By CL request, a Review of the all-new 2011 Ford Explorer.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/explorer/2011/

IN A NUTSHELL: This great American SUV-classic no longer dominates the SUV sales-charts, but is now re-born in an all-new, unibody version.























I received a number of CL requests for a 2011 Explorer review, and, to be honest, after reviewing the also all-new (and quite impressive) 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee, which was once the Explorer's main domestic competion, I wanted, myself, to see how the new Explorer stacked up. Too bad that the new Grand Cherokee has been on the market for months now, and the new Explorer is just now being released. But, like with the delay on new Taurus last year, perhaps Ford had its reasons for the delay.....maybe to insure a more defect-free assembly line.

Ah, the modern SUV....the automotive version of the perfect go-anywhere, in-any weather, carry anybody-or-anything, people/cargo hauler. Its roots can (arguably) be traced back to the Kaiser-Jeep Wagoneer (Station Wagon) of 1946, the first post-war, civilian application of a body-enclosed, people-mover Jeep. This lead to the famous British Land Rover of 1948, which was actually done, with a British/Rover drivetrain/body, on a Jeep-derived chassis. Others claim that the roots of the SUV can be traced to the original Chevy Suburban of 1935....both views, IMO, have some merit.

Up until the 1960's, though, there were precious few other vehicles in production like the Jeeps, Land Rovers, and Suburbans. And these vehicles, having a very limited driver/buyer base, received little attention from their manufacturers...they were generally good off-road Mountain-Goats, but uncomfortable to drive, and sometimes poorly-built. My late father, for example, did not own, but had access to, a 1950s-vintage Jeep Wagoneer when he was Army-based in South America (I vaguely remember, as a young boy, taking some rides in it) and he later told me he thought it one of the poorest vehicles he had come across in his many years of driving......this, of course, in contrast to the famous rock-solid Jeep of World War II combat fame.

In the 1960's, the market for this type of vehicle began to expand slightly, and the Ford Bronco, Chevy Blazer, and Toyota Land Cruiser were introduced.......essentially chopped/shortened pickups with steel roofs instead of a bed, primitive rear-seats, and little else. In fact, Consumer Reports, in 1966, rated the Land Cruiser Not Acceptable, because the fuel-line plumbing actually ran from the tank, INSIDE the cabin, to the engine up front.

In 1970, Land Rover introduced the first truly modern, comfortable, plush/luxurious (and yes, expensive) SUV for the masses. It has been an off-roading (though unreliable) icon ever since, and eventually spawned competitors like the Mercedes G-Wagen and the more recent, larger, upgraded Toyota Land Cruiser and the Lexus LX460. But, in 1990, it fell to the ubiquitous Ford Explorer to give America its first true SUV for the masses.....some 80 years after Henry Ford, with the same Ford Motor Company, had essentially put America on wheels with the original Model T.

The original Explorer was an explosive success....along with the Dodge/Plymouth minivans of the era, a truly pioneering vehicle. As with the Dodge Caravan and Plymouth Voyager, the public took to the Explorer like Friday night free beer at Clancy's Bar. It offered much (but not all) of the minivan's cavernous interior, but with the added bonuses (for those who were image-conscious) of a more macho-styled body and, of course, the extra bad-weather traction of AWD/4WD and off-road capability. Ford based the first-generation Explorer on the compact Ranger pickup truck, but its interior was large, roomy, comfortable, and versatile. Families just loved it. Jeep, of course, bristling that Ford had launched such a stunning success into what was once considered their territory, soon followed with the Grand Cherokee, which was also a stunning success (the smaller, compact Cherokee had also been a success, but appealed to a different buyer-class). For years, during the 1990's, the Explorer and Grand Cherokee dominated American SUV sales, and were the two primary factors in turning the SUV from its rough-and-tumble image into mainstream Suburban America. Dozens of competitors followed, of course, both truck and car-based, from many manufacturers, and I won't go into all of them...the list is too long.

However, despite its popularity, it turned out that the Explorer, even with its innovative features like the electronic multi-position transfer-case-selector switch and on-pavement-use AWD, had some notable weaknesses as well. Auto manufacturers, of course, often try to save money in vehicle-design, and Ford is certainly no exception. The first-generation Explorer used the independent Ford Twin-I-Beam front suspension that dated back to its 1964-model trucks. Firestone Wilderness tires were used (Henry Ford and Harvey Firestone having struck up a friendship and buisness-alliance early in their careers), but the Ford and Firestone engineers could not agree on the recommended tire pressures. This resulted from some Explorer customers complaining about the original model's firm, trucky ride (expected, of course, on a truck-derived chassis). Instead of more-extensive (and more-expensive) chassis revisions, Ford took the easy way out......simply dropping the recommended tire PSI's to 26 pounds, to make the tire softer and absorb more bumps. Firestone disagreed......their engineers insisted on 30 PSI, for better heat-resistance. Most tires, of course, have (or should have) a built-in safety-margin, to account for tire-gauge error and other factors, but this was (apparantly) not the case with the Wilderness tires.....the PSIs were indeeed critical. Ford, however, insisted that the vehicles be produced with the new 26 PSI-recommendation to address the customer-ride-issue. So, that, plus the fact that some Explorer owners were lax or negligent in checking their tires, speeding, and loading up their vehicles with a lot of weight/towing while speeding on hot desert roads in the Southwest, became a formula for disaster. The Wilderness tires, from low-pressure and all of the other heat-stress factors, started failing at an alarming rate...and, in some cases, along with the Explorer's relatively primitive front-suspension, led to rollvers, with injuries and deaths. This launched a Federal investigation and a recall for new-tires and tire PSIs. It also launched a class-action suit, though, IMO, the owners themselves bore at least part of the blame by not checking their tire PSIs often enough and overloading their vehicles...the media never really hit on that part of it much, trying to place most of the blame on Ford and Firestone. This fiasco, of course, led to the break-up of the decades-old Ford-Firestone buisness partnership.....and it has till not yet been restored, though, of course, Ford is still free to use newer Firestone tires on its vehicles if it sees fit.

Subsequent models of the Explorers, of course, having already got the new tires, finally got the extensive chassis revisions and the new front suspension they needed.....and all was once-again Hunky-Dory with the public. A Mercury Mountaineer Spin-off model was added, though the Mountaineer was aimed at a more-conservative, upscale class of buyers (those who were not as likely to actually go off-road), and so lacked the Explorer's Low-range transfer-case and some of the off-road hardware.

The Explorer, now in a sea of car-based unibody competitors, no longer rules the roost in SUV sales as it (along with the Grand Cherokee) did in the 1990s. And, for the first time, the all-new 2011 model sheds all traces of its once-Ranger-derived truck-chassis in favor of a car-type, unibody construction. The low-range transfer case is also gone. This, of course, will affect its off-road capability and towing some (though, with the towing package, it can still haul some 5000 lbs...down from the 2010 model's 7115). But the low 16-21 degree approach/breakover/departure angles show that it is clearly not designed to be a mountain goat or classic off-roader. And, of course, that is not surprising, as only about 4-5% of SUV owners (Jeep-jocks being some of the exceptions) actually go off-road any more in the traditional sense.

For 2011, the all-new Explorer comes in three basic trim-lines.....Base ($28,190), XLT ($31,190), and Limited ($37,190) versions. I couldn't find an Eddie Bauer version listed any more, and the useful Explorer Sport Trac model with the small truck-bed has, unfortunately, also been dropped, due to declining sales. All three Explorer series for 2011 come in 2WD or AWD versions. All share the same engine...a 3.5L V6 of 283 HP and 252 ft-lbs. of torque, and a 6-speed Select-Shift automatic transmission. As of now, there is no more V8 option. There is no more Mercury Mountaineer version, either, with the whole Mercury Division having been sacrificed to the Ford bean-counters. Lincoln, of course, has their own SUVs with the MKX/MKT/Navigator, and, as far as I know, will not sell a rebadged Explorer...the former, Explorer-based Lincoln Aviator having also bit the dust.

One interesting change in the new powertrain layout, with the conversion from a truck ladder-frame to car-based unibody, is that now, 2WD Explorer models are front-drive instead of rear-drive. In that sense, it now makes the Explorer, mechanically, more or less like a big brother to the smaller FWD Ford Edge and Escape models. You had to actually look at the specs and/or the window-stickers to note the FWD layout, as the big plastic engine-cover somewhat hides the engine configuration underhood...more on that below. Of course, not everyone needs AWD........Paul (bitkahuna), as an Explorer owner living in FL, my guess is that you, for one, probably don't need it much, unless you regularly drive to a colder climate.

I've been at the Washington, D.C. Auto Show the last few days (I'm pretty much recovered, for auto-review purposes, from my recent surgery), and, of course, checked out the new Explorer there, too, but decided to take a break from the show and do the full-review of the Explorer today. I had previously done a preliminary CL CAR CHAT thread on an Explorer Limited wih a number of options, and was stunned at its factory-sticker price of almost 49K (as were some of you as well).

For the full-review today, I didn't have a whole lot of choice as to the particular Explorer I drove (unless I went all over the place hunting for different models). The Ford shop I was at (and it was a big one) only had one 2011 model ready for a test-drive........a white FWD Limited model that listed for roughly 45K. It was take it or leave it on the review/test-drive....so, of course, I decided to take it (if necessary or desired, I can always sample an AWD model later). However, despite the current lack of available dealer-stock, unlike some foreign-nameplate SUVs, new Explorers can be special-ordered from Ford's Kansas City plant in any model/paint/trim/options desired. But don't expect new Explorers to be discounted much; after all, it is a band-new, totally-redesigned, popular vehicle with a lot of hype in the auto press...and that, of course, often means high demand.


MODEL REVIEWED: 2011 Ford Explorer Limited FWD


BASE PRICE: $37,190

OPTIONS:

Rapid Spec Package: $4810

White Platinum Metallic Paint: $495

Moon Roofs: $1595

20" Polished Aluminum Wheels: $595


DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $805 (about as expected for a vehicle of this type)

LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $45,490


DRIVETRAIN: AWD, Longitudinally-mounted 3.5L TiVCT V6, 283 HP @ 6500 RPM, Torque 252 Ft-lbs. @ 4100 RPM, 6-speed Select-Shift automatic transmission.

EPA MILEAGE RATING: 17 City / 25 Highway (FWD) 17 City / 23 Highway (AWD)


EXRERIOR COLOR: White Platinum Metallic (extra-cost)

INTERIOR: 2-tone Pecan (Brown)/Black leather.



PLUSSES (+):


Switch to car-based design improves driveability and road manners.

Smooth, quiet 6-speed Select-Shift automatic transmission.

Nice fore/aft transmission shifter with no zig-zag.

Fairly good response from the V6 in the FWD version (I didn't sample the AWD).

Firm, effective brake pedal.

Reasonably smooth ride.

Fairly low wind noise.

Fairly low road noise.

Adaptive Cruise Control for safety.

Stability system includes Roll-Stability.

Generally good underhood layout.

Vehicle-surround black lower-body cladding protects paint from road debris.

Good paint job and exterior fit/finish.

Nine exterior paint colors.....and some, IMO, are nice.

Reasonably solid doors/sheet metal.

Land-Rover-Type Terrain-Management Selector (AWD models).

Durable-feeling, easy-snap/swing outside mirror assemblies at last.

Relatively roomy cargo area.

Fairly good front/rear legroom.

Entry/exit height good for many people without running boards.

Simple, capless refueling-pipe.

Soft-feel dash materials.

Generally attractive interior dash/console/front-door materials.

Interior door-handles now much less awkward-feeling.

Fairly comfortable power-front seats.

Securi-Code Keyless-entry touch-pad on B-pillars.

Many steering-wheel buttons for convienience.

Manual tilt/telescoping steering column.

Numerous interior cup holders for drinks.

Nice stereo sound quality.

Attractive 2-tone brown/black leather seats.

Convienient, power-folding 3rd-row seats.





MINUSES (-):


Top-line Limited models, with options, have a Lincoln price tag.

Not readily in stock at some dealerships.

Relatively low approach/breakover/departure angles for off-roading.

Somewhat jumpy throttle starting up from rest.

OK but fairly slow steering response.

Noticeable body roll on sharp corners.

Car-based and FWD design slightly lowers tow ratings and off-road capability.

Hand-swung prop-rod for hood instead of struts.

Cargo-area trim level not quite befitting the price.

Large, thick A/B/C/D pillars impede vision slightly.

Extra-cost for White Metallic Platinum paint.

No body-side trim-mouldings for parking-lot-ding protection.

Temporary-spare tire instead of a real one.

Marginal rear headroom for tall people under rear sunroof housing.

2-tone leather rear seats attractive-looking but not very comfortable.

Complex video-screen climate/stereo controls.

Cheap-feeling interior rear-door-panel trim.

Complex electronically-adjustable dash gauges.

Electronic-display tachometer IMO too small.

Awkward left-foot parking-brake pedal for long legs.

Faddish, 20" wheels (IMO) larger than necessary.




EXTERIOR:

Well, of course, the 2011 Explorer is all-new, and, though the exterior size is more or less similar to the old truck-based model, not only is the switch to unibody styling/FWD quite different from the old model, but so is the general styling as well. The front grille, while somewhat similiar to that in some other Ford products, is much different from the old Explorer.....so, to some extent, is the rear-quarter and rear end, though it still retains the space-efficient, squarish rear-roofline. A nice black lower-body-belt moulding runs around the entire vehicle and in all the wheel-wells to protect the paint from road debris. The general level of exterior fit/finish in the body and trim is pretty good, and the paint job is well-done. Nine exterior colors are offered, and some of them, IMO, are nice enough to not remind you of Murphy's Funeral Home. Unfortunately, the White Platinum Metallic paint job on my test-car ran a healthy $495 extra....just like the European automakers have been doing for years. The exterior sheet metal and doors are well-done and reasonably solid,though not of the Mercedes Gelandewagen-class by any means. As on some other Fords, the clever Capless-Refueling system is standard. Rather large, bulky A/B/C/D pillars do impede outward vision a little, but I suspect that it (may?) be due to the new Federal roof-crush rollover standards...more reinforcing-metal inside and greater strength means a bulkier size. The optional ($595) 20" polished-aluminum wheels were, IMO, rather faddish, and also, IMO, somewhat larger than necessary. There are no body-side mouldings for door-protection in parking lots (little excuse for this, IMO........it's just cost-cutting by the auto manufacturers). The twin outside rear-view mirrors, unlike many past Ford products, (finally) have nice solid housings and a strong, smooth swivel/snap/lock mechanism comparable to those on many foreign-nameplate SUVs. It probably won't matter much in a unibody vehicle, unlike the former Explorer, no longer specifically designed for off-roading, but the low approach/departure/breakover angles underneath don't bode well for going out in the boonies.



UNDERHOOD:

Raise the reasonably solid-feeling hood, with its underhood insulation pad, and what holds it up? A simple hand-swung, El Cheapo prop-rod......this , on a vehicle that, in top-zoot trim, can list for 50K. Come on, Ford....the 18-19K Subaru Impreza now has nice gas struts to hold its hood up. Underneath the hood, the general layout is reasonably good, though the big plastic engine cover hides not only the top-engine parts, but the actual orientation of the engine and drivetrain itself.....as I mentioned above, I couldn't tell the vehicle was FWD until I looked at the specs and price-sticker. Still, I've seen lots worse underhood, especially in premium, upmarket vehicles. There is some room (though not a lot) to reach engine parts lower down the block; the battery, up front, is uncovered and easily accessable, and all dipsticks/filler caps/reservoirs are readily accessable.




INTERIOR:

Having rather recently reviewed the all-new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee and its much-improved, rich-looking interior trim, I especially wanted to see how the interior of the new Explorer (the Grand Cherokee's traditional rival) looked and felt in comparison. I wasn't disappointed.....the new Explorer's interior, especially in the top-zoot Limited trim verson, was attractive and had good-looking trim materials, though, IMO, it wasn't quite as rich-looking as the new Grand Cherokee's. Still, the designers didn't skimp much on the new Explorer's interior except, maybe, for the cheap-feeling, hard-plastic rear-door inner-panels. The dash trim, though, with wood-tone and brushed-metal materials, was nicely-done, and had a soft-feel dash. The steering wheel was well-shaped and had a lot of buttons/controls on it for convienence. The seat leather seemed of a decent grade, and I liked the two-tone pattern of black and brown (Pecan). The front seats were reasonably comfortable, not particularly supportive, but of course, this is not a high-G sports car where you need a lot of support. The rear seats also looked nice, but were somewhat less-comfortable than up front, as is the case with many vehicles. The 3rd-row seats were not the smallest or most-confining I've seen, but, of course, are best left to children and small adults. Legroom is good in both the front and rear seats. Headroom, with the power-operated seats, is good up front for tall people, but marginal for those same tall people in back, under the rear moonroof-housing, which robs an inch or two of headroom in back. There are a number of cupholders in both the front and rear seats for drinks.....the Explorer, of course, is a traditional family-vehicle. My test-car included double moon-roofs; front and rear.

One thing in the interior (actually two things) I didn't like were the electronic video-screen displays in the center of the dash for both climate-control and stereo functions, and the adjustable electronic-displays for the secondary engine gauges, next to the large round, race-car style (0-RPM straight-down) speedometer. I found the two-tone blue electronic fuel gauge somewhat confusing and hard to read a a glance, and the other instruments depended on how you adjusted the video-screens. The electronic climate-control and stereo controls/displays were, IMO, confusing as well (almost to the frustration level of BMW's I-Drive and Audi's MMI), though the stereo sound quality itself was very nice....definitely one of the better stereos I've heard. The sun-visor and roof-ceiling fabric seemed decent, and most of the interior hardware was solid and well-done, though there were a few cheap-feeling parts. The steering column had a manual tilt/telescope feature. A major improvement, IMO, inside the new Explorer are the new inside door-handles that are much more conventional and less awkward-feeling to use....the old ones were located at the extreme front of the door-panel arm rests, and you had to pull them up and back to
unlatch them.




CARGO AREA/TRUNK:

Open the rear power-operated hatch lid (it has a good, solid feel), and the cargo area, being a mid-size, square-roofed SUV, is generally pretty roomy and space-efficient, although the level of trim is not quite what you would expect for the price. But one nice feature (besides the power-operated hatch lid) are the power-operated, self-folding 3rd-row seats. At the touch of a button, they automatically fold up, flip over, and stow themselves under the trunk floor, leaving a nice carpeted cargo area. But the black carpeting is limited to the floor......the trunk walls are cheap-feeling hard plastic. The old Explorers had a real spare tire....the new 2011 model, somewhat less off-road-capable due to the unibody design, uses a temporary spare, located, like in many vehicles, under the trunk floor. One thing I forgot to check on, in the review, was whether there was a cargo-area pull-cover to hide cargo stowed when the 3rd-row seats are down......many vehicles offer it as a dealer-installed accessory if it is not standard.




ON THE ROAD:

Start up the ubiquitous 3.5L V6 with a nice engine START/STOP button, and the engine springs to life with a reasonably smooth, quiet idle. Some of you may want the Turbo Ecoboost V6 available as an option (it is currently not offered), but the standard, N/A V6 is no slouch....it will get out of its own way. At lower speeds, it feels like a little more than its rated 252 ft-lbs. of torque, especially for a vehicle of this weight.....and the electronic throttle can be downright jumpy from a dead stop. But, of course, I was sampling the lighter FWD with less drag on the powertrain....the AWD version would probably be a little more sluggish. And, even the FWD version starts to run out of steam a little when you get up to expressway speeds....but it stays responsive below that. The engine also stays smooth and reasonably quiet, though, some exhaust noise makes its way into the cabin during hard or significant acceleration.

The 6-speed Select-shift automatic was also smooth and quiet, and the shift-lever has a nice fore/aft motion, which, IMO, is better than the annoying zig-zags used in some vehicles. Its auto-manual shifting function, though, is a little unusual, with the "M" manual-shift function back directly behind the "D" Drive spot, instead of the more-common side-gate.

The chassis, as mentioned earlier, is much more car-like than in past versions of the Explorer, and that, in conjunction with the suspension-settings, not only smooths out the ride a little (the truck-like ride on early-model Explorers, as noted above, was once a major complaint), but makes all of the road-manners a little more civil. The general level of handling/steering is not quite like a BMW X3/X5, but still not bad by mid-size SUV standards......the steering response is fairly slow but stable, and there is some noticeable body roll on corners. The ride comfort is reasonably smooth......I dont think we'll hear any complaints with this one about a trucky ride like on the first-generation Explorers. Wind noise and road noise are both fairly well-controlled, though, of course, not to Lexus LS460 standards. AWD models have a Land-Rover-like Terrain-Response system, operated by a rotary-**** on the console (don't forget, Ford used to own Land Rover), that programs engine/transmission/suspension response depending on what kind of surface you are on....hard pavement, sand, snow/ice, etc..... Brakes are surprisingly firm and effective (on many larger SUVs, they tend to have a spongy feel). The pedal responds quickly, without sponginess, has a nice firm feel reminiscent of German sports sedans, and stops fairly quickly for a mid-size SUV. And the brake-pedal height, though not located perfectly for my big size-15 shoes, still does not cause them to catch much on the underside of the brake pedal when lifting my foot going from the gas pedal to the brake.




THE VERDICT:

I'm generally pleased with the new design, though, IMO, the electronic stereo/climate and secondary engine-gauge controls are confusing and overly-complex. Some annoying cost-cutting features are also evident, like the (now) temporary spare, hood prop-rod, and lack of body-side mouldings. For what loaded Limited models cost, you can go down the street to the Lincoln dealer and look at some of their SUVs....and get the longer Lincoln warranty and better customer-perks.

But, these quibblings aside (and the extra-cost for the white Platinum paint), there's not a whole lot to complain about with the new Explorer...it is well-done and well-designed. The new unibody frame/chassis has made the road manners more civil. The interior, while not quite as rich-looking as that of the new Grand Cherokee, is attractive, generally comfortable, and family-user-friendly. In the Limited Trim version, many power-operated accessories are included for convienence. The loss of the truck-frame and RWD, of course, will lessen tow ratings and off-road capabilities, but few people nowadays buy SUVs for that purpose. It is estimated that only 4-5% of average SUV owners ever go truly off-road, and even a lot of Jeep Wrangler owners don't either.

New 2011 Explorers, though, as of this writing, don't seem to be readily in stock, at least in the D.C. area, so you are not likely, as a shopper, to find exactly what you are looking for on the dealer lot. As I mentioned above, though, Explorers can be special-ordered from the factory in exactly the configuration you want. Just don't expect give-away deals or big discounts, at least for the next several months.

And, as always, Happy Car-Shopping.

MM

 

I thought it looked awesome in the commercials but then I saw it at the Philly Auto Show and was not impressed. Nice write up MM! Here are a few quick pictures I snapped.

 

Thanks. ....nice shots. White seems to be the new Explorer's feature color, both in ads and at the auto shows. Ford, of course, charges extra for it...as I pointed out in the review.

What did you find unimpressive about it? My biggest problem with it was simply coping with the complex electronic gauges and stereo/climate-controls.

 

It was only based on the looks. In the commericals I really thought it looked sharp. I have a 2008 Limited 4Runner and I'm thinking about getting the new 5th Gen since I'm a Toyota guru but the Explorer really caught my eye. It didn't look that bad in person, I just like the new 4Runner better.

 

Since you (apparantly) like the 4Runner's mechanicals, if you are just getting tired of your 2008 and simply want a change, the FJ Cruiser is also an option.......it is done on the same chassis/drivetrain as the 4Runner, but with a different, more classically-styled body and a more versatile interior.

http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/

 

Yeah a coworker just bought a new one with a Ruff Country 6" lift and I love it. Since we have a 2 year old my wife prefers 4 "real" doors. She does like the looks of the FJ though.

 

thanks for the review. How do you rate it against the Acura MDX, they seem to be similar in concept and size. I just did an online comparison and the base MDX (only comes in AWD) costs more than Explorer XLT AWD and close to the same price of a Explorer Limited.

Note: base MDX is fairly loaded with bluetooth, HIDs, power tailgait, heated seats (etc.)

 

Sure...anytime.

Well, there's no question that the MDX has proven build quality, and, strictly from a reliability standpoint alone, would probably be a safer buy than a brand-new, untested Explorer. Engineers, of course, do a lot of factory-testing under various conditions, but nothing beats real-world experience in the actual hands of customers. I have always had an extremely high opinion of Honda/Acura build quality, and, to this day, still believe they they assemble a vehicle better and more-precisely at their factories than any other automaker.......and Consumer Reports, with their reliability charts, seems to bear that out. Ford, of course, has enjoyed an increasingly good reputation for the reliability of some their recent products, but, nonetheless, whenever you are dealing with an all-new, totally redesigned vehicle like the 2011 Explorer, there's always somewhat of a roll of the dice on reliability, as teething problems and Technical-Service-Bulletins (TSBs) are a possibility.

However, the new Explorers I looked at, both at dealerships and the D.C. Auto Show, appeared generally well-built. But sometimes problems lurk under the surface, undetected by the human eye/ear or other senses until some miles build up on the vehicle.

The MDX, of course, is also (probably) right now, a safer bet for depreciation/resale-value, though we don't know, right now, how well the new Explorer will eventually sell. How well a vehicle sells when new and its availability as a used-vehicle for supply-and-demand determines not only what its resale (or residual) value is but also what monthly lease-rates will be charged by the manufacturer.

Keep in mind also that, even if he new Explorer turns out to be fairly popular, this is not the mid-1990's, when the Explorer (and, to slightly lesser extent, the Jeep Grand Cherokee) ruled the domestic SUV market. You can (probably) bet the monthly rent that we won't see the kind of Explorer sales that we did back then, simply for no other reason that there are lot of competitors now, from both American, Asian, and European manufacturers, that simply did not exist back then.....or exist in the American market. Back then, the Explorer and Grand Cherokee had little if any competition....today, that is definitely not the case.

As far as the choice of actually choosing between driving a new Explorer vs. a new MDX, though, the overall picture, IMO, becomes a little less-clear. The MDX may have Swiss-Watch build quality/reliability, but, IMO, it drives like an appliance (about like the Camry-based Toyota Highlander), and I found its road-manners competent but somewhat boring. In contrast, except for the confusing electronic dash-controls, I definitely enjoyed driving the new Explorer more, and felt that it had a little more personality than an MDX.

 

Nice job MM, keep resting. :Thumbup:

I'm not a big fan of the taillights, two fords i have not been a big fan of. This and the new Taurus have ugly rear-ends but the front looks great.

 

Thanks. I've had more than my share of rest for the whole last month. The better I get, the more it's time for my life to get back to normal.

Although styling, of course, is subjective, the Taurus rear end, as I see it, couldn't possibly be more of an eyesore than the Acura TL's.

 

Nice review,Mike.
I love the new Explorer but it's over $48K the way I would want it and that's way too much.

 

I thought the american car market was supposed to be about value. Where is the value in paying nearly 50,000 smackers for something american made, when the same money will get you a NICE RX, with a better reliability track record, and proven engineering by a top notch company. Not saying that Ford isnt any of those things, and this is a NICE rig. However, Like the new Durango and the Chevy Traverse, it is NOT 50k loaded nice. People can get the same features in a Kia/Hyundai with as good/better build quality and a KICKASS warranty for almost half the price. DUH.

Lexus:
The Highlander Loaded, might actually be cheaper yet...

Hyundai VeraCruz:

(could not copy/paste) Limited, 3.8L V6 w/6speed auto, FWD
Total Shipped: $37,035...FULLY LOADED.

Chevy Traverse:

So basically they are letting Traverse's go for MSRP. Thats insane, and I will bet we see the same thing come a year or 2 and the new Explorer is not selling as well as its slightly smaller counterpart, the Ford Edge.

Anyone looked at a New Durango though? I about crapped my pants when I saw a window sticker that said $59,xxx.xx for a Loaded Durango (with dealer markups, and it was a Citadel version, so that did not help) With all the markups and dealer installed accessories it came to 59xxx, the MSRP was $49xxx. It was the BRAND new style. I am telling you, auto manufacturers are getting WAY to proud of their new cars. I mean did I miss something? I remember looking for a 1 ton (F-350) New, in 1997 with my dad, and Laughing at the $38,000 sticker price...on this:

 

Mike...

Between the JGC and Explorer, from a handling, interior functionality and luxury perspective, which would you choose? VERY interested in your take...

PM me if you need more from my vantage point

From another post, Highlander would take the RX in pricing, drove both back-to-back and you lose little in luxury PLUS seats 7... Highlander even better value if you go hybrid

 

+1, price is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too high for an Explorer.....who the hell would be one for even $45K?


thanks for the review MM !!!! excellent as usual!

 

Thanks.

Yes, the Limited models are pricey, particularly with options, but base versions start around 30K.