2015 Ford Everest - Page 7

chookaradley · 31-01-2015, 10:59 PM

Maybe in need of performance upgrade?
This surprised me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0J0KcLrOjzk

aZ` · 31-01-2015, 11:18 PM

That surprised me too chookaradley, for two reasons.
I have heard numerous complains from amerok owners/test drivers that they feel sluggish.

Secondly, my work van 2wd Vw transporter has the bi turbo 132kw 400nm engine and my wife's awd sz 140kw 440nm feels like it has about 200nm more rather than 40, both empty or towing.

Is it really all in the amarok's trans or are there some numbers games going on here?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Road_Warrior · 31-01-2015, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chookaradley

Maybe in need of performance upgrade?
This surprised me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0J0KcLrOjzk

Wow ok. I guess that 8 speed in the Amarok had a bit to do with that?

SumoDog68 · 31-01-2015, 11:32 PM

In my experience Amarok auto is quickest of the rest - still not a match for 550 though. Manual Amarok is more than 4s slower to a 100 - 550 9s - Amarok over 13.

aZ` · 31-01-2015, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SumoDog68

In my experience Amarok auto is quickest of the rest - still not a match for 550 though.

If only Nissan didn't turn the pathfinder into a kluger and offered the 550.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SumoDog68 · 31-01-2015, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aZ`

If only Nissan didn't turn the pathfinder into a kluger and offered the 550.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can get R51 550 Pathfinder - they were around 75k new. Pathfinder swaps from monocoque to frame on body every generation - next one will be a body on chassis again :-)
Nissan will probably offer something similar to Everest , MU-X etc. based on new Navara but most likely without V9X.

aZ` · 31-01-2015, 11:57 PM

👍

Anyway, back to speculation about the Everest.

Is the 3.2 duratorq available in any other cars in a more powerful configuration?
You have me concerned the 470 may not be adequate (assuming it really is 470) when towing heavy loads.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SumoDog68 · 01-02-2015, 12:13 AM

Ranger is rated to tow up to 3.5T - 470 Nm is more than enough - mighty 100 series cruiser with 1HD-FTE has 430 ...of course torque distribution in rev range is more important than just a peak number.

chookaradley · 01-02-2015, 12:15 AM

Is a Prado same as a Hilux 340nm?. Makes the Ranger/Everests 470 look pretty good. In regards to the Amarok, I tend to think it's a higher stressed engine than the Ranger so may not go the distance, but I'm not sure the Ranger has been a pillar of reliability.

wranger · 01-02-2015, 01:35 AM

I wouldn't read too much into that video to be honest, driven many Amaroks and own a Ranger and I'm confident in saying the Ranger is quicker. Some reviews quote the manual 3.2 as nearly 3 seconds more to 100 than I've timed mine at.

Plus a remap, exhaust and intercooler on the Ranger nets 200whp, at which point the auto is only about a half second behind a 3.0 Jeep at 8 sec to 100 looking at this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wsHgU-t33c

chookaradley · 01-02-2015, 10:17 AM

Any at can be re mapped and upgraded to gain performance. I guess the alarming thing is that the numbers don't seem to reflect the actual performance.

aZ` · 01-02-2015, 10:24 AM

I'm not convinced the majority of brand new Everest drivers would be happy to risk their driveline warranty to gain performance.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

galaxy xr8 · 01-02-2015, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chookaradley

Is a Prado same as a Hilux 340nm?. Makes the Ranger/Everests 470 look pretty good. In regards to the Amarok, I tend to think it's a higher stressed engine than the Ranger so may not go the distance, but I'm not sure the Ranger has been a pillar of reliability.

No the Prado is 410nm.

Ben73 · 01-02-2015, 03:26 PM

Had a mate test drive a Ranger and Amarok back to back and said it was very noticeable the Ranger had more torque and more power.
Another work mate bought and Amarok. He is have a number of problems with it now and wishes he bought a Ranger instead.
A mates brother has a Rok as well and recently destroyed the engine. It's 2.5 years old, but I think there may be more to the story. He may have done some mods to the engine.

I like the Amarok but at this point in time I am glad I have a Ranger instead.

I think if the Everest had the 3.2 with 470nm that would be more than enough for most buyers.

Itsme · 01-02-2015, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben73

Had a mate test drive a Ranger and Amarok back to back and said it was very noticeable the Ranger had more torque and more power.
Another work mate bought and Amarok. He is have a number of problems with it now and wishes he bought a Ranger instead.
A mates brother has a Rok as well and recently destroyed the engine. It's 2.5 years old, but I think there may be more to the story. He may have done some mods to the engine.

I like the Amarok but at this point in time I am glad I have a Ranger instead.

I think if the Everest had the 3.2 with 470nm that would be more than enough for most buyers.

View these two links & eat humble pie!!!

http://youtu.be/0J0KcLrOjzk
http://youtu.be/8sIvuxW0OTs

Warrenk · 01-02-2015, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chookaradley

Maybe in need of performance upgrade?
This surprised me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0J0KcLrOjzk

This video tells another story

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28vo...ature=youtu.be

Warren

aZ` · 01-02-2015, 07:32 PM

Unfortunately tug of war videos often have very little to do with hp or torque but everything do to with the coefficient of friction between the tyre and road surface.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

XR Martin · 01-02-2015, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben73

Had a mate test drive a Ranger and Amarok back to back and said it was very noticeable the Ranger had more torque and more power.
Another work mate bought and Amarok. He is have a number of problems with it now and wishes he bought a Ranger instead.
A mates brother has a Rok as well and recently destroyed the engine. It's 2.5 years old, but I think there may be more to the story. He may have done some mods to the engine.

I like the Amarok but at this point in time I am glad I have a Ranger instead.

I think if the Everest had the 3.2 with 470nm that would be more than enough for most buyers.

I know a guy who had two Amorak engines pop.

baboon · 01-02-2015, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aZ`

Unfortunately tug of war videos often have very little to do with hp or torque but everything do to with the coefficient of friction between the tyre and road surface.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also if the drivers had weetbix or eggs for breakfast...

vztrt · 02-02-2015, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rapid_Axe

Still ugly as when I first come across this thread.

Also no petrol option rules it out for me as well.

What makes you think there is no petrol option?

Quote:

Originally Posted by trublu

The Chinese built Everest gets the 3 engine options, Australian model will only have 3.2 diesel.

Guess again

Franco Cozzo · 02-02-2015, 12:19 PM

Who the hell wants a petrol SUV?

TheSneakiness · 02-02-2015, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoke Pursuit

Whats the infatuation with petrol?

Having owned a turbo diesel 4x4 for 6 and bit years comparing everything to a petrol car its not worth owning one.

Cost heaps in maintenance
Cost heaps for consumables
Cost heaps to fill up, and get the same range out of a modern petrol engine
Cost more in insurance

See a pattern?

You would need to have boulders in your head to even try and justify why you need a 4x4.

Franco Cozzo · 02-02-2015, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rapid_Axe

Having owned a turbo diesel 4x4 for 6 and bit years comparing everything to a petrol car its not worth owning one.

Cost heaps in maintenance
Cost heaps for consumables
Cost heaps to fill up, and get the same range out of a modern petrol engine
Cost more in insurance

See a pattern?

You would need to have boulders in your head to even try and justify why you need a 4x4.

My diesel car isn't a 4x4 but:

Oil filter is $25 from Ford
Oil costs $80/5L like any other good quality 5W30 full synthetic
I fill it up every 900km which was $75 when diesel was around $1.50/L
Insurance is the same as my other cars

aZ` · 02-02-2015, 12:48 PM

Sz terry petrol capped price minor service $280
Sz terry diesel capped price service $285.

10.6l/100 in the petrol and 8.2 for the diesel.

That's 1590l of petrol between services.
And 1230l of diesel.
If petrol is $1/l that's $1590 of fuel between services.
If diesel $1.18/l that's $1451.40 of fuel between services.

So five bucks extra to service and about 140 saved on fuel.

I see them much of a muchness, but for my purpose (towing) diesel reigns supreme.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

vztrt · 02-02-2015, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Who the hell wants a petrol SUV?

There is a whole continent that want (actually will only buy) an ethanol powered car.
Different countries have different wants. Its also gives choice to the consumer.

new2ford · 02-02-2015, 01:07 PM

Diesels don't stack up financially in terms of WOL costs (of which fuel cost is only a small propertion). Ford used this argument for ages when trying the resist putting diesel in Territory but unfortunately the market thought only of fuel costs/range.

You have to own the vehicle for quite a few years to amortise the additional costs (upfront and ongoing) of diesel. If, for example, you compare the WOL costs of a diesel vs petrol Territory TX using the NRMA/RAC operating costs calaculator (which includes every input - service costs, depreciation etc etc), the diesel costs $43 a week in fuel compared to the petrol at $53 a week (using fuel prices prevailing at the time of survey), but the whole of life operating costs for both are the same at $251 a week.

I've searched other models in the past where the WOL costs for the petrol version is cheaper than the diesel version.

I'm impressed by modern diesel engines, but modern petrol engines have almost closed the gap on fuel economy and you don't get that rattle which I don't like. The feds greenhouse guide also shows better air pollution ratings for the petrol versions. Diesel has its roles, like that torque, but for ordinary driving I'd go for petrol.

TheSneakiness · 02-02-2015, 01:45 PM

I'm not here to start ****, I've had my experience with diesel and it didn't favour what we had.

I would prefer petrol first over anything, LPG second and hybrid/diesel third.

Back to Everest topic at hand.

Vesper Martini · 02-02-2015, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Who the hell wants a petrol SUV?

There must be some.
Top end Euro SUV's with 6L twin turbo v8s's sell well, Jeeps SRT8 is getting quite common on the road
the new Patrol has no diesel. (but it may struggle to sell in AUS)
and my point of interest the Ford Explorer has no diesel but instead runs and economy designed Petrol Turbo.

I have one, and its considerably more powerful and cheaper to run than our other diesel. but its not apples vs apples

Bossxr8 · 02-02-2015, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Who the hell wants a petrol SUV?

Your average American by the trailer load.

RANGEREST · 02-02-2015, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trublu

View these two links & eat humble pie!!!

http://youtu.be/0J0KcLrOjzk
http://youtu.be/8sIvuxW0OTs

I'd like to see a drag with the same two vehicles but with 2 ton trailers on the back of them, Not many 4x4s can keep up with my Ranger whilst towing, 200 series and big Americans aside.
I'm keen on the Everest as a replacement for my wifes territory, but the engine bay will want to be well insulated for my to be converted.