2012 Explorer Ecoboost Roadtest | Ford Explorer Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free!

2012 Explorer Ecoboost Roadtest

VinceL

Explorer Addict
Joined
May 24, 2011
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
4
City, State
Frisco, TX
Year, Model & Trim Level
2013 Explorer Limited
Hello all,

Well it finally happened, I have found some of the first test drives of the ecoboost Ex!

See here:

Motortrend

and here:

Automobile

and here:

Car and Driver


and here:

Autoblog

Looking kinda slow unfortunately, not that I was expected a hot rod. All I can say, it better get those mileage estimates (and easily!), or we won't even consider it.

P.S. - Why is Motortrend hatin' on the Ex so much? Jeez. And another thing, why does Car and Driver call it a first drive and only publish performance estimates? WTH? Why? I don't get it. I guess they want me to come back and read the full road test (which of course, I will do, despite myself!)
 



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!
.





FAIL!! Man...they need the ECO-Boost from the F-150 or Taurus SHO, this **** is whack!! I've been experimenting with my 4WD Limited and I am already achieving 28mpg on the highway of course this is flat turnpike with some ups and downs in there.

Its not worth ponying up another $1K on it, give me the Eco-Boost in V6 format and I'll pony up an additional 2K to 3K....but until then leave the 4 cylinders for the pussy Edge...

Can I say pussy on this forum??? Sorry its the Boston Lager and lack of substenance in my guts!!

I just let Ford have a piece of my mind on my thread over in the Modified section on my Quest for 30mpg on the hwy on my current V6 Ex...
 






Ford should have just put in the Ecoboost 6 and called it a day, why they won't offer it is beyond me, people in the Flex report about the same mpg numbers in the real world, and yet you have way more power and torque... both vehicles weigh similar but go drive an Ecoboost Flex and you'll be amazed at just how quick it is whether daily driving, city, or passing power... just effortlessly torquey. Look how slow the Ecoboost 4 is, and I just see the amount of owners actually complaining once they load their Ex up with passengers and struggle, or get worse/same mpg then the V6 since the 4 will be in boost a lot trying to move that truck around with people on board etc.

Still curious as to why Ford stuck such a small fuel tank in the Explorer, even the much smaller Edge carries a couple gallons large fuel tank, damn Jeep has a 24/25 gallon tank.

Ecoboost 4 is a cool engine, just totally wrong application in the Explorer... now stick this in the Fusion with a manual trans and they'd have a cool car right there with great mileage.
 






P.S. - Why is Motortrend hatin' on the Ex so much? Jeez.

You're right about MT dislking the Ex, but it seems over the top. I like hearing the other side of things and many of their comments echoed comments in this forum (albeit MT stated them in an "over the top" fashion).

I was surprised about their comments on the interior being unergonomic, and not having much space? I test drove, but didn't sit in the back seats (my wife did, but she didn't complain?)

This comment bothered me somewhat - "deceptively small amount of interior space, among other problems. You can imagine what happens then if you stretch and repurpose a five-passenger sedan into a seven-seater SUV. Compromise, and lots of it"


I like the Explorer's styling, so this comment just made me laugh - "Looks like the Range Rover Evoque’s older, fatter, balding middle-aged brother." . I didn't like the Evoque that much, and being compared to Range Rovers isn't bad.
 






Read only Motortrend wonder if Ford quit sponsoring them, they seemed hateful, they have been lately singing Chrysler praises. But any Ford is much nicer then comparable GM or Chrysler. Also Explorer outsold Jeep Grand Cherokee or Dodge Durango
 






i love my explorer... suits me just fine...

but i understand the comments on the interior...

i'm about 5'10 185lbs... i think rather average in size...

in the driver seat it looks big and does feel big... because you have that width where you cant really drop your left arms and rest your elbow on the door when driving... it's too far left. you learn to use the armrest in the middle :). and if you try to roll your window to reach for a gate pad or gate ticket at the airport... you have to practically lift your butt off the seat, unbuckle, and stick half your body out to reach it. or just get out of the car and use the key pad. i find you really have to reach out further than any other car when at the mcdonalds drive thru when they hand you the food.

spaceous up top but yes cramped in the leg area.

in my honda ody, i use to be able to park my car at the gym parking lot and in my seat remove my warm up pants and just have my shorts underneath and put on shoes before going into the gym all in the drivers area (i know weird but that's what i did). i noticed with the explorer when i drove to gym... no way i can do that even though the ****pit is so airy it looks like you have the room. front passenger seat too... try putting a small bag on the floor next to your feet... you see how much space you really have... compareable to a compact car when you are sitting in a bigger suv/cuv.

second row, the seats look great and they are comfortable. but you really dont have a lot of leg room and cramped if you fit three.

but it works for me. but i can see there is a major compromise for putting 3 rows.

come on... the MFT does suck... such a unpolished product for a nice vehicle in other areas.

the ecoboost engine is a fail where it must really hurt driving experience in the explorer and probably really shows the cars weight and only gets an extra mile or two per gallon... for a $900 option! should have been the base no charge option for the econo freak. and the v6 the $900 option.

i have to add in the end i do understand the criticism... but i agree the MT article did go over the deep and sound like he was bashing it. he hated the vehicle... guess he was trying to come off funny or something. eh.

You're right about MT dislking the Ex, but it seems over the top. I like hearing the other side of things and many of their comments echoed comments in this forum (albeit MT stated them in an "over the top" fashion).

I was surprised about their comments on the interior being unergonomic, and not having much space? I test drove, but didn't sit in the back seats (my wife did, but she didn't complain?)

This comment bothered me somewhat - "deceptively small amount of interior space, among other problems. You can imagine what happens then if you stretch and repurpose a five-passenger sedan into a seven-seater SUV. Compromise, and lots of it"


I like the Explorer's styling, so this comment just made me laugh - "Looks like the Range Rover Evoque’s older, fatter, balding middle-aged brother." . I didn't like the Evoque that much, and being compared to Range Rovers isn't bad.
 






Read only Motortrend wonder if Ford quit sponsoring them, they seemed hateful, they have been lately singing Chrysler praises. But any Ford is much nicer then comparable GM or Chrysler. Also Explorer outsold Jeep Grand Cherokee or Dodge Durango

To be honest, I haven't stricken Dodge Durango off my list, although I'd be tempted to wait another year till they have an 8 speed, as their transmission is the weak link. Ex has a few more tech gizmos (well one - parking), but from what I've read Durango has a better interior with better seating. I'd want to check it out though, and I've spend a LOT more time concentrating on the Ex, so I have a better understanding of its faults, than I do Durango's.

Decisions, decisions .. argh ... why couldn't Durango have the 8 spd now and Ex have a great MFT now. Good part is I can afford to wait and keep my current ride.
 






You're right about MT dislking the Ex, but it seems over the top. I like hearing the other side of things and many of their comments echoed comments in this forum (albeit MT stated them in an "over the top" fashion).

I was surprised about their comments on the interior being unergonomic, and not having much space? I test drove, but didn't sit in the back seats (my wife did, but she didn't complain?)

This comment bothered me somewhat - "deceptively small amount of interior space, among other problems. You can imagine what happens then if you stretch and repurpose a five-passenger sedan into a seven-seater SUV. Compromise, and lots of it"


I like the Explorer's styling, so this comment just made me laugh - "Looks like the Range Rover Evoque’s older, fatter, balding middle-aged brother." . I didn't like the Evoque that much, and being compared to Range Rovers isn't bad.

What i dont get is how they bash everything about it as if it was totally redesigned from the 2011 they seemed to like?

Here are some quotes from their 2011 review...

"If you buy an Explorer as a family vehicle, you'll find it sufficiently satisfying. There's enough motivation to squeeze into freeway traffic, for example.


The Explorer is quiet and cushy in traffic, and it's softer and smoother than the Grand Cherokee over rough pavement, where the Jeep's stiff ride severely hurt it in our Sport/Utility of the Year competition. And yet, the Explorer rolls less through RPG's fast sweepers, eschewing the Jeep's tendency to wallow under dive. "
 






the difference is the engine... difference between a good car and bad can come down to the engine you drop in it. and the ecoboost is gonna suck in everything but gas (get it? ;)) it's slower than the v6 and i imagine a little harder and less enjoyable to 'squeeze into freeway traffic.'

it has less horsepower but a little more torque. funny enough the spec for the ecoboost earlier in the year actually showed less hp AND torque but somehow they managed to squeek out a few more lbs.

What i dont get is how they bash everything about it as if it was totally redesigned from the 2011 they seemed to like?

Here are some quotes from their 2011 review...

"If you buy an Explorer as a family vehicle, you'll find it sufficiently satisfying. There's enough motivation to squeeze into freeway traffic, for example.


The Explorer is quiet and cushy in traffic, and it's softer and smoother than the Grand Cherokee over rough pavement, where the Jeep's stiff ride severely hurt it in our Sport/Utility of the Year competition. And yet, the Explorer rolls less through RPG's fast sweepers, eschewing the Jeep's tendency to wallow under dive. "
 






My favorite part "Looks like the Range Rover Evoque’s older, fatter, balding middle-aged brother" Its funny because it does look just like the RR Evoque.
 






Back
Top