What year did Expedition go to IRS (Independent Rear Suspension)

[gtncpa]

What year did Expedition go to an IRS?

 

[JExpedition07]

2003

 

[mquick5]

2003

Wow I had no idea they've been doing it that long!

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[gtncpa]

GM may go that way in 2020.

This thread came up because I was filling on my Expi. The guy next to me had a 2016 and said ... "I cant wait for the 2020 because I really wants an IRS, not this solid axel like everyone has." So ... dumb founded a little bit, I said, look under your truck ..do you see an axel ... (he did not say no but somethign like "hmmm". Well if you dont see an ol' school bar bell ... well my friend you have an IRS now.

He walked away skeptical...

 

[SEPTIC PROFESSOR]

https://www.google.com/search?q=Wha...S?&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

what gas should i be putting in my expee like dude ?

 

[rjdelp7]

03 or 04. It was done, in an effort to lower the stance and give more interior space. They were 'marketing' the Expedition, as an alternative to a mini van. They wanted short women buyers to get in it, easier. The sales have dropped, from that point on. The Independent rear end should handle better, but can't tow as much. It has CV joints, that when the fail are not cheap to fix. The IRS allows for more alignment adjustments.

 

[Flexpedition]

03 or 04.

2003.

It was done, in an effort to lower the stance and give more interior space.

Handling. Side benefit was more 3rd row headroom & to accommodate a segment first 3rd row seat that folded flat into the floor.

What do you mean by lowered stance? Ground clearance was up over an inch, 2nd gen compared to 1st. Closer to an inch and a half.

They were 'marketing' the Expedition, as an alternative to a mini van. They wanted short women buyers to get in it, easier.

I don't recall any Expedition marketing targeting any minivan. Ford barely marketed the Windstar or the Freestar and had no trouble selling them at the time. In fact, Ford sold 233K 1997 Expeditions and 205K 1997 Windstars.

You either hate women or marketing, because you repeatedly gripe that Ford also marketed the 2018 Expedition to women.

The sales have dropped, from that point on.

2000 sales were down from 1999.
2001 sales were down from 2000.
2002 sales were down from 2001.

Seeing a trend here? Ford certainly did, thus the next generation.
The redesigned 2003 outsold both the 2002 and 2001.

The Independent rear end should handle better, but can't tow as much.

Should? The new chassis was 70% stiffer (because evidently thats what short women were after) and frankly maximum tow ratings actually increased with the 2003. Besides, we all know women don't tow, so who cares?

It has CV joints, that when the fail are not cheap to fix. The IRS allows for more alignment adjustments.

I'm trying to think back to the last failed CV joint thread and don't recall many.

 

[Trainmaster]

An interesting discussion regarding 1st Gen vs. 2nd and the independent rear. I had a 2000 which I drove as an emergency vehicle, and loved everything about it. My 2008 rides considerably smoother and quieter but, maybe by habit, I miss the harsh and nimble handling of the 2000 SSV.

They're different animals in some ways and similar in others. I believe Detroit has tried to eliminate noise, vibration and harshness at every turn and the Expedition's evolution is an example of this.

The trucks still do most of what us hard ***** want while riding nice enough for those less, eh, earthy.

Yea, I'm nostalgic, but I don't expect everyone to embrace a 1967 Econoline's or 1980 Bronco's ride. The 3rd Gen Expeditions sure do a nice smooth and quiet job cruising down the Interstate at 80 MPH.

Hate to admit it, but these trucks have evolved more than I have.

 

[1955moose]

So it's legal to drive 80 in New York? Evolution is inevitable. I had a first year Datsun 240Z, 1970. Nice car for the day, state of the art actually, but my older brothers Nissan 370z stomps it every which way to Sunday. Better speed, better brakes, ride, you name it. 45 years later, it should. That would be like comparing a 1935 Chevrolet Suburban to the 2019 Suburban, you can't. What was state of the art in one year, becomes the also ran in the next generation. That's life. Think about this for a second, remember how cool a 1974 Ford Ranchero or Gran Torino looked then, look at how dated they look to the same eyes today. Vehicles like life have to change, it's the plan. Can you imagine someone telling you, sorry but old used cars is all you can buy, if your lucky!

Sent from my N9131 using Tapatalk

 

[Gregg Eshelman]

I know I like the ride of my 07 EL with IRS much more than the ride of my 98 Mountaineer with solid rear.

What I'm not so enamored with on the EL is the 4x4 system. The Mountaineer has full time AWD with a viscous coupling to the front. No switches, no need to manually turn it on, but it also doesn't have the slight fuel savings of 2WD mode nor the extra grunt of locked up 4x4.

The 'problem' with the EL's auto 4x4 mode this winter was having it engage during sharp slow speed turns and doing a bit of noisy herky-jerky due to the front/rear speed difference making it think something was slipping. Going straight on a slick road, auto 4x4 worked smooth and quiet.

The older truck's AWD is simply *there* and if a wheel slips it instantly shunts more power to the front. The old 302 has plenty enough power to spin all four tires a bit when you stomp the gas down.

 

[rjdelp7]

2003.


Handling. Side benefit was more 3rd row headroom & to accommodate a segment first 3rd row seat that folded flat into the floor.

What do you mean by lowered stance? Ground clearance was up over an inch, 2nd gen compared to 1st. Closer to an inch and a half.



I don't recall any Expedition marketing targeting any minivan. Ford barely marketed the Windstar or the Freestar and had no trouble selling them at the time. In fact, Ford sold 233K 1997 Expeditions and 205K 1997 Windstars.

You either hate women or marketing, because you repeatedly gripe that Ford also marketed the 2018 Expedition to women.





2000 sales were down from 1999.
2001 sales were down from 2000.
2002 sales were down from 2001.

Seeing a trend here? Ford certainly did, thus the next generation.
The redesigned 2003 outsold both the 2002 and 2001.




Should? The new chassis was 70% stiffer (because evidently thats what short women were after) and frankly maximum tow ratings actually increased with the 2003. Besides, we all know women don't tow, so who cares?



I'm trying to think back to the last failed CV joint thread and don't recall many.

Ford HAS admitted, it marketed the new Expedition to Women buyers and Men to the F150). Ford thinks guys only want pickups and there wrong. You have to be blind to see its become more SUV, than truck. The 2003 didn't have a 'new' chassis. It was the same body on frame design and not 70% 'stiffer'. That is is just ridiculous. Its the same vehicle, with slight cosmetic changes. 1999-2002 were peak Expedition sales and the same body style. Appx 200,000 vs 40,000 in later year models(a huge change). The more third row room theory, is a joke. Just about every Expedition owner ditched the 3rd row. The 4 CV shaft boots are rubber and if they tear or rip, must be replaced. It is just more thing to worry about breaking. Every heavy duty truck uses a straight axle, not IRS. Your facts are fake news.

 

[Trainmaster]

Well Ford definitely left those of us who want heavy duty with one choice - their pickup. The Expedition, as it was with the 5.4 is good enough for me, but I wouldn't buy another unless they bring back the V-8. I'm afraid my next truck will be a Suburban or an F-250. They have alienated one portion of their market, though I suppose they feel they've built another.