looking for honest opinions on 5th Gen Ex

[08Ex]

Currently own a 2008 Ex XLT with 4.0 engine and it has been great. Only have 95K miles but thinking of trading her in on a 2017 or 2018 Ex. I'm also thinking about Honda Pilot and Chevy equivalent due to consumer ratings. I see reliability is rated worse than avg for the 17 Ex so that's why I'm asking you all to see if you would buy something different if given another chance. Looking for honest opinions and not a Ford marketing commercial. I've owned them all so I'm not stuck on brand. Currently have 2 Fords and a Toyota but have owned Chevy and Dodge in the past. Thx in advance.

 

[peterk9]

Welcome to the 5th generation Forum.
The 2018 won't be available until around the end of November or in December. I have a 2017 and have been very happy with it. I don't drive a lot and haven't had any issues except one which resolved itself in very short order. The 2018 is a bit of a 'refresh' with a few changes. There is a thread on that here.

Peter

 

[thefranchise713]

I haven't been impressed with the quality on mine. If I had to do it again, I'm about 50/50.

None of the other vehicles in the class do a whole lot for me, though. Explorer in the same class, Escape had I realized how much better that vehicle in the fleet was to be and was OK with a smaller size vehicle.

 

[Jon M]

I've only had my 2013 since January. It's just over 60k. I've got the exhaust smell issue, but other than that, it's been relatively minor stuff. The power liftgate motor has been replaced, the right front window due to the 'chattering' issue, my sunroof drains clogged, and now I'm starting to have issues with Nav, radio, and the steering wheel controls. I just haven't taken it in for that yet, because the issues aren't consistent.

Before buying, I'd take it out and get on it, to see if you get the exhaust smell, since it doesn't happen to all of them, and it's not fixable, so far.

I'd buy it again. I don't think I'm as in love with it as I was with my Grand Cherokee; I and many others swore that Chrysler must put crack in them, because no matter how bad they were, we couldn't help but still love it, and want more. Trading it in was the hardest of any vehicle.

If I do buy another one, it will be the EcoBoost. That's the only thing I'd really like to change about mine. The 3.5L is fine, but the 3.5L EcoBoost is so much better.

 

[thefranchise713]

Interesting point re: the engine.

I bought the 2.3L over the 3.5L, NA or turbo. Sport could have been had if I wanted, still got the 2.3L despite everything.

I'd probably pick that part again. The 3.5L sounds better, but I'll take the extra mileage and range that comes out of the 2.3L. Easier on the wallet. Enough speed for me. I just wish it had a better engine note. Only complaint. Hell, I'd even accept augmented sound if that fixed it.

 

[Halwg]

Interesting point re: the engine.

I bought the 2.3L over the 3.5L, NA or turbo. Sport could have been had if I wanted, still got the 2.3L despite everything.

I'd probably pick that part again. The 3.5L sounds better, but I'll take the extra mileage and range that comes out of the 2.3L. Easier on the wallet. Enough speed for me. I just wish it had a better engine note. Only complaint. Hell, I'd even accept augmented sound if that fixed it.

I've had a 2014 with the 3.5L NA, and now am driving the 2016 with the 2.3L Ecoboost. The 2.3L is far and away a better engine, and in my opinion worth the extra price. I've been getting 27 mpg on the highway, and in 20,000 miles of driving, mostly city driving, I am averaging 22.5 mpg.

The 3.5L was lucky to get 20 on the highway and it got 14 around town. Yeah, the 2.3L doesn't have the smooth sound of the 3.5L, but it has a lot more low end torque that comes on very quickly. I'd buy it again.

 

[Jon M]

I've had a 2014 with the 3.5L NA, and now am driving the 2016 with the 2.3L Ecoboost. The 2.3L is far and away a better engine, and in my opinion worth the extra price. I've been getting 27 mpg on the highway, and in 20,000 miles of driving, mostly city driving, I am averaging 22.5 mpg.

The 3.5L was lucky to get 20 on the highway and it got 14 around town. Yeah, the 2.3L doesn't have the smooth sound of the 3.5L, but it has a lot more low end torque that comes on very quickly. I'd buy it again.

I run around 16-17 mpg with mostly city/suburban driving. My highway jaunts have been fairly short, but I run around 23 mpg.

 

[thefranchise713]

My 2.3L is getting a solid 24 MPG all day all tank long.

 

[613GT500]

I haven't been impressed with the quality on mine. If I had to do it again, I'm about 50/50.

None of the other vehicles in the class do a whole lot for me, though. Explorer in the same class, Escape had I realized how much better that vehicle in the fleet was to be and was OK with a smaller size vehicle.

I'm leaving my final judgement on whether I would by again, after the 5yr mark on the amount I spend in terms of repairs.
Otherwise, I agree that the quality is subpar; but the power that 3.5L puts down and it's towing capabilities is what won me over.

 

[cwescapexlt4x4]

Overall pleased with mine (2 so far) and would be hard to get me to tell folks NOT to buy one ... unless that person wanted something for more off-road use.
Sure it's not perfect, is there such a vehicle?

 

[Sixonemale]

First off, I would really like to be raving about how great this vehicle is, similar to how I post on another forum for one of the other cars we own, but you want an honest opinion and that’s what you will get. My opinion is one of many that you can either value or throw out.

I owned an ’02 Eddie Bauer Explorer fully loaded with the 4.0 engine in the longitudinal position. Your ’08 is very similar to the ’02 and will easily run well over 100,000 miles with very low maintenance costs.

The current generation Explorer is unibody design and drives far more like a car than truck, not a bad thing. The cabin is quieter than previous generations, another good thing. Some of my reservations on the current generation Explorer are as follows:

- It does not have a longitudinal engine position which makes working on the engine more difficult for certain maintenance tasks and/or will cost much more in labor hours to have work performed on it.

- The water pump is located on the inside of the engine block and when it goes bad can either leak externally or internally into the engine oil. Also, to replace it, most dealerships pull the engine to do so, resulting in very high labor costs for replacing about a $40 part. I was quoted the other day about $1,500+ to perform this task.

- Not entirely new to Explorers is that the front end suspension can creak and clunk due to a design that is not built for anything over mild off roading.

- Some owners have complained about exhaust leaks into the cabin when driving their Explorer at wide open throttle. As far as I know Ford has not fully addressed this problem with the two TSB’s that have been issued for it. Perhaps the new CEO will address this issue and put it to bed.

- Several owners have complained about paint issues on their aluminum hoods which Ford after five years of complaints now has a warranty for, but is not retroactive.

- Several owners have complained about water leaks from the moon roof, etc.

- Several owners have had issues with the none conventional or electric power steering

- My electronics associated with MFT is finicky and inconsistent at times

In summary, it’s a nice looking Explorer that has quiet car like ride with a fair amount of power even in the 3.5L NA, but the overall QA/QC in regard to build quality and forethought for general maintenance is lacking. I feel like I’m driving a vehicle that has overall low reliability and could cost a lot in maintenance at any given point and time vs my first and third generation Explorers that had minimal maintenance costs, in addition to me having very few reservations about reliability when going on a long road trip. My guess based on what I've read is that few of these vehicles will make it to 150,000 without significant maintenance costs, hopefully I'm wrong.

Would I buy it again with what I know now, no, I should have done more research. I personally would buy a Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus regardless of their looks in exchange for build quality and proven reliability. If you really want an Explorer I would wait for the redesigned Explorer coming out in late 2019 for model year 2020 and hope that Ford's new CEO will change the company culture and put more effort into a better build quality.

 

[luc]

I have to agree that QC is not very good.
since I installed the "factory" towing package, I had to to remove quite a few parts and in the process I found quite a few issues of missing or loose fasteners, electrical wiring not routed correctly, plastic bracket hanging loose because someone was too lazy to push the fir-tree all the way, etc
on the + side the "car" ( its really what the explorer is now) handle well, has great brakes, great LED low beams (16,up) is quiet ( after fixing a couple of rattles) has plenty of room and even with the NA 3,5, has plenty of power.
look good too, but look obviously is very subjective
Will I buy it a again?
Yes i will but keep in mind that I have quite a few vehicles and do all maintenance ( and even some repair jobs myself)
most important in any car purchase is knowing exactly what you want otherwise you will be very disappointed
For example, don't get a new explorer if you expect it to be a great off road vehicle

 

[J_C]

I've had a 2014 with the 3.5L NA, and now am driving the 2016 with the 2.3L Ecoboost. The 2.3L is far and away a better engine, and in my opinion worth the extra price. I've been getting 27 mpg on the highway, and in 20,000 miles of driving, mostly city driving, I am averaging 22.5 mpg.

The 3.5L was lucky to get 20 on the highway and it got 14 around town. Yeah, the 2.3L doesn't have the smooth sound of the 3.5L, but it has a lot more low end torque that comes on very quickly. I'd buy it again.

The EB engines are by far the worse choice. I wouldn't take one if it were $1000 cheaper. The MPG difference is very slight and the failure rate and repair bills much higher. Your MPG results are not typical, independent testing has verified this.

People who actually work on Ford engines and see the problem rates, avoid EB.

 

[thefranchise713]

The 3.5L NA is stupidly pricy to repair in the event of water pump failure--at least with the 2.3L, the water pump doesn't require $1,500 worth of labor. And overall, it seems like it leaves a lot more room in the bay to work with, too.

My local dealer has said they're seeing 3.5L NAs come in more and more lately with pump failures.

 

[Eric F]

I spent 11 years in an '06 XLT 4.6L V8, putting on nearly 160k miles in that time. The trans was replaced once, and the second one was starting to have issues. The water pump had to be replaced fairly early in its life. The radiator was replaced multiple times. Even with that, I loved it. It had decent get-up-and go for a big vehicle, it hauled people and gear beautifully, and handled reasonably well.

At the end of March, I said goodbye to my '06, and welcomed a '17 XLT 3.5L to my driveway. It's the first vehicle I've been passionate about in a very long time. It looks awesome ("badass" according to my daughters), it has more room inside, but isn't overwhelmingly large like an Excursion or Suburban. The engine has enough grunt to make things pretty fun, if desired. I had a chance to push its handling limits on a twisty mountain road, and was very surprised at how well it did - including leaving a BMW X3 far behind. So far, it's been a really fantastic vehicle, I have had no mechanical issues (almost 7k miles), and the gas mileage is 4+MPG better than the old Ex. The modern technology features are really nice, but those are pretty similar across all brands. That said, in comparing to the new Mazda CX9, I was surprised how many more features the XLT has over the top-line CX9. My complaints...A little sluggish off the line, rear window does not open separately from the rear hatch, windshield wiper stick is on the opposite side from the '06. In hindsight, I still wonder if I should have gotten the Sport model for the more powerful engine and better handling.

 

[kmarnes]

I found the Explorer to be pretty much the best 7 seater for the price. I wanted a hefty engine and none of the Asian cars can provide, and all of the European equivalents are much more expensive. For me it came down between the Audi Q7 and the Explorer. I went Explorer because of the significant savings. I've had it for 10 months now and very happy with it.

I bought a 10 year extended warranty to avoid problems and have peace of mind. Ford's are "middling" when it comes to reliability. Mine's been great so far, but it's still early days.

 

[J_C]

The 3.5L NA is stupidly pricy to repair in the event of water pump failure--at least with the 2.3L, the water pump doesn't require $1,500 worth of labor. And overall, it seems like it leaves a lot more room in the bay to work with, too.

My local dealer has said they're seeing 3.5L NAs come in more and more lately with pump failures.

That's expected now that the 3.5L NA has been around for over 10 years. Approaching that time period an Ecoboost will need the carbon cleaned off the valves at least twice (assuming avg yearly miles driven), so that cost alone is about a wash. Plus, it still has a water pump that a dealer's going to want about $200 to do if not more.

Plus, seeing 3.5 NA come in more and more often, doesn't mean the rate is high. It's a time tested, proven reliable design. Never have I ever seen anyone credible who thinks the long term repair costs of the EB will be lower.

Typically the more experienced the mechanic, the more they feel the EB is a time bomb. That doesn't make it a bad choice from a subjective point of view if the owner doesn't keep the vehicle till the end of its otherwise viable lifespan, but if too much bad data comes in, that could affect resale value.

 

[Sixonemale]

The 3.5L NA is stupidly pricy to repair in the event of water pump failure--at least with the 2.3L, the water pump doesn't require $1,500 worth of labor. And overall, it seems like it leaves a lot more room in the bay to work with, too.

My local dealer has said they're seeing 3.5L NAs come in more and more lately with pump failures.

Interesting, because I had not seen my local dealer in over a year and the last time I saw the service agent he said very few vehicles were coming in with water pump problems. Just over a year later, he now says he is also seeing more and more water pump failures.

 

[J_C]

Interesting, because I had not seen my local dealer in over a year and the last time I saw the service agent he said very few vehicles were coming in with water pump problems. Just over a year later, he now says he is also seeing more and more water pump failures.

That's the crazy part. that you feel like a whole year is a long time. I'm pretty confident that I won't ever see my local ford service agent.
.

 

[Sixonemale]

That's the crazy part. that you feel like a whole year is a long time. I'm pretty confident that I won't ever see my local ford service agent.
.

I don't think that one year is a long time because this generation of Explorer is still very young and we'll know a lot more about things like the water pump each and every year that goes by. I typically will only go to a dealership if it's a proprietary Ford problem or for a repair that is not all that ordinary that I believe their mechanics would know how take care of better than an independent shop, mainly because of the redundancy of them doing that repair. If I keep this Explorer long enough for a water pump failure that is something I would have done at a Ford dealership, lots can go wrong with that repair, plus many of the dealerships pull the engine to replace the water pump.