylinder deactivation) would provide nearly equivalent real world MPG and probably better reliability.