cal3thousand

Agreed. I initially recommended that the OP "would have to pay the price at the pump".... maybe I should have rephrased it to: "You will not gain the full benefit of the extra cost as an appreciable MPG gain and some will tell you it may hurt your engine somehow" That's what I get for answering the OP's questions...

Pics or it didn't happen.... Just kidding, but pics would definitely be welcomed.

I'll ask one more time... explain to me in scientific terms not marketing terms.... please.

You can get 22s and not hydroplane. You just have to shell out the cash to get proper tires. Most people that run LARGE rims either don't budget for good tires or accept whatever tires come with the "package" being offered by the Wheel shop. Those generally include the cheapest tire that the shop can squeeze onto the rim. At 22", if you aren't spending at least 150 per tire, you are asking for it. Good tires will run you from 200-300 each. The Nitto's that LooseCannon is rolling are pretty sweet tires that's run you about $200 a pop.

I just read your link to here: http://www.paxtonaut...e.php?id=152#q5 Complete GARBAGE from them: Will the supercharger affect the gas mileage? Fuel economy depends entirely on your driving habits and in some cases you may experience an increase in gas mileage. Under normal freeway driving, for example, the supercharger is not under boost but is increasing the efficiency of the engine by forcing air through restrictions like the air filter. But let's face it, you are not interested in a supercharger to enjoy "normal driving conditions." When you are demanding additional performance from your vehicle it will require additional fuel. If you are a "lead foot" your fuel economy will decline because your car is working harder. If you are simply using the supercharger for occasional acceleration and passing performance, then your fuel economy should remain about the same. Not single shred of science in there. All BS claims. How would making your engine drive an air compressor at ALL TIMES (belt driven supercharger) also make it more efficient? "By forcing air through restrictions like your air filter" ... that is soooo laughable.

Your blanket statement about burning a fuel not meant for your car damaging your catalyst needs to be rethought. From your wik-link: "Any condition that causes abnormally high levels of unburned hydrocarbons" ... does nothing to explain a closed looped system that uses MAF/MAP sensors and Oxygen sensors to meter fuel and rid the unburned hydrocarbons. (Do you know what a closed loop system is?) "Burning a fuel that is not designed to be burnt can damage the catalyst" ....get real, we are talking about gasoline with an Octane rating of 4 pts difference here... not putting biodiesel in a gas car. Hypothetical: Our cars weren't designed for Ethanol either, but what damage would ethanol do to your catalyst? NOTHING!!!... it would actually be better on the catalyst due to its lower EGTs produced and cleaner burn. AND adding Ethanol would increase your Octane rating as well. Still no catalyst damage. Only risk would be from alcohol (being hydrophilic) drying out the rubber in your fuel system. So your 'high octane leads to broken catalyst' idea is wrong. (note: I am not a proponent of Ethanol based fuels as corn is better food than fuel) Back to the turbo thing. Try to bring an example of science and not just some other company claim that is intended to sell you something. Science is more believable than Marketing in my world. Please oh Please tell me the science behind how forced induction will increase fuel efficiency of a particular engine block. Please go into AFRs and boost pressures so I can understand. I didn't ask why Ford did not include the 3.5L EcoBoost in the Edge. I stated that the 3.5L EcoBoost is not as good on gas as the 3.5L N/A. It's sure better than a V8 that it is trying to replace. Let's not forget that these EcoBoost engines are direct injected on top of twin scroll turbos.

Replace 'em! Would be a great opportunity and excuse to have the color body matched. I'm really interested in painting mine with some paint from the dealer. I wonder if Tri-Coat White is available?

I highly doubt that due to the immense difference in the headlight structures. At least not without extensive retrofitting. You are best off to buy a retrofit kit. I got a sweet one at TheRetrofitSource.com for about $400.00. It included FX-R Bi-Xenon projectors with clear lenses, shrouds, ballast, bulbs, harness and CCFL light rings. They were destined for my Volvo, but I'm not sure of the car's fate at this moment. Too busy enjoying my Edge. I have noticed that the Edge's HIDs could be better and I will look to improve them eventually. The projectors are a weird 2 sphere design (Hi/Lo) with fresnel markings as well as dimples and a ridge across the horizontal line. (interested in having someone do a retrofit for your Edge? Hit me up and we can work on something)

I'm not sure about the picture functionality at this point, but I can speak on the texting issue. Only a couple phones out there right now will text over bluetooth. It requires something call the MAP BT profile (Messaging Access Profile, iirc). Motorola Droid X comes to mind.

For #1... I said of engines with same power. Don't forget that part! Semi Trucks have turbos to increase power. In order to make a N/A semi truck meet the same power as that turbo one, the engine would have to be larger, which would reduce overall efficiency due to the weight of said unit (rotational inertia of engine components as well as increased block weight. You prove my point by saying EcoBoost. The Edge's EcoBoost is a 2.0L ... way lighter engine and more MPG. The EcoBoost 3.5L does not get the MPG that the Edge 3.5L does. Read the whole analogy in part one before saying its all wrong. I come from a world where Turbo's are King. http://www.volvospeed.com/vs_forum/ I will rephrase again for you: There is no turbo in the world that you can add to your Edge to increase MPG. DONE. End of story. (The OP asked about adding a turbo, not shrinking his engine to a 2.0L 4-cylinder and THEN adding a turbo) For #3 with the use of oxygen sensors, tell me how will you "piss out 91 octane" and "damage a catalyst"? If the system is running on closed loop (not WOT, we are talking about MPG not racing), an engine/ECU will work to increase AFR if it detects a rich condition by affecting the STFT and then LTFT, which will affect MPG. But, the 20 cents you pay extra will not get you 20 cents extra mileage in regards to higher octane. If a car is running poorly and pinging (an extreme example) it will be very inefficient. On that particular car, running higher octane fuel will decrease pining and, in turn, increase MPG. Don't get me wrong, I'm not running anything other than 87 in my Ford Edge and 91 in my Volvo 850 T5.

I don't personally like the idea of having to "always drop your hood on any car". Humans are a forgetful species and if some human were to try to close these hoods with something forgotten in the engine bay, that could cause more damage than flexing some aluminum (which aluminum is meant to do, see aircraft construction). And I put my hands on my paint ALL the time because I keep it polished and touchably soft (car and hands) :lol:

My mother-in-law has a GMC Terrain and I was quite impressed with the little 4 banger. And although It looks a TON better than its Chevrolet cousin, I would never give up my V6 torque. All this talk has me interested to see how the new EcoBoost does with its 2.0L mill

I'm getting the same if not better driving MPG. I state driving MPG, since I spend some time idling. This weekend for example, the kid was napping in the car and I wanted to wash it. So I had to run the engine and A/C while she slept for 30 minutes. A sure MPG killer if you figure that into your numbers. As for your ideas to lower MPG, let me address them 1 at a time: 1) Turbo - turbos create more power, not MPG efficiency. Having said that, turbo cars are more efficient than their Normally Aspirated counterparts when engines of the same power level are concerned. That's how a Nissan GT-R can muster 500HP+ from a 3.5L V6 and a 6.2L BOSS engine puts out 400-500 HP depending on tune. Simply due to the size of the engine block, you can see where an advantage occurs. Adding a turbo to your 3.5L won't make it more efficient, it will give it more power. 2) Cold-Air Intake - Ford's design on this vehicle is already a cold air intake. It takes cold air from the outside of the vehicle. Kits that are available are generally "Short Ram" intakes that lessen the restrictions to flow in the system. It also won't increase MPG. Believe me, if it did, Ford would have used it in today's fight for MPG supremacy. 3) High Octane - This will give you some more distance and MPG but at the cost of money. 91 Octane (California) is slightly more energy dense than 87, but you pay the price at the pump. 4) Bug Deflector - I'm pretty sure that this will decrease your MPG as it causes disturbances in the flow of air around your vehicle. You'd have better luck taping the seams where 2 body panels meet to reduce air drag. 5) Regional MPG - Differences in fuel blends, air quality, air density, and ambient temperature will all have varying effects on MPG from region to region. Additionally, gasoline expands and contracts at 0.069% per degree Fahrenheit. So, in Alaska, where the fuel is colder and more energy dense by volume, you should have better MPG, albeit very little difference. 6) You are already doing the right things in regards to efficiency. Only thing I think you could change is driving habits. I don't know you personally, so I can't comment on your personal driving, but a keen eye in traffic can save you a bunch of mileage. Coasting to lights that you know you won't make on green, hustling a bit to lights that you know you can make it through will both help your MPG, but you have to be familiar with the street light timing in your area. I, personally, like to keep an eye on my MPG. But I don't scrutinize every minute detail as it isn't all that important to me. If I lose $1.50 at the pump, but I enjoyed my car more because of it, I feel fine. I could spend my time or effort trying to hyper mile constantly to save a few cents, but I could also save more (or make more money) putting my time in elsewhere. If MPG were really that important, I would be driving a Chevy Equinox instead. (But we all know those things are fugly)

I think v2.8 of Sync addressed this issue. Don't quote me on it though.

Totally agreed. Chips for forced induction engines: 75+ HP and similar torque increases are easy and cost a few hundred dollars. That same few hundred dollars tuning on an NA car will net you 10, maybe 20 HP and only a couple lb-ft of torque. Especially true if the maps are already tuned well from the factory. It's going to be difficult to squeeze more than 285 HP from this 3.5L NA mill without other bolt-ons.

I'm lucky to report that I have no alignment or pulling issues with my 18s as well. (stock Michellin)

It's designed like that. The wide angle is meant for you to be able to aim your car using surrounding reference. Seeing my back bumper in relation to a red painted curb or white parking lines is awesome. Backing into my parking spot in my car port is tough due to the tight configuration of the support pillars, but the Edge's camera allow me to see a cross reference between the front of the pillar and the corner of my car. With the camera, I can move this large car is tight places better than people in Corollas. I just have to be careful sometimes as the wide angle deceives your depth perception, even more than the passenger mirror does.

You still need one? I think I can get one for $100 locally.

I wouldn't disable PATS ever. But I think what you have is the PATS module that mimics your key being present so remote start will work.

Not sure about the 07-10, but for my '11, there's the autounlock feature that unlocks the car when thrown in Park.

I've been looking at some DEI alarms as well. But I already have the factory remote start and IA package. I think I'm holding out on an option that will allow me to roll up/down the windows without carrying a separate fob. I know that Viper SmartStart will allow me to use my phone to start the car, but I want to use the phone to roll my windows up from the anywhere. Honestly, the alarm is not that enticing to me. I want the convenience features of an aftermarket system. One idea is to set up some relays and a couple DEI 530Ts that will respond to a combination of keypresses. For example, if I unlock the car and then hit the lock twice (horn beep) within a specified time, the windows will roll up. But for the OP, I think the ford system will be good enough. If he can install on his own, it will cost only $125.

Looks like I missed the question... Ambient light should only be on when your parking or headlights are on. And they should all go out together.

That's good! I feel that your flickering bulb will continue as that generally indicates that the LED is dying. The control board on there is having leakage of some sort and causing the fluctuation. Hopefully your Jeeps wiring was the suspect, but my instinct says no.

If your parking brake is not set and the light remains lit, there is something wrong. Could be the sensor. You're still under warranty I presume, so I would advise you to take the car in for repair.

I have a Class II factory package and it has a 2" receiver.