Typical C&D, they're truly not comparing Apples to Apples in this review in my opinion. Price shouldn't determine which trims they pick for a head to head test, especially in SUV's. Vehicle type, size, seating capacity, trim content & like power trains should be the criteria. Price should only be a category rating, as CD has it in the ratings categories. The 4 cyl. Explorer XLT trim is respectively two model levels below the top trim 6 cyl. Pallisades Limited, Kia Telluride SX & Enclave. In reading the article, the slalom result, hard plastic interior, hard seats (? - I love my ST seats) & engine NVH dings they attribute to the XLT are inherent to the 4 cyl turbo and XLT trim level content. Had they correctly included the 6 cyl. Explorer Platinum w/ 600A & Prem. tech to this test, most of the ratings categories would be substantially better/higher for the Explorer, if not superior. The Platinum would fairly get dinged in the "as tested price" rating, so be it as it would be priced much higher. Frankly, the way I see it, including the Explorer XLT in this comparison is as unfair as if they had added the Explorer ST to this same comparison.... Interesting, the hard plastic interior criticism all Explorer trims are getting dinged for is not new to Ford. I originally purchased a Ruby Red 2010 SHO when it debuted with the 3.5 Ecoboost, awesome car, similar hard plastic interior criticism that Ford changed to a very nice soft touch in the 2013 model. If history repeats itself, than we should see some new soft touch materials by 2023. I love my ST...
