Test Drive...?

[gtnator]

So had the opportunity to test drive a loaded limited max and a XLT FX4 max-

I'm coming from a 2010 Escalade ESV so the that the only full size SUV I can compare these to. The Escalade has the magnetic ride shocks and I replaced the factory 22" wheels with 18" wheels with larger sidewall tires.

In no particular order here are some impressions- keep in mind these were limited dealer test drives so these are initial impressions.

RIDE/HANDLING

No comparison - I really don't think the Escalade ever rode well- but the Expedition is light years better.

The loaded Limited had the 22" wheels and CDC- this vehicle was very impressive- very smooth ride over patched asphalt and potholed roads and railroad tracks, very little impact sensation and no bounce or shudder through structure. On a smooth highway it was like butter- I honestly was shocked- I expected to not really like the 22" wheel ride but boy was I wrong. I would compare the ride to mid/high end sedans- rode as well to me as an Audi A6, Honda Accord, or Lexus ES300.
Also as a note- this unit does have a fairly high ride height- noticeably taller than the Escalade when parked next to each other- and also noticeable from the drivers seat. I do think this is why some reviewers may feel the vehicle drives bigger than the GM units ( although I have the previous generation GMT900 platform) - its not that its ponderous or lacks steering response, but you just feel like your in a larger vehicle- I think ride height and the view out of the windshield of a fairly flat wide hood induces this impression, its more of a visual impression versus a handling response impression.

FX4- this unit rides on 18" wheels with 65 sidewall tires. I have more seat time in this rig, so more road variation traveled.
Overall ride is very good. On smooth roads I don't think there is much difference between the two Expedition vehicles - still light years better than the Escalade. On rougher roads/pavement would say the Fx4 is not as smooth as the limited/CDC unit. A little more impact sharpness comes through to the body and over a longer stretch of rough road I did notice more roughness coming through. Again way better than the Escalade but not a impressive as the limited/CDC.

I was also able to drive this unit on a more high twisty two lane road- the steering is nicely weighted although I do think there is more steering feedback from the GM GMT900 platform. Overall limits are very good- the vehicle was able to carry more velocity thru the turns than the Escalade, and honestly more velocity than I would want to carry with any passengers in the vehicle. My overall impression is the FX4 is more stiffly shocked than the Limited/CDC.

INTERIOR QUALITY

The XLT unit was equipped with the 202A package
Limited equipped with the 302A
2010 Escalade is Platinum model

Expedition- In both units I was impressed. The soft touch points on dashboard, armrests, and door panels is good to very good overall. I don't know but my impression is the touch points on doors is leather in the Limited versus a pleather material in the XLT- although I'm not sure of this. Either way the interior quality as equipped on the two Expeditions is very similar. The major difference is the wood like trim used on the center counsel and door panels of the limited versus the graphite plastic used in the XLT. I like the impression of quality better on the Limited, although my wife had the opposite response. She felt the wood trim in the Limited looked artificial and appreciated the simple/honest plastic of the XLT. To the touch the materials both feel of quality solid materials.

I own a 2014 Ford fusion energy and a lot of the switch gear and plastics look and feel familiar. Of note the rotary knobs for radio/climate/ and transmission are the same in both Expedition vehicles- and I found the tactile response and weighty feel of the units to be of premium quality- nice as these are going to be the most used switchgear in the vehicles.

I will agree with one review that I read that the plastic surrounding the center stack leaves a little to be desired. Its a common ford plastic that I remember from my 2005 F150- there is nothing inherently wrong with it but at these price points it would be nice to see little more effort. Also based on the Ford website I thought the XLT had aluminum trim- but is the graphite color plastic.

The seats in both in terms of construction, padding and support. and quality of leather were of good quality. I believe the seats in both the Limited and XLT were the same- Front seat quality was great extremely comfortable- same with the second and third row quality. It might just be because I saw the limited first- but I do feel the leather quality was higher in the limited- not sure of this, just how I remember it.

I would say the the plastics, and switchgear are superior to the Escalade.

SPACE

The front seat passengers have as much leg room and shoulder room as any person could want. I'm not a big guy, just under 6' and 190lbs- so I can position the drivers seat so far back I can touch the pedals- so I would say plenty of room.

Second row- both expeditions had bench seats. Leg room is plentiful. All three seating positions in the third row slide and recline independently, and the amount of legroom is awesome. I was comfortable in any of the three seats, and would be for an extended amount of time. Our current Escalade has captain chairs in the second row- so I can't make a direct comparison- but my impression is the Expedition has more legroom and space in the second row.

Third row- better seating position in the Expedition and honestly a decent amount of leg room. The fact that all the seating positions in the second row can slide allows you to allocate leg room between the second and third rows. I found the third row to be inhabitable and fairly comfortable but with the second row bench in place as an adult I wouldn't want to spend a longer trip in the third row.

cargo space- in the rear cargo I was actually surprised but the escalade ESV does seem to have larger cargo space- width they are about the same, it just seems like an extra 3-4" of depth for the Escalade.

Center counsel space is huge- I think it could swallow a 12 pack of soda- there is a small sliding shelf to help organize and there is a 12vDC receptacle in the storage area as well. i would say similar to the space in the Escalade- GM splits this space into two separate compartments- so more of preference than total size.

Glovebox- Usefully sized in the Expedition- two shelves and to me a fair amount of room- much more useful than the Escalade.

ENGINE

So this is my first time with the 3.5 ecoboost. All I can say is the Expedition moves really well. I honestly didn't floor the Expedition so I couldn't tell you who would win in a drag race- but the ecoboost just has tons of torque- thats the main personality of this motor - just dip into the throttle and the expedition just goes. Where the 6.2 v8 in the Escalade needs some revs to get a response the ecoboost is more like a diesel motor, no revs really needed just a massive reserve of torque that moves the vehicle forward.

I do have an aftermarket exhaust on the Escalade so I do get a nice burble and exhaust note from the V8, in comparison the ecoboost really doesn't have an exhaust note or much personality. The ecoboost is smooth- better throttle response and most likely performance compared to the GM V8- I think around town the expedition will be more responsive.

TRANSMISSION

The six speed in the GMT600 platform works- I find some the gearing ratios to be a bit wide but overall no complaints from me.

The 10 speed in the Expedition shifts smoothly and in everyday driving you wouldn't know its a 10 speed transmission- this is a compliment. I will say in more extended driving in the XLT FX4 model - there is a little searching when moving at slow speeds - as an example slow roll where you don't come to a complete stop and then add throttle - too light on the throttle and it searches for a second- more decisive on throttle and its all good to go.

ELECTRONICS

I like the info display between the gauges on the 202a package( std on Limited and above) there is a lot of information available and you can configure your own preference menu. Not as cool as the the virtual cockpit on Audi/VW but good vehicle information. The new sync 3 ( or at least new to me) works well - I like the interface and the apple carpal integration is awesome and honestly if your doing carplay or android auto you don;t need the navigation. The touchscreen is responsive and has a nice matte finish that seems to help reduce glare and fingerprints.

When equipped with the 202A package both Expeditions have multiple USB port in each row plus a built in WIFI hotspot-

I will say the largest difference in the trim levels to me was the B&O sound system. Double check but I don't think you can get this system in the XLT. Based on the my small sample size- I was really impressed with the B&O system - comparing the two systems- its not really close, I can live with the base system in the XLT- I love the B&O system. Much more depth. clarity , and bass response on the B&O.

Other items I can't really comment on- the Limited I test drove had the adaptive cruise control, auto parking, 360 degree camera ( pretty cool) lane keep assist, pre collision etc. I couldn't really sample all of that in a test drive. I did get the lane assist when exiting an offramp and crossing the shoulder line marker. I believe you can equip any model with these features if they are important to you.

Thats pretty much it, I like the new Expedition I think its a very competitive vehicle in the segment and if you need a full size rig you really need to give it look.

For me- I bought the XLT FX4 max- now its on to some bumper upgrades, some LED lighting, and going to replace the factory speakers with some upgraded units.

If you have more questions I will try to check back in and answer.

Thank you for the detailed review and congrats on your purchase. Reading through your review, it became obvious to me that you really pay attention automotive details that are important to "car guys" like me (and many others on this forum).

Therefore, I'm guessing that you have probably compared the Expy to the current GM offerings. How would you say the new Expy compares to a new Tahoe/Yukon or Suburban? Those GM vehicles look really nice, especially the Yukon Denali (in my opinion). I don't know if its fair to even bring up a new Escalade unless we can talk about the new Navi, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[gtnator]

Took my wife to test drive a platinum yesterday and she loved it. However, we may end up saving about 16k on a 17 Denali closeout. It's insane what they are discounting on them right now!!!

Yes, I noticed that too. Where I live they are offering $15-18k off MSRP for 2017 Yukon Denali and $10k off of 2018's. I've never seen that much discount all at once, especially for the "next" model year, a 2018 model during the end of the 2017 calendar year. I believe its because GM knows they finally have some real competition from Ford. Not that the older Expy wasn't competition, it was, but this 2018 Expy might take the crown.

 

[dlcorbett]

I can help here. For reference, i am comparing to the cadillac escalade(15) but i have sat in the gm utes and driven silverados with the 5.3l so i will use this as well:

As far as interior goes, the expy has a much higher seating position than the gm utes, helping them feel a bit more spacious, esp in regards to hip room. I aldo noticed that the gap btw seat and console is smaller in the gm utes. Im not a fan of the esc seats but love the silv seats, the ltd expy seats are on par with the silv in terms of cushion and support. The plat expy seats are closer to the esc, but they are still more comfy. The std esc seats are too firm but the esc plat seats may be better. I wont go into materials, but i will say the esc interior is gorgeous but cheap, theres a piece already loose on the dash. This will mean somethin if you want a navi. The tahoe n silv feel their price however. To make it easier, the tahoe feels closer to a car than the expy. If the rear passengers mean anything, theres no comparison, expy blows the gms away in terms of passenger n cargo space. The seats(2nd row)are the same lvl of comfort.

Feature content wise, they have around the same amt features but the expy has understandably more advanced function to feature. This is a wash.

Drive wise, the gms handle better, simple as that. Better steering feel and flatter around turns. However, the expy rides better in all applications, but the old expy drove better so not news here. Its on par with the armada, mayb better. The esc 6.2l is nice when you prod it, it still has that gm hesitation thing going on. The 5.3l is nice enough though, its plenty quick when its prodded. The 3.5l is quick in plat guise and has more of steady smoother power delivery.

Hopefully this comparison helps in this regard.

 

[Mike Wolfe]

Interesting
FYI
The 3.5L Turbo engine has more torque than the GM 6.2L at sea level
The 3.5L Turbo engine will produce the same torque & hp at high altitudes whereas the N/A Gm 6.2L will lose about 3% torque & hp for each 1000 ft in altitude
Therefore the 6.2L will produce about 357hp & 391 lb ft of torque in Denver while the 3.5L will have 480 lb ft of torque in Denver
JUST SAYIN

 

[JExpedition07]

Interesting
FYI
The 3.5L Turbo engine has more torque than the GM 6.2L at sea level
The 3.5L Turbo engine will produce the same torque & hp at high altitudes whereas the N/A Gm 6.2L will lose about 3% torque & hp for each 1000 ft in altitude
Therefore the 6.2L will produce about 357hp & 391 lb ft of torque in Denver while the 3.5L will have 480 lb ft of torque in Denver
JUST SAYIN

the 3.5 will not make full power at that elevation it still loses power, just not as bad with turbos. To the rest i could care less i like big bore, big displacement V8s You can wind up a V6 all you want I’ll still buy the V8 first. The L86 is a great motor and 460 torque is plenty more than anyone who owns an SUV needs. It’s a corvette engine that’s capable of 750 horse and 725 torque. My 5.4 has never not had enough power for me in any situation btw, just putting that out there. 6.2 sounds amazing, 420 horses, is full of life, and gets great mileage towing, for me it wins. I respect the ecoboosts capabilities but I’m a bigger motor guy. BTW the jury is still out on the gen 2 ecoboost reliability. So far gen 1 was pretty successful.

 

[rumline]

Therefore the 6.2L will produce about 357hp & 391 lb ft of torque in Denver while the 3.5L will have 480 lb ft of torque in Denver

Quibbles about turbos also losing power aside, this is exactly why I won't consider the GMs, better looking though they may be. I live at 7000 feet and will be pulling a trailer over the Rockies many times. Naturally-aspirated engines will be at 50% power going through the Eisenhower tunnel, right when you need power the most. If you've never driven I-70 between Denver and Grand Junction, you don't know what you're missing. ;-) A turbo in this situation is a no-brainer.

Thankfully capitalism works and we can each buy what best fits our needs.

 

[Mike Wolfe]

I am a retired automotive engineer
Just to set the record straight. Because turbo's use absolute pressure sensors to control boost pressures they will produce the same hp & torque in the Eisenhower tunnel as they will at sea level. That is a proven fact.
N/A & supercharged engines will lose power at higher altitudes.
That is also a proven fact.
Some folks like the sound of a big v8 but facts are facts when it comes to high altitude go & torque.

 

[JExpedition07]

I am a retired automotive engineer
Just to set the record straight. Because turbo's use absolute pressure sensors to control boost pressures they will produce the same hp & torque in the Eisenhower tunnel as they will at sea level. That is a proven fact.
N/A & supercharged engines will lose power at higher altitudes.
That is also a proven fact.
Some folks like the sound of a big v8 but facts are facts when it comes to high altitude go & torque.

lol depends who you get your facts from. They did an Ike Gauntlet towing test on TFL and the 6.2 got better fuel mileage and accelerated up the hill better than the ecoboost despite being at “reduced power”. What something is on paper isn’t necessarily how it is in the world... and being in New York I’m not worried about power loss.

 

[J_82]

lol depends who you get your facts from. They did an Ike Gauntlet towing test on TFL and the 6.2 got better fuel mileage and accelerated up the hill better than the ecoboost despite being at “reduced power”. What something is on paper isn’t necessarily how it is in the world... and being in New York I’m not worried about power loss.

I thought I had seen the 6.2 being a little slower but got better MPG.

 

[ExpeditionAndy]

I thought I had seen the 6.2 being a little slower but got better MPG.

That's the way I remember it. At least on the video that I saw the Expedition beat it by 10 or 11 seconds. It was pretty equal really.

 

[J_82]

I am a retired automotive engineer
Just to set the record straight. Because turbo's use absolute pressure sensors to control boost pressures they will produce the same hp & torque in the Eisenhower tunnel as they will at sea level. That is a proven fact.
N/A & supercharged engines will lose power at higher altitudes.
That is also a proven fact.
Some folks like the sound of a big v8 but facts are facts when it comes to high altitude go & torque.

Absolute pressure is just a better way of measuring boost pressure, Psig can also be used. I think what you meant to say was that turbos are more efficient therefore are less affected by the lack of oxygen at higher altitudes.

 

[J_82]

Too bad the 6.2 only comes in a Denali or Escalade, they are expensive $$$$$$

 

[shane_th_ee]

Absolute pressure is just a better way of measuring boost pressure, Psig can also be used. I think what you meant to say was that turbos are more efficient therefore are less affected by the lack of oxygen at higher altitudes.

Not quite... If I understand what he's saying correctly, an engine with a turbo will respond to a drop in mass air flow (due to altitude) by increasing the turbo boost to maintain the correct ratio of combustion gasses. A naturally aspirated engine responds to a drop in mass air flow (due to altitude) by reducing the amount of fuel injected into the combustion chamber (to achieve the correct ratio between the gasses to support combustion). What type of pressure transducer one uses (absolute or gauge) is really immaterial to how the engine achieves the correct ratio of combustion gasses...

 

[J_82]

Not quite... If I understand what he's saying correctly, an engine with a turbo will respond to a drop in mass air flow (due to altitude) by increasing the turbo boost to maintain the correct ratio of combustion gasses. A naturally aspirated engine responds to a drop in mass air flow (due to altitude) by reducing the amount of fuel injected into the combustion chamber (to achieve the correct ratio between the gasses to support combustion). What type of pressure transducer one uses (absolute or gauge) is really immaterial to how the engine achieves the correct ratio of combustion gasses...

I know that I was saying turbo compared to supercharger.

 

[JExpedition07]

Fan of the ford 6.2 as well but they don’t currently offer it in the light duty segment.... i mean it’s a beast. Ecoboost is a good powertrain but for V8 motorheads one would be nice.

 

[gtnator]

The GM 6,2 Yukon XL Denali tops out around $82k with all available options, which is still cheaper (lol if I can even use that word when talking about an $80k plus vehicle) than the fully loaded Expy Max Platinum, by about 2k. Pretty comparable.

The Denali looks better, in my opinion. The Expy has better features, ride quality, safety, and most importantly for me, quality. Now we’ll see what the actual quality numbers are with the Expy redesign, but GM is still having huge quality problems with its full size SUVs: Tahoe, Yukon, Suburban and variants. That’s how I and a lot of others ended up becoming interested in the Expedition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JExpedition07]

I will say i have noticed GM has some quality issues. I have a family member who owns a Denali and it’s seen it’s share of issues in 60k. No buffering or vibrations though, which is a majority of the complaints. It seems GM fixed those issues as of recent but not all units were effected anyway. Part of Fords quality is the fact they’ve ran Expedition simililary since 03’ and with time comes better quality and less bugs. They found something good and ran along with it which is why I and many others bought them. New models always bring new issues unfortunately. But i agree ford has a leg up on overall quality and don’t get me wrong so far i think i like the new one.

 

[rumline]

Getting back to the test drive aspect for a moment, [emoji16] I finally got to drive an Expedition today. It was a base 4x4 XLT Max 201 with 20" wheels added and the sunroof. I barely got to drive it because the couple that was buying it let me take it for a quick spin while they drew up the paperwork. It had just been delivered last night and the couple had just finished their test drive and decided to buy it when I got there at 1pm.

I have never driven an Expedition of any vintage before so I'm not sure that my perspective will be meaningful to you all but here goes.

From the reviews I was expecting a lot of body roll and to feel like I was driving a gun boat, since they always couch their praise like "oh yeah it drives good, for a huge SUV" or something like that. It definitely didn't feel like I was driving a Mini Cooper, but coming from a Grand Cherokee it didn't feel much bigger. Body roll was well-controlled and didn't feel any more than my Jeep does. The suspension was super smooth, soaking up bumps in the road with aplomb. It almost felt a little too disconnected. Or maybe I'm just used to more bumps in my Jeep. I wonder how the CCD will change the road feel, especially when you switch it to sport mode. IIRC the XLT only has fixed shocks, right?

The engine had plenty of power. Turbo lag was about normal. My Grand Cherokee has the V6 ecodiesel so I'm used to driving a heav(ier) turbo SUV. Hitting the gas from a stop you had to wait a second for the turbo to spool, but if you were already driving and then applied more throttle it responded instantly. The transmission might need some break-in time, because it hunted a little for gears after coasting for a while and then applying throttle again.

Dayum that B pillar is huge! I remember one or two reviews that mentioned it but brushed it off. It's farther forward than I'm used to in other cars, like I can just see it in my peripheral vision when facing straight forward. I might have been able to move the pedals further forward and thus move the seat up as well but I doubt it had much room left in it. Anyway, I underestimated how much that little loss of visibility would throw me off. It almost forces you to use your blind spot monitors more, although I'm sure it's just something you can get used to after owning it a while.

In "Normal" terrain mode the truck is in RWD. I wanted to get it in 4Auto since that's how my Jeep is all the time, so I fiddled with the selector dial until I got into sand mode. I couldn't really tell a handling difference on dry asphalt, in the maybe 2000 yards I had it activated. Even though it said 4A on the instrument display, I forgot that sand mode is for loose terrain only as I got binding on a sharp turn into a parking spot. Switched back to 2wd before the salesman knew what was going on lol. I'm sure once you get used to the different modes you'll learn what is what, but if a mode locks the differential, I'd prefer a different visual indicator than just plain "4A".

Parking was a snap. The turn radius is pretty nice, even with the extended wheelbase. It's easy to tell where the edges of the vehicle are. I did have to back up to adjust but that was because the spot at the dealership was pretty narrow.

Overall I was very impressed with how it drove, especially for being pretty much the base configuration.

 

[JExpedition07]

4Auto locks the vacuum Hubs so the wheels are locked to the CV shafts up front. No power is sent forward to the differential until rear wheel slip is detected, at least that’s what my manual states for my truck. So there generally isn’t a handling difference because it’s just arming the system to send power forward if needed. Did the one you drive have a two speed transfer case?

 

[rumline]

No it didn't, because you need the HD tow package to get that.

How you described yours is how I thought the system would work. I wouldn't expect binding in that case though. But when I looked at the 4WD screen (I forget what it was called) in the center display it showed power flowing forward to the front wheels. (?) I definitely need to read the manual to try to understand how the 4WD system works.