Monday Mileage Champion: 2001 Ford Expedition XLT

by Steven Lang

Published: September 24th, 2012

monday mileage champion 2001 ford expedition xlt

True Miles Unknown. For some folks these three words conjure up the fear of a car with more miles on it than the Grateful Dead. Others simply head on off to Carfax and try to approximate the mileage figure.

This one had 1 owner and 280,923 miles on it as of January 2012.

17 service records at the dealership. A pretty healthy record of attendance given that it’s an 01 model.

This Expedition had a surprisingly decent interior on it. You see those frayed edges on the driver seat? They’re as common as kudzu on these Fords. Trying to find an old Expedition with good leather seats is like trying to find an old Volvo 850 with a good left side bolster on the driver’s seat. Weight, age and lack of leather conditioning always wear them out.

This Expedition also happens to be the ‘Quiver’ 8 seater. I always thought that these vehicles would end up in the holler or perhaps with 24 speakers, 6 TV’s and a young man with a deep appreciation for polka.

Actually this one was driven 30k+ for a while, then sat. It went through the sit/drive cycle a second time before finding the long and winding road to automotive wholesale heaven.

I wonder if that rear tailgate is sagging in sympathy of the frayed front seat. It sold ‘True Miles Unknown’ for $1100 + a $115 auction fee. The new owner is a buy-here pay-here dealer who has a solid Latino clientele at multiple locations. I’m sure he’ll have no trouble selling it.

The question for today is the same as last time. Which engine? Some of the features that I just highlighted should give you a good clue as to what’s lurking under the hood. Gotta love those Expeditions!

#Auctions #CarAuctions #Ford #FordExpedition #HighMileage #Leather #MondayMileageChampion #V8

Steven Lang

More by Steven Lang

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 38 comments

Nikita on Sep 25, 2012

Forget the engine. How many $2000 automatic transmission rebuilds has it had? Even without towing, that seems to be what I have seen go wrong in Ford trucks. The 8.8 rear axle also had problems until the factory fill lubricant was upgraded to 75W-140. As with the ball joints, there is a heck of a lot more than just the engine needed to keep a vehicle on the road. It is way too typical to obsess about engine oil changes and neglect everything else.

Like Reply
Ciddyguy on Sep 25, 2012

Can't vouch for these as I never owned one, and besides they were hideously huge by my estimation, but I CAN vouch that Ford CAN build a long lasting motor, no problem. I had a 1992 Ford Ranger with the venerable 4.0 V6, yes, that one, in the pushrod variation, and I got it up to almost 237K, before cooling system leaks, front in issues, shifter issues, a bad idle air controller valve and a bad, or loose U-joint, along with a prodigious oil leak, a Qt every 2 weeks or so finally did it in. Up until the very end, it was a reliable as the day is long, which was, it started up without issue, and rad just fine. I could not detect any valve clattering as yet and it didn't seem to push the blue smoke anywhere and it still had plenty of oomph for it's 120hp. If anything, I wished it weren't so damned thirsty with the gas though.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I don't understand ... red texas residents hates earth saving hippy electric cars ... did a invasion of democrats occur ??
Macca I'm a bit disappointed in the CX-90, albeit from a brief test drive a couple weeks ago. We'll be buying a three-row SUV this summer and the CX-90 had been my top pick based on the initial reveal. Our local dealer didn't have any S Premium/Plus on the lot to drive so they stuck us in a mid-level PHEV. Once I got in and oriented myself to the gauges I noticed that the battery was depleted. I was shocked at the unrefined nature of the 2.5L I4 - it was quite loud, louder than I've experienced in a newer vehicle. It was thrashy and also didn't seem to rev smoothly. Even my former 1st-gen Mazda3 GT (2.3L) was more refined with regard to under-hood noises emanating into the cabin and NVH in general. In essentially ICE-only mode, it was only adequate when it came to acceleration, which isn't surprising. More road noise intrusion than I would like also seems to be a persistent Mazda trait despite recurring claims of addressing noise levels. Agree that the shifter 'innovation' here from Mazda is just silly and doesn't improve functionality. The super-shallow aspect ratio to the nav screen is an odd choice and not terribly pleasing.I can partially understand the choice to package the CX-70/90 in this manner, but it would seem neither model quite lives up to the aspirational pricing. Instead it feels like the price premium serves to help a small automaker stay solvent. Even more distressing is that the forum research I've done so far for the CX-90 is that it isn't quite fully baked and has some significant issues for many early adopters. I know owner's forums aren't the gospel for reliability, but some of the CX-90 horror stories I read were only outdone by true lemons like the Grand Cherokee/Wagoneer debacle. I am a Mazda fan and would gladly help support the brand if the product was dialed in, but this one fell short of expectations and fell a couple slots on our list.
MaintenanceCosts Tim, are you saying that the PHEV with the four is smoother with the engine running than the gas-only version with the six? If so, that's just baffling. I really should go test drive them both.Anecdotal "walking along the street" experience says that the CX-30, CX-5, and CX-50 are all taking this area by storm, but I don't see as many CX-90s. Seems like that segment is dominated around here by (Grand) Highlanders, Pilots, and Telluride/Palisades.
Bd2 Hyundai is, of course, not on this list as a forefront leader in ethics and accountability. Meanwhile the egg is in Toyota's face yet again.
Jkross22 This is likely my final chime in/experience with our leased CX9 as the lease is up in less than a month. We're getting 19.5- 20.0 mpg combined over the last few months. That's with the legacy 2.5T with the 6 speed auto. Not great but it is a responsive drive train and there's a fuel penalty for that I suppose. If you're thinking about picking up a used CX9, Mazda settled a lawsuit that extends the warranty of the 2.5T for another 2 years/24k miles. Double check to make sure the 2.5T model you're looking at is covered by this. This had to do with an oil consumption issue. We did test drive the CX90 with the inline 6. It was nice, but not what I was expecting in terms of sound and smoothness. As others have said, it ain't no BMW inline 6. Power was ok, but oddly not as responsive as the 2.5T. Maybe they'll get that sorted in the next couple of years. The improved mpg has to be due to the hybrid system and shutting off at stops. Lastly, Mazda's lease return process is terrible. They're good at reminding us the end is nigh, but they outsourced the inspection process to AutoVin. AutoVin noted a scratch that AutoVin said is normal wear and tear, but Mazda says (in their lease end paperwork) exceeds normal wear and tear. I took it to the nearest dealer and the manager there claimed to have no say in the return process and was unable/unwilling to assist.I called the leasing dealer and they said they couldn't help either. I called Mazda Finance and they said they would send AutoVin out again for a 2nd look, and no one has followed up to do this. In fact, it's extraordinarily difficult to get anyone at Mazda Finance to answer a call. Abysmal customer support all around. I would not lease a vehicle from Mazda again.Mazda says that they can send a final bill to us within 60 days if they determine there is anything beyond normal wear and tear. I guess I'll repair the scratch, but customers shouldn't be left guessing or getting conflicting information from the inspection company and the manufacturer. And neutering your dealers in this process is counterproductive and foolish.