[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/o/ - Auto


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




Looking for a shitbox, honestly have never owned American. How are these fuckers? Wouldn't mind something higher up than the 10 sedans I've owned and some better hauling capacity without going for a pickup
>>
>>25756471
Theyre trash. The previous gen is way better. Try to find a V8 or or an older OHV V6.
>>
>>25756492
Trash in terms of what though? DD performance, reliability or both?
>>
>>25756508
V6's kill RS head timing chain tensioner shoes which then cause the RS cam to skip time bend all those valves and damage the pistons. Fixing just the tensioner shoe is still an engine-out job since the cartridge is on the back of the RS head. V8's are the ones you want here.

5R55 trans likes to shit out a lot. Biggest failures are the solenoid pack, 2-5 and Direct servo pistons, along with wear of those same piston pin bores in the trans case. Early-early ones also suffered from torque converter rattle. Never heard of that? Well, Ford found a way...

Wheel bearings. All of them. All four bad at the same time isn't unheard of and aftermarket bearings are no better than the originals. Fronts aren't so bad but the rear is a pain. Cost me 800 three-four years ago and that was pretty much the accepted rate for that then.

Door Ajar switches. Holy fuck do these things suck. It doesn't tell you which door so you have to figure it out and until you do the truck acts like it's possessed by cycling the interior lights randomly with an annoying beep and cycling the door locks repeatedly every time you touch the brake. Even New Old-Stock ones are old and dried up now so they don't last long before sticking again. I'm on my third go-around with this shit.

The thing is definitely a truck and it never lets you forget it. The ride seems ok until you hit a tar strip or something with an impact and you think "Really? They thought that was acceptable for 2002+? Really?"

Best avoided imo. I'd be out of my Mountie by now if used car prices hadn't gone stratospheric.
>>
>>25756471
The ones with solid rear axles are /okay/ for how cheap they are.
>>
>>25756471
I got one of these free from a friend
great winter beater shitbox
never changed the oil in the 3 years I drove it
>>
>>25756471
Can you imagine paying 37 grand for one of these pieces of shit optioned out when they were new? A lot of people did.
>>
>>25756637
Nerd
>>
File: 7092174_3_orig.jpg (7 KB, 320x239)
7 KB
7 KB JPG
>>25756471
I like it, I have a 2002 4.6L V8. I've had it for 3 years and 15k miles so far.

Like >>25756637 said, the 4.0L V6 is the inferior engine because of the timing chain issue. As far as I know, the engine isn't really that bad except for that issue.

The transmission is known to have issues with servo bore wear, which pretty much means you'll get a slipping transmission. I honestly don't understand why, none of the other transmissions with the same servo design are known for issues like that. There's two ways to fix this. Either you take out the transmission and put in these brass sleeves where the servos ride, or you put in an aftermarket servo with O rings (pictured). It's easy enough to do yourself if you want.

But if it's been slipping for a long time, then your clutches are probably fucked and it still might need a rebuild anyway, but not necessarily.

The aftermarket servo stuff is all on this website, feel free to read through it if you want, or watch this video from it:

https://www.fordservoboretransmissionfixsolution.com/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP1j4ldeH7E

I haven't had any problems with the solenoid pack, but they're pretty easy to replace anyway.

Wheel bearings are a known issue on this car like the other guy said too, but I doubt that there aren't any aftermarket ones better than the originals. People always talk about them like they're so hard to replace, but they really aren't. I got my car with 3 bad wheel bearings, 2 in the front and one in the rear. Things were a little seized, but it's nothing a blowtorch putting some heat in couldn't take care of. The torch made it real easy. I did the work myself, and the rear bearing was around $50, and the fronts were about $120 each. Replaced them about 2 or 3 years ago, and they're still doing well. Used a slide hammer for the fronts, and a press kit and a sledge hammer for the rear, just make sure to use a wire wheel on a drill to clean off the ridge to press the rear bearing out easier
>>
>>25756471
>>25759162
2/2

Handling is okay, I guess. The steering could be better and turns a little too much around curves and makes it seem like you don't know how to drive to other passengers. It's nothing that makes it undrivable though. The turning radius though, is really nice and small for a car like this. Makes parking lot navigation easier.

Overall, they're not that bad of cars. Many people still drive them, I see them everywhere. At this point, since they're like any other old used car, don't be surprised if something breaks, you can expect that from any other car of this age at this point. Parts aren't that expensive, but just make sure to not cheap out and get garbage that'll break right after you put it in.

Also, I got my parts from rockauto.com, they got a pretty big selection of parts for everything. Just do your research on brands so you don't accidentally buy shit. The wheel bearings I got were Timken and BCA, no problems since I put them in. There's a freebie from me. :) Also, I got my parts from rockauto.com, they got a pretty big selection of parts for everything. Just do your research on brands so you don't accidentally buy shit. The wheel bearings I got were Timken and BCA, no problems yet since I put them in. There's a freebie from me. :)
>>
>>25756637
thanks for the detailed post anon
>>
>>25756637
>Cost me 800 three-four years ago and that was pretty much the accepted rate for that then.
Mechanics always charge too much for stuff. :(

>and cycling the door locks repeatedly every time you touch the brake.
How does that even happen? Mine has been a little finicky once in a great while, but never did that. If you replace them again, try and get brand new ones and spray dry lock lube for keyholes into there. (Pictured) Try and use it on the old ones in your car regardless to see if you can fix them too.

Also use rockauto.com. I don't know what you paid for them, but you can probably find brand new switches cheap there, as well as everything else.

>The ride seems ok until you hit a tar strip or something with an impact and you think "Really? They thought that was acceptable for 2002+? Really?"
You mean that little wiggle the car does with the rear end whenever we hit potholes? I just ignore it, it honestly doesn't hinder driving.
>>
>>25756471
just get a 4.6l expedition.
>>
>>25759205
Are Expeditions that bad? With how many of them I see being driven around by questionable individuals, I have always assumed they were turds.
>>
>>25756471
>>25759162
Also I forgot to mention, but the 4.6L V8 option is the same exact engine in a Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, and Lincoln Town Car, so it'll have the same reliability as those cars' engines, and the same common problems. Like the plastic intake manifold possibly cracking from age (Except it doesn't use the same heater core output as the Panther platform cars, so it might not have that issue, since it cracks from there on those cars.).

And if there's ever an issue with timing chain guides, at least they're both in the front of the engine and easy to replace. As far as I know, it doesn't happen here as often as the Cologne V6 engine.
>>
>>25759205
They have a 5.4L engine option for that car too, the 4.6L is the base engine. As far as I know, the 5.4L is just an oversized 4.6L Modular engine, so it should be just as reliable.
>>
>>25756471
Get a first gen with a manual if you can find it- damn near unkillable
>>
>>25759211
I don't see any of that, it's just a normal car to me.

I don't own one, but they're pretty big on the inside, bigger than the Explorer. That's about all I know.
>>
>>25759249
>damn near unkillable
Except for literally every single one of the same problems other than the transmission. I don't even think the manual was offered with the 4.6L V8.

The Cologne V6 isn't that bad though, it's not like it goes bad every 5 minutes or something. They last awhile.
>>
>>25759249
>>25759263
Oh you said first gen, I missed that part. Nevermind, forget everything I said, I'm a retard. Everything I said referred to the third gen, 2002 was the last year offered with a manual.
>>
>>25759249
>>25759266
Why is the first gen so good?
>>
>>25759249
Also, the first gen had some rollover problems, just like the second gen. But then again, pretty much all old SUVs had higher centers of gravity and rollover problems. If you're not driving like a maniac, it'll be fine.

The only reason the second gen gets the infamy it does is because Ford decided to blame Firestone for tire blowouts instead of changing their wheelbase width and it was a huge controversy.
>>
>>25759304
(Second guy.)

I don't know, I never drove one. Whatever they did was good though, they're one of the original pioneers of the SUV market. They're one of the original vehicles that transitioned the family car from station wagons to SUVs.
>>
>>25759235
nope it is modular engine so they change a few things and 5.4 gets fucked check out the YouTube. 5.6 tritons cam phases and oil passages get clogged.
>>
I have a 2004 4.6 I bought with 195k miles on it, now has 207k on it. Only things I've had to do is ball joints (boots were ripped) and front wheel bearings. There's some whine from the rear but I think it's the rear end, not bearings. They had seal issues with the 8.8 IRS and the fluid would leak out and roach the gears and nobody knows how to set up gears right anymore.
>>
>>25759552
>They had seal issues with the 8.8 IRS and the fluid would leak out and roach the gears.
Mine has a bad differential too, but I thought the issue with these was shitty made gears, I haven't heard of seal issues. Mine doesn't leak either, and I doubt it's ever been serviced. I would assume it has 220k like the rest of the car.

>and nobody knows how to set up gears right anymore.
They don't? In that case, I guess the best option is to do it yourself if you're able to. I would, but I don't have the equipment for it.
>>
I own two of these piece of shit suv/trucks
It's been my first car since I got my license and I've had them used for about 2 years now only had to do the servo bore fix at 200,400 miles and my other is at 160,000ish haven't done the bores on that one but I've changed a seized bearing on the driver side front. Both are v6's not the best trucks but man have they grown on me. Perfect for everything I've needed them for all the seats go down so it's great to fuck whores after punk rock shows and drag my dumbass drunk friends around in. The amount of memories and stupid shit I've pulled off with the boys in a 2003 for explorer will forever keep it a shining example of what an suv should be. A people move. Shit mover. Drunk sleeper. And whore fuckin banging car. 2/10 as far as like fixes and shit I once had two lug nut snap off and had to replace a whole rear cv axle because it was seized into the actual knuckle assembly. But 10/10 for the memories it facilitated fell in and out of love in that car and had so many near death experiences. Go get yourself one and 5% tint that bitch king
>>
>>25761558
that convinced me never to touch one even with a borrowed hand, at any price
thanks
>>
>>25761558
>and had so many near death experiences.
What the fuck were you doing, m8?
>>
>>25761565
The guy literally didn't say anything different than anyone else, except for going on a(n awesome) nostalgia trip.
>>
>>25761558
>Go get yourself one and 5% tint that bitch king
Also, you get to save labor cause all the windows except for the fronts and windshield are already tinted :)
>>
Had a 98' v6 XLT. not that bad from a utility perspective but they have issues. Interior is not great, and the steering column has this cool part that likes to break and fucks shit up, everything inside is cheap plastic that likes to break as well. Mileage sucks but so does everything else SUV. Mine was starting to slip. For a first car you could do a lot worse, but i would be very careful buying one unless it's in good shape and has 4 wheel drive.
>>
>>25761605
So... basically a Ford Ranger?
>>
>>25761605
>Interior is not great,
It is if you have leather. I got compliments on how comfortable the passenger seat was in my 95 xlt all the time.
>and the steering column has this cool part that likes to break and fucks shit up
Are you talking about the rack and pinion wearing out and making the steering mushy?
>everything inside is cheap plastic that likes to break as well.
Like what besides the rearview mirror sensor housing?
>>
>>25759304
1st gen had the good V6 motor and was based off the boxy ranger. They're very stout SUVs, especially for how little power they made. I've got a 93 with 280k miles on the original drivetrain; still drives like new, 4x4 works great, and with the 5spd I get like 20mpg.
>>
>>25761605
>and the steering column has this cool part that likes to break and fucks shit up
What part exactly? I feel like you're talking about the column shifter getting loose which a lot of Fords did from this time, but a torx bit and some locktite would take care of that.
>>
>>25761629
I thought leather was often less comfy in cars, it is in my experience at least, unless you're driving a landboat which literally is made like a couch. Other cars I've seen just has the leather pulled really tight and the seat is all stiff, and not as comfortable as the cloth ones.
>>
In retrospect I genuinely reccomend getting one though they're pretty decent first cars and always got me from a to b safely despite how fucked up I or anyone else was in the car.
To be fair I was a career mechanic at the time so repairs where never something I couldnt do but off the top of my head most of the repairs were things I fucked up.
I remember once i jacked it up on the radiator support thinking it was a lift point and it absolutely blowout coolant all over my garage I was so pissed haha.
>>25761580
God we used to drift that thing at car meets and piss off all the dudes with nice cars.
Still remember walking into that car shitfaced my friend had to drive it will I made out with a "lesbian" lead singer of some shitty local band.
It had a small dent on the front right quaterpanel that happend when we drifted into a fence post once lol.
>>25761588
Appreciate it king itll forever be the best car I've ever owned.
>>
Op, if you're looking at a V8 Explorer, just go and get an expedition. The first gen, and 2010 to 2014 or the sweet spots. Even better if you get the Lincoln navigator because they're cheaper
>>
>>25761668
>I thought leather was often less comfy in cars,
Nah thats just a poorfag cope.
>>
>>25761671
I've had mine for 15k miles and 3 years so far, it's treated me well. I do my own repairs too, I never took it to a mechanic once yet. Every repair I've done so far was pretty much just overdue stuff that the previous owner didn't get done, nothing actually went bad since I owned it. The parts were cheap and the work was easy, so I didn't mind. I like it, it's my first car too.
>>
>>25761685
Not in the cars I've seen. My mother used to have a 2001 Mercedes ML320 and the leather seats sucked in there. They were all stiff and my father said he was really disappointed cause her old Volvo was much more comfortable than that. And I went to a car auction place, and the Explorers I sat in with leather seats were less comfy than mine with cloth seats, although to be fair the seats in those were probably a little flattened, they kinda looked like it. But there was barely any give to them.
>>
>>25756637
>I'd be out of my Mountie by now if used car prices hadn't gone stratospheric.
No they haven't, stop buying your cars at retarded dealers, you're wasting your goddamn money. Private sales like on Craigslist are pretty much the same as before the pandemic started.
>>
>>25759310
I literally can’t find data about rollover and roof strength for the 3rd gen… strange no? 2nd gen rolled AND had a weak roof
>>
>>25761668
main issue with leather is if you live where it can get really hot and you have to park your car in the sun at work or something. even with a sunshade on the windscreen the leather can often bake to burn your ass. also damn shifter knobs that have metal/chrome where you hold them
going to velour seats from leather is unreal. just plop your ass right down without hesitation
>>
>>25762341
They fixed the rollover problem with the third gen, they made the wheelbase a bit wider so it's more stable. It does feel pretty stable too when I drive it, if I take a corner too hard it doesn't feel like I'm gonna roll over, instead it feels like I could spin out if I lose traction.

The rear is also slightly heavier than the front, so the traction is better than usual for a rear wheel drive car.

It's weird how you can't find rollover data and roof strength for this car though. I just know that they had to have tested the shit out of this car, given what happened with that whole Firestone tire controversy. It's gotta be somewhere.
>>
>>25756637
>Early-early ones also suffered from torque converter rattle. Never heard of that? Well, Ford found a way...
I assume you mean the thing I've always called "torque converter shudder", right? Not so much of a "rattle" though.

My mother's Honda CR-V has the same thing too, if I haven't mistaken what you mean at least, and it is a known issue on that car. For some reason apparently nobody knows how to fix it, everything I find says people took it in and they just changed the fluid and reprogrammed the computer, and I think they said it *might've* went away for awhile but still came back regardless.

I know how to fix it though. Early to mid 90s Crown Victorias had the same issue. When it would try to go into lockup around 40mph, the torque converter clutch would slip and cause a shuddering feeling in the car. Ford fixed this with a recall, where they replaced the torque converter. I don't know why Honda can't do the same thing.
>>
>>25756637
>>25763543
I forgot to mention the year, my mother drives a 2014 Honda CR-V.
>>
>>25763546
Ironically, i still have a 90s CRV sitting in my garage. I don't like it because it was one of the first years they put auto trannies in them and it sucks more than modern gearboxes.
>>
File: P1120605_zpsb89fe1d0.jpg (914 KB, 1000x750)
914 KB
914 KB JPG
>>25763558
What's wrong with the transmissions in them?

I still see these cars all over the place, they're just about as common as the third gen Explorer, so they can't be that bad. And I highly doubt people are driving the manual version, not in this country.
>>
>buy my first ford, a 96

>battery hold-down screws into the bottom of the battery tray, subject to acidic runoff
>bolt snaps instantly and leaves stud in retainer on side of battery, now i have to bash the retainer apart, and it's too deep to drill, can't get battery out

Ford what the fuck. This is just lazy and cheap.
>>
>>25763654
I don't know what you're referring to looks like, but it just sounds like bad design without foresight. Wouldn't be the first time they did that...
>>
>>25763278
>I just know that they had to have tested the shit out of this car, given what happened
My thoughts too. But the IIHS has roof strength data for the gen before and the gen after, but not this one
>>
>>25763543
>I assume you mean the thing I've always called "torque converter shudder", right? Not so much of a "rattle" though.
Oh, no I definitely meant rattle. After literally millions of torque converters made Ford decided to change something in the manufacturing process, no doubt to make it cheaper, and on these the turbine and impeller fins come loose and vibrate from the impact of the fluid. On mine it manifests as a light clatter/rattle at idle in Park, a growling sound at idle in gear, one hell of a bad roller bearing sound light throttle which gets everyone looking at you like "wtf?", and it shuts up when the converter is either hydraulically coupled or the converter clutch locks up. It's an early 02 with the 4.6 and 5R55W that I picked up three-four years ago with 85K. I presume the trans has never been rebuilt so it's probably had the sound since early on and the word is the rattle doesn't hurt anything it's just annoying as hell.

In the pic, notice that the assembly on the right has had the fins brazed to the case and the ring. This is best practice for durability. The one on the right has not and is in line with common assembly methods with using welds
>>
>>25756637
You the guy from the escalade ext thread? You know your shit.
>>
>>25763993
No, I haven't been in that thread. And I've got a couple more years on than most around here.
>>
Bump
>>
File: 5cd.png (42 KB, 225x225)
42 KB
42 KB PNG
>>25763989
>notice that the assembly on the right has had the fins brazed to the case and the ring.
>The one on the right has not
>>
>>25756508
Coming from someone who owns a 90's F150 pickup All three, quality on 2000's Fords, Dodge's GM's trucks and SUV's is just horrid. Buy something from the 90's if you can. Otherwise get Japanese, like a 4runner.
>>
>>25765858
He meant the one on the left is not. Its pretty obvious from the pic what he means.
>>
>>25763989
Did these come with a proper transmission or autotragic only?
>>
>>25756508
What the heck is "DD performance"?
>>
>>25765993
2002 was the last year a manual transmission was offered in this car, so yes.
>>
>>25765993
I'm told some of the 4.0's came with manual, but I've never seen one. Pretty sure 99% of them are autotragic.
>>
>>25766023
I think the manual was a special order or something, I feel like I heard that somewhere, but I'm not sure. Would explain why they're so uncommon though. And yeah, I don't think they offered the 4.6L with the manual.
>>
File: IMG_0328.jpg (779 KB, 2084x1245)
779 KB
779 KB JPG
>muh rollovers
Explorers rolled because the shitty firestones would blow and retarded first time SUV owners would panic and overcorrect.
I've owned 3 second gen explorers over the course of 20 years and have never come close to rolling any of them.
>>
>>25766023

There were a bunch of 5 speed explorers in the 90s, but the clutch Slave cylinders went bad so the clutch would quit working on them and it was too much for the average explorer owner to take care of.also all of rhe other old car issues made them popular for cash for clunkers.
>>
I've got an 03 ranger top trim 4x4 with 215k and it's basically the same as a v6 model exploder. Fun truck, somewhat cheap parts that unfortunately are starting to get harder to find. Some engine parts can parts can be used on the 05+ v6 mustangs too which is interesting. So far she's only let me down 3 times in the over 4years I've owned her and it didn't start happening until 2-3 years ago. I would look for a clean example if possible.
>>
>>25765976
im a weldlet so i had no idea
>>
>>25766010
daily driver im assuming
>>
File: 02d.jpg (41 KB, 600x509)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
>>25766010
>>
File: WTF.gif (843 KB, 213x183)
843 KB
843 KB GIF
>>25766052
Ford spec'ed the PSI at 26 for ride quality which is lower than any other modern vehicle I've seen (some might exist), so when it drops a few lbs it doesn't look *that* low. Firestone claims the tire wasn't designed for that pressure, but what really happens is retard owners get a leak and let the pressure get down to 12-15PSI and load up the back end and go for a leisurely 70-80 mph roadtrip in the middle of summer and the tire blows.

Ford: Firestone made a shit tire
Firestone: Ford used too low of an inflation pressure
Owners driving around with near flat tires when they blow out on the highway: >picrelated
>>
>>25766132
It's not my fault I don't use retarded abbreviations and don't know what the heck random letters mashed together is supposed to mean, I mean have you ever had those times where a friend texts you and you have to look up what the heck their text speak means?
>>
>>25756471
All I know is that the 2009 ford escape hybrid is quite literally the most dangerous vehicle I have ever driven and I have flown in a robinson r22.
>>
>>25766052
It wasn't Firestone's fault, it was Ford's fault.

As far as I know, they lowered the tire pressure specs which is somehow supposed to mitigate rollover risk. Some tires ended up exploding for the reason that >>25766616 mentioned, and because Firestone had *some* issues with tread separation on *some* of their tires, Ford decided to pin the blame on Firestone entirely, and tried to take no responsibility for their own error.
>>
File: 19022733.jpg (1.11 MB, 3155x1904)
1.11 MB
1.11 MB JPG
>>25756471
Why do people keep calling these trucks? They call every other SUV an SUV, so how come this thing gets to be "a truck"?
>>
>>25767119
>and I have flown in a robinson r22.
What's wrong with those?

Also what's wrong with the Escape, too? I never been in one of those.
>>
>>25767158
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/126202222/robinson-helicopters-plunge-in-popularity-amid-reports-about-safety-concerns-crashes
They are danger boxes in an already dangerous mode of transport.
The escapes hybrid at least for me had its breaks lock up at 60 mph on a high way off ramp.
The ECU is dog shit
>>
>>25767148
If its body on frame you can call it a truck.
>>
>>25766072
Probably becuase the slaves are for some inconceivable reason are inside the bellhousing, just like on F150's and Rangers, which means you have to drop the transmission to get to it, they also only last about 80k miles, and are a bitch to bleed.

That being said, they're not the only ones that did this, GM did the same thing on S10's and Blazers at the time.
>>
>>25767178
>The escapes hybrid at least for me had its breaks lock up at 60 mph on a high way off ramp.
How did that happen? Did you press the brakes and the calipers seized or something, or did it do some weird shit with the traction control and it decided that 60mph was a good time to apply full braking force?
>>
>>25767202
Traction control, The mechanic I talked to said that apparently when the ECU starts to fail all sorts of weird shit happens.
So it was the car deciding to test my reflexes.
>>
>>25767186
>Chevy Caprice is body on frame... Chevy Caprice is a truck. :D
>>
>>25767213
Did it try to apply full brakes like I thought?
>>
>>25767264
yup, fuck ford.
>>
>>25767269
Man, none of the car manufactures here are good anymore, sadly.
>>
>>25756471
I'll copy paste my review from the last time this thread cropped up with some minor edits.

Owned since 19k, sitting at 137k miles. If you like high ride height and drive around with your headlights and fogs on at noon in the dead of summer because you’re a suburban mom and it “just feels safer” this is the truck for you. Ask my mother how she knows.
For problems I have the 4.0 V6 the 5-speed automatic has needed servicing twice, first time for a worn-out reverse band so it had trouble going backwards, second time was total failure and every gear was neutral except park, prompted a rebuild which was covered right at the end of the 2-year warranty from the first one but after that we only got a 1-year warranty from the transmission shop lol. Granted I don’t think that thing ever saw a single fluid change so go figure. Other misc things are the radiator leaking at 85k, got a new one of those, the throttle body/idle air control valve being dirty af so it would stall rarely, and currently a leak from the 3rd row heater core. Also the park aid sensors no longer work and I replaced them with cheapo Chinese ones that failed a year later, listen for the dead one and replace just the one with OEM.
Whenever the thing is able to go forward you’re treated to a whopping 13mpg, and being a 4500-lb SUV it handles like an F-150 with a roof considering it wears the underpinnings of one. It doesn't feel like it's going to tip over every 5 seconds like a jeep but if you're used to econobox sedans it'll take some adjusting It can actually haul ass if you floor it, but don’t go tailgating people with the brakes that really need to be bigger than they are. That or the master cylinder is leaking.
>>
>>25767303
cont.
It’s not all bad though, the interior is really nice, although mine is in immaculate shape. Yeah it’s got a lot of creaking if you go pressing on stuff but if you care you should have thought about that before buying American. The steering isn’t super tight but it doesn’t need to be since it’s not really a driver’s car. What it has instead if you have the Eddie Bauer or Limited trims is big leather seats that were crafted by god himself, which apply to the whole car including the 3rd row. Ok that may be an overstatement but unlike any other car in the family this truck has never made my butt even the slightest bit sore even once.
Autism review over, but I’d check it out if you get the chance. Also get the V8, you lose 1mpg down to 12mpg (good job Ford) and the 6AT doesn’t blow up at random. At least for 06 you can tell assuming it has its original wheels, the V6 has a matte silver 5-spoke and the V8 wears a shinier almost chrome 6-spoke. It’s taken a backseat to the manual A4 and now is just the trash hauler every few weeks but it’s a mid 2000s American SUV, you get what you pay for (which should be like 8k max).
>>
>>25767303
>Whenever the thing is able to go forward you’re treated to a whopping 13mpg
I'm guessing that's city traffic for you.

I calculated mine once, but I got 16mpg. I keep forgetting to calculate it more, but I'm pretty sure I can get at least 18, maybe even up to 20, but maybe that's too ambitious.

I have the 4.6L V8 and 3.55 differential gears, the rpms are a little above 2k when cruising at 70mph.

>and currently a leak from the 3rd row heater core.
I didn't know the third row ever got a heater core. I thought only the second row passengers had at least *the option* of having separate climate controls, and that the third row people can just go and suck it.
>>
>>25767303
>>25767304
Also, what year is your car?
>>
>>25767304
And speaking of steering, it feels like it turns too much around curves if you take them too fast. You turn the wheel a little, and the car turns a lot, and the maneuvers end up feeling pretty violent even when they're really not. It doesn't feel like it's gonna flip over, but still. Maybe I'm just not good at driving anymore, I don't know.
>>
>>25756471
They’re excellent as long as you stay away from the V8 and 4x4 models. I had a V6 rear wheel drive for years. It hit 250k miles without a problem.
>>
>>25766052
This is 2000s Ford propaganda. Explorers rolled over before and after those tires. Now why did Firestone tires blow up? Because Ford told owners to deflate their tires. Why did Ford tell people to deflate their tires? Because Explorers rolled over at a high rate.

Plus, similarly constructed vehicles also rolled over a lot. But what made the Explorer particularly dangerous is that in addition to rolling over easily it had a weak roof that collapsed, having only a 1.5 strength ratio.
>>
>>25767148
It’s ok to call a body on frame SUV a truck. The crime is calling a crossover a truck or SUV
>>
>>25767740
What's wrong with the V8? There isn't really anything wrong with this engine besides the plastic intake manifold cracking, but it doesn't even have the same heater core output as something like a Crown Vic which is where it usually cracks from.
>>
>>25767740
Also, what's wrong with 4x4? I mean, it's a bit retarded how you can't disable the Auto 4x4 normally, but it's fine otherwise.
>>
>>25767793
>The crime is calling a crossover a truck or SUV
So, the new Ford Explorer?

What even are crossovers anyway, crossovers of what? Nobody ever says what. This class all just looks like crossovers of an SUV and a hatchback, is that just so they can avoid calling something a compact SUV? They're usually kinda small.
>>
>>25767330
2006, somehow forgot that one.

>>25767327
Yeah highway will get you up to 20mpg, still a gas guzzler, also I believe if you have the overhead vents for the second and third row you also have the third row heater.
>>
File: Freestyle.jpg (25 KB, 640x400)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
>>25767856
>What even are crossovers anyway, crossovers of what?
Basically a lifted station wagon. It's the new "cool" word because station wagons aren't cool. Remember this Freestyle is a "crossover" It is definitely not a Five Hundred station wagon.
>>
>>25767257
>2wd
2wd trucks aren't even real trucks.
>>
>>25768424
Miss this nigger like you wouldn't believe
>>
>>25767303
>>25767304
You just described my 2000 Expedition perfectly. I like it for what it is though, it does what I need it to do.
>>
>>25767103
Literally everyone knows what a DD is you autist
>>
>>25767835
>>25767844

Tbh, I can’t speak from experience what’s wrong with the 4x4 or V8 (only ever drove the RWD V6).

There’s a lotta old Consumer Reports tests and other reliability surveys that point to the V8 and 4x4 causing issues. That could all be baloney though.

Bottom line, the V6 was solid in my experience, but can’t authoritatively speak on the other varieties.
>>
>>25767327
My 2wd f150 cruises higher than that for some reason at 70 with the 5.0 6r80 with 3.55. Don't really get good mpgs either like 15-16
>>
>>25767327
>but I'm pretty sure I can get at least 18, maybe even up to 20, but maybe that's too ambitious.
I drive mostly highway with a little city and my 04 4x4 4.6 w/3.73 has been getting about 19.
>>
File: FH.jpg (61 KB, 575x431)
61 KB
61 KB JPG
>>25768507
Five Hundred / Freestyle and 5th Gen Taurus / Taurus X were underrated. Bulletproof 3.0 Duratec and ZF CVT that didn't shit itself riding on Volvo bones. I can put 10' 2x4s in my Five Hundred and close the trunk.
>>
>>25769821
Crap that was supposed to be
>>25768516
>>
>>25769821
Doesn't the Freestyle have a lot in common with the Flex?
>>
>>25769876
Yep, They were all D3/D4 platform based on Volvo P2. Related to the 5th Gen Explorer too.
>>
>>25768806
I know what a daily driver is, not a DD. I don't frequent this board very often.
>>
>>25769078
I'm not sure what issues they're saying the V8 has, it's a pretty good engine. It's in a bunch of different cars and trucks, and it's the same exact engine that's in the Crown Vic that everyone gets a hard on about for the car being so reliable. (2 valve, 4.6L Modular V8.)

I haven't really heard of any issues with the 4x4, except for the transfer case chain stretching and being a little loose on high mileage cars, but that's fairly reasonable.
The 4x4 doesn't even work on mine, I think it's because the electric transfer case shift motor is messed up. I haven't looked at it yet, but if it is what I think it is, it'll be an easy fix by taking the motor apart itself and fixing it. A lot of people just buy a new motor though, and that's more expensive.

And yeah, the V6 really isn't that bad of an engine. As far as I know, the only real annoyance is if the timing chains or tensioners or something gets messed up, they gotta take the whole engine out to get to the one in the back. It's not like it happens that often though. I don't think the V8 really has timing chain issues, but if they do it would be an easy fix since they're both in the front of the engine.
>>
>>25769109
That's weird.

What kind of engine does it have? Also, when does this transmission shift into the second overdrive gear?

On my 02 Explorer, if I have the 5R55W (which is what it should have as far as I know), and not the 5R55S, then the one and only overdrive gear I have is .75:1 ratio. Your transmission has .69:1 in the final gear, so theoretically you car should be better. The only variable I can see here is the engine, and you said it's a 5.0, so it's not the same as my car.
>>
>>25769645
And you get that with 3.73s? What speeds do you usually go at?

I do a lot of highway driving, often between the range of 50mph to 75mph, depending on the road of course. I can go something over 300 miles on a full tank of gas (22 gallons), but if I use the whole gas tank on a lot of city driving it can be just under 300miles, like 290.

I always keep forgetting to include 4x4 when talking about fuel efficiency. This car doesn't have locking hubs, they're permanently engaged so it should bring it down just a little. Probably just 1mpg or less honestly, I don't know how much this ever factored in on cars.

So to clarify, my car is an 2002 Explorer 4x4 4.6L V8 with 3.55 differential gears, and most likely a 5R55W transmission, which has an overdrive gear ratio of .75:1 (As opposed to the 5R55S which has .71:1.)
>>
>>25769109
>>25770764
I think I just realized, when typing my post I forgot to ask one of my primary questions.

You said it cruises higher than that at 70, are you referring to the rpm? Just to clarify.

If you are, at that point the only thing I can think of is that maybe it's not in the final gear at 70mph. I'm not sure about that since I don't know what the shift points are at, but if you're in the first overdrive gear instead of the second, the gear ratio would be .86:1. I don't imagine that they wouldn't have overdrive 2 engaged by 70 though. I would expect it to be in by at least 50mph.

Having multiple overdrive gears is kinda pointless though, I mean the 700R4 had an overdrive gear of .69:1, and it engaged at about 40mph if I'm not mistaken. And this thing showed up in the early 1980s, and GM slapped it in literally everything.
The Ford AODE had a ratio of .66:1, and I know for a fact that that one engaged at about 40mph. And in cars with 2.73 differential gears, you can get up to like 30mpg on the highway with a V8 engine. Cars like the Ford Crown Victoria (civilian version), Mercury Grand Marquis, and Lincoln Town Car were like this.
>>
File: Exp1.jpg (125 KB, 1008x756)
125 KB
125 KB JPG
>>25770801
>And you get that with 3.73s? What speeds do you usually go at?

One-way 2 lane highway 55 limit so I usually do 60-62 for a 9 mile stretch with a PITA stop sign halfway there at the bottom of a hill. Then 6 more miles at 35-45 with 4 more stop signs.
>>
>>25768424
I kinda thought it was an SUV and station wagon mix, but they're usually not even a lifted station wagon, most crossovers don't even bare any resemblance to a station wagon whatsoever. Apparently the new Ford Explorer from 2011 and up is considered a crossover, and it looks nothing like a station wagon at all. It's not even a short SUV, this thing is fucking massive.
>>
>>25768424
>>25772672
And a lot of the modern station wagons usually look too tall. They don't look like real station wagons, but they would probably be the most fitting for the crossover name.

The only real modern station wagons I can think of is like the Volkswagen Passat.
>>
>>25768507
semi trucks and box trucks arent real then?
>>
>>25773672
Precisely.
>>
>>25772275
I finally calculated my gas mileage again, and this time I got 17mpg. There's a significant amount of city driving in there though, and I use the AC all the time.

I'm not sure how much the AC brings it down, but there's a noticeable change in power when I turn it on due to the system being so big. It works a lot better than pretty much any of the cars made nowadays though, at that point I could give a shit about the fuel economy potentially being affected by the AC.

So probably a third of it was city driving, and the rest highway. The highway stuff was mostly just cruising at 75mph, at about 2,200rpm.
And all miles had the AC running, it probably only really makes a difference for city driving though.

And I way underestimated how far I can go with this car on a full tank of gas. I don't usually run it very low, but this time I got 340 miles before I needed to fill up. I'm sure I could've gone 360 if I ran it to empty. And if it was all highway miles on that tank, I probably could've gone even further than that.
>>
Bump.
>>
>>25773672
Correct. They are semis and whatever the fuck else you said.
>>
>>25756471
They're OK.
>>
>>25776087
Do you not know what a box truck is?
>>
Bump
>>
>>25777307
that's a straight truck, not a box truck.
>>
>>25778992
I never heard anyone say "straight truck" before.

It's not even what I consider to be a box truck either, but that's all that comes up when I search box truck. Pic related is what I really consider a box truck.
>>
>>25777307
Ain't a pickup truck nigger.
>>
>>25777307
>>25779201
Those are vans.
>>
My 2000 V8 Limited has a fucked up tranny. I tried road tripping it a few months ago and I couldnt even make it out of my county. Around town its fine. But at highway speeds my o/d off light starts flashing.
So I know the tranny needs to be rebuilt. I'm not gonna do that though. I'm just gonna keep driving it.
>>
>>25779277
Not to me they aren't.

The second one I could consider a van, but definitely not the first one. Way, too big to be a van in my opinion.
>>
File: 02114071990003.jpg (84 KB, 1024x682)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
>>25756471
>>25779282
Speaking of transmissions, does anyone here know anything about adjusting the bands on one of these?

I'm trying to figure out if I have to remove the front driveshaft for the 4x4. And everything I find on adjusting the bands is completely useless on giving techniques on how to work your hands and tools in that cramped area.
>>
>>25779568
>adjusting bands
oh man, are you the famous Exploder Autist?
>>
>>25779674
Yes.

I don't know how it go so infamous.
>>
Bump
>>
>>25756808
> $37k

this price isn’t enough to get you 75% of ford’s lineup today. i would happily pay that today for a fully optioned car
>>
>>25779568
Nevermind, I figured it out. I posted actual instructions here >>25780542 , that's better than anyone else who's ever talked about adjusting the bands has done.

Feels like a brand new car now, the shift from 2nd to 3rd always felt like the intermediate band was a little loose since I got the car. It started to actually slip with too much rpms, so I finally decided to try adjusting it. Glad I finally did. :)
>>
Bump
>>
Bump.
>>
Bump
>>
>>25782695
Every gear shifts about the same now, but it still feels like there's some minor hesitation to shift occasionally. I'm guessing that likely has to do with the valvebody, I don't feel like there's actually any clutch slippage. Valves are probably just sticking a little. I've noticed it more often under low throttle. I don't think anything is really out of the ordinary, I probably just need to change my transmission fluid. What do you think?

I'm still gonna do it anyway though.
>>
>>25756471
You'd probably have a lot better luck with a Blazer of the same era. That Vortec engine is pretty hard to kill.
>>
>>25788669
That 4.3L V6 sure was a nice one.
>>
>>25756637
>Early-early ones also suffered from torque converter rattle.

Oh is that why my 02' Ranger makes a rattle when I accelerate from a stop sometimes?
>>
File: deadblazer.jpg (100 KB, 640x480)
100 KB
100 KB JPG
>>25790373
Pathetic power, Dethcool addled gaskets and the brilliant design of chopping 2 cylinders off a tree fiddy. Only engine that ever shit itself on me. (with only 110k on the clock. Fuck the 4.3
>>
>>25790477
I've heard people say it's reliable, I suppose it depends on what kind of car you get it in though.

>and the brilliant design of chopping 2 cylinders off a tree fiddy.
What's wrong with that?
>>
>>25790422
Possible if it's got one of the 5R55's. In a later post I described how it sounds in the Mountaineer

"On mine it manifests as a light clatter/rattle at idle in Park, a loud growling sound at idle in gear, one hell of a bad roller bearing sound light throttle which gets everyone looking at you like "wtf?", and it shuts up when the converter is either hydraulically coupled or the converter clutch locks up."



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.