Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Ford Explorer Sport Trac (2007+)

1235712

Comments

  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    Have about 200 mi. on my 2007 ST V-8 as well, gas mileage really does blow, about 12 MPG, they claim that this engine needs 5,000 mi and that we can expect 2-5 mpg improvement, sticker is 13/20 I think, be nice if it made it there.
    Anyone have the 2007 V-6? What kind of mileage are you seeing?.

    I never recall any of my other Ford (or Porsche/or Volvos) MGP improving after break-in?! We will see.

    I will say it feels way more solid than the old model, corners extremely well and rides like an F-150 and you can't even feel the 6-speed tranny shift, pretty sweet and "carbon-fiber" accents, rubber floor and overall interior treatments are very nice. By the way, try grabbing the door handles palm up, work way easier, little change from the normal, but it is OK, not a deal-breaker.

    It is going off-road this weekend, I will let you know...don't know if Independent R suspension is the best thing for off road, we will see, should handle the wash-boards better in any case. Can't find stats anywhere for ground clearance...anyone know, even the dealer answered with the ole' shoulder-shrug? Have a good weekend gentlemen.
  • jagujagu Posts: 3
    Have the V6 - getting about 12 in the city and 20 on the hwy.
  • Reading this forum can be humorous sometimes. I drove a new sport trac last week and was fully impressed. My mindset going into the test drive was fairly negative about the sport-trac, thinking that I would probably purchase an 05 Explorer or 05 Mountaineer to reap the big discounts available. After test driving all 3, my decision is easy. I'll purchase a new V-8 sport trac hands down. The sport trac offers a powerful, quiet, and a very stable drive much akin to its big brother, the F150. A few of my thoughts about previous posts in this board:

    In regards to complaining about the V8 sport trac milage compared to a Honda Ridgeline, lets look at the #'s

    Ridgeline: 3.5L V-6; 247 hp; 245 lb-ft torque, 5000# towing capacity, mileage: 16 city / 21 highway

    V8 sport trac: 4.6L V8; 292 hp; 300 lb-ft torque; 6600# towing capacity, mileage: 14 city / 20 highway

    The performance difference between the 2 is very significant if you intend on towing boats, trailers, misc. like I intend on doing. Yes, it's going to cost me more at the pump. But the 300 lb-torque will be enjoyed at the boat ramp pulling a boat and trailer out of the water. My suggestion...if you're not going to pull anything, don't by the V8!! Or better yet, consider an Escape or the new Edge which are designed to be PEOPLE movers, not TRUCKS.

    The Ridgeline does have some attractive features like the extra storage in the bed. And I agree that the door handles in the sport trac are very different, but it's definitely not a feature that will turn me away from buying this truck. I think I can adapt to a door handle. LOL. My only question is, WHICH COLOR TO BUY???!!
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    Say 'Stang: Couldn't agree more, after test driving Nissan, Honda, Chevy, Dodge, Toyota, this is the best mid-sized truck on the market unless you are a serious rock climber. And, after a full 2 weeks of ownership, I like the '07 Sport-Trac even more! Everyone who has ridden in it can't believe the ride and feel, in fact, a friend admitted it is as nice on the interior as the '06 Chevy Tahoe, and $15,000 cheaper! Incidently, the heated windshield option is very trick during the rain, instant fog clear.

    My main disappointment, as stated before, was that the mileage was well below the stated mileage, but... floor the pedal getting onto a long interstate on-ramp and you can't believe you are in a truck, this baby is very fast. Can't wait to add a K & N and put a cat/back in it and then it will also be the best sounding truck on the road as well. I say look at a burgundy red one, I went with traditional gloss black...and the door handles, please...they feel mormal already?! What is the fuss? Can't wait to push that 4x4 Low button this Summer at the bottom of the boat ramp!
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Posts: 1,640
    The Ridgeline has one feature that I haven't heard much comment about on the Sport trac side, and that is the AWD system. I am very curious how Ford laid out the full time 4wd system, as obviously there isn't a solid front axle like most vehicles in this class. Since the engine is pointed "standard" towards the rear, most 4wd systems will have a transaxle, short forward shaft, and a solid front axle.

    Anyone up to speed on what Ford did?

    John
  • K-Man - about the mileage... the engine needs time to break in yet, which normally takes 10-15K miles. The mileage will go up.
  • ayarbo1ayarbo1 Posts: 56
    The ground clearance is 8.4 inches for both the front and rear.
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    ...has anyone out there put 5,000 mi yet on a 2007 ST V-8? If so, I would really like to hear whether there was any significant change in gas mileage and/or what are they getting now? I guess what I can't quite figure out is that my friend's 2005 F-150 crewcab fullbed Triton V-8 (similar HP) avgs about 16-18 MPG and he drives like he is in a Porsche; and I can't get 12 MPG driving like my grand-mother...I just don't get it?! Way less weight, allegedly advanced 3 valve engine, less wind drag (I have the Tonneau, he doesn't) and the funny thing is that highway driving makes no difference compared to what I get in the City (or very little?) It is going back to the dealer this week to check it out!

    What are guys in the 4.6L Mustangs getting for mileage I wonder?...basically the same set-up.
  • Comparing to a 4.6L Mustang isn't an apples to apples comparison. 4X4 itself will eat up 3-4 MPG even when not engaged.
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    True, you are correct, I was going to account for that in my calculation, just curious, as this engine is a totally new design, Ford claims in their testing that it got better mileage than the 6, time will tell, just a bit disappointing, as I have zero complaints otherwise. I know...quit sniveling, right.
  • blksn8kblksn8k Posts: 36
    I plan to wait until the power rear window is available. Otherwise, I have pretty much made my choice. As for color, I haven't seen one in Mineral Grey yet but I did test drive a Limited in Dark Cherry. Someone else recommended that color and I agree it is very nice. I just didn't like how badly it showed road spray and that is something to consider here in sunny Ohio. Lol. :shades:
  • Got a red one, I think every option except adjustable pedals. Styling and safety are what hooked me. Ford really got it together, the box flare, chrome up front, 18" wheels, best looking truck on market. But thats me. First job, hauling a 6000 lb machine from Lake Placid to Syracuse in two weeks. Drive a 2003 Explorer and traded in a 95 Dakota. First thing noticed is quiet and ride, even compared to my Explorer. Inside door pull will take some getting use to, compared to my overall impression, that doesn't register.
  • congenicongeni Posts: 8
    I have been driving the 07 Sport Trac for almost two months now I've had zero problem with the truck. Everybody I meet makes a comment on how good the truck looks. This truck really makes people turn their heads. The Sport Trac is almost as fun to drive as my 05 Mustang convertible
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    Really trashed the 07 ST this past weekend, went turkey hunting and took it several miles into thr woods, handled everything, without the differential (now that it is IRS)the drive line is very high and had no center clearance issues, forded some streams, went up some seriously steep (15-20 grade) and climbed like a pro, and it rides almost as smooth in the woods as the H1 (which is also IRS for those who say you must have a solid axle for off-road)...very impressive. Three washings later, mud is seeping from cracks, but what fun. Down-side, no turkey This time!) MPG have rsen dramatically now with just over 100 miles, over 14 in town (up from 10)and about 19 on Hwy. (up from 14) and rising...
  • My new company provided car is a sport trac limited 2wd. I have driven the 4.6 and agree it is a very nice engine. I don't plan to tow though. Is the 4.0 powerful enough for the truck. I have read some 0-60 times and the 4.6 is about 1.5 sec faster than the 4.0. BUT if the 4.0 has enough torque (264 vs. 300) general driving should be OK with the smaller engine (Really How many times do you floor it to 60?). I can buy the 4.6 for about $1100, but I lose that money when I get another car. I will try to drive a 4.0 when one comes in, but I hoped to get some feedback here. Thanks
  • ayarbo1ayarbo1 Posts: 56
    If your not going to be towing and you don't just have to have that additional 1.5 sec. faster 0-60 time then you will probably be fine with the 4.0. In my area, the 4.0L are plentiful, it's the 4.6L trucks that have not saturated the area yet.
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    I say drive the 4.6 and the 4.0, the 6 speed auto on the 4.6L makes the vehicle seem even smoother yet, you can barely feel the shifts...Lexus SUV-like! Regarding the MPG, the 4.6L was to get better MPG than the 4.0L (in early press releases) mine isn't there yet, but recently nudged nearly 20 mpg, what most are saying the 4.0L gets on the Hwy? I only have 1000 miles on it, but the mileage is improving with every fill-up (which definitely hurt a lot more now!)
  • The door handles are really poorly designed and positioned. Never realized that when we ordered the V8 Limited/Loaded. The door handles are not a deal breaker.

    Started out with 13 miles on the odometer at noon. Drove 350 miles on a 4 lane, two stops,, cruise control at 60 on most of the trip, premium gas and got an honest 21+ MPG... pleased so far...

    r
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    As I have stated in other posts, my mileage has not been that good, but is improving with every tank, now close to 18mpg (mixed hwy/city) with 1500 miles on the truck. By the way, skip the premium,use regular, the engine is designed and actually will run no different on regular...in fact, mine seems to run better on regular as the engine was designed around 87 octane. Saves a bunch of money...oh, the door handles will seem fine in no time...no worries
  • ayarbo1ayarbo1 Posts: 56
    My local dealer here in Dallas just informed me that they are building Sport Tracs with the optional Navigation System. Now i'm anxiously awaiting the Power Down Rear Window option....
  • blksn8kblksn8k Posts: 36
    I can relate to that. I will be in PA all next week for the first week of spring gobbler season. I hope to be able to place an order for a 4.6 Limited 4x4 when I get back. I too am waiting for the power down rear window option. One of the members on the BON forum works at the Louisville plant and he claims they have the windows in stock but have not been released to install them yet. He did say, however, that at least one customer has been able to place an order with that option. By the way, the option code for the power down rear window is 617.
  • I'm leaning towards getting a Sport Track over the Ridgeline, basically because I can get x-plan pricing on Ford vehics. While on a test drive yesterday, the salesman told me that new/better rebates are coming out this Monday. So, I'm holding out to see what they look like. Thought anyone else interested in them might want to know.
  • rbsternrbstern Posts: 1
    Just read the review, and needed to share my comments with the Edmunds editors. Here they are for the folks here who might be interested. I'd be interested in counterpoints, if you feel I am wrong in my critique.

    April 28, 2006

    To the Editors of Edmunds:

    Your review of the 2007 Sport Trac ("Full Test: 2007 Ford Explorer Sport Trac") lacks real world perspective. In the review, the caption under the photo showing the tonneau cover tie downs, reads, "We're not sure why Ford includes these bungee-cord tie-downs on the tonneau cover. Driving with it open hardly seems smart and gravity does a pretty good job of holding it open when the truck isn't moving."

    This simpe caption perfectly encapsulates that the reviewer doesn't understand the marketplace for the Sport Trac.

    If you talk to even just a small number of owners, you would understand this simple device allows the truck to be safely driven with the rear half of the tonneau cover open, which dramatically eases the task of transporting tall, bulky cargo items without removing the tonneau cover. For example: Lawnmowers. Pressure washers. Bicycles. Barbeque grills. Washing machines. Real stuff transported by real owners. In combination with the bed extender, the tonneau-securing bungees provide great cargo versatility.

    Fold down rear seating: The Sport Trac implementation is much more pet friendly than seats which fold up against the rear bulkhead. Ask owners if that's important. Many will say yes. Few owners need extra cargo height in the interior space. Far more often, Fido is back there, enjoying the ride with his owner. Having a flat space without seat anchoring hardware in the way is safer for the most frequent occupents of the folded rear seat space.

    Huge upgrades in vehicle safety: This is perhaps the most serious inadequacy of the review. The only words on the subject are complaints about the safer door handle design. You should know well that the Explorer name has been dragged through the mud in rollover cases. Ford made a huge effort to address vehicle controlabilty and stability in the latest Sport Trac. The only wisdom the reviewer offers on the matter is that it reduces slalom speed. In the real world, I'd prefer Ford's perspective on this. When the family’s teenager gets behind the wheel of a Sport Trac, the higher slalom speed you seem to think is a good indicator of product worthiness is not something owners will miss. But the stability control algorithms, computer-monitored vehicle position and inertia sensors, the advanced air bag deployment schemes, these things will matter greatly, when that teenager with little driving experience makes a mistake. Frankly, it's shameful that you don't give a good accounting of the safety improvements in this vehicle.

    The reviewer makes no mention of the six speed auto and how the shift quality reduces awareness of shifting in ordinary driving.

    Performance: While a handful of enthusiasts will lower this truck and put performance tires on it, that's not the target for this vehicle. "Performance," for a vehicle in this class, means towing, hauling, and not getting stuck in the mud, while providing excellent passenger comfort and a quality driving experience. The Sport Trac is a nearly ideal balance of these attributes.

    Bottom line, the 2007 Sport Trac is a big upgrade over the previous generation, in numerous, important ways. Your reviewer seems to go out of the way to nitpick the vehicle about things that aren't terribly important. Ending the review by saying the Tacoma and Frontier are better performing might make sense if you take a stopwatch and orange cones every time you go to the grocery store. The ways actual owners use these vehicles make your reviewer's comments about performance seem out of touch.

    I am by no means a Ford apologist. I've owned several Hondas over the last 20 years, and respect the Honda brand greatly. The 2001 Sport Trac is the first Ford product I've owned. Despite the innovation of the configuration, the first generation Sport Trac showed it's age, owing to an outdated platform, in the first model year. The 2007 is so far beyond the first generation vehicle and is class leading in many regards. It's a shame your review missed the mark so badly by not fairly crediting it for the things it does so well. Real world things.

    If accuracy and relevance are attributes you hope to achieve in your reviews, I invite your writers and editors to spend some time with Sport Trac owners at [link edited out to obey forum rules]. The perspective of owners who frequent the Sport Trac Web Site will undoubtedly help your staff produce more accurate reviews.

    Sincerely,

    Rich Stern
    Publisher
    The Sport Trac Web Site
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    Very nice job, Rick. Well done, you hit most of the key areas of why, after driving EVERY small pickup in the marketplace, I chose the 2007 4.6L ST Limited, there is no other truck that compares when all aspects are considered, and as you pointed out in your rebuttal, the ASPECTS that are important to the folks who purchase a small pickup for its intended use. Most of us are not posers! We actually USE a truck for what it was designed to do and the ST is way ahead of the class, in looks, ride and function.
  • huntsalothuntsalot Posts: 1
    Hello, I just bought a 2007 XLT 4.6L Sport Trac, so far I love it, but I have been looking for performance parts for it and haven't found much yet. Does anyone know a resource? I am looking for the standard cold air intake, headers, exhaust possibly a chip, I want to get the most out of this engine ;) . I understand that it is the same engine that is in the Mustang GT, would those parts fit this engine, i.e. headers, intakes etc... And does anyone know where to get exhaust for this version yet?
    Appreciate it and thanks ahead
    MH :cry:
  • jagujagu Posts: 3
    Rich,

    Completely agree with you. I bought a 4.0 limited a month ago. I was actually one of those folks that made fun of the Sport Trac when it first came out. Years later, and a re-design. I really like my '07. FOr those who want it to "handle" and "perform". you're looking at the wrong automobile. Buy a Mustang GT or wait for the Shelby to come out. I actually traded my '05 GT in on the Sport Trac because I now have a limited use or chance to use the "performance" the car can deliver. However, having the pick-up bed with a locking cover is something I use regularly. Toss in the fact that the second set of doors open to a rather spacious rear seat . . . . As for a previous writer's comment that you may as well buy a F-150 ("I've had two and think they are the best trucks on the market)I considered getting the 150 when I got tired of the GT. They're a little too big to negotiate my my cramped parking garage or easilly fit in the home garage. The '07 Sprot Track is a VERY close next best thing. Great truck.
  • jagujagu Posts: 3
    Hello huntsalot:

    There are a great deal of parts for the 05/06 Mustang GT with the 3v 4.6. Your problem wll be fit in the engine bay that is configured differently, e.g. stearing shaft, header clearance, air intake path, etc. Obviously, all the current parts for the GT are specifically designed for the GT. Ford even released several GTs to aftermarket performance companies, months ahead of release of the GT to the public, so that part would be available at aboutthe same time as the '05 GT was released. Have not heard of Ford doing that with the sport trac.
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Posts: 792
    The review in USA Today indicates that the reviewer has seen the new interior door handles (cups in the armrest), so it seems obvious that they will be switching over when the regular 2007 Explorers go into production 7/31/06.
  • Good news for everyone waiting for the power rear window - I ordered by sport-trac tonight and much to my suprise (and the salesman's) the power rear window option was available in the system. So, I'm getting the power rear window too!
  • kman1956kman1956 Posts: 14
    ...to the truck, so certainly those of us without that, could possibly get it installed after-market? That is one of those things that is either going to be inexpensive or very much the other way. Curiosity, what was the cost of the option?
Sign In or Register to comment.