Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Performance Upgrades - Maintenance - Modifications - Problem Solving - Off-Road - Street Trucks. Covering the Explorer, ST, Sport, Lincoln Aviator, Sport Trac, Mercury Mountaineer, Mazda Navajo, Ford Ranger, Mazda Pickups, and the Aerostar. Featuring H.I. - Human Intelligence.
If you drive a 2016 Explorer 4WD with 2.3L EcoBoost engine, please post the fuel efficiency you've observed.
Thank you in advance.
Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year. Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,. Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!.
It was discussed a bit already and actual numbers are not inspiring at all! It is much worse! It is too much of load on 2.3l EB to work optimally, vehicle is heavy and 2.7l EB could've served it better.
The ONLY way a turbocharged engine produces fuel mileage is when it's not producing boost. So I'm sure the 2.3l gets great mileage as long as it's rolling down hill. A tiny engine like this "not" making boost pulling 5,000 lbs on the flat is highly unlikely.
Believe it or not, my original post was for a 2016 2.3L Limited Explorer... that was babying it too, to be fair.
I rarely have that good of luck with EcoBoosts. I have a hard time getting the 36 MPG promised on our Fusion, but it was more consistent/easier to get near the Explorer's promised ratings.
Average over 80k is 23.7. Otherwise if you are considering cost of ownership and in possibly needing to buy a transmission at 80k miles. That was 5000 dollars. We we were still 2/32 from the treadwear indicator on the original tires. Ford did nothing to help. Look at the total cost