View Poll Results: A poll
Ford Explorer 4.6 liter V8
0
0%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll
Which would you recommend
Thread Starter
|
Record Breaker
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,655
Likes: 2
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
ORIGINAL: stump_breaker
Well out of your list I would look at the Trailblazer first but only with the LTZ package (I think that's the letters).
After that it's a toss up between the Durango or the GC.
I would never recommend a Ford to anyone unless it's got a very nice rebate and great warranty.
Personally I would test drive, test drive and then test drive some more. Look for the best warranty - which I think all are 3/36 now unless you get a 2005 D/C product then it should still have a 7/70 on it although some dealerships offer a 5/50 extended on 2006 D/C products for "free". IMO, excluding the Ford, thay are all pretty equal as far as SUV's go. I really don't like the direction D/C has gone with the GC though - too carish.
If they can wait until 2007, they might look at the 4 door Wrangler. The 4.0 is gone but the 3.7 will be a decent powerplant although the low end torque is gone. It's taking on some Libberty lines though. It's going to be more universally friendly to include a wider array of drivers.
Well out of your list I would look at the Trailblazer first but only with the LTZ package (I think that's the letters).
After that it's a toss up between the Durango or the GC.
I would never recommend a Ford to anyone unless it's got a very nice rebate and great warranty.
Personally I would test drive, test drive and then test drive some more. Look for the best warranty - which I think all are 3/36 now unless you get a 2005 D/C product then it should still have a 7/70 on it although some dealerships offer a 5/50 extended on 2006 D/C products for "free". IMO, excluding the Ford, thay are all pretty equal as far as SUV's go. I really don't like the direction D/C has gone with the GC though - too carish.
If they can wait until 2007, they might look at the 4 door Wrangler. The 4.0 is gone but the 3.7 will be a decent powerplant although the low end torque is gone. It's taking on some Libberty lines though. It's going to be more universally friendly to include a wider array of drivers.
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
In spite of Consumer Reports panning of the GC I'd still go with it. I haven't found CR to be a terribly objective nor reliable barometer of anything where trucks or SUVS are concerned. If your in the market for an econo box or sports car they seem to be better at rating those. Remember. these are the same clowns who killed the Samurai with their "rolls over too easily" BS. Duh! Its a short wheel base, 4x4. Not a fookin Miata dunces! Ya can't drive them the same. They weren't intended for the same purposes. And if you can't tell the difference you shouldn't be driving one OR rating one. ......... Anyway. That said. 
The GC is a great value at the moment. They've got large rebates on them too. All the running gear is proven stuff except some of the more exotic full time transfer cases. I WOULD recommend staying away from them. Go with the part time case and you're golden. Id stay away from the "hemi". Its thirsty as a wino on payday and you don't need all the extra juice in a GC IMO. The 4.7 is more then enough go for that platform.
One last comment. The Explorer is a ground up redesign for '06. Based on that alone it isn't fair to judge it on its predecessors. BUT, I also wouldn't recommend the first run of any new vehicle. let some other sap be the guinea pig to get the bugs worked out. look again after the second or third year. Good luck
The GC is a great value at the moment. They've got large rebates on them too. All the running gear is proven stuff except some of the more exotic full time transfer cases. I WOULD recommend staying away from them. Go with the part time case and you're golden. Id stay away from the "hemi". Its thirsty as a wino on payday and you don't need all the extra juice in a GC IMO. The 4.7 is more then enough go for that platform.One last comment. The Explorer is a ground up redesign for '06. Based on that alone it isn't fair to judge it on its predecessors. BUT, I also wouldn't recommend the first run of any new vehicle. let some other sap be the guinea pig to get the bugs worked out. look again after the second or third year. Good luck
Thread Starter
|
Record Breaker
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,655
Likes: 2
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
ORIGINAL: proram
In spite of Consumer Reports panning of the GC I'd still go with it. I haven't found CR to be a terribly objective nor reliable barometer of anything where trucks or SUVS are concerned. If your in the market for an econo box or sports car they seem to be better at rating those. Remember. these are the same clowns who killed the Samurai with their "rolls over too easily" BS. Duh! Its a short wheel base, 4x4. Not a fookin Miata dunces! Ya can't drive them the same. They weren't intended for the same purposes. And if you can't tell the difference you shouldn't be driving one OR rating one. ......... Anyway. That said. The GC is a great value at the moment. They've got large rebates on them too. All the running gear is proven stuff except some of the more exotic full time transfer cases. I WOULD recommend staying away from them. Go with the part time case and you're golden. Id stay away from the "hemi". Its thirsty as a wino on payday and you don't need all the extra juice in a GC IMO. The 4.7 is more then enough go for that platform.
One last comment. The Explorer is a ground up redesign for '06. Based on that alone it isn't fair to judge it on its predecessors. BUT, I also wouldn't recommend the first run of any new vehicle. let some other sap be the guinea pig to get the bugs worked out. look again after the second or third year. Good luck
In spite of Consumer Reports panning of the GC I'd still go with it. I haven't found CR to be a terribly objective nor reliable barometer of anything where trucks or SUVS are concerned. If your in the market for an econo box or sports car they seem to be better at rating those. Remember. these are the same clowns who killed the Samurai with their "rolls over too easily" BS. Duh! Its a short wheel base, 4x4. Not a fookin Miata dunces! Ya can't drive them the same. They weren't intended for the same purposes. And if you can't tell the difference you shouldn't be driving one OR rating one. ......... Anyway. That said.
The GC is a great value at the moment. They've got large rebates on them too. All the running gear is proven stuff except some of the more exotic full time transfer cases. I WOULD recommend staying away from them. Go with the part time case and you're golden. Id stay away from the "hemi". Its thirsty as a wino on payday and you don't need all the extra juice in a GC IMO. The 4.7 is more then enough go for that platform.One last comment. The Explorer is a ground up redesign for '06. Based on that alone it isn't fair to judge it on its predecessors. BUT, I also wouldn't recommend the first run of any new vehicle. let some other sap be the guinea pig to get the bugs worked out. look again after the second or third year. Good luck
To stump_breaker, the 2007 model Wrangler is going to offer the 3.8L V6 instead of the 3.7L V6.
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
ORIGINAL: 97 3.5 Intrepid
Although I think the Magnum is a great vehicle and probably a better choice than any of these, they stated that they want an SUV. I am trying to talk them into a Magnum, but part of the reason why they want an SUV might be the shape of the road that they drive on. They live in the country in northwestern Missouri (their farmers) where the roads are twisty, hilly, very snowy in the winter, and in bad shape. Would the Magnum be high enough off the ground to be safe from these problems?
Their past vehicles have been a 1985 LTD stationwagon with over 300,000 miles (a 5.0L V8 I think) and a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquire (4.6L V8) with over 200,000 miles, no major problems with either (I'm shocked by this). They take very good care of their vehicles.
Although I think the Magnum is a great vehicle and probably a better choice than any of these, they stated that they want an SUV. I am trying to talk them into a Magnum, but part of the reason why they want an SUV might be the shape of the road that they drive on. They live in the country in northwestern Missouri (their farmers) where the roads are twisty, hilly, very snowy in the winter, and in bad shape. Would the Magnum be high enough off the ground to be safe from these problems?
Their past vehicles have been a 1985 LTD stationwagon with over 300,000 miles (a 5.0L V8 I think) and a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquire (4.6L V8) with over 200,000 miles, no major problems with either (I'm shocked by this). They take very good care of their vehicles.
If they have kids they should bring them along when test driving so they will know if everyone will have a comfortable seating position (leg/ head room).
Are they going to be towing stuff a lot?
Thread Starter
|
Record Breaker
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,655
Likes: 2
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
ORIGINAL: 89Daytona
The 2006 Magnum AWD versions (SXT and R/T) have 6.6 inches of ground clearance, the non-AWD versions have 5.6 inches. The Mercury Grand Marquis had about 6.1 inches of ground clearance, so if they get the AWD Magnum they should be fine travelling anywhere they went with the Marquis.
If they have kids they should bring them along when test driving so they will know if everyone will have a comfortable seating position (leg/ head room).
Are they going to be towing stuff a lot?
ORIGINAL: 97 3.5 Intrepid
Although I think the Magnum is a great vehicle and probably a better choice than any of these, they stated that they want an SUV. I am trying to talk them into a Magnum, but part of the reason why they want an SUV might be the shape of the road that they drive on. They live in the country in northwestern Missouri (their farmers) where the roads are twisty, hilly, very snowy in the winter, and in bad shape. Would the Magnum be high enough off the ground to be safe from these problems?
Their past vehicles have been a 1985 LTD stationwagon with over 300,000 miles (a 5.0L V8 I think) and a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquire (4.6L V8) with over 200,000 miles, no major problems with either (I'm shocked by this). They take very good care of their vehicles.
Although I think the Magnum is a great vehicle and probably a better choice than any of these, they stated that they want an SUV. I am trying to talk them into a Magnum, but part of the reason why they want an SUV might be the shape of the road that they drive on. They live in the country in northwestern Missouri (their farmers) where the roads are twisty, hilly, very snowy in the winter, and in bad shape. Would the Magnum be high enough off the ground to be safe from these problems?
Their past vehicles have been a 1985 LTD stationwagon with over 300,000 miles (a 5.0L V8 I think) and a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquire (4.6L V8) with over 200,000 miles, no major problems with either (I'm shocked by this). They take very good care of their vehicles.
If they have kids they should bring them along when test driving so they will know if everyone will have a comfortable seating position (leg/ head room).
Are they going to be towing stuff a lot?
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
ORIGINAL: 97 3.5 Intrepid
First of all, I would like to welcome you to the site and thank you for your input, proram. I agree with you on Consumer Reports. My list on how inaccurate they are is too long to list; however, as far as the Explorer's transmission is concerned, I believe that the Explorer transmission must be bad because a brand new vehicle should NOT have a rating of "poor" rating for transmission. You refered to the "exotic full time transfer cases." Are you refering to the Quadra-Drive II AWD systems? If so I agree. They had a good share of problems with the Quadra-Drive I so I don't trust a newer one. I prefer a traditional 4WD system in SUVs anyways. I believe that the rest of the powertrain line is good as far as the transmission and engine line. The main problems the Grand Cherokee tends to have is with A/Cs, electrical equipment, and other luxury problems. Considering the vehicles they are used to driving, they would probably not care too much about problems like this. I guess they will probably go for a Grand Cherokee or a Durango. Which between these to would you recommend?
To stump_breaker, the 2007 model Wrangler is going to offer the 3.8L V6 instead of the 3.7L V6.
ORIGINAL: proram
In spite of Consumer Reports panning of the GC I'd still go with it. I haven't found CR to be a terribly objective nor reliable barometer of anything where trucks or SUVS are concerned. If your in the market for an econo box or sports car they seem to be better at rating those. Remember. these are the same clowns who killed the Samurai with their "rolls over too easily" BS. Duh! Its a short wheel base, 4x4. Not a fookin Miata dunces! Ya can't drive them the same. They weren't intended for the same purposes. And if you can't tell the difference you shouldn't be driving one OR rating one. ......... Anyway. That said. The GC is a great value at the moment. They've got large rebates on them too. All the running gear is proven stuff except some of the more exotic full time transfer cases. I WOULD recommend staying away from them. Go with the part time case and you're golden. Id stay away from the "hemi". Its thirsty as a wino on payday and you don't need all the extra juice in a GC IMO. The 4.7 is more then enough go for that platform.
One last comment. The Explorer is a ground up redesign for '06. Based on that alone it isn't fair to judge it on its predecessors. BUT, I also wouldn't recommend the first run of any new vehicle. let some other sap be the guinea pig to get the bugs worked out. look again after the second or third year. Good luck
In spite of Consumer Reports panning of the GC I'd still go with it. I haven't found CR to be a terribly objective nor reliable barometer of anything where trucks or SUVS are concerned. If your in the market for an econo box or sports car they seem to be better at rating those. Remember. these are the same clowns who killed the Samurai with their "rolls over too easily" BS. Duh! Its a short wheel base, 4x4. Not a fookin Miata dunces! Ya can't drive them the same. They weren't intended for the same purposes. And if you can't tell the difference you shouldn't be driving one OR rating one. ......... Anyway. That said.
The GC is a great value at the moment. They've got large rebates on them too. All the running gear is proven stuff except some of the more exotic full time transfer cases. I WOULD recommend staying away from them. Go with the part time case and you're golden. Id stay away from the "hemi". Its thirsty as a wino on payday and you don't need all the extra juice in a GC IMO. The 4.7 is more then enough go for that platform.One last comment. The Explorer is a ground up redesign for '06. Based on that alone it isn't fair to judge it on its predecessors. BUT, I also wouldn't recommend the first run of any new vehicle. let some other sap be the guinea pig to get the bugs worked out. look again after the second or third year. Good luck
To stump_breaker, the 2007 model Wrangler is going to offer the 3.8L V6 instead of the 3.7L V6.
I quote from two different sites:
1. "and is powered by an improved 3.8-liter V6 engine"
2. "Engine choices will include a 2.4-liter four-cylinder and a 3.7-liter V-6. Rumored for the four-door Wrangler only is an optional 5.7-liter Hemi V-8."
So it's all relative
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
ORIGINAL: stump_breaker
Well, that depends on which site you go to.....
I quote from two different sites:
1. "and is powered by an improved 3.8-liter V6 engine"
2. "Engine choices will include a 2.4-liter four-cylinder and a 3.7-liter V-6. Rumored for the four-door Wrangler only is an optional 5.7-liter Hemi V-8."
So it's all relative
Well, that depends on which site you go to.....
I quote from two different sites:
1. "and is powered by an improved 3.8-liter V6 engine"
2. "Engine choices will include a 2.4-liter four-cylinder and a 3.7-liter V-6. Rumored for the four-door Wrangler only is an optional 5.7-liter Hemi V-8."
So it's all relative
"The Wrangler is expected to have the 3.7 liter V6 since DCX is intent on eliminating unnecessary engines and transmissions; though the 3.8 might also show up, since the 3.7 might be discarded entirely in favor of the 3.8 across the board (the 3.8 produces 205 hp). " http://www.allpar.com/model/jeep/wrangler.html
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
Well, not to go O/T too far but it seems that nobody knows what enigine they are going to use for sure. Talk of the 3.7, 3.8 or a new v-6 version of the 4.0
http://www.jeepsunlimited.com/forums...d.php?t=705638
http://www.jeepsunlimited.com/forums...d.php?t=705638
Thread Starter
|
Record Breaker
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,655
Likes: 2
From:
RE: Which would you recommend
The fact that the 3.8L is being mentioned is a sign that they are probably planning on using this engine since it has not been used in any Jeeps yet, whereas the 3.7L has been used in Jeeps. The 4.0L V6 that they are refering to has more in common with the 3.8L than it does with the current AMC 4.0L I6, since it is basically a bored and stroked 3.5L which is on the same block as the 3.8L. Allpar mentioned under the part that you quoted, 89Daytona, that this was what they first wrote, meaning that they have had updates and now have reason to believe that it will be offered with the 3.8L instead of the 3.7L. They thought at very beginning that it would have the 3.7L and didn't even suggest that the 3.8L was even a thought. They listed the info for the 3.8L and the transmissions that it would be hooked up to, so they seem to believe it will be the 3.8L, and they are pretty good about prediction the Chrysler line of vehicles.