2016 to 2020 Ford Explorer 4 cylinder

[Snagglefoot]

Which 4 cylinder engine might be the least amount of grief?

Duratec 20 Hybrid
Duratec 25
2.0 Ecoboost
2.3 Ecoboost

Are the 2.0 2.3 Ecoboost engines reliable enough to make it a contender?
Thoughts? Thanks.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Man I thought the Exploder only came with the Ecoboost 2.3 then a Cyclone 6

Sure you don't mean escape?

 

[Snagglefoot]

Man I thought the Exploder only came with the 6 or an 8

Sure you don't mean escape?

Have a look at the list of engines I added. Thanks.
The V-8 was gone by the 5th Gen in 2011.

 

[hemitom]

That list is from the Escape !
I almost positive some of those engines were never an option on the Explorer .
I could be mistaken but I have never seen an explorer with a 1.5 or the old 2.5 .

 

[Snagglefoot]

The Ecoboost 2.3 showed up on a separate list. The other list is from Wiki so yes, it may be bogus.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Here is something from C&D. They confirm there was a 2.0 Ecoboost in 2016 but not very many.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

My wikipaedia has this table: for gen 5

I never seen nor heard of an Exploder with an engine smaller than the Ecoboost 2.3L in southern New England USA,

I don't think any of the common engine options have been reliable whatsoever. I can buy mid mileage LEO Interceptor with the 3.7 Lincoln motor with a new water pump for about 10 grand all day. This vehicle is way too heavy for a 4 banger IMO. And Don;t even consider downsizing to the Edge.

 

[dnewton3]

IF the OP is referring to the Explorer (not the Escape), then the following is true:

Gen 5 ran from 2011-2019 and is based on the same unibody FWD/AWD chassis as was the Taurus and Flex (and their Lincoln variants).
These came with 3.5L (n/a and EB) and 3.7L Cyclone (n/a only; SSV and Lincoln?) V-6 engines, and some 2.3L EB engines (very rare and mostly in the Taurus). Despite what Wiki says, I don't think they ever came with the 2.0L EB; I'd have to see physical proof of one to believe it. I don't think they ever got a 2.5L n/a engine.

 

[Snagglefoot]

IF the OP is referring to the Explorer (not the Escape), then the following is true:

Gen 5 ran from 2011-2019 and is based on the same unibody FWD/AWD chassis as was the Taurus and Flex (and their Lincoln variants).
These came with 3.5L (n/a and EB) and 3.7L Cyclone (n/a only; SSV and Lincoln?) V-6 engines, and some 2.3L EB engines (very rare and mostly in the Taurus). Despite what Wiki says, I don't think they ever came with the 2.0L EB; I'd have to see physical proof of one to believe it. I don't think they ever got a 2.5L n/a engine.

I edited post #6 to include the 2016 Car and Driver article. It did indeed have an Ecoboost 2.0 available but was not very popular.

 

[dnewton3]

Yikes! That would suck to have those little engines in the big vehicle.

IMO the only decent engine in that chassis was the n/a versions of the Cyclone. Yes - they will cost a lot of $$$ when it comes to a water pump replacement. But that issue aside, these are wonderful engines; run strong, clean and long-lasting.

 

[ctechbob]

As I recall, those were the generations where the I4 EB's were a little less than reliable with head gasket problems. I don't think that was fixed until somewhere near 2018-2019. I know it was a big issue in the 2.0's, but I don't remember hearing anything about the 2.3's in that generation.

The 2019 on 2.3 is a great engine. Its only downside is that it is GDI only, but it largely avoids all the other EB problems. No cam phaser issues to speak of, external water pump, gear driven oil pump.

Isn't that the generation of Explorer that Ford would rather forget? Seems I remember hearing they were pretty much all garbage.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Here is a subjective description from Motor Trend on a 2016 Explorer with an 2.3 Eco-boost. Enjoy.

 

[super20dan]

all explorers are now garbage

 

[gabriel9766]

As a ford tech stay away from the 2.3 explorers. From 16-19 the 6F35 is way to underpowered for the big suv unless you plan on few transmissions you want to put in and some have coolant intrusion problems.

 

[meep]

Interesting @gabriel9766. I had a rental with the 2.3. I loved the engine - it felt every bit as dialed in as a Honda motor. But, the transmission, while mine never missed a single shift, was extremely busy with many shifts.

 

[Snagglefoot]

I like the definition of "little engines". The Ecoboost 2.3 has more torque then either the NA 3.5 or 3.7 engine, and at a lower RPM than those two engines.

 

[TomYoung]

Nothing in this thread offers any promise that these are acceptable used cars.

 

[SC Maintenance]

I forget the original poster of this, but he shared this with me on this board - its the eco-boost engines that had the head gasket failure issues. I think from this you can infer that a) the 2.0 never made it into the Explorer, and b) you would not want one if it did.

Did the 2.3 have the same gasket / lack of cross drill issue?

 

[SC Maintenance]

IMO the only decent engine in that chassis was the n/a versions of the Cyclone. Yes - they will cost a lot of $$$ when it comes to a water pump replacement. But that issue aside, these are wonderful engines; run strong, clean and long-lasting.

Looks like a lot of steps but not particularly hard? At least the engine doesn't have to come out. Have you done one? Is it harder than it looks?

 

[KCJeep]

Did the 2.3 have the same gasket / lack of cross drill issue?

Nope, not at all.

Most famous for it was the 2.0 years 17 thru 19 IIRC.