[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-Apr-01 AT 11:54 PM (EST)[/font][p]>The Escape is going to have
>the 2.5 or 3.0 engine
>they are the same engine
>except for bore or stroke.
>As far as engines in
>Contours being junk the 2.5
>is the same engine in
>the Contours(if the Contour has
>a v6)
>All of these engines are based
>on the early yamaha engines
>put in the SHO Taurus.
> These engines are far
>from junk. I get
>20 MPG city and 30Mpg
>hway and the engine redline
>is 7000 rpms. I don't
>know what's going on you
>must have had a bad
>experience with a Contour, just
>because one engine had aproblem
>doesn't mean they're all junk.
>So far I have had
>NO Problems.


Sorry man, but I'm gonna have to call BS on the 3.0 having the first thing to do with the SHO engine. If you ever bothered to look under the hood of an SHO, and then a contour, you'd laugh at yourself. The real story is that in 86 ford asked yamaha to develop heads and exaust for a 250+ HP motor, using the 3.0 as a base to go into a concept. Yamaha said that the 3.0 was too weak to handle that the power (73.6+ hp/liter) that the SHO engine puts out stock, which was actually detuned from the original concept stages and submited their own, unique design, based upon the F1 racing engine block. Talk about a tough bottom end! The result is one of the all time great engines in history, which, as you say, are far from junk. The SHO redlines at 7500, but can run extensively in the 8500 rpm range on stock valve springs, but i've heard of 10500 being obtained with a spring upgrade. And In my SHO, I can get your same fuel milage, but I can also run past 99.9 percent of the cars out on the road. And you don't have to look too far to find good running, 240k miles, unrebuilt 89s. As for the 2.5/3.0 engines, the Contours are so unreliable they are a joke. Because the cyl clearances are so pared down to the bare minmum, there is no rebuilding these motors. Why do you think the 95-96 sells for less then an escort? Their trannies break all the time as well. So, while the escape motor may or may not have anything to do with the contour's, which I am not sure about(not into the rubbermaid trucks), The 4 cyl is a much better bet. As far as reliability goes, my mom's mazda 2001 MPV van, with a 3.0 six sometimes cranks for 6-8 sec., doesn't always catch the first time and has a HORRID transmission. SOOOOOO jerky! It is also painfully slow with no load. It's GONE the day its 60000 mile warranty is up. So, don't go out thinking you're getting a quality vehicle in the escape, specially if it's engines have one thing in common with the MPV. In addition to being FAR overpriced, compared to much better vehicles to be had in or around this price range. you could buy a brand new station wagon and an old, nice condition pickup for real jobs/toughness. But I guess you do need that extra 2 inches of cabin hieght to haul your egos around in afteralll, most sport/ute owners need all the space they can get....Have a nice day!

P. S. The escape is not a real ford truck. You dhould start a webpage for yourselves called www.not-ford-trucks.com you could have great tech articles about how to install wind-deflectors and bras.

 

You make a lot of could points, but let me make just a couple of clarifications.

The Escape 3.0L is really a tweaked Taurus 3.0L.

It is from the same Duratec family as the 2.5L V6 in the Contour, Cougar and MPV. Yes, your MPV motor is the 2.5L, which is its biggest problem. I believe once it gets the 3.0L next year, it will be a much better powertrain match.

My 2.5L/MTX Mystique is a decent car. Yes, I have had a few issues with it (power steering pump leak, a couple of trim issues), but largely it's good at what it was designed for. What it doesn't have is a lot of extra capability to take modifications. It's not like your old muscle car that can support 30% more torque and power with no concerns. I always crack up when I read about guys who take their stock SVT Contours to the drag strip or autocrossing with no modifications and then complain when they break their diffs, burn up their clutches or starve the engine for oil and blow it up. Folks, it was designed for a twisty country road, not serious competition. The car gives a lot of capability for $20K; refined steering, good power, flat torque band, trick intake, vented rear discs, nice suspension, big trunk, decent mileage to name a few, but like anything else you have to know its limitations and not exceed them.

It's no secret the Escape was never designed to be a typical "light truck"; it's well known that it lacks a transfer case, is an AWD not 4x4 system, and it's a unibody, like a car. Yes, it has a car engine and car trannie. It's not trying to be a "real" truck. Just like the CRV, RAV-4, and Sidekick aren't "real" trucks. It's a very capable wagon with lots of ground clearance. Ford's biggest mistake was rushing along the development having a spotty launch. I think they've learned from that on the Focus and Escape, and are being much more careful with the new Explorer.

 

You,re right, the van is a 2.5l. Another bothersome point about the escape: If you opt for a auto tranny, which makes using cell phones while driving that much easier, I'm guessing, but not sure you get the 3.0 taurus tranny cooler. This unit is inadequet in the Taurus, causing tranny failures at 90k, and add an,AWD system to that with an available towing package...I think you have the ingredients for disaster. Might I suggest the Mazda variant, with a 60000 mi warranty? Also, the sidekick is a real truck, or at lest the closest thing you can get to one in this day and age for under 25000 from japan since the demise of the first generation Trooper (all hail.) -the most reliable, best quality, most rugged, do-anything vehicle I have had the pleasure of owning. 4wd insurance=death for under 25 male.
Anyways, thanks for the corrections. I still dunno about mondeolatform reliability though...Two seperate guys brought their 97s into a dealership where I was having a new ignition cylinder installed to find out they were essentially FUBAR. The car was worth less than what it would take in Ford parts to get it back on the road. But I have to admit they areb't bad cars at all, when they run. I wouldn't mind the 4cyl/mtx if i needed a commuter.
So anyways, good luck and best of wishes to those who own escapes. Please recognize your vehicle's limitations, particularly in emergency handling and keep the rest of us safe! If you are still shopping for cars get a Subaru WRX wagon and a classic truck...Much more fun/intelligient package all the way around, especially given compact american SUV's dismal resale.

 

Well, the old adage about not buying an American car in its first year, or its first year after a major redesign still holds true, unfortunately.

I've got a '94 Taurus LX wagon with the 3.8L, and it just passed 82K. I've heard about the trans cooler issue, but I've never had a trans issue. I've got the AX4S, and it does get its fluid and filter changed every 30K miles. The only thing I've noticed recently is a little more noticeable gear whine in first gear. It usually goes away before the shift to 2nd, or possibly it just becomes inaudible. Not sure what it is, but it doesn't sound ominous. Plus, living in Michigan where it's cool or moderate most of the time, trans oil temp is usually not an issue.