Last post on Nov 05, 2013 at 4:27 PM
You are in the Ford Freestar
What is this discussion about?
Ford Freestar, Mercury Monterey, Van
#86 of 922 Freestar????
Aug 20, 2003 (7:01 am)
What's up with Ford and there 'F' kind of thing. By 2006 practically all of there vehicles except Explorer, and Mustang and Expedition and Escape will have 'F's in it. Not to get offtopic though...
The Ford Freestar will be pretty behind all of the competition because of it's 200 hp engine. People will just keep on putting it behind because of that.
I don't expect to buy a minivan, because I won't need one. I just look at them and see which one is ahead. Right now, it looks like the Quest and Sienna are getting the big buzz. Chevy/Pontiac/Saturn which will be the last to get redesigned will have a whole lot to think about from here to the time for the release in fall 2004, when it is due to come out.
Ford, I think is rushing it too much. They need to come out with a more powerful 240 hp V-6 for the Freestar and maybe a extra digit for the Monterey minivan.
Aug 20, 2003 (8:31 am)
The Freestar, compared to the Windstar, is quite portly. Ford needed to add a torquey engine to compensate for the extra weight thus the use of a big cube, slow revving engine.
I, too, am a little disappointed that the 4.2V6 only puts out 201hp. However, the 265 lb-ft of torque is impressive and usable. I would argue that the Ford's 265 lb-ft of torque is more useful than Toyota's 230hp.
However, we will all have to reserve judgement until we get a seat of the pants experience.
#88 of 922 Tq. is definitely better in a minivan case...
Aug 20, 2003 (10:59 am)
Mostly, families look for a minivan not because it is the strongest of the pack, like many people look at horsepower on sports cars/convertibles. In this case though, torque is something worth looking at. The 265 will, yes definitely be something better than the 230 or 240 hp on the Toyota Sienna/Honda Odyssey Nissan quest
Update you with more info when I can
#89 of 922 .....HP vs Torque...
Aug 20, 2003 (12:30 pm)
Someone here pointed to the fact that that we look or want is hp but what gets us going is torque...and that is the truth. Even in the Mustang world (where I am from) hp numbers are impressive but torque is what we are all looking for, granted that usually hp and torque go pretty much hand in hand, but when it comes to minivans torque is the most important thing to have when we get in the highway from a ramp or changing lanes..that is the difference. From what I have read from people test driving the Odyssey, Quest and Sienna they were dismayed at the poor "acceleration" and extreme "laboring" or "noise" of the engine..uhmmm..I wonder why?....maybe lower punds of torque?..I think so, is just that most of us do not know to describe this when it happens and we tend to think that it is hp.
...just my opinion, not trying to be confrontational...
#90 of 922 ...some more info...
Aug 20, 2003 (2:17 pm)
For those that want some comparison...Sienna...242lbs3600rpm.(2004)
..just a note for the "curious"...
2002 Explorer V8....282lbs4000rpm.
2002 Explorer V6....254lbs3700rpm.
My 2002 Limited sure pulls a lot (V8).....
Aug 20, 2003 (4:11 pm)
Heavier the vehicle, the more torque it should have (Even better if it's down low under 4000RPM). That's what moves the mass at first, whereas HP shines upon upper RPM acceleration, at points where passing power is needed.
The Freestar's 4.2L has quite a bit of very usable torque down low, and that will help offset the weight gain.
This WILL be the last generation of these 3.8(now 3.9L and 4.2L) engines. The next generation of Ford minivans will be powered by the 3.5L V-6 Duratec coming out in a bit over a year from now in other Ford vehicles. That will be quite a major leap above the current 3.9L, 4.2L offerings.
As for the name game. Passenger cars will start with "F" names, while SUV's will stick with "E" names. With the Exception of the F-150 naturally. And then their "Heritage" vehicles will be Mustang, Tbird, GT Etc. Mercury's line will have "M" names as well throughout all vehicles.
#92 of 922 New Duratec Engine
Aug 20, 2003 (5:51 pm)
I hope it will be a good engine. All Duratec's are fine, but this seems to be even better. At least that's what they sell us here:
ANT14: The Freestar will be about 150-200 Lbs. heavier than the Windstar, not more (like one heavy passenger...) so we WILL feel a difference in power with this engine. It seems that nobody even thinks about the 3.9L engine with just 193hp (down from 200 in the current 3.8L) with 248 Lb.-Ft of torque. This will be too slow for the Freestar.
(Ralph, svofan2: I didn't meant to say 'surprise', I meant to say 'upset'... of course I hate the Aztek more than you... just know that English is NOT my primary language...)
Aug 20, 2003 (7:03 pm)
Yes the 3.5L will feature a few other tech pieces that will trickle into the 3.0L as well. So far the Duratecs have been a problem free, reliable offering. I was quite pleased when the Mazda MPV started using the 3.0L over the 2.5L. Although many have pointed out, why wouldn't Ford install the 3.0L unit onto it's Windstar (like Toyota did with the Sienna). Unfortunatly, it wasn't economically possible for the 3.0L to be fitted "properly" to have decent torque off the line. So next possible offering was the 3.8. And for such a heavy vehicle, the 3.8 would have better performances over the 3.0L.
I just prefer to flash forward a few years, when the next generation of Ford minivans debut with the 3.5L and AWD.
#94 of 922 ...you are all well informed...
Aug 20, 2003 (7:35 pm)
It seems that you guys are all well informed and very perceptive on what is coming down the pike..uhmmm....I wonder if any of you are a Ford employee?...in any case homework well done...Sam you do fine with the English language..I believe you write your thoughts better than some of the recent high school graduates that I encounter .....is the new generation of Freestars coming in 06 or 07?..what is the rumor?..
Aug 21, 2003 (7:46 am)
Not specific target date yet has been mentioned, right now the program needs to start, than in maybe a years time, they can narrow down the Job1 date.