Ford Edge...2.0, 2.7, or 3.5?

[Ws6]

My girlfriend has a 2016 Titanium 2.0.

Handling is good.
Power down low is great for what it is, at speed its okay.
Headlights are horrible, otherwise features are very good.
Road noise is too much. She prefers her 2014 Pilot or my 2019 cx5 greatly.
Driving dynamics were good.
AWD system is excellent.
Reliability so far has been very poor regarding features and mechanically, based on dealership records.
Body flex and rattle is very poor compared to the pilot and my 2015 cx5 at same mileage.
Mpg is mid 21s, for daily use for her. The Pilot was 2 to 3 less, but was not awd.

Over all, the Edge is a great idea poorly executed. I'd recommend something else. She is very luke warm on it at the 6mo mark.

 

[tcp71]

Originally Posted by john_pifer
Originally Posted by MCompact
I've never heard anyone say that they wished they had bought a slower model.


Some here have said that the 2.7 EB feels faster. Personally, I'm with you - I can't imagine it. 3.5 has more power and torque, and, as long as it's not too much heavier, it should have better acceleration. .


The 2.7 eco has 335hp and 380 lb/ft of torque compared to 290 hp and 255 lb/ft of torque in the 3.5l. The torque comes in significantly earlier from the turbos on the 2.7 as well. It would make the normally aspirated 3.5 dead slow, by comparison.

 

[grampi]

So basically engine wise, I should either go with the 2.0 turbo, or opt for the 2.7?

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted by Ws6
My girlfriend has a 2016 Titanium 2.0.

Handling is good.
Power down low is great for what it is, at speed its okay.
Headlights are horrible, otherwise features are very good.
Road noise is too much. She prefers her 2014 Pilot or my 2019 cx5 greatly.
Driving dynamics were good.
AWD system is excellent.
Reliability so far has been very poor regarding features and mechanically, based on dealership records.
Body flex and rattle is very poor compared to the pilot and my 2015 cx5 at same mileage.
Mpg is mid 21s, for daily use for her. The Pilot was 2 to 3 less, but was not awd.

Over all, the Edge is a great idea poorly executed. I'd recommend something else. She is very luke warm on it at the 6mo mark.


I thought the Titanium came with the 2.7?

 

[metroplex]

Originally Posted by grampi
Originally Posted by Ws6
My girlfriend has a 2016 Titanium 2.0.

Handling is good.
Power down low is great for what it is, at speed its okay.
Headlights are horrible, otherwise features are very good.
Road noise is too much. She prefers her 2014 Pilot or my 2019 cx5 greatly.
Driving dynamics were good.
AWD system is excellent.
Reliability so far has been very poor regarding features and mechanically, based on dealership records.
Body flex and rattle is very poor compared to the pilot and my 2015 cx5 at same mileage.
Mpg is mid 21s, for daily use for her. The Pilot was 2 to 3 less, but was not awd.

Over all, the Edge is a great idea poorly executed. I'd recommend something else. She is very luke warm on it at the 6mo mark.


I thought the Titanium came with the 2.7?



Edge Sport, now called the Edge ST, has the 2.7 EcoBoost. The 2017-2019 Fusion Sport has the same engine, and in fact, the same engine/transmission and calibration as the Edge Sport. I see the Edge ST even uses the same seats, steering wheel, and most of the interior layout as the Fusion Sport. The 2.7 EcoBoost in the Fusion/Edge is nearly identical to the truck 2.7 with some differences. The problem with the Edge ST is it costs almost as much as an Explorer ST but is too heavy and is underpowered. If you pay like $5k more for the Explorer ST, you get almost 70 more hp for not much more gain in weight, but with a lot more cargo/people capacity. The best way to describe it is that the stock Explorer ST has the same weightower ratio as a Fusion Sport. When both are tuned, they have comparable weight to power ratios as well. The Edge ST is slower in each scenario.

 

[metroplex]

Here's an interesting video showing what the water pump design looks like as they water jetted them in half:
https://youtu.be/yrmH4S2_ZOI

They basically have 2 failure modes. One is via the weep hole if you're lucky. The other is very bad.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted by metroplex
Originally Posted by grampi
Originally Posted by Ws6
My girlfriend has a 2016 Titanium 2.0.

Handling is good.
Power down low is great for what it is, at speed its okay.
Headlights are horrible, otherwise features are very good.
Road noise is too much. She prefers her 2014 Pilot or my 2019 cx5 greatly.
Driving dynamics were good.
AWD system is excellent.
Reliability so far has been very poor regarding features and mechanically, based on dealership records.
Body flex and rattle is very poor compared to the pilot and my 2015 cx5 at same mileage.
Mpg is mid 21s, for daily use for her. The Pilot was 2 to 3 less, but was not awd.

Over all, the Edge is a great idea poorly executed. I'd recommend something else. She is very luke warm on it at the 6mo mark.


I thought the Titanium came with the 2.7?



Edge Sport, now called the Edge ST, has the 2.7 EcoBoost. The 2017-2019 Fusion Sport has the same engine, and in fact, the same engine/transmission and calibration as the Edge Sport. I see the Edge ST even uses the same seats, steering wheel, and most of the interior layout as the Fusion Sport. The 2.7 EcoBoost in the Fusion/Edge is nearly identical to the truck 2.7 with some differences. The problem with the Edge ST is it costs almost as much as an Explorer ST but is too heavy and is underpowered. If you pay like $5k more for the Explorer ST, you get almost 70 more hp for not much more gain in weight, but with a lot more cargo/people capacity. The best way to describe it is that the stock Explorer ST has the same weightower ratio as a Fusion Sport. When both are tuned, they have comparable weight to power ratios as well. The Edge ST is slower in each scenario.

Originally Posted by metroplex
Originally Posted by grampi
Originally Posted by Ws6
My girlfriend has a 2016 Titanium 2.0.

Handling is good.
Power down low is great for what it is, at speed its okay.
Headlights are horrible, otherwise features are very good.
Road noise is too much. She prefers her 2014 Pilot or my 2019 cx5 greatly.
Driving dynamics were good.
AWD system is excellent.
Reliability so far has been very poor regarding features and mechanically, based on dealership records.
Body flex and rattle is very poor compared to the pilot and my 2015 cx5 at same mileage.
Mpg is mid 21s, for daily use for her. The Pilot was 2 to 3 less, but was not awd.

Over all, the Edge is a great idea poorly executed. I'd recommend something else. She is very luke warm on it at the 6mo mark.


I thought the Titanium came with the 2.7?



Edge Sport, now called the Edge ST, has the 2.7 EcoBoost. The 2017-2019 Fusion Sport has the same engine, and in fact, the same engine/transmission and calibration as the Edge Sport. I see the Edge ST even uses the same seats, steering wheel, and most of the interior layout as the Fusion Sport. The 2.7 EcoBoost in the Fusion/Edge is nearly identical to the truck 2.7 with some differences. The problem with the Edge ST is it costs almost as much as an Explorer ST but is too heavy and is underpowered. If you pay like $5k more for the Explorer ST, you get almost 70 more hp for not much more gain in weight, but with a lot more cargo/people capacity. The best way to describe it is that the stock Explorer ST has the same weightower ratio as a Fusion Sport. When both are tuned, they have comparable weight to power ratios as well. The Edge ST is slower in each scenario.

My wife and I drove both the Edge (actually two of them, one had the 2.0, and the other had the 3.5) and an Explorer. We both thought the Explorer was to big for us. We may actually look at the Escape as well. If it has the 2.0 turbo, it may actually be fairly peppy. We thought the Edge had sufficient power with the 2.0, though not overwhelming...

 

[grampi]

We will also be driving some of the other makes and models as well...we are not in a rush...we also drove a Rav4, but we felt it was too small. We wanted to drive a Highlander, but they didn't have any used ones, however, they are very pricey compared to other models in that segment. The Honda CRV is nice, but this is another pricey model. We will be checking out the Mazdas as well. We had an MPV that was an excellent vehicle. Really my only complaint about it were the body panels had a terrible case of rust, which is actually why we had to get rid of it. Other than that, it was a wonderful vehicle...

 

[grampi]

It looks like Mazda no longer makes the CX-7, which probably would've been a perfect size for us...we'll still be looking at the 5 and 9 though....I wonder why they quite making the 7?

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by grampi
It looks like Mazda no longer makes the CX-7, which probably would've been a perfect size for us...we'll still be looking at the 5 and 9 though....I wonder why they quite making the 7?

The 9 is so much better.

 

[meep]

If it were me, I'd probably lean towards the 2.0, because of handling. I don't like have all that weight up in front of the front axle. The 2.0 should have plenty of power for driving a small SUV around. That said, the 2.7 is one of the nicest driving engines I've owned - it does everything well. Gobs of torque, feels refined, great mpg, and has balls when you ask it to deliver. It just seems overkill for an SUV. I mean, this thing pulls the truck plus a laden trailer up steep grades on the highway without breaking 2500 rpm - it's overkill for a passenger car. BUT, if that's attractive to you, the 2.7 is a great engine IMO.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted by meep
If it were me, I'd probably lean towards the 2.0, because of handling. I don't like have all that weight up in front of the front axle. The 2.0 should have plenty of power for driving a small SUV around. That said, the 2.7 is one of the nicest driving engines I've owned - it does everything well. Gobs of torque, feels refined, great mpg, and has balls when you ask it to deliver. It just seems overkill for an SUV. I mean, this thing pulls the truck plus a laden trailer up steep grades on the highway without breaking 2500 rpm - it's overkill for a passenger car. BUT, if that's attractive to you, the 2.7 is a great engine IMO.


I haven't driven one with the 2.7 yet, but I don't like the extra cost of the trim level you have to get to get that engine...it would be nice if you could get this engine in the SEL trim...

 

[jcartwright99]

2.7 hands down. Hi on power and a very reliable engine. The other two engines have potential minuses.

3.5 and water pump replacement if you keep it that long. Just expensive to replace due to the placement of water pump in engine bay. It's a good engine though.

2.0....link below

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2019/MC-10162071-0001.pdf

Just something to keep in mind. I have a 2.0 in my Fusion and love it but I am getting close to being out of warranty so I am due to get a pressure test to see if I am affected soon. If you get the 2.0, make them sweeten the deal with an extended powertrain warranty just to be safe.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by meep
If it were me, I'd probably lean towards the 2.0, because of handling. I don't like have all that weight up in front of the front axle. The 2.0 should have plenty of power for driving a small SUV around. That said, the 2.7 is one of the nicest driving engines I've owned - it does everything well. Gobs of torque, feels refined, great mpg, and has balls when you ask it to deliver. It just seems overkill for an SUV. I mean, this thing pulls the truck plus a laden trailer up steep grades on the highway without breaking 2500 rpm - it's overkill for a passenger car. BUT, if that's attractive to you, the 2.7 is a great engine IMO.

2.7 is nowhere near over-kill in an Edge. Has only a touch more power/weight than my CX5, and I consider that the upper edge of "adequate".

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by meep
If it were me, I'd probably lean towards the 2.0, because of handling. I don't like have all that weight up in front of the front axle. The 2.0 should have plenty of power for driving a small SUV around. That said, the 2.7 is one of the nicest driving engines I've owned - it does everything well. Gobs of torque, feels refined, great mpg, and has balls when you ask it to deliver. It just seems overkill for an SUV. I mean, this thing pulls the truck plus a laden trailer up steep grades on the highway without breaking 2500 rpm - it's overkill for a passenger car. BUT, if that's attractive to you, the 2.7 is a great engine IMO.

2.7 is nowhere near over-kill in an Edge. Has only a touch more power/weight than my CX5, and I consider that the upper edge of "adequate".


I'm not putting down the CX-5, it may be a great vehicle, but it isn't really comparable to the Edge. It's in the segment with the Escape. It's also down by more than 100 HP compared to the 2.7 Edge, which is significant...

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted by meep
it's overkill for a passenger car.

It's all about one's point of reference and expectations, I suppose. I've driven a Fusion Sport with that 2.7 engine, and I would call it adequate, not overkill. It would certainly not be overkill for a midsize SUV. But if it's just for getting groceries, I'm sure even a 1.5T would do.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by grampi
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by meep
If it were me, I'd probably lean towards the 2.0, because of handling. I don't like have all that weight up in front of the front axle. The 2.0 should have plenty of power for driving a small SUV around. That said, the 2.7 is one of the nicest driving engines I've owned - it does everything well. Gobs of torque, feels refined, great mpg, and has balls when you ask it to deliver. It just seems overkill for an SUV. I mean, this thing pulls the truck plus a laden trailer up steep grades on the highway without breaking 2500 rpm - it's overkill for a passenger car. BUT, if that's attractive to you, the 2.7 is a great engine IMO.

2.7 is nowhere near over-kill in an Edge. Has only a touch more power/weight than my CX5, and I consider that the upper edge of "adequate".


I'm not putting down the CX-5, it may be a great vehicle, but it isn't really comparable to the Edge. It's in the segment with the Escape. It's also down by more than 100 HP compared to the 2.7 Edge, which is significant...

It turns similar acceleration performance as the 2.7 Edge because it's lighter, and I find my CX5's acceleration barely enough to satisfy me. The Edge ST is so far from "overkill" that it's not even funny.

CX5 2.5T vs. Edge 2.7 ST:

0-60: 6.1 vs 5.7
5-60: 6.7 vs. 6.2
0-100: 16.2 vs. 14.9
1/4 mile: 14.6@95mph vs. 14.3@98mph

 

[jcartwright99]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by meep
If it were me, I'd probably lean towards the 2.0, because of handling. I don't like have all that weight up in front of the front axle. The 2.0 should have plenty of power for driving a small SUV around. That said, the 2.7 is one of the nicest driving engines I've owned - it does everything well. Gobs of torque, feels refined, great mpg, and has balls when you ask it to deliver. It just seems overkill for an SUV. I mean, this thing pulls the truck plus a laden trailer up steep grades on the highway without breaking 2500 rpm - it's overkill for a passenger car. BUT, if that's attractive to you, the 2.7 is a great engine IMO.

2.7 is nowhere near over-kill in an Edge. Has only a touch more power/weight than my CX5, and I consider that the upper edge of "adequate".


We get it. You love your CX-5. However the Edge ST isn't just a hair faster it is significantly faster. It's clear you have never driven one because they are not slow. Every scenario other than fuel economy it would lay waste to the CX-5. Driving experience will be much better too because of a thing called torque at low rpm.

Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by meep
it's overkill for a passenger car.

It's all about one's point of reference and expectations, I suppose. I've driven a Fusion Sport with that 2.7 engine, and I would call it adequate, not overkill. It would certainly not be overkill for a midsize SUV. But if it's just for getting groceries, I'm sure even a 1.5T would do.

True but in what world is a 0-60 time a tenth or two over 5 seconds adequate. Actually, I want to live in that world.

 

[meep]

LOL. I guess I must be showing my age!! I grew up with 45HP VW vans and 88HP station wagons, and V8s that were putting out 160HP. 6 second 0-60 times were only the fastest of muscle cars back then.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by jcartwright99
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by meep
If it were me, I'd probably lean towards the 2.0, because of handling. I don't like have all that weight up in front of the front axle. The 2.0 should have plenty of power for driving a small SUV around. That said, the 2.7 is one of the nicest driving engines I've owned - it does everything well. Gobs of torque, feels refined, great mpg, and has balls when you ask it to deliver. It just seems overkill for an SUV. I mean, this thing pulls the truck plus a laden trailer up steep grades on the highway without breaking 2500 rpm - it's overkill for a passenger car. BUT, if that's attractive to you, the 2.7 is a great engine IMO.

2.7 is nowhere near over-kill in an Edge. Has only a touch more power/weight than my CX5, and I consider that the upper edge of "adequate".


We get it. You love your CX-5. However the Edge ST isn't just a hair faster it is significantly faster. It's clear you have never driven one because they are not slow. Every scenario other than fuel economy it would lay waste to the CX-5. Driving experience will be much better too because of a thing called torque at low rpm.

Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by meep
it's overkill for a passenger car.

It's all about one's point of reference and expectations, I suppose. I've driven a Fusion Sport with that 2.7 engine, and I would call it adequate, not overkill. It would certainly not be overkill for a midsize SUV. But if it's just for getting groceries, I'm sure even a 1.5T would do.

True but in what world is a 0-60 time a tenth or two over 5 seconds adequate. Actually, I want to live in that world.


No, never driven one, but by the numbers...do you REALLY consider 3 tenths in the quarter "significantly faster"? I mean, it IS faster, no doubt, but my definition of "significantly faster" has a much larger margin than 3 tenths in a quarter.