DANG good looking truck David

 

Would be nice.

 

Probably will never happen for such a limited market. A CCSB SD comes really close to filling the void that the Excursion filled. If Ford would offer a diesel in the Expedition in addition to the EB engines and 5.0L engine, most market needs would be met for less investment.

 

If they do I'll buy one... in 15 years when they get miles on them and I can afford one That is assuming you guys will still be here to help me put it back into one piece

 

You said it, It would be nice but I couldn't afford a new one.

 

Maybe Michael would sell his "old and busted" rig for his new 2017 Excursion... I forget, whose first in line again?

 

I'm sorry, but I'm a sucker for the 5.0 engine. If they came out with an excursion with a 5.0 I would throw a vortex supercharger on it soooooo fast....

 

I don't see it coming back at all. And the that slammed excursion with that stupid camber kit looks like ****.
Using a gas engine for the excursion was also another dumb idea. All that weight and people wanted a 5.4 in them? I never understood that.
I don't see a market for it again regardless of gas or diesel prices. Instead ford should worry more about a new ranger. Also another 2 door v8 car but unfortunately ford doesn't seem to think what needs a percentage of people have.
I liked the excursion I just don't think there will ever be a market again for it.
Here's an idea for ford and I hope mike Harrison sees this. Redesign the expedition. Same body design since 03 all ford does is change grille's. Yeah that's a good selling point.
Someone wrote they would love to see a 5.0 in a new excursion that is about the most dumbest idea i have seen not insulting you its just dumb for something that big with tiny displacement.

 

I would take one if it offered the 6.7, no traction control, no dang "infotainment" system (seriously I cannot stand that crap) and NO DANG HONKING HUGE SCREEN IN THE DASH TO BLIND ME WHILST DRIVING IN THE DANG DARK!!!!!!!

I just want one with todays manufacturing processes, materials, and the technology of the one mine already has.

 

WOOOOAH There Hoss: "Using a gas engine for the excursion was also another dumb idea" I've had a Navistar, a 7.3, AND (4) 6.8s THAT'S CORRECT FOUR. The V-10 by far is my personal favor Orit.

 

4 V10 engines? You know the 7.3 is a navistar right? The V10 was a better engine than the 5.4 in both superduty and excursion but at a certain trailer weight the V 10 got miserable mileage. The power to displacement ratio was awful like the 5.4 the V10 was not efficient enough but still was a better option than the 5.4
the inability to flow air with inefficient port sizing caused these motors to create terrible mileage and the 5.4 was way to small for superduty and excursions. At a certain point the V 10 is actually worse than the 5.4 towing.
Headflow can make or break an engine and the ford 2 valve engines validate that and many will agree they lacked power even by then standards.

 

Ok, the normally aspirated Navistar , Could not remember the displacement..
No question the 5.4 in the X or 250 ain't to smart... My 7.3/ 250 got 12mpg stock, 11-12 tuned on 35s & 8-9 towing..


"At a certain point the V 10 is actually worse than the 5.4 towing. " ARE YOU COOCOO


I pull 10-12K at 70MPH on 37s ALL DAY LONG Yeah it get 10-11 hwy,6-8 towing OK SURE 6-8 SUCKS but lets do a little math.


7.3 5K over the V10
fuel +$1.00 or better a gallon
oil changes
cyc additive as to not burn a hole it the liners
If I just stopped at the 1st 5K you will never catch up
AND MY V-10 out pulls the 7.3 I owned 3x's over
PS: all MPG s are hand figured the entire life of my ownership full to full


ALL RIGHT I got a little excited my V-10 pulls WAY MORE BETTER than my 7.3 did.. Yes 4 Xs with6.8s

 

6.9 and early 7.3 s IDI I think? There's a major difference between gas and diesel engines from 1980 1990 1997 2003 . you run 37s? That in its self won't help gas mileage. I use a 2001 f350. 4.10 4x4 7.3psd as a shop truck even with bigger injectors than stock I'm pushin 19 mpgs 12 loaded. At a certain rpm when held the v10 actually is consuming more fuel than a 5.4 at I think it was 2000-3200 rpm loaded of course unloaded the v10 saw better mileage than a 5.4 town or high way. Gearing helps to a point too but the weight of the of the X and superdutys were too much for the 5.4. If the v10 had better airflow through the heads combustion would be more complete creating less emissions and less fuel burned. 417 cubic inches with heads that flowed under 230cfm and valves way too small. That engine was choked. Try and breath from a straw youll see what I mean. The v10s actually worked harder in certain rpms than 5.4 s did thus consuming more fuel loaded or unloaded. vehicle weight and poor breathing capabilities hurt the v10 The 10 was better in 1300-2000rpm This is why most v10 trucks were offered with a 4.10
1300-2000rpm the v10 got 3 points better than 5.4 at 2000-3000 themv10 lacked miserably. Cruising speeds the v10 did better in mpg. A lot of people think tunes will create better MPGs on gasoline engines that's only true on i4 s and V6s.

 

The 5.4s where offered with 4.10s. The 6.8L where offered 4.30s. Of course the V10 will drink down more gas, it's a bigger engine....





As for should Ford make the Excursion again, I think they should, I'd buy one in a Gasser. Not a really big fan of diesels now that you need DPF fluid n all that nonsense.

 

My 6.8 came with 4.10s