- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,215
- Reaction score
- 24
- Points
- 38
- Age
- 58
- Location
- KY
- Transmission
- Manual
It's a 4WD minivan. It's where vehicular evolution is headed for the time being. Deal with it. Don't like it? Don't buy it.
Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.
As long as they base it off the indestructable Ranger platform, the owner will be welcome here any time!
^this...this is what needs to be built next! Keep the soccer mom SUV's but build this for US..
It's not too far fetched. Look at what they did with the Raptor..I don't think they've forgotten about what we all would like to see.
oh and don't forget to build a small, barebones Ranger too! Please.
+1, they know what they are doing. My parents have had Explorers since '96. They are big inside, look nice on the outside, get decentish milage, and go thru snow like nobody's buisiness. I feel pretty confident that is how most other Explorer buyers look at them too.Why don't you post a pic of the actual Explorer instead of the concept?
I think it's a good looking vehicle. Yeah, off-road caability sucks, but WHO CARES?
These comments on the article sum up my feelings pretty well:
I'm glad Ford used the Explorer name instead of naming it something else. Remember what happened when they renamed the Taurus the Five Hundred? Nobody knew what the hell a Five Hundred was or that it even existed, hence, nobody bought one. But everyone knows what a Taurus is. And everyone has heard of the Explorer. Kudos to Ford for not making the same mistake twice.
Even the older ones, 01 and older are normally sporting the tiny stock tires with a saggy baggy rear end. At least the '02+ seem to have more durable rear springs...I'm with exbass on this one...How many 2000+ Explorers have you seen that are suspension lifted, body lifted, or have larger than stock All-terrain or mud tires? Slim to none. Ford's not run by a bunch of idiots.
The Raptor is not a standalone truck, it is a tweaked F-150. They know they won't sell a ton of them so they based it off an existing vehicle. They would lose money on that Bronco... which is why they didn't pursue it.
^this...this is what needs to be built next! Keep the soccer mom SUV's but build this for US..
It's not too far fetched. Look at what they did with the Raptor..I don't think they've forgotten about what we all would like to see.
oh and don't forget to build a small, barebones Ranger too! Please.
that with superduty(or any solid axles) and ecoboast engine and ill be sold
^this...this is what needs to be built next! Keep the soccer mom SUV's but build this for US..
It's not too far fetched. Look at what they did with the Raptor..I don't think they've forgotten about what we all would like to see.
oh and don't forget to build a small, barebones Ranger too! Please.
Still has the same 4.0 engine and 5 speed automatic transmixer. Also has a 31 spline 8.8 rear axle (with a cool cast aluminum cover) and I believe it still has a D35 front diff too.uhhhhhh... yall forget that the explorer hasn't been on the ranger platform for some years now right?
I mean... in 02 it lost every aspect of the ranger correct?
So.... I guess my question is... is there some good reason why your bitching now?
Or am I wrong?
an optional 4.6 and IRS? I'd love that ranger I won't lie.Still has the same 4.0 engine and 5 speed automatic transmixer. Also has a 31 spline 8.8 rear axle (with a cool cast aluminum cover) and I believe it still has a D35 front diff too.
Otherwise... yeah, not much in common with a Ranger.
Well I for one know that if they don't pull up their socks, my next vehicle will be a Jeep. Why can't Ford market the Bronco as an off-roader like jeep's been doing (quite successfully I my add) for YEARS!!!They would lose money on that Bronco... which is why they didn't pursue it.