Last post on Feb 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM
You are in the Ford Explorer
What is this discussion about?
Mercury Mountaineer, Ford Explorer, SUV
#708 of 859 Sirius Sat. Radio
May 21, 2007 (6:13 pm)
I have a 2006 Explorer with the Nav radio without the factory Sirius. My wife just purchased a 08 Escape Hybrid with Nav and Sirius from the factory, and after listening to her system on a long trip we just took, I wanted to check to see if it is possible to upgrade my unit. Has anyone had their dealership upgrade a Nav radio with Sirius that did not have it at the factory? Looking on Pioneer's website, I see that the Nav radios they supply to Ford are Sat ready. I am having the dealership check on this, just wanted to find out if anyone has had this done.
#709 of 859 The End of the Ford Explorer & M. Mountaineer
May 22, 2007 (5:53 am)
I was at a Mercury dealer yesterday and noticed that the 2008 Mariner is out. Interestingly, the MPG dropped by 2 MPG. I thought that strange so I inquired and found out that since they are 2008's, the sticker reflects the new EPA "real world" miles per gallon.
So that got me thinking. My Mountaineer has a sticker showing 14 MPG around town. If that drops to 12MPG on the sticker for the 2008, that will be the end of this vehicle.
14 is downright scary at $3 and climbing for gas, but 12 is almost like placing a banner on the vehicle saying "DON'T BUY ME, I AM A PIG".
I mean this post not to bash Ford or Explorer...both of which I like! But just wondering out loud if this new "EPA HONESTY" thing is going to be the final death blow to the American auto industry in general and to our beloved Explorers in particular. NO ONE is going to buy 12MPG vehicles (even though nothing really has changed except the "real world vs EPA estimate" joke is over)...oh and gas is now $3 instead of .99 as it was when I bot my prior Explorer.
#710 of 859 Re: The End of the Ford Explorer & M. Mountaineer [daryll44]
May 22, 2007 (6:44 am)
The old is 15 city, 20 highway for the V6 while the new is 13 city and 19 highway. The V8 was 14/20 and is now 13/18.
See the new calculations for your old vehicle here.
Roughly 90-95% of our driving is in the city and we get 13 MPG exactly. I'm not unhappy with that but I can see why others would be.
#711 of 859 Re: The End of the Ford Explorer & M. Mountaineer [daryll44]
May 22, 2007 (6:46 am)
And how long ago was it that you bought the prior Explorer? Haven't seen that price for quite some time around here.
The mileage hasn't actually changed, just the government rating. In the case of something like the Freestyle, it will go down but the old sticker showed a number that was pretty easy to get. For the majority of vehicles, the new number is likely to be closer to the truth.
#712 of 859 Re: The End of the Ford Explorer & M. Mountaineer [baggs32]
May 22, 2007 (6:55 am)
I agree that I'm getting 13 to 13.5 city on my 2003 Mountaineer AWD V8 and 19 highway. My window sticker, which I still have, says 14/19. So I agree that it appears that the new numbers are honest.
MY POINT is that ratcheting down the already scary OLD numbers is going to hurt Explorer (and similar) sales much more than vehicles getting mpgs in the 20s. 15 sounds bad....13 sounds REAL bad.
#713 of 859 Re: The End of the Ford Explorer & M. Mountaineer [daryll44]
May 22, 2007 (9:39 am)
Well if you look at the new crop of CUVs that are supposed to be so much better than old SUVs like the Explorer you'll find that the MPG isn't all that much better. For example, the GMC Acadia is rated at 16/22. That's not all that much better than an Explorer and the Acadia can't tow nearly as much nor does it have the off-road capability of the Explorer.
Most people don't care about those two things so the CUVs are more attractive to most folks, myself included, and I think that and the slightly better fuel economy are definitely issues Ford has to address with the Explorer for the future.
Rumors in the big car mags have stated that the next Explorer will be a unibody and use the new Duratec35 motor which should give it more power and much better fuel economy. We'll see.
#714 of 859 Explorer Unibody? Not likely.
May 26, 2007 (11:59 am)
Explorer has no reason to go unibody. It already has one of the most expensive frames of any SUV in its class plus exclusive independant rear suspension. Only FORD and NISSAN have body on frames SUVS with independant Rear Suspension.
#715 of 859 Re: Explorer Unibody? Not likely. [mschmal]
May 27, 2007 (1:39 pm)
Explorer has no reason to go unibody.
Considering what Ford will have on the lot when that is rumored to happen I totally agree with you. I'm just reporting what C&D and MT have written recently.
#716 of 859 Explorer unibody
May 27, 2007 (4:29 pm)
I agree - I think this is dumb. But it's a pre-
ARM idea, and maybe he'll nix it. I'm sure it's been done for CAFE reasons - and I suppose the Unibody would work as well as the Grand Cherokee does now, but I prefer the toughness of the Explorer frame for towing and rough service. In my mind, the Explorer has always been the gold standard of Mid-Sized SUVs and until recently, America agreed with me. I just don't see why it's so important that that be ruined.
#717 of 859 Re: Explorer unibody [nvbanker]
May 31, 2007 (9:51 am)
Another rumor is that the base engine will eventually switch to the Duratec35 in the Explorer and Mustang. If we can have an Explorer with fuel econ greater than or equal to that of the latest crop of large CUVs then why switch it's body/frame? It does serve a different purpose in body on frame form after all.