Manual trans, more from the 2.0 EB or add a 2.3 EB, AWD, suspension, interior, and a little styling. I think it would have potential.
Manual, AWD, n/a 4 or 6 cylinder, dash full of control buttons, tiny or no screen.
I will not purchase another EB Ford if I can help it. Not a fan at all, I see no benefit.
The n/a 2.5L in my '12 Escape has been great. Simple, dependable, great mileage.
Hi po version of the 2.3 from the mustang and awd would be a winner. Bonus points for a manual option from the focus rs but I don't think Ford has the cajones for that.Manual trans, more from the 2.0 EB or add a 2.3 EB, AWD, suspension, interior, and a little styling. I think it would have potential.
Hi po version of the 2.3 from the mustang and awd would be a winner. Bonus points for a manual option from the focus rs but I don't think Ford has the cajones for that.
This.I was thinking basically a tamed down version of the Focus RS drivetrain.
@SID297 you know something we don't?
Years in the post.Isn't that 2.5 still a DI engine? I'm not sure what year Escape you're talking about.
Then towing needs to be 5500-6000 lbs..Lots of things.
Years in the post.
Then towing needs to be 5500-6000 lbs..
Then towing needs to be 5500-6000 lbs..
the regular one tows 4k lbs.. my wife's old 2015 Santa Fe could tow 5000.. the explorer Timberlane can tow 5500 lbs.. no reason it couldn't tow 5500-6k if they use to 2.3 ecoboost..
It has much less to do with the power of the engine than the power of the brakes/chassis and suspension.
The Maverick is not (not even close) the same size nor as capable (chassis and brakes) as the Explorer.
are you saying Ford couldn't upgrade those components and market it as.... an ST?It has much less to do with the power of the engine than the power of the brakes/chassis and suspension.
The Maverick is not (not even close) the same size nor as capable (chassis and brakes) as the Explorer.