I had an opportunity to drive my neighbor's Explorer XLT with less than 20k. It is the FWD, not the optional 4WD, with the 3.5L V6 and 6 speed auto. The Explorer became a unibody with FWD in 2011 model year unlike the old Explorer which was body on frame and rear wheel drive or 4WD. I generally prefer body on frame and rear wheel drive layout, so I was dubious about the new model. I rode in it several times and was impressed. Finally I got a chance to drive it some distance. It is a very solid feeling SUV with a firm but compliant ride. It's what I call the European feel like the BMW has. Very controlled, very stable and yet comfortable. The seats are firm as well. The engine is a 3.5L V6 with 290 HP and 255 Ft. Lb's of torque. Very smooth power, not a high performance engine, but plenty for most drivers needs. The only other engine choice is a Eco-Boost 4 cyl. with turbo charging. In reading the reviews, one main complaint is that the third seat row is difficult to get to. One question I have is why does Ford have both a Flex and a Explorer in it's line up? Both are FWD/4WD unibody large SUV's with a similar powertrain and three row seating. So if you are looking for a large SUV, I would suggest that you take a test drive in the new Explorer. I think you will be impressed by this SUV.
Driving a 2012 Ford Explorer XLT
- Thread starter Jim Spahr
- Start date
- Status
JHZR2
Staff member
It is really nice. It, like the highlander and tahoe, have major compromises if the third row seat is used.
It was a bit more cramped inside than I would have expected. Still very nice.
It was a bit more cramped inside than I would have expected. Still very nice.
The Ecoboost v6 is available on the 2013 models. 4wd only. The new "Explorer Sport" model. 350 hp/350 tq or something very close to that. Only loses like 1 mpg on the hwy.
JHZR2
Staff member
I wish the ecoboost 4 cyl was available on awd versions. No need for the power of the NA v6, let alone a boosted one. I'm not towing.
From what I've observed, the Flex is more like a crossover\minivan replacement since Ford dropped the minivan from their lineup. Although Flex and Explorer may seem similar they are targeted towards different audiences.
I don't really get why Ford dropped out of the minivan market. They never really tried to improve the Windstar much after its '95 or '96 introduction aside from adding a door. The Freestar was just a Windstar. Minivans seem to be a somewhat important part of the Honda and Toyota lineups, not to mention Chrysler. Siennas and Odysseys are everywhere. It's like Ford just gave up and is banking on CUVs.
The base 2012 Explorer starts at $28,200 and the XLT version with mag style wheels, fog lamps, and a IDrive type dash starts at 32,100. I am telling you, it really handles well.
I just rented one for a business trip last week, put about 1400 miles on it and gave the AWD a little workout going over the Sierras during that snowstorm last week. I was prepared not to like it, but I have to say it was a very nice vehicle to spend a lot of time in. The key to understanding the new Explorer is forgetting the old one- think of this as an AWD Taurus wagon, and you'll be spot-on. The highway ride is wonderful, and the AWD system does a remarkable job, even with the all-season rubber. It slogged through foot-deep snow on Ebbett's Pass admirably. Definitely skip the My Ford Touchy Sync touchscreen system, though, it's really terrible. It's powered by Microsoft, and you can tell.
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I don't really get why Ford dropped out of the minivan market. They never really tried to improve the Windstar much after its '95 or '96 introduction aside from adding a door. The Freestar was just a Windstar. Minivans seem to be a somewhat important part of the Honda and Toyota lineups, not to mention Chrysler. Siennas and Odysseys are everywhere. It's like Ford just gave up and is banking on CUVs.
Ford left the minivan market when they quit the Aerostar. Front Drive minivans are simply bloated cars. More of a station wagon that a van.
I don't really get why Ford dropped out of the minivan market. They never really tried to improve the Windstar much after its '95 or '96 introduction aside from adding a door. The Freestar was just a Windstar. Minivans seem to be a somewhat important part of the Honda and Toyota lineups, not to mention Chrysler. Siennas and Odysseys are everywhere. It's like Ford just gave up and is banking on CUVs.
Ford left the minivan market when they quit the Aerostar. Front Drive minivans are simply bloated cars. More of a station wagon that a van.
It uses the Volvo-based P2/D3 platform (a revised version, D4), which is the same as my Freestyle, so I'm not surprised by the driving dynamics; for a giant toaster, my Freestyle handles pretty well. There's a LOT of rigidity in this car's chassis.
The one disappointing thing that they stopped doing after the Freestyle is the raised roof in the back/third row. I know it kinda looks dorky, but it was a big reason I bought the car. It greatly increases the cargo utility (and passenger headroom if one cares about it). With the roof rack hiding the lines, it doesn't look that bad, and it makes a huge difference in cargo space. The interior looks really nice, but the end result is a car with less space and worse fuel economy than my Freestyle. I realize it's more SUV than wagon, but it's not the direction I want to go.
The one disappointing thing that they stopped doing after the Freestyle is the raised roof in the back/third row. I know it kinda looks dorky, but it was a big reason I bought the car. It greatly increases the cargo utility (and passenger headroom if one cares about it). With the roof rack hiding the lines, it doesn't look that bad, and it makes a huge difference in cargo space. The interior looks really nice, but the end result is a car with less space and worse fuel economy than my Freestyle. I realize it's more SUV than wagon, but it's not the direction I want to go.
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Gabe
It seems like the Explorer is no longer an SUV.....
Ford is giving the consumer what they want. Can't blame them.
I believe the Pathfinder is going the unibody, FWD route for the next model year.
People don't want body on frame, rugged, truck-based SUVs any more.
Er ... sorry ... not "SUV", "crossover"!
Originally Posted By: Gabe
It seems like the Explorer is no longer an SUV.....
Ford is giving the consumer what they want. Can't blame them.
I believe the Pathfinder is going the unibody, FWD route for the next model year.
People don't want body on frame, rugged, truck-based SUVs any more.
Er ... sorry ... not "SUV", "crossover"!
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Gabe
It seems like the Explorer is no longer an SUV - more like a minivan with different doors. Without 4WD, towing, or the ability to haul something, I don't see the point in buying one.
This is very true, and will be part of our consideration. Why buy a highlander or explorer other than the feel good "Im too young/cool/whatever to be seen driving a minivan"... Yet the volume is greater and the doors are more convenient on the minivan I think.
My issue is that I can get a highlander hybrid that gets me 28 MPG city, while the Sienna MPGs STINK.
It seems like the Explorer is no longer an SUV - more like a minivan with different doors. Without 4WD, towing, or the ability to haul something, I don't see the point in buying one.
This is very true, and will be part of our consideration. Why buy a highlander or explorer other than the feel good "Im too young/cool/whatever to be seen driving a minivan"... Yet the volume is greater and the doors are more convenient on the minivan I think.
My issue is that I can get a highlander hybrid that gets me 28 MPG city, while the Sienna MPGs STINK.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Gabe
It seems like the Explorer is no longer an SUV.....
Ford is giving the consumer what they want. Can't blame them.
I believe the Pathfinder is going the unibody, FWD route for the next model year.
People don't want body on frame, rugged, truck-based SUVs any more.
Er ... sorry ... not "SUV", "crossover"!
Sadly it's true.
For me the best years of the Explorer were '91-'01. My 1995 Sport could hold its own off road, but had the interior of a Lincoln.
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Gabe
It seems like the Explorer is no longer an SUV.....
Ford is giving the consumer what they want. Can't blame them.
I believe the Pathfinder is going the unibody, FWD route for the next model year.
People don't want body on frame, rugged, truck-based SUVs any more.
Er ... sorry ... not "SUV", "crossover"!
Sadly it's true.
For me the best years of the Explorer were '91-'01. My 1995 Sport could hold its own off road, but had the interior of a Lincoln.
If I was going to buy a Exploder, I would order an Interceptor Utility.
A new Explorer Sport for me, please. I still haven't been in, nor driven a new one. I've owned 4 previous Explorers (of various generations).
- Status
