Extended Test Drive 2018 Ford Ford Explorer Limited

We took a trip to Vermont. One of the objectives was to drop off an air compressor and a shelving unit we previously cleared out of our storage unit. These do not really fit in the BRZ so we decided to rent something a bit bigger.
It should be noted that we had an issue with the tires on this rental, this is discussed in another post.
Our first challenge was figuring out whether or not a Ford Explorer would have sufficient space with the rear two rows down for a 78" shelving unit piece. This proved really hard to find. Apparently the dimensions with seats folded down were not published for this generation of Explorer. Holly and I spent roughly 1 hour 15 minutes collectively searching for this information and came up with some board dimensions (kind of) off a Ford Explorer forum. Just to contrast we then searched Subaru BRZ cargo dimensions and found full dimensions (rear seats up, down, and removed) within 3 minutes. Funny how difficult it is to find anything except cubit feet of cargo volume for a vehicle that people might actually haul lumbers or other stuff in.

Rear of the SUV loaded, plenty of space for the air compressor. Just enough space for the shelving unit.

In terms of styling I would say it is just squared up enough to be a "macho" SUV. Truck like in its appearance. And yet just rounded enough on the edges with enough windshield rake that the fuel economy would not be awful due to wind resistance.
We found the headlights to be fine though likely aimed a bit high if behind a shorter vehicle (a constant sore spot for the Subaru BRZ).
The top grill also looks funny, and as best I can tell that is not an active grill.

This vehicle is large and heavy but handled its weight well. Based on information online the weight is in the ballpark of 4,400+ lbs. In our driving we had some body roll, though not a ton on turns and highway ramps.
We found a fair amount of side to side oscillation though, just from bumps in the road. My guess is the vehicle is under damped. It would have been a bit nicer if the vehicle were more quickly settled when passing over road imperfections. The ride was pretty comfortable and quiet.

The vehicle reacts immediately when the steering wheel is moved off center. There was no dead zone we could find. Still there was no feel for the front wheels through the steering wheel and no communication through the driver's seat for what the rear wheels were doing.
This made the two occasions where the rear stepped out due to the driving conditions and very bald tires (more here) rather disconcerting.
At 20 MPH a 90 degree turn required 135 degrees of steering wheel input. The steering rack was quicker than I thought it would be.

The steering did not feel particularly slow or hesitant (an issue we had with the Mustang we previously rented). I felt lane changes were a bit slow, at least initially. Holly did not feel this.
Holly noted a few of our exit ramps because I was seeing how much momentum could be carried, here are her notes:
"First exit ramp: Corolla brakes in front of us. Silly. We did not have to shed that much speed. Did not feel the body roll too much at such a slow speed."
Many miles later in our drive...
"We caught up with a VW Tiguan on an exit ramp. Still haven't had a chance to test it properly on a corner."
Basically, it handled well enough. I think with this little feedback and this much capability I have a better understanding of why people get in trouble with their SUVs. They certainly handle well enough to let you take things at speed and with the lack of feedback (feel) you certainly might be deceived into driving this like something smaller and sportier than it actually is.
Holly also noted:
"Oh shit handle not as nice as BRZ. But what is? It is not unintuitively badly placed. It is in the right spot but you have to angle your wrist down to grab it."

You certainly sit higher and more upright than we are used to. We are also not used to being able to see the tops of mini SUVs; or cars in general.
I thought it would have been nice to have a higher arm still on drivers side to rest my arm on while driving long distances.
Despite the more commanding view rear and side visibility left something to be desired. The large C pillars and small view out the rear windshield leave a lot to be desired. The mirrors were certainly useful and usable but I personally would have liked some sort of camera system to help with blind spots. The side mirrors automatically fold when you park it so that the vehicle takes up the much less space (and the mirrors are protected). In order to take the photos here we had to have it running.
Rear windshield wiper with fluid. Heated mirrors were turned on when the rear defroster was turned on, at least according to the owner's manual.

We found that the transmission did a pretty good job of kicking down a gear when more was required of it, even in cruise control. It also did a pretty good job of managing the power ban and maintaining fuel efficiency. There were six gears. You could only use manual override while in "sport" mode. We found acceleration was sufficient to not use the sport mode for anything. It did hold revs longer.
When using sport mode and manual gear selection I was very happy with the amount of engine braking provided. When taking highways off ramps gears 4 and 3 provided very meaningful amount of engine braking.

With all the seats folded down there is quite a bit of space to load stuff. The seats were also designed in such a way to leave a nice flat cargo floor.
Also, as you can see the second row windows are pretty big but the C and D pillars are also rather large which helped contribute to the cave like rear visibility.

The front seats were comfortable enough. We started getting a little fatigued by them after about 3 hours in them. I believe both driver and passenger seats were heated, cooled, and power adjustable for height, tilt, and lumbar. The headrests were manually adjustable.
Driver seat moves back out of position when you turn the car off for easier ingress and egress and then automatically moves back into position when you start the engine.

The instrument cluster was typical Ford. I do with there was a better RPM display when looking at fuel economy though. We pretty well drove it like this, though other options could be used.

Cup holders and so on were convenient and were lit at the bottom. The stereo reminded me a little bit of the second generation Mazda3 with its big central volume knob.
There were plenty of steering wheel controls. The automatic gear selector had the Ford manual selection push buttons on the side.

There were a lot of options for climate controls. Aside from heated and cooled seats the front was dual zone. The rear was its own third zone. As far as I could tell the rear was serviced by the vents in the ceiling.
There was also a heated steering wheel. This was only available via the touch screen (as far as we could tell). Also vent selection appeared to be a mix of touch screen and physical buttons. I probably prefer everything to be done outside the touch screen menu.
Holly really liked the heated steering wheel. Our biggest gripe regarding that feature was that it was controlled by touch screen only and that there was very little heat at 9 and 3 on the wheel. Since this was where we typically hold the wheel it was very noticeably missing there.

The gas pedal was very light with almost no resistance or feel. We did not like this. It made judging throttle position (especially in more wintry shoes) very vague. The brake pedal had more resistance but no meaningful feel. Still braking was even throughout the pedal which was fine. We had no complaints for the brakes considering the size and weight of this vehicle.
I do not know how well the brakes would work for towing, but the towing capacity is 2,000 lbs. in standard trim and 5,000 lbs. if optioned (standard on the 3.5L EcoBoost engine options).

Second row seating appeared adequate for adults. Only the passenger side appeared to have a slider for moving the seat forward and back. There was a 60/40 split for this row.
The second row also has its own charging outlets and climate controls.

Time for some cargo dimensions, and adding some choice words here for future search-ability:
Fifth Generation Ford Explorer cargo dimensions:
With both third and second row down the longest length possible behind the front seats is 84 inches. This drops to 78 inches with the front seats all the way back.
The rear is 40 inches wide at its narrowest point (due to the wheel arches).
Between the rear passenger doors we found 62 inches of available width extending back 30 inches.
With the second row up and third row down we had 47 inches of length if the second row was all the way back, 53 inches behind the passenger side if slid all the way forward. but this only had a 25 inch wide pass through to the rest of the rear.

With all the seats folded down there were 37 inches to the ceiling.
The rear cargo hatch was pretty well unobstructed.

Putting down and lifting up the third row would be operated by a convenient set of electronic controls.
Putting the cargo dimensions in their more published format:
Cargo Area Length to Row 1: 78-84 in
Cargo Volume to Row 1: 80.7 ft³
Cargo Area Length to Row 2: 47 in (up to 53 in, passenger side only)
Cargo Volume to Row 2: 43.8 ft³
Cargo Area Length to Row 3: 27 in
Cargo Volume to Row 3: 21 ft³
Cargo Box Width @ Wheelhousings: 40 in

With the third row up there were 27 inches behind it and it was 46 inches wide. This space also drops lower than the rear opening.
As can be seen with the headrests on the second row up the rear visibility gets worse.

With the third row headrests it is even worse.
The third row looked best for kids or adults for rather bried trips. I would not likely want to spend a long trip back there at all. Also very dark and seemingly more C pillar than window.

The engine was decently responsive. It looks like our rental came with the 3.5L Duratec Ti-VCT V6 which produces 290 hp (216 kW) @ 6500 RPMs and 255 lb⋅ft (346 N⋅m) @ 4000 RPMs.
We were turning 2250 RPM in 6th gear at 75 MPH.
The previous driver had a reported computer average of 19.6 MPG. During our trip to Burlington, VT and back we got the following:
24.1 MPG average over 376.4 miles reported by the SUV's computer, 22.9 MPG based on our math (376.4 miles, 16.440 gallons to fill the tank).
29.3 MPG average over 66 miles reported by the SUV's computer, 26.3 MPG based on our math (66.0 miles, 2.508 gallons to fill the tank).
Our calculated fuel economy for the 442.5 mile trip is 23.4 MPG which is less optimistic than the display shown in the dash of 24.8 MPG.
(Honestly, I am a little disappointed now that I did the math.)

Conclusion:
Overall neither of us found this as onerous to drive as we thought it was going to be. It handled better than expected and was more comfortable than expect. It was much nicer than hauling stuff (especially for a 400+ mile round trip) than a rental cargo van or truck.
Compared to our other most recent Ford rental we found it a lot less claustrophobic. The roof line was a lot higher, which certainly helped. The glass house was much larger. We are not sure whether the dash was shorter or just appeared shorter but we did not feel like we were in a deep dark bathtub.
All in, it was not unpleasant.

I would still encourage you to read about the tires though.