Explorer Reliability Issues?

Wesley wrote:

> Did you replace the OEM Michelins with the same thing? Just wondering what
> to put on the Trooper when it finally wears out its original shoes (only up
> to 16k so far). It's got 16" Bridgestone Dueler's on it now...

Yes - they were great tires, so I replaced them with exact duplicates.
It also meant that I could buy 3 (instead of 4) and use the
still-brand-new spare as the fourth.

Bill

Wesley wrote:

> What is a "hensley hitch"? I've not heard of that before...

A very elaborate and very expensive trailer hitch with sway control.
Most sway control is a simple friction slide affair that damps sway.
The Hensley uses an entirely different approach involving the geometry
of a set of steel bars.

Anyone with a trailer sway problem has basically three choices of how to
handle it.
1. Friction - cheap, and a bit more effective than nothing. This is an
add-on to a standard weight-distributing hitch, not built into it.
About $100.
2. Dual cam - a more effective approach than friction, and built into
certain weight distributing hitches. Quite effective, and adds less
than $30 to the cost of your $200 WDH.
3. Hensley - the nuclear weapon of sway control - and you pay for it,
too. About $3000, IIRC.

In my opinion (and it is only mine) if you have such a huge sway problem
that you need a Hensley, then something is drastically wrong with your
setup and you are living on borrowed time anyway.

Again in my opinion, the best thing about the Hensley Company is that
they make McKesh mirrors, which are superb.

http://www.nosway.com/

Bill

If you happen to notice, OTR trucks use turbochargers full time, with
varying degrees of boost. There are also passenger cars and trucks that use
them as well, as OEM items.
It's not so much that you want a boost of power for a few seconds, but
an overall increase in efficiency in engine performance. These not only
increase horsepower, but improve fuel efficiency by bringing the air:fuel
ratio closer to optimal levels.
As for drag racing using a supercharger, it's not a great idea, as there
is a certain amount of lag time before the blower can come up to speed, and
in a race of such short duration, it would already be over before the blower
could come online. The better item for this application is a supercharger,
which is mechanically linked to the engine, via a belt drive, and uses a
certain percentage of horsepower to run the compressor, as opposed to the
turbocharger, which is driven by exhaust gases, and is adjustable by
adjusting at what point and percentage the wastegate opens.

I would love to have a turbocharger on one of these 4.0 L motors, if for
nothing else, than to improve overall efficiency.


Hmmmm ....maybe I need to ask Jim Warman about doing this. It sounds
intriguing.

"Bill Jeffrey" > wrote in message
news:Hzy5e.11439$Xs.496@fed1read03...
| Jean -
|
| You are exactly right about that. In situations like that, I would kill
| for a decent supercharger that would boost the pressure back up to
| something near sea level.
|
| I've looked. There are a lot of shysters out there selling mini-blowers
| that are too small to do much of anything. There are also a lot of
| leave-rubber-at-the-light kind of macho dorks who think of a
| supercharger as something to get a burst of power to leave someone else
| in the dust. But boosting intake pressure above sea level for more than
| a few seconds is liable to harm an engine that isn't designed for it.
| What I am looking for is something that will bring pressure back to sea
| level and no more, and can operate for a half hour at a time without
| hurting itself or the engine, as I negotiate a mountain road. Haven't
| found anything.
|
| Any ideas?
|
| Bill
| --------------------------------
|
| Jean wrote:
| > Bill Jeffrey wrote:
| >
| >> Richard -
| >>
| >> In Nov '01, I bought a 2002 Explorer ... The vehicle has
| >> been adequate, but no more than that, pulling this trailer into the
| >> high Sierras and over Loveland Pass and Vail Pass in Colorado. The
| >> combination of steep grades and high altitude just kill the engine's
| >> output.
| >
| > It's not surprising that your Explorer couldn't cope with the mountain
| > passes. Based on my readings, you have to derate the capacity of a
| > vehicle anywhere from 2% to 4% per 1000 feet of altitude above sea
| > level. So for Loveland Pass (~12000ft altitude), that means you lose
| > anywhere from 24% to 48% of towing capacity - which makes towing your
| > 3500lb camper kinda iffy.
| >
| > Jean
|

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:08:21 -0400, "Chris Cowles" >
wrote:

>Thanks. Basically, the smaller the wheel/tire the easier to pull/stop.

No.
Smaller wheel/tire (actually, smaller circumference) means more
pulling power available.
However, that smaller circumference means a smaller tire patch on the
road surface, which means less friction available for stopping. Also,
less ability to put that pulling power to the road (slipping upon
accelleration).
It's a compromise, like most things.
You can get better tires to help with traction. These will also have
lower tread life (unless you want to pay some really high dollar
amounts for the tires).

>
>"C. E. White" > wrote in message
...
>> Two ways -
>>
>> 1) Larger wheels and tires effectively lower the gear ratio.
>>
>> 2) Larger wheels and tires weigh more. This is a double hit
>> to your braking an acceleration. When stopping you not only
>> have to burn off the extra forward inertia added as a result
>> of the extra weight of the larger wheels and tires, but you
>> also have to burn off the extra rotational inertia. Bigger
>> tires and wheels are both heavier and have a larger diameter
>> - this makes them a better flywheel - which is not a good
>> thing when you are trying to change speeds (either slowing
>> down or speeding up).
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Cowles
>>> Gainesville, FL
>>>
>>> "tobe" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> >
>>> > The max tow trailer weight depends upon the engine size (V-6 or V-8),
>>> > the
>>> > axle ratio (3.55 or 3.73), and the size of the wheels (16" or 17") and
>>> > 4X2
>>> > vs. 4X4.
>

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 08:16:45 -0400, "C. E. White"
> wrote:

>
>
>Big Bill wrote:
>
>> >Jean
>>
>> I've heard you lose about 2% of your power for each 1000 ft of
>> altitude, but never heard about derating your towing capacity for
>> altitude.
>> The brakes, powertrain (except for power) and suspension don't change
>> with altitude.
>> The loss of power is self-limiting concerning towing.
>
>I believe the brakes will not be as effective at high
>altitude becasue the less dense air will not cool them as
>well.
>
>Ed

I've never heard that before.

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 12:51:47 -0500, "John Riggs"
> wrote:

> If you happen to notice, OTR trucks use turbochargers full time, with
>varying degrees of boost. There are also passenger cars and trucks that use
>them as well, as OEM items.
> It's not so much that you want a boost of power for a few seconds, but
>an overall increase in efficiency in engine performance. These not only
>increase horsepower, but improve fuel efficiency by bringing the air:fuel
>ratio closer to optimal levels.

No, superchargers are not used on street cars for fuel economy, but
for accelleration numbers.
OTR trucks use turbo/superchargers to boot HP and torque, becasue of
the loads they carry; anormally aspirated diesel engine with that kind
of power output would be far too heavy.
> As for drag racing using a supercharger, it's not a great idea, as there
>is a certain amount of lag time before the blower can come up to speed, and
>in a race of such short duration, it would already be over before the blower
>could come online.

Obviously, you meant turbocharger here, instead of supercharger.
>The better item for this application is a supercharger,
>which is mechanically linked to the engine, via a belt drive, and uses a
>certain percentage of horsepower to run the compressor, as opposed to the
>turbocharger, which is driven by exhaust gases, and is adjustable by
>adjusting at what point and percentage the wastegate opens.
> I would love to have a turbocharger on one of these 4.0 L motors, if for
>nothing else, than to improve overall efficiency.

It wouldn't, though.
A preasurizer, whether turbo- or supercharger, forces more air into
the engine, which requires more fuel. If the 4.0 L engine delivers
adequate performance, a turbocharger will not improve fuel mileage. If
it doeasn't, the only time a turbocharger will increase power is
during acceleration, when economy is already at its worst. (Or at WOT
while cruising, which is kinda wrong on the street.)
Since a gas engine designed to run on the street with a turbo will
have a lower compression ratio that one without, overall economy will
be lower. If the CR isn't lowered, each use of the turbo hurts the
engine, and that's expensive.
>
>
> Hmmmm ....maybe I need to ask Jim Warman about doing this. It sounds
>intriguing.

There are reasons it's not done. You are far from the only one
intrigued, and no where near the first. :-)

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 08:15:21 -0400, "C. E. White"
> wrote:

>
>
>Big Bill wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 23:09:15 GMT, respk >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I used to have an V8 AWD Explorer which we used to tow our 25' TT about
>> >5000#. It towed it just fine as far as power goes. The only thing I
>> >noticed was that on a long hill the air conditioning would start to blow
>> > warmer air and then cool back down when we crested the hill. I also
>> >towed with a hensley hitch since the wheelbase is so short on the
>> >Explorer. Would not have tried it without one.
>>
>> I think the loss of AC is because trhere's a vacuum switch that cuts
>> power to the compressor when the vacuum drops beyond a certain point -
>> as when pulling hard, for example.
>
>I don't think they use a vacuum switch anymore. I think it
>is just built into the PCM logic. When you go past a certain
>power level, the PCM cuts off the compressor and at least in
>some cases, the alternator as well.
>
>Ed

Hmmm...
Maybe I should buy a newer Explorer?

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

Hmmm...good question. I'm pretty sure it doesn't keep that from happening
(RPM's seem to stay the same, etc), but I'll definitely pay close attention
and find out for sure. My original thinking was that it could potentially
help with gas mileage (engine not having to work as hard due to quicker
upshifts and not as quickly downshifting) assuming I don't get too heavy in
the pedal. If it's not allowing the torque converter to lock up, that
definitely wouldn't help gas mileage!

Thanks,

Wesley


"meldx" > wrote in message
...
> Wesley, if you leave your PowerMode on all the time, you probably
> restrain the lock converter of the Overdrive to kick in .

Big Bill wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 08:16:45 -0400, "C. E. White"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Big Bill wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Jean
>>>
>>>I've heard you lose about 2% of your power for each 1000 ft of
>>>altitude, but never heard about derating your towing capacity for
>>>altitude.
>>>The brakes, powertrain (except for power) and suspension don't change
>>>with altitude.
>>>The loss of power is self-limiting concerning towing.
>>
>>I believe the brakes will not be as effective at high
>>altitude becasue the less dense air will not cool them as
>>well.
>>
>>Ed
>
>
> I've never heard that before.
>

The figures I quoted were taken from Ford and Chevy towing manuals
(circa 1992) and relate to the vehicle's ability to pull a load. I'd
guess that the figures primarily relate to the engine, with maybe some
consideration for the tranny also.

Jean

When it comes to automobiles, Consumer Reports should be called Consumer
Opinions because their ratings are all about what gets reported. Everyone's
experience is different - I personally have driven nothing but Chevy trucks
since 1988 and all three of my vehicles have performed far better than CR
indicated they would, but CR never asked my opinion so I don't give much
credit to theirs.

As for initial depreciation, you only take the hit if you actually go to
sell the vehicle. Keep it and nothing happens. The same for resale
values - it only matters if you're going to re-sell the vehicle. This is
the basic truth for all vehicles - it's only worth what someone else is
willing to pay for it. You can claim your foreign truck is worth more than
my domestic, but if nobody is willing to pay you for it then the point is
moot.

One problem with off-lease vehicles is that you don't really know just how
your used vehicle was treated by the person who leased it before you.
Leased vehicles are notorious for not having been broken in correctly, not
having received the best or most timely maintenance, and not have been
driven in the most conservative manner. For some folks that's OK, but for
others not so much and they prefer buying new. Plus financing is more
appealing on new over used so that plays into it for some folks.

Cheers - Jonathan

"Mapanari" > wrote in message
...
> Have you ever heard of Consumer's Report magazine?
>
> They take no advertising nor free cars and rely upon thousands of yearly
> reports directly from consumers instead.
>
> You should never buy any America car unless it's a rebadged jap car, and
> you learn that Mercedes Benz, Jaguars, Hummers and many GM products are
> the
> worst made cars in the world.
>
> CR April issue with the year end auto issue update was on sale this month
> or last. Get it.
>
> Also, according to reports, Exploder sales are way down and your resale
> value is now **** due to bad resale value coupled with horrible gas
> prices.
>
> And of course, what in the hell are you thinking about buying a brand new
> car for unless you just won the lotto?
> The day you drive it off the lot, especailly an american car, it loses
> about 40% of it's value.
> If you have to have an exploder, buy a 2004 lease return and bargain like
> a
> demented lebanese trader.
>
> HTH
>
> --
> ---Mapanari---