So I went to the local Ford dealership today as they were having a little ceremony to honor local veterans, and they were also demolishing the old used car building via Ford F-150 FX4 EB (i'll post pictures of that later). Anyway I spotted this right out front. Hot off the truck, delivered last night. Here you go:
Frenchy, you may especially like this because of its color
I'm surprised that they didn't distinguish the rear end more than this... It still has a very Escape/Kuga influence, right down to the mismatched grey trim piece at the bottom...
I agree that the Escape's mismatched rear trim doesn't look the best, but Ford is hardly the only manufacturer to do this. I think the designer do it on purpose to break up the visual height of the vehicle from the rear view. I think most SUVs would look like minivans from behind if designers didn't play visual tricks on us.
I think Cadillac is the real offender here. The muffler or whatever it is hanging belong the rear bumper looks like a full diaper. :stifle: Ick.
You had an old SRX, didn't you? I always thought those looked cool. I much prefer that generation of SRX (w/the Northstar V8 and Ultraview roof) to the current version.
I looked at the mkc, but the only big diff between that and the loaded E was the 2.3L and couldn't justify the cost. Nice looking rig though. I'd love to know 2 things. Which trans the 2.3L uses (same as 2.0?) and how that power feels
I think the 2.3L gets paired with the 6F50. I don't believe the 6F35 (paired with the previous 3.0L and current 2.5L/1.6L/2.0L engines) is able to handle that much hp and torque.
2013 Taurus 2.0L EcoBoost/GTDI, 240hp and 270 ft-lb, got the 6F35.
2013 Taurus 3.5L Cyclone, 288 hp and 252 ft-lb, got the 6F50.
2013 Taurus 3.5L EcoBoost/GTDI, 365hp and 355 ft-lb, got the 6F55.
In the MKC, the 2.3L EcoBoost/GTDI is marked for 285hp and 305 ft-lb. In the next Explorer, it's rated for 270hp and 300 ft-lb.
We had one for Lincoln's two day drive and dinner event and came to the conclusion that we preferred our Escape. The Lincoln does not drive, ride, or handle as well and the 2.3 sucked fuel fairly prodigiously compared to our 2.0. We also did not like the seats as well as the leather ones on our Titanium... All in all, it seemed like more steps backward than forward for 10 grand more.
I think the 2.3L gets paired with the 6F50. I don't believe the 6F35 (paired with the previous 3.0L and current 2.5L/1.6L/2.0L engines) is able to handle that much hp and torque.
2013 Taurus 2.0L EcoBoost/GTDI, 240hp and 270 ft-lb, got the 6F35.
2013 Taurus 3.5L Cyclone, 288 hp and 252 ft-lb, got the 6F50.
2013 Taurus 3.5L EcoBoost/GTDI, 365hp and 355 ft-lb, got the 6F55.
In the MKC, the 2.3L EcoBoost/GTDI is marked for 285hp and 305 ft-lb. In the next Explorer, it's rated for 270hp and 300 ft-lb.
With a tune and some parts the 2.0 can make up near 260-280hp at the wheels. The 6f50 can handle that added power though!
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ford Escape Automobiles Forum
440.5K posts
32.4K members
Since 2008
A forum community dedicated to Ford Escape owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!