1999 model VS 2003 models

The biggest reason to buy a 2003 Sport is that this is the end of that model - the two door Explorer will not be made in 2004.

Sean, the rollover issue is neither a function of wheelbase, track nor centre of gravity - it is totally operator driven. It is entirely possible to roll any vehicle ever made.... we just need to be stupid enough to get there.

-- Jim Warman snipped-for-privacy@telusplanet.net

Wow, the laws of Physics have been repealed....

Read my post a little closer..... the laws of physics have always applied. It is when we try to break those laws that things turn ugly.

Like I said... all we need to do is to be stupid enough to think that there are no laws of physics.... we'll get there (on our roof, that is...).

-- Jim Warman snipped-for-privacy@telusplanet.net

There is no need to read it any "closer". When you say "...rollover issue is neither a function of wheelbase, track nor centre of gravity

- it is totally operator driven.." you are making a claim that is simply not true. ALL of those things PLUS the abilities and knowledge of the driver impact the probability of a vehicle to roll or not roll.

Since the Blazer didn't have nearly as many rollover problems, does that mean that Chevy drivers are just naturally smarter? ;)

Dave

I couldn't say unless you plan on funding a major marketting study into why some folks chose the Blazer, or the Bronco or the Exploder (in larger numbers than any of the others) or any other particular vehicle. I made a simple statement..... there are those than cannot see an incipient problem and there are those that can see an incipient problem.

-- Jim Warman snipped-for-privacy@telusplanet.net

I disagree..... a driver must understand the vehicles reaction to his/her input..... That an Explorer will rollover more easily than (say) a Mustang isn't a closely guarded secret - this is what we can call a "no brainer" with one look at the differences betwixt the two.

I can roll a Mustang by ignoring what feedback the car is giving me..... I can roll an Explorer by ignoring what feedback the car is giving me. To take our shortcomings and try to deliver them onto an inanimate object is shortsighted and foolish.

Read differently, my statement says that an Explorer (or any other vehicle) will not rollover unless I command it to. You squirmed out of the laws of physics statement.... let's see how you do that one....

-- Jim Warman snipped-for-privacy@telusplanet.net

Your data on rollovers is incorrect. Not surprising given the hype in the press on Explorers, but I hate to see facts being ignored. For the particular models in question when the rollover thing started, and even with the Firestone Wilderness AT tires being on roughly half of the Explorers, that vehicle exhibited significantly less rollover problems than the Blazer. Specifically, as measured by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety as actual death rates per million registered vehicle years from 1995-1998, the numbers were:

4 Dr 4WD Explorer - 26 4 Dr 4WD Blazer - 45 2 Dr 4WD Explorer - 51 2 Dr WD Blazer - 112

Note also the difference between 2 Dr and 4 Dr models, which is likely due to a difference in the demographics of the drivers. Why the buzz that there was a rollover problem? As the most successful and popular passenger vehicle (i.e. - has a back seat) in the country, it represents a juicy target for lawsuits and press from those who think, without any supportive data, that SUV's are evil.

=Vic= Bear Gap, PA

Dave Brower wrote:

The small Blazer has a higher rollover rate than Explorers. And the Toyota

4Runner is in a different zip code completely (it is just about the most dangerous vehicle on the planet). The media started picking on Explorer just becasue they could, not becasue the stories made any sense.

Regards,

Ed White

Dave Brower wrote:

I'll go along with that. Now, how about getting to the crux of my question?

Did Ford redesign Explorers (Sport in particular) to make them behave more like a Mustang in regards to rollovers?

Sean

No... simply because that would be physically impossible without reducing the Explorer to Mustang proportions, weights and weight distributions. Since the Ex is still taller and heavier than most cars, it requires less driver input to achieve a "stability crisis" than something lighter and lower.

Sports car handling in an SUV would be much like having a shoe that is size

11 on the inside and size 9 on the outside.

-- Jim Warman snipped-for-privacy@telusplanet.net

Man, what a pain in the ass you are. I didn't ask if ford made the explorer just like a mustang. I asked if they made it behave more like a mustang in regards to rollovers as compared to the previous version of explorers.

Just to state the obvious again. Is the new design more stable as it pertains to rollovers than the previous design?

You just have a bug up your ass about drivers causing rollovers not cars.

No shit mr. obvious.

We get it.

Now genuis, is it possible to answer the question or are you too stuck on being a 1 trick pony?

I bet your ex-wive(s) have lots of fun stories about arguing with you.

Sean

I'll jump in here, what part do you not understand, are you a complete idiot? The question was answered in several different ways. The Explorer cannot be compared to a Frick'in Mustang. Previous years, next years, still not designed or behave like a Mustang!!! If you cannot understand the difference then go somewhere else for your stupid questions. Now just to state the obvious, you are not looking for true answers, you are a troll. Pushing the rollover scare in regards to the Explorer is just showing your ignorance. You have been told something that scared you (the rollover issue) now in your simple mind you can understand it was all hype and fueled by big business. Do not buy an Explorer, it will not let you sleep, you will be consumed by your own fears.

OK... so let's get back to Explorers and forget the Mustangs (you wanted the comparison, anyway). The newer Exs appear to ride much smoother and are more comfortable than the older ones. However, they still retain good ground clearance and have, if ever so slightl, experienced the usual Ford 'bloat' regarding overall size.

During my usual duties, I do drive these fairly regularly (though most of my work is on SuperDuties) but I drive them on the street and don't usually find a need to push these things to their limits. Though the suspensions have become quite refined, they remain SUVs. As such, they are easier to force into delicate situations than cars. They are not "prone" to rollovers but neither should we fling them about the "twisty bits"... they are still SUVs and I can't make that any clearer.

Compare this to a gun.... guns do not kill people - it is the silly bugger hanging on to the gun that accomplishes that. Similarly, cars do not rollover though they do feature a group of controls that allows some silly bugger to command it to do so - some vehicles are a little more willing, but they still require sufficient driver input to achieve the undesired result. Often, in spite of the vehicle exhibiting obvious warnings of impending doom.

Bottom line.... Explorers can still rollover whenever we tell them to (most on the NG would be hard pressed to even infer that this is an indication of being 'prone' to rollover) - comparing them to cars is of little use (apples and oranges one might say). There is no finite answer to your question other than skid pad testing - and since these are not conducted in a real world setting (off camber corners, tar seams, road heaves etc. are not part of a skid pad) the information is of dubious value without taking other aspects of vehicle dynamics into consideration.

I've been driving 4X4s for something like 25 years..... some of them touted by the press as "rollovers waiting to happen". The few times I have approached being 'out of shape', I have found each and every one of these vehicles telling me that I best change my course of action lest I stop being a motorist and start being a statistic.

Finally, January will mark the 30th anniversary of my loving (and only) bride and I...... I fail to see the importance of this in this conversation but it does prove that some folks are very quick to jump to assumptions.

-- Jim Warman snipped-for-privacy@telusplanet.net

Parse your prior comments all you like, it doesn't change your

*original* claim. The fact is you made a statement that you are now trying to distance yourself from in full backpedal mode. It was you that claimed we can ignore the laws of physics, not me, and now you are trying to squirm out of your own statements. Why don't you just admit it? You've already corrected your own erroneous comments twice while pretending you didn't say what you said.

Having owned both a '95 and an '03, I strongly agree with the former statement while I only agree with latter statement. I think Ford's decision to go with independent rear suspension starting with the '02

4-door made a big difference in their ability to make the vehicle ride and handle well simultaneously. On the new one, the rear end seems to track better over rough pavement compared to the old one. The ride is firm and controlled. As for handling, I've driven all three generations of Explorers. The first gen models (through '94) just flat scared me both times I've driven one. The second gen ('95 through '01) are much better drivers. The third gen ('02 and later) are slightly better yet. Just my opinion.

If anything, the '03 sits a little higher than the '95 did. Not sure if there is appreciable difference in the ground clearance, though. The lower control arms on the rear suspension on the new one seem to be about as close to the ground as the differential carrier was on the old one. Also, the front crossmember on the new one seems more noticeable, if not lower, on the new one when compared to the old. I have no measurements to back up these statements, just observations.

The new one seems to have a bit more interior room compared to the old one. Again, no measurements, just observations.

Bob...

Since no one else seems willing to stay on topic I'll throw in my 2 cents. Yes, they redesigned it to be less prone to roll overs. The original Explorer was based on the ranger underpinnings. During development, Ford found that the wheel track was a little on the narrow side but it was too far along to change it. It made it more rollover prone then it ideally would have been but still perfectly within acceptable parameters for it's intended use. They needed about a 2" wider track for more ideal characteristics. When they did the full, from the ground up, redesign of the newer ones they were able to widen the track and make whatever other changes they felt were appropriate, particularly in light of the budding rollover issues.... keep in mind that the product design cycle is around 4 years, so the redesign was most likely well underway before the Firestone/Rollover thing mushroomed.

In spite of all the nonsense that some people spout about how they will rollover, the fact is that if you compare either rollover fatality rates, or rollover injury rates of the original explorers to other vehicles you find that they are just in the middle of the pack and actually better then some cars in terms of what happens in the REAL world, as opposed to what happens in some people hyperactive imaginations. I didn't keep all the figures but when I looked them up a couple years ago, there was a Mercedes Sedan that had worse rollover statistics then the Explorer did.

Another fact about the original Explorers that is often missused by detractors is the issue of tire pressure. Ford recommended 26 psi as a late in the game way of reducing the likelihood of rollovers,... by going to the lower pressure the front end washed out at a lower speed in turns making it harder to turn them fast enough to even generate a rollover. In many ways the whole thing is kind of silly. They have an arbitrary "J" test for turning that they ideally will pass that requires a certain amount of steering input. If the vehicle is *too responsive* with that steering input it could fail the j test. So they made it less responsive by using lower tire pressure. The same

26 psi tire pressures used on a couple of import SUVs. But no one cares about those SUVs and rollovers because they didn't have Firestone tires on them.

You're absolutely right. And there are some vehicles that reach that point of incipient problem before others, given the same operator input. I think the question was, is the newer Explorer such that it takes more input to reach that problem point than the older Explorers?