Last time we had our hands on the new Ford Explorer, it finished sixth out of six in our three-row SUV comparison test. Yes, friends, dead last. But that car was a preproduction vehicle, and quite literally fell apart on us. This time around, by dint of its new 2.0-liter EcoBoost engine, I think the Explorer would have placed lower. Like below a city bus. Yes, my kneecaps are thankful Harry Bennett is dead.

"It's just such inefficient packaging," crowed bossman Angus MacKenzie as we stood contemplating Ford's big-on-the-outside, cramped-on-the-inside kiddie hauler. What exactly is so wrong with it? "It's intellectually dishonest," continued Angus. "It looks roomy, but it's not. It looks sporty, but it's not. And the interior looks good, but that MyFord Touch is a mess. It's just a bad vehicle." Keep in mind, Angus hadn't even driven the four-banger version yet.

But I had, and Mr. Mac is right. The Explorer is bad. Bad as in I can't remember driving a car as dynamically lifeless. Nor could others. "Handles like an oversize, overweight Volvo," states our Detroit scribe Todd Lassa. Says associate editor Mike Febbo, "It sits and handles like a truck, but it's a tall car." Executive editor Ed Loh feels much the same. "It's like driving a large overstuffed armchair. The cushions are very soft and squishy, but you sit so far inboard that it's weird." And then there's associate editor Rory Jurnecka's take: "Wallowy in the slalom and figure-eight with understeer being the flavor of choice. This isn't fun."

But at the end of the day, it's the EcoBoost's performance, and lack thereof, that really confounds and confuses us. The non-punch-pulling Febbo explains, "The EcoBoost is a horrible idea in this thing. Well, the four-banger is anyway. Let's get a V-6 EcoBoost in there." Scott Evans continues, "Soooo Slow. There's just not much throttle response." The EcoBoost is such a slug that to me, the white Explorer just doesn't register as a new car. It feels like it hails from the first half of the 1990s.

Slow, clumsy, pricey, thirstier than we would have thought, and a packaging disaster, the new Ford Explorer EcoBoost is not a Motor Trend favorite.

My own notes say, "Weak engine equals slow truck, but for mommies hauling four girls to ballet class, who cares?" But, as Jurnecka notes, the Explorer EcoBoost really is a tortoise. "Woefully slow. Is there actually a power band to be in, or does the engine just produce noise and heat? I can't even get this thing to 100 mph at the end of the straight." If you're curious, 0-60 mph happened in 9.2 seconds. On the bright side, that's half-a-second quicker than a Fiat 500. The little 101-hp Italian closes the gap in the quarter-mile, doing so in 17.2 seconds compared with the 2.0-liter Explorer's 16.9.

Yes, yes, fine, you don't buy the EcoBoosted version of the Explorer for performance. You buy it to sip fuel. Well, during our (pretty much) real-world testing, the 2.0-liter Explorer returned a combined 19.9 miles per gallon, an exactly 1.5-mpg increase over the standard 3.5-liter V-6 Explorer. That's an improvement, sure, but not an earth-shattering one. But, as tech editor Frank Markus points out, "At least it's $1,000 more expensive!" Also, we got that mpg number when the Explorer was empty and unloaded. Imagine if a dad plus four ballerinas plus all their junk were onboard. And we did, as our own Nate Martinez drove the EcoBoost Explorer around fully loaded and found it couldn't hold a gear. The engine is just mismatched to the vehicle. Instead of the 2.0-liter turbo as gas-miser, Ford would have been much better served offering up a diesel.

Then there's the interior. It's problematic. If you've never spent much time thinking about the 2012 Ford Explorer before, this should be your takeaway: It's not an SUV anymore. Rather, it's a crossover -- a tall wagon. Which is fine, or would be fine, except that the Explorer is based on the same blah Volvo sedan chassis that underpins the Taurus, a car we continually knock for having a deceptively small amount of interior space, among other problems. You can imagine what happens then if you stretch and repurpose a five-passenger sedan into a seven-seater SUV. Compromise, and lots of it.I'll let Frank take it from here. "Terrible dead pedal -- WAY too far aft of the accelerator. This fouled-up footwell geometry makes it nearly impossible for me to get comfortable in this cockpit. I ended up raising the seat way up as high as it could go to try to get my foot comfortable. I also resent sitting so far inboard. Hard to use the armrest comfortably and it makes the truck just feel gratuitously wide."The third row is absurdly cramped, and the second row isn't much better. Your teenager(s) will only resent you more. Says Loh, "Ergonomically it's mess. Side pillar intrusion is laughable. I saw Lieberman crack his noggin really hard whilst loading in coolers. Not so funny when you do the same thing yourself moments later." Febbo also gets a dig in. "Horrible seats, no support, no comfort, why are they here?"But the real 800-pound problem gorilla in the Explorer room is MyFord Touch. Just as an experiment, I decided to -- with the car parked -- keep my right arm as still as humanly possible and "touch" the fan control the same way 10 times in a row, moving only my index finger. Results? I got what I wanted six times out of 10. Which is, as my ninth-grade French teacher taught me so well, a D-minus. Zut alors! Says Rory, "Can Ford admit defeat with the MyTouch interface? How so many Ford owners enjoy this, I haven't a clue. I suspect they love the idea of it without playing with it much before purchasing then realize what a catastrophe it is."

There you have it. Slow, clumsy, pricey, thirstier than we would have thought, and a packaging disaster, the new Ford Explorer EcoBoost is not a Motor Trend favorite. We're not sure we even like the styling anymore. Here's Loh: "Looks like the Range Rover Evoque’s older, fatter, balding middle-aged brother." Concludes Mr. Lassa, "The Explorer may prove wrong the cliché that there are no bad cars anymore, as it's hard to find anything good to say about this SUV. At best, it's mediocre." Here's to next time.

I remember the days when the Explorer was THE Toyota Camry of SUVs..They were everywhere....Now it is diluted in an ultra competitive field and saddled with a $50,000 price tag, regardless of whatever else may be said here.

This Explorer is a hog. Drive a Jeep Grand Cherokee and you will see. Ford builds some great vehicles, this is not one of them. By the way, one dud rants about how ford took no bailout, true, but they did borrow hundreds of millions of $$$ from uncle Sam and have paid zero back so far. GM and Chrysler at least have paid most, if not all of their loans back. So that is a moot point. Ecoboost is OK, but not a huge advantage on mileage anymore. A v6 ecoboost in this Explorer would help with the power, but its still a mess. Drive one.

I think a few commenters should quit blindly defending this thing. I've had to drive one of these for a few months as a work vehicle now, while I cannot speak for the V6s, this EcoBoost is absolutely out of place here. And I love Ford. I still have an old 2001 zx3 in the garage. (which accelerates quicker and has a faster quarter mile, I might add. Still think this vehicle isn't terrible?)Every problem they've highlighted in this article is truth. It's a behemoth, and yet it's cramped. Actually, the tiny third row seats seem to have more legroom than the second row. However, this tank has taught me something. I will not purchase a new vehicle with a touchscreen. I know this limits my options, but I simply won't do it. This is the single worst new vehicle feature ever designed and implemented. You have to anchor your hand using your thumb on the dash, then attempt to touch the right button. Without anchoring your hand, you have about 0% chance of hitting the button. This is an automobile, not an iPad. How did these even get approved? In both of my vehicles, I can change anything I want without my eyes leaving the road. In this pile I have to navigate menus on a touchscreen. Excuse me? How is this even legal? Texting is illegal but this is somehow okay?

Worst car I've ever had the displeasure of driving. I'm not writing off Ford, but this has been a nightmare of a vehicle. I'm sad to hear the Taurus is cramped as well. I'll have to test that first hand.

I have owned an '11 for about 1 1/2 years. I have about 20,000 miles on it. First the good: It's pretty. I love the 3.5L V6. Very flexible motor. Excellent brakes. Now the bad: You don't know the HALF of it. It feels ENORMOUS. It's easier to park a Suburban. This thing is falling apart! It rattles, squeaks, and groans. They've already repaired internals in BOTH the engine and transmission! MOST uncomfortable seats EVER! It's been to the dealer to be put back together 8 times and it's going back again this week for more.And don't get me started on that DISASTER that is FordTouch. OMG!! It is an absolute abomination. It should NEVER, EVER have been sold to the public. Yes it's been updated to the latest version, but all that does is enable it to do the wrong thing FASTER. FLAT PANEL TOUCH CONTROLS DO NOT BELONG IN CARS. EVER!!!No, I didn't do enough of my homework before I bought it, so it's my fault. I will NEVER buy another Ford.

Having just purchased a 2013 Explorer Limited with My Ford Touch. I find My Ford Touch easy to use(I am 68 yrs old). I find the 3.5L engine to have plenty of power, the vehicle is quiet, comfortable and a joy to drive. I think your magazine writers must have had a burr under their butts.

We recently purchased a Ford Explorer with the apparently per your review evil 4 cycl Ecoboost. I recently traded a problem plagued 2010 GMC Acadia for it. We have had zero issues with it. For in town and highway driving it's excellent. Passing on two lanes no issues, and maybe it's not a race car so what?? A vacation trip netted us 31.4 MPG at highway speed, in town MPG is 14 to 16. We have no problems with it other than the naysayers. You don't want one don't buy it. Let those who do be left alone come on guys really??

We, meaning my wife and I, just purchased a 2013 Ecoboost Explorer. We love it. We get compliments about it all the time. It has more than enough room, the gas mileage is 24 average, and the My Ford Touch is the best interactive user friendly platform I have ever seen in a vehicle. What other vehicle can you say "Climate Temperature 72" and it does it. "Play Track Devil went down to Georgie" and it does it. "I'm Hungry" and it replies where would you like to eat. I agree MT is getting payed by someone to say all of these horrible things about the Explorer. You can get a Durango or Jeep with a 5.7 V8 and get 15 MPG (maybe). But it can do 0-60 in 7.0. I think MT should wake up. When gas goes back to $1.21 a gallon, I may read another review by MT. I have always held them to a pretty high standard until this article. They obviously have no clue anymore. Thanks for reading!"A very happy Ford Explorer Ecoboost owner!"

Well a 4 banger is just that a 4 banger. Not for agressive drive's. MT biased as always to imports. The new Eplorer, is roomy, the my touch being a windows based system, took awhile but now its all good. This vehicle is a crossover, not an suv, should not be compared to an SUV like durango. Ride is sooo much better in even a base EX the a new Dodge Durango Citidel. I sold Chrysler Products for 16 years, and came to Ford because I honastly got tired of hearing the customers who drive everyday complain about c their chrysler products. Ford isnt Lexus, in reliability, and more importanly its not Lexus in PRICE. For the money Ford makes a quality car. If your concern is power and handling buy a sports car, not an explorer. I will say that the third row sucks, but I don't sit back there. the front seats are fine. Drive one over night people, and look at the money. If you want a comfy third row look at the 87% butt ugly flex, they are great.

Since the MT editors can't be bothered to read comments on their videos I would like to address points made in their video, as I feel that it was a very unfair representation of the Explorer.I'll use a Durango for a baseline. It gets much less scrutiny from MT. All of these are just numbers. You'd have to sit in the car to make your own ideas.- It isn't roomy?Leg room : Front 40:40Leg room : Rear 39:38Head room: Front 41:39Head room: Rear 40:39- It isn't sporty?Weight 4,500:5,4000-60 8.0:7.31/4 16.5:15.5 *The 2011 Optima's time was ~16sec also*70-0 177:178Slalom 41:41G .78:.75-"MyFordTouch"A actual fix is being promised by Ford, and I'd expect a bit more respect considering that they could've left it how it was, because most drivers under 60 love it.-MPG in "Real World Testing"I don't own both so I cannot tell you from personal experience, but I can give you data from Fuelly for the 2012 Durango and Explorer.MPG 24.8:15.9

The MT review on the Ford Explorer Ecoboost is too subjective. Compare the 2012 Honda Pilot which has 250Hp V6 with a 4414 lbs weight and accomodates 8 passengers. These two SUVs are almost identical except in fuel economy. The Pilot has 18/25 mpg in city/hwy and Ford Ecoboost has 20/28. Some reviewers find the Honda pilot smooth and fast. You can buy more options with the Ford Ex compared to the Honda EX. Backup camera for the ford is $500.00 while the Honda Pilot is $1000.00. Rejecting a car because of this kind of reviews is not wise.

Oh yeah, another thing. Most people I know just need a car to get from one place to another and get out of the way of people who are going 0 - 60 in... whatever seconds. I, for one, feel very good about depriving OPEC of 3MPG every way I can.

Who is paying you? I love this car and bought one today. I have to agree on the third row seats, but everything else you say is ridiculous. Who wants to go 0 - 60 in... how many seconds? 100 mph? Where am I going to need to go that fast in an SUV? So call it a crossover and be done with it.

I am just like mortified at this review. True this engine is ridiculous in this car I totally agree but I def don't agree with the other commecnts. Even Car and Driver didn't rip it to shreds like this. I have the 2011 LIMITED with the V6 and sometimes I would like more power so I get the engine. But other than that its stunning. Purrs like a kitten super smooth. The seats are the best I have ever sat in and I have had mostly BMW and Mercedes. And don't even get me started on how amazing my ford touch is.

Fairly selective in their harshness. The previous generation Camry was a complete mess, and you could barely muster a response. It's hard for me to imagine wanting the 4 cylinder, but having spent some time behind the wheel this thing is competitive in an under-achieving class of vehicles. The interior space feels roomier to me than a Highlander and comparable to a Pilot. Funny, those cars weren't described like they committed the automotive crime of the century. We'll see if this new found frankness is consistent, situational, or merely a desperate ploy.

As a relatively new owner of a Explorer V6, XLT, I would have to disagree with much of what the MT writers say about the new Explorer. We went from a GMC Yukon XL to this vehicle and while the Yukon was a good truck, the Explorer is much nicer, rides better, is much quieter and gets about 6-7 mpg better on the highway. Before buying the Explorer, we drove most of the 3 seat smaller SUV on the market and felt that the Explorer was the most refined in regards to ride, handling and comfort. Have not had any problems with the MyTouch screen and there are traditional adjustments for the radio and climate below the screen if you prefer. I find the seats to be the most comfortable that I have sat in in a vehicle in some time. Not sports car seats, but they are not in a sports car! Took a 1000 mile trip to Colorado and after 8 hours in the car, I felt fine and my back was not sore or anything. With the cost of new cars these days, you have to drive a number of them and just pick the best for YOUR money.

While M/T has seemed to favor Fords, I give them credit for calling this vehicle like it is. Had they put a V6 EcoBoost in it, it would have been a much more acceptable vehicle, despite the fact Ford shrunk the wheelbase from the previous Explorer and it's still cramped inside. To pay more for a 4 cylinder, when the competition (Chrysler in particular) is offering a real SUV with a V8 option, is crazy. I can't imagine anyone who understands the very basics about vehicles ordering a 4 cylinder Explorer for MORE money than the more powerful V6. Better yet, pass on the Explorer and get a Durango, Grand Cherokee, Chevy Traverse, Toyota Highlander, etc.

Yea, it was harsh but what can you really expect from an extremely heavy SUV being powered by a little turbo 4-cyl. I'd like to know what these real world (pretty much) tests were. If you're flogging it around then I can clearly see the poor economy. I agree with parts of the article in that it makes no sense to charge more for this motor. It should be the base if anything and the fuel economy numbers are more of an advertisement to get people in the door. I've seen quite a few new Explorers on the road so they seem to be doing just fine, horrible review or not.

F u motortrend!!! Not only did u rob the f150 of its truck of the year award but to talk all this crap on Ford??? Go love ur plastic nasty silverado bailed out garbage all u dumb asses hating on the only company that didn't take ur money and is putting better cars out than any car co in the us, fools!!! That's y everything is the way it is GM got car and truck of the year, and the Cayman suv of the year??? That's why so many people are gonna go drive it for themselves cause their tired of all YOU DAM SELL OUTS HOW MUCH DID GM PAY U TO TRASH THIS TRUCK?? HOW DID THE NORTH AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL AUTO SHOW NAME THIS TRUCK OF THE YEAR??? I HOPE ALL THOSE PEOPLE THAT DON'T BELIEVE U AND GO DRIVE IT FOR THEMSELVES LIKE ME, WILL BUY IT!!!

The article may have been a bit harsh, but MT are not the only ones that have disliked this Ecoboost Explorer. Most of the commenters here seem to think MT soley hates this vehicle, but Car And Driver were equally unimpressed with this particular model.It is simply not enough engine for such a large vehicle, and that is all there is to it. Just buy the V6 model, save some money, and live a happy life.

A very unprofessional article. It seems that the magazine has an axe to grind with Ford, perhaps because of the whole pre production fallout from the first comparison test. You poor magazine writers are so abused; you should try out the shoes of the average working man. If this article appears in print, Ford please, please shut this magazine off entirely.

I bet 95% of the people on here haven't even test driven the Ecoboost Ex. I have, twice, and it really isn't that bad. Passing power was there, as well as for an uphill onramp(20 degree) onto a 70mph highway. Now, that being said, the Ex isn't going to pull you back into your seat when you get on the throttle like a damn M series beamer, but it does the job when you want the power. Especially for a person that wants a good looking vehicle,good gas mileage, with plenty of room, at a decent price tag. Very unfair review....

Sdiego:Putting a 2.0 liter 4 in a huge SUV is a DIRECT RESULT of a whole league of morons voting marxist tree-huggers into office (yes, we all know who they are). So, while your selected politicians are blathering about drowning polar bears, windmill-injured birds and other various world's in demise propaganda, our beleaguered automakers are wasting millions in resources trying to figure out how to make an eight gerbil vehicle run on two.All actions have their consequences - The Ford SUV and your "social issue" are indeed connected. Here's some advice: If you do not understand politics, PLEASE DON'T VOTE.

Well, Sdiego, rather than continuing to fixate on THAT the Explorer is bad, why not explore WHY it is bad? What went wrong? Did Ford, which essentially created the popular "family utility" SUV category suddenly go senile and make a piece of crap for fun? No. And the truth is is pretty straightforward: the incessant demands of the gods of Fuel Economy, as dictated by The Government. Find one press release from Ford that says anything other than essentially "we knew we had to transform the Explorer to meet fuel economy standards".Ford discovered there was no possible way to reach the required Fuel Efficiency standards in the previous high volume SUV BOF platform on the previous best-in-class Explorer. Throw in a little international oil shortage and a 10% panic rise in gas prices, and you have the makings of a national disaster. Ford had no choice but to sterilize the much loved Explorer, and essentially restyle an unpopular Freestyle / Taurus X station wagon and call it the "New Explorer". What a shame.

I'm out Motor Trend. I can't trust a rag whose opinions are so different from mine. I bought an Explorer after testing several other SUV's. I found it the best over deal where I got the most for my money. I took it on a 2400 mile round trip recently. I drove straight through and the cabin was so comfortable I hopped right out of the seat at each stop without any problem from my persistently bad back. Also, during the trip I ran into a very nasty storm in Georgia. While all other vehicles were pulled off to the side of the freeway, the extremely well functioning wipers and a ride that tracked very true allowed me to continue my journey. Lastly, while the MyFord Touch system has been maligned I found it extremely useful as well as the redundant steering wheel controls. If you've got an iPod or a smart phone you shouldn't have any issues picking it up, and I love the voice controls. The kids love it and always want to drive that vehicle and I will never own another vehicle without telematics.

Well, unfortunately here is exactly what you will get when you are forced to follow The Regime of Socialist Party Chairman Obama's orders, and focus exclusively on increasing fuel economy, and abandon all other aspects of driving enjoyment and practical utility. This vehicle foreshadows and proclaims what is to come. But we went through this drill before in the 1970s, when high performance was neutered, and we hated it then as well. Congratulations America! This is what you voted for and demanded. Hope you enjoy the Koolaid.

Few points to be noted: It is certainly not every buyer dream to stomp the paddle for 0-60 experience. I am sure the '07/last Explorer it replaced was doing the same thing with V8 kinda fuel exploring. So the new fuel economy & horsepower relativity for the same kinda buyer wanting to replace, is refreshing news! However, I am all out for deceptive exterior & interior; now really less airy with heavy pillars Angus MacKenzie is quite right, but I think that's due to new safety standards. Still designers/ engineers could've come up with a better solution.Last word on My Ford Touch system. Remember when BMW pioneered iDrive in 7 series sedan, it was and still the complex (German) system in the world. Simple reason: the car aimed at the group (company bosses) who were still learning how to use mobile phones! Remember there was no Blackberry or iPhone at all. But was a benchmark for rest of automakers to follow & build upon onwards. I would say, let there be more light. Haven't you changed your phones lately?

$42,000 for a 17sec suv that gets 19mpg. Looks like this ecoboost crap is a big joke. 4 cylinders isnt enough to move a 4500lbs vehicle,and when that turbo spools up,which it will a lot to move this big turd,and the MAF picks up on the extra air,its gonna pump more fuel and there goes your gas mileage.

Okay -- okay, enough with the verbal slug-fest. I've seen you guys snuggle up to vehicles in this segment with similar flaws. Tinnitus-inducing road-noise and hibachi-lid styling are welcome if the candidate has an "H" in its grill.Unfamiliar ergonomics, inconsistent MyFordTouch and general reader-alienation aside, I agree that conventional wisdom suggests that Ford has no business putting a 2 liter 4 in a 4,500 lb. vehicle. But, after comparing numbers with old-school truck-based suvs, this combination is not far off from what we can expect going forward with respect to fuel consumption requirements and crossover vehicle performance capabilities. After all, this truck (car?) is more powerful and efficient than say a 1980 Bronco V8 weighing the same. All that aside, from a buyer's perspective, the Explorer needed to remain more truck-like to keep its popularity among the loyal and for this segment, a longer wheelbase version of the Edge is what we should really be looking at.

I have said this before but it bears repeating ... only MOTORTEND comes to this conclusion re the Explorer ... in fact, when it was first released, MOTORTREND sang its praises to the hilt .. like every other car rag ..SO really one has to take what we read with a grain of salt .. GO DRIVE ONE and find out yourself ..Whereas I wouldn't buy any crossover, obviously some folks do and the Explorer is leading in sales.

I too was surprised at the bluntness when I read this, to say the least. I am not the world's biggest crossover fan in general, but I agree that the explorer is a half baked effort. The rear and 2nd row seats were as cramped as MT said they were, and the idea of putting a turbo 4 pot in a car that weighs 4500lbs is idiotic. I am normally a huge fan of ford, but the sheer cheek of even associating this car with the explorer marque is tragic. Needless to say, there will be a lot less people buying explorers on blind faith after this generation. respect to MT for publishing what was actually on their mind though...

I have never seen a group of writers speak so bad of a vehicle so quickly and to me, it's refreshing because it's not the standard vanilla story put out. It's just simple- it's crappy. End of story. No comparison test needed. It's just bad.

Fair enough, but sales still don't tell much in my opinion. The Camry is the best selling mid-size. There's no way I think it's the best mid size, but that's just my opinion. Impala sells more than the Charger I bought, but I guarantee many people won't even look at a Dodge simply cause they don't like them and think they are crap yet never owned one.As far as the ecoboost 2.0, isn't that the explorer's "premium" engine? Maybe that's why they're so hard on it. The V6 felt better in every way and is cheaper. Why pay extra? The V6 in the Durango is the base engine, with the HEMI being optional.

ICUH8N-You cant compare burgers to cars.. A burger costs $1. People don't research burgers before they buy them. Most cars cost over $20,000 which is a lot of money for 90% of people. I don't know a single person that has purchased a car before doing research and test driving it. I do agree that dodge improved the interior of its cars. But I still think Ford is far ahead in design and feel. On a side note.. I looked at the quarter mile times for Durango and Ecoboost EXP.Durango V6 1/4 mile: 16.6 secondsEcoBoost Explorer 1/4 mile: 16.9 secondsThat's a difference of .3 seconds! I dont think a human would be able to tell a tiny time difference like that. Yet... Motortrend never bashed the V6 Durango out of proportion.

SuperM-Mcdonalds sells the most burgers, doesn't mean they are the best. Sales aren't everything. I have nothing against the Explorer, I actually like Ford (as well as GM and Chrysler). I'm not all that biased, but for you to say the Durango's interior is "plastic and crap" leads me to believe you haven't been in one. I've been inside and out, literally touched every panel and surface and knob in the new Durango, and I gotta say, Chrysler is no longer the king of crappy interiors. The Jeep Grand Cherokee is even on Ward's top 10 interiors for 2011 (as is the 2011 Charger, which I own and am impressed more and more every day). The Grand Cherokee and the Durango essentially have the same interior.

I don't see this as a hit piece (I didn't think the 1st review with the "pre-production one" was either a few months back). The real issue isn't how bad the Explorer is but just how much better the competition is. The Explorer name has some huge credibility and hence customers will blindly purchase it- especially those who take there kids in who love all the tech crap.

Here are the sales numbers for july 2011. I know its not for the ecoboost version but i'm just comparing durango v6 to EXP v6 for comparison reasons since people think they should stop producing the new Explorers.Durango July sales (5,827 units)Explorer July sales (9,897 units)Obviously Ford is doing something right since the EXP is selling very well...Sources: http://ikicktires.com/2011/07/04/chrysler-reports-sales-surge-in-june-2011/http://corporate.ford.com/investors/investor-news/investor-news-detail/pr-ford-motor-co26rsquos-july-sales-34976

Wow Motortrend.. I cant believe they published this article. I'v never in my life read an article bashing something this bad. Obviously Motortrend is biased because I test drove both the 2011 Durango and 2011 explorer. They had almost nothing bad to say about the 2011 durango which is slower, interior is plastic and crap, fuel economy is worse even tho its a v6 and it has nowhere near the technology the EXP has. Motortrend has definitely lost its credibility by actually posting this "Crappppy" article. Time to cancel my subscription. *And no, i didnt buy the 2011 EXP. I got the 2010 Tahoe.*