Sport track numbers

[barho]

Can someone after they take delivery of one of these head to the track so we can get some real world 0-60 and 1/4 mile numbers? Please! For the love of God!

 

[tazcubed]

Car and Driver article

Can someone after they take delivery of one of these head to the track so we can get some real world 0-60 and 1/4 mile numbers? Please! For the love of God!

Just came out - have a look:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-ford-explorer-sport-first-drive-review

 

[barho]

Just came out - have a look:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-ford-explorer-sport-first-drive-review

Nice! Thanks!

Good numbers, but I have to say the torque steer comment has me little concerned

 

[VinceL]

What is up with Car and Driver. Aren't they a automotive magazine whose primary purpose is to test cars? It irritates the crap-a-doodle out of me when they do a test and then put C/D Est. numbers down. Seriously? So I am to assume that they actually didn't do a 0-60 run of the Sport? I guess not, since they don't know what the 0-60 is, only an estimate.

/rant

 

[tazcubed]

Motor Trend as well...

What is up with Car and Driver. Aren't they a automotive magazine whose primary purpose is to test cars? It irritates the crap-a-doodle out of me when they do a test and then put C/D Est. numbers down. Seriously? So I am to assume that they actually didn't do a 0-60 run of the Sport? I guess not, since they don't know what the 0-60 is, only an estimate.

/rant

It's a first drive, not a full-on performance evaluation. Seems like all the car mags say the same thing - look at Motor Trend....

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1210_2013_ford_explorer_sport_first_drive/

 

[zackcrazy]

I had a chance to do some 0-60 runs today.
300 miles on odometer, 1/2 tank fuel, no passengers, dry, 68 degrees.
Tried some differant starts with brake and throttle but no noticeable differances in numbers.
Slower than I was hoping.
6.7 - 7.0 seconds were most of the runs.
No way is this going to run sub 6's or flat for that matter.

 

[VinceL]

It's a first drive, not a full-on performance evaluation. Seems like all the car mags say the same thing - look at Motor Trend....

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1210_2013_ford_explorer_sport_first_drive/

I understand that, but it would be nice if they did some runs with a stopwatch and simply labeled them "C/D prelim". That way we know they actually ran some quick tests, but that they didn't necessarily use the 'real' equipment. Or is that what "C/D est" means? I don't know, and that is what irritates me, lol

 

[VinceL]

I had a chance to do some 0-60 runs today.
300 miles on odometer, 1/2 tank fuel, no passengers, dry, 68 degrees.
Tried some differant starts with brake and throttle but no noticeable differances in numbers.
Slower than I was hoping.
6.7 - 7.0 seconds were most of the runs.
No way is this going to run sub 6's or flat for that matter.

Bummer, I was hoping for a bit faster. I'm curious as to how your numbers will compare to the official tests of the car mags.

 

[JarHead1833]

I had a chance to do some 0-60 runs today.
300 miles on odometer, 1/2 tank fuel, no passengers, dry, 68 degrees.
Tried some differant starts with brake and throttle but no noticeable differances in numbers.
Slower than I was hoping.
6.7 - 7.0 seconds were most of the runs.
No way is this going to run sub 6's or flat for that matter.

What type of fuel?

 

[zackcrazy]

87 octane

 

[VinceL]

87???? Wha?????

Okay, so now we have some good numbers for reduced octane (and power) to compare with the premium numbers that I hope get posted in the near future

Oh yeah, don't forget to track the hand calculated mileage at the pump so we have some good reference numbers there too

 

[JarHead1833]

87 octane

If you put in that higher octane and run with only 1/4 of a tank you will see those numbers closer to 6.

 

[zackcrazy]

When you get a chance to try yours please do. I dont think 40 lbs of fuel and maybe 5hp gain with 93 octane will do anything noticable.

 

[VinceL]

When you get a chance to try yours please do. I dont think 40 lbs of fuel and maybe 5hp gain with 93 octane will do anything noticable.

I'd be surprised if it were only 5hp. I say that because the 2000 Honda Odyssey V6 would see a 5hp gain when using premium. I would expect a modern turbo engine with direct injection to be able to adjust its tuning more significantly resulting in greater HP gains with premium.

Also, I want to apologize if my request seemed too forward. It wasn't my intention to offend you with my suggestion of using premium fuel to get additional performance numbers. I'm just used to members around here being a bunch of junior mad scientists experimenting with their Ex's, trying to find the best and worst about our machines

Enjoy your ride and keep us posted as the miles pile on

 

[zackcrazy]

I'd be surprised if it were only 5hp.

Could be a little more. On Fords website the 2013 Mustang is 402hp and 420hp on premium. Bigger engine and higher compression make those numbers but it wont be enough to notice anything on the EX.

It wasn't my intention to offend you with my suggestion of using premium fuel to get additional performance numbers

Im not offended....no problems here.

I will dump $20 of some 94 octane in there in a day or so went the tank gets completely empty and try again.

 

[VinceL]

Cool, and thanks

 

[JarHead1833]

When you get a chance to try yours please do. I dont think 40 lbs of fuel and maybe 5hp gain with 93 octane will do anything noticable.

I will have to wait until spring... I won't get mine until December and the NE winters aren't too road friendly up here. I live close enough to Englishtown raceway (drag), to take it up there to use their clocks. I use to run my civic when I was younger, and its crazy to see the difference on 8lb per gallon not in you rear holding you back. And just that little bit of octane boost does wonders. Another great trick is to remove your headlight for air induction (Ram air) but you would have to also open the airbox, I am no way going to be doing that on my new Sport.

But thanks for giving it a run so we have something to go off of.

 

[SlwSVT]

Could be a little more. On Fords website the 2013 Mustang is 402hp and 420hp on premium. Bigger engine and higher compression make those numbers but it wont be enough to notice anything on the EX.

A turbo car will respond much better then any naturally aspirated car. Timing is crucial on turbo cars for performance and safety of the motor. If the EX is setup for 87 octane, then the timing tables are very very safe. Not sure if the stock computer will adjust major by just adding higher octane. But a aftermarket tune on these motors with torque management tweeks, higher octane timing tables and more boost is going to add probably 75hp/.100ftlbs.

 

[JarHead1833]

A turbo car will respond much better then any naturally aspirated car. Timing is crucial on turbo cars for performance and safety of the motor. If the EX is setup for 87 octane, then the timing tables are very very safe. Not sure if the stock computer will adjust major by just adding higher octane. But a aftermarket tune on these motors with torque management tweeks, higher octane timing tables and more boost is going to add probably 75hp/.100ftlbs.

I don't believe it is set up for 87. I believe it's set up for 91.

 

[zackcrazy]

Originally Posted by zackcrazy
I dont think 40 lbs of fuel and maybe 5hp gain with 93 octane will do anything noticable.

Well I was wrong!

Drove the Sport today until it said 7 miles left to empty, then added some 94 octane. My wife took if for some errands and I drove it tonite again before doing some testing. Im not sure how long it takes the ecm to learn that adjustments can be made but here are the resullts.

Little over a 1/4 tank, no passengers, dry and 48 degrees

0-60 runs 5 in in total
All were 6.2 and 6.3.

This was done with a stop watch on my cell phone. I started after the wheels were rolling and stopped it at the best of my ability at 60mph. There is room for error here in BOTH directions.
I am going to order a GTECH SS or a VBOX Performancebox shortly to take alot of the error out of it on my end.

I have to say I feel a little better about the times as .5 seconds less is a huge improvement and closer to what we all thought it would be.