2011 Explorer gets ECOboost twinturbo V6?

[willied]

Exactlly this V6 is 290 hp and the out going 4.6 had 292 hp

Though torque numbers are quite different. The V8 has 315 ft-lb. torque vs. the V6 at 255.

 

[Silver X]

Yep huge difference in torque. The V8 also makes it at lower rpm, where it is needed in a heavy vehicle.

That's why I like turbos...more hp and low end tq even with a smaller engine. Need more power? You could play with the tune, up the boost, or upgrade the turbo(s).

 

[tmike]

Yep huge difference in torque. The V8 also makes it at lower rpm, where it is needed in a heavy vehicle.

That's why I like turbos...more hp and low end tq even with a smaller engine. Need more power? You could play with the tune, up the boost, or upgrade the turbo(s).

The V8 made its PEAK tq at 4000 RPM! They should have put the mustang's 3.7 V6 in the Explorer. 305 hp out it sounds pretty good!

 

[rhauf]

the TT v6 is pretty cool, but personally i don't have much interest in any explorer models after the first gens. i like "truck like" builds, and as soon as they went torsion bar, it was all downhill from there (overhead cams, CV axles, etc) hell, the '11 model isn't even 4x4.. it's "all wheel drive" it's just a top heavy car as far as i'm concerned. does it even have a frame or is it unibody?

 

[thebrakeman]

My daily driver is an '04 Mazda3, but I drove an '89 Probe GT (turbo) for 10 years before that. The Mazda has about 15 more hp than the Probe, but the Probe had a lot more torque from the turbo (190 ft-lbs vs 145, IIRC). It's that low-end grunt that makes a vehicle a pleasure to drive around town. I like the Mazda, once I got used to it. But it takes a lot more gear changing to do what I want to do, versus the Probe which would pull hard in any gear.

I suspect most will find the same if they go from a 4.6L-3V to the NA 3.5L. Same power, but you are going to have to labor the engine into high-rpm to get it. It will pull a trailer, but getting off the line will be less satisfying with a load. These are best holding onto your 4th gen, or waiting for the Ecoboost (though no more 12,000 lbs GCVWR).

 

[chicagojoe]

Ecoboost

I believe the 2011 Explorer is getting only 4 cylinder not a 6 Ecoboost, the 6 is a 3.5, Ti-vct engine, am i wrong?

 

[Silver X]

The Ecoboost 6 should be available later in the model year.

 

[thaywood]

With that 365hp Ecoboost V-6, that thing will be a torque steering *******! I hate wrong-wheel-drive!

 

[LincolnAviFan]

The Ecoboost 6 should be available later in the model year.

Is that confirmed or speculation?

 

[willied]

With that 365hp Ecoboost V-6, that thing will be a torque steering *******! I hate wrong-wheel-drive!

It will only be offered with AWD if you choose the Ecoboost V-6 if I'm not mistaken.

 

[LincolnAviFan]

It will only be offered with AWD if you choose the Ecoboost V-6 if I'm not mistaken.

At least on the Lincoln MKS and Ford Taurus, that statement is true.

If that applies to the Explorer as well - I don't know (I'd say probably). I'm still waiting for an official announcement that the V6 EcoBoost will be offered at all.

 

[willied]

At least on the Lincoln MKS and Ford Taurus, that statement is true.

If that applies to the Explorer as well - I don't know (I'd say probably). I'm still waiting for an official announcement that the V6 EcoBoost will be offered at all.

Yeah, I would assume they would do it that way, but we'll see. I think if it's popular (and so far it seems that it will be) then they will come out with the V6 Ecoboost since the car it's based on already has it.

 

[FStephenMasek]

Exactlly this V6 is 290 hp and the out going 4.6 had 292 hp

Yes, but what about torque? What about the clumsy front wheel drive design? What about the mini-van-like width? What about the massive price increase?

 

[peterk9]

I believe the 2011 Explorer is getting only 4 cylinder not a 6 Ecoboost, the 6 is a 3.5, Ti-vct engine, am i wrong?

The following was taken from the Ford EcoBoost Forum; Explorer offers an optional 2.0-liter EcoBoost™ I-4 engine delivering V6 power with four-cylinder fuel efficiency.My understanding is that it will be available with the FWD models only.

 

[Lanky]

I can not understand why Ford will not use the the v6 from the new mustang that has 305 hp and gets like 31mpg highway. Do they think that will not push an explorer? Wonder what kind of mpg it would get in a 4x4 explorer?

 

[edge929]

I can not understand why Ford will not use the the v6 from the new mustang that has 305 hp and gets like 31mpg highway. Do they think that will not push an explorer? Wonder what kind of mpg it would get in a 4x4 explorer?

You're asking why a sports car can't get the same gas mileage as a mid-large SUV? The weight difference between the V6 Mustang and the 2011 V6 Explorer is nearly 1300 pounds. That's a huge hit to gas mileage. How do we even know it's not the same V6 anyway? Different displacement doesn't imply everything else is different. Both are Ti-VCT, same valve lifter method, both fuel injected, both aluminum, both naturally aspirated, etc. If they bumped the displacement of the 3.5 on the Explorer to 3.7 of the Mustang, I'm sure they'd be putting out the same numbers (mainly more torque).

 

[thaywood]

I can not understand why Ford will not use the the v6 from the new mustang that has 305 hp and gets like 31mpg highway. Do they think that will not push an explorer? Wonder what kind of mpg it would get in a 4x4 explorer?

That's a good question. Maybe the FWD drivetrain in the Flexplorer can't handle the 3.7L's 305hp? I don't know.

You're asking why a sports car can't get the same gas mileage as a mid-large SUV? The weight difference between the V6 Mustang and the 2011 V6 Explorer is nearly 1300 pounds. That's a huge hit to gas mileage. How do we even know it's not the same V6 anyway? Different displacement doesn't imply everything else is different. Both are Ti-VCT, same valve lifter method, both fuel injected, both aluminum, both naturally aspirated, etc. If they bumped the displacement of the 3.5 on the Explorer to 3.7 of the Mustang, I'm sure they'd be putting out the same numbers (mainly more torque).

Basically, the 3.5L/3.7L block is a variation of the old Duratech 2.5L/3.0L block. They're pretty much the same engine with different bore/stroke dimensions. Same as the old 221/255/260/289/302 V-8 block from Ford's good ol' days.

 

[Lanky]

I'm not saying that the ex should get the same mpg as a sports car, I just think Ford could save money if they would put the same engines in several vehicles, but I know that would also cut some assembly line jobs. No need for different variations of a v-6 IMO.

 

[willied]

I'm not saying that the ex should get the same mpg as a sports car, I just think Ford could save money if they would put the same engines in several vehicles, but I know that would also cut some assembly line jobs. No need for different variations of a v-6 IMO.

They do use the same engine in multiple vehicles.

 

[RLWSNOOK]

That's a good question. Maybe the FWD drivetrain in the Flexplorer can't handle the 3.7L's 305hp? I don't know.

My guess is it is because they don't think people will use the power. Ford keeps talking about how only a small fraction of owners actually use over 5,000 pounds towing.

Thus.. They see fuel economy as a better motivator.

Also the old ford explorer got 292 hp... and 300 pounds of torque... the new v6 gets 290 hp and 255 pounds of torque. So it's got almost the same power as the old V8.. just not the torque (needed for towing which as mentioned above isn't an important factor for the people who drive this segment)

The new ecoboost is going to have 237 hp and 250 pounds of torque. So this replaces the old V6 and gives better fuel economy... (not sure what or if this will be able to tow).