Bamm1

MSRP $42,355 Ruby Red Metallic Tint Clearcoat $395 White Platinum Metallic Tri-Coat $595 Equipment Group 401A $5,585 ST Performance Brake Package $2695 Convenience Package $835 Cold Weather Package $495 Cargo Accessory Package $290 Ford Co-Pilot360 Assist+ $795 Panoramic Vista Roof $1595 Destination $995

Interesting. Here is a quote from the article I posted: "Order guides show the ST has been priced from $43,350, including destination." I wonder why the author would state he got the pricing from the order guide? Maybe it came from another source and he is generically referring to it as an order guide?

It looks like an updated order guide was released on or around July 5th. That one appears to include pricing. Hopefully someone will post that one up soon.

Looks like there was an updated order guide released. Edge ST starts at $43,350 401A Package: $5,585 ST Performance Brake Package: $2695 The article doesn't mention the pricing for the Cold Weather Package or the Cargo Accessory Package. But if someone posts an updated order guide it will be listed there. Source: https://www.carsdirect.com/automotive-news/2019-ford-edge-st-priced-from-43-350?src=20&lnk=TnL5HPStwNw-wVEor0jNRptzlWvZejiuqQ

This is the "range" I was referencing. My statement regarding the "range" was referring to the current 0-60 time range for the Edge Sport vs. the estimated 0-60 time range for the Edge ST posted by Nicksteer. Then I went on to talk about the new Edge ST likely getting closer to the times for the current gen Ford Fusion Sport. At no point did I state that any Ford product I referenced fell into the same range as the M40i.

Why can't we compare the starting price of the M40i to the starting price of the Edge Sport? Because the M40i has more options and amenities at its staring price? Then we can just look at the "loaded" Edge Sport. It is still 5k less than the M40i's starting price. Even if the ST costs 5k more than the Sport the "loaded" version will still cost less than the M40i's starting price. You also don't have to pay 300 bucks to get Carplay. I wouldn't consider that an insignificant amount. The cargo capacity of a Lexus IS350 or Cadillac ATS is less than 11 cu-ft. The current Edge Sport already goes 0-60 in that same range. The ST is at least a few tenths faster. I would say maybe closing in on FuSpo territory for straight line performance. Ford could put the Raptor motor in the Edge and charge M40i money. But I am not sure that makes business sense given the take rate for the Sport and the expected take rate for the ST.

The rumor mill has the Explorer ST following in the footsteps of the Edge ST. It is being suggested that it will be equipped with the new 10A and a re-tuned version of the MKZ's 3.0T taking it over the 400 hp mark.

The X3 M doesn't exist just yet. But given that the M3 starts at ~67k and "model for model" the X3 costs more than the 3 series sedan, I wouldn't be surprised if ends up in the 70k area to start. It is simply not an Edge ST competitor at that price. That would be reserved for the likes of the Merc GLC63, etc.

The Edge Sport was able to tie the Porche Macan S through Motortrend's figure-8 course when shod with all season tires. With the ST improvements this could be prove to one "sure footed" SUV.

With a tune alone that is a pretty big reduction over stock. It seems possible that LMS could make some tweaks to knock off a few more tenths and get into the 12's. So the V3 tune, which is showing much better dyno numbers under the curve, actually slowed you down?!? Wow. Did you reach out to LMS to help troubleshoot?

I have searched the forum. It looks like with a 93 Octane tune alone we are seeing mid 13's (or slightly below). I see the LMS just released a new version of their tune. On their youtube page it says customers are reporting being in the 12's. But no timeslips, etc. there either.

So it looks like getting into 12's required some pretty extensive modifications (motor mount, lowering springs, upgraded intercooler, etc.) plus an e30 tune. I was mistakenly under the impression it was just a Stage 1 93 Octane flash tune with no other modifications. So it doesn't really translate to the improvements Ford will be adding with the ST trim. Looks like there are some wheel hop issues. Maybe with the ST alterations to the suspension, etc. that could be reduced or eliminated. Again, not looking to beat the M40i or the GLC43. Maybe the SQ5 would have been a better performance benchmark (again, I understand it is smaller). But the weight is very close (4429 lbs.) and though its power ratings (354/369) are an almost exact match for the M40i, it is a good bit slower. I would think matching performance numbers from the ST are much more in the realm of possibilities. 2018 SQ5 0-60: 5.1 0-100: 13.0 1/4 mile: 13.7 @ 102 mph The ST would need half second improvements to 60 and through the 1/4 mile (vs. the Sport) to match the SQ5. It would also need a little less than a 2 second improvement to 100 (maybe less doable). The 19 horsepower deficit (likely more as Audi also tends to under rate their hp #s as well) will likely not allow a trap speed match, but it could break into triple digits. Coincidentally, these numbers would also match the ~300 lbs. lighter Ford Fusion Sport. I think I am banking on the transmission alone for some not insubstantial performance improvements. When Chevy moved from the Aisin Warner F8F35 8-speed to the GM/Ford 9T50E 9-speed on the 2017 Chevy Malibu (with no other changes) it saw a 0.5 sec. faster 0-60 to time and a 0.4 sec / 3.4 mph improvement in ¼ mile mile. I can only hope for similar gains in moving from the current 6A to the new 8A (with the power bump only helping the cause).

Interesting. Do you happen to have any additional information? Which tune? Do you know elapsed times and trap speeds?

The Edge numbers reported above were produced using 91 Octane. So even then, likely not the full 315/350. The MKX is ~220 lbs. heavier than the Edge Sport. The only performance numbers I could find were generated using 87 Octane. So again, not the full 335/380. But here they are for reference: 0-60: 6.0 0-100: 15.4 1/4 Mile: 14.5 @ 97 mph The 5000 lbs. X5 35i xDrive produces similar numbers to the MKX. (0-60: 5.8, 0-100: 15.7 and 1/4 mile 14.5 @ 96 mph).

Are there "official" time slips showing an Edge Sport in the 12's with just a tune? All the time slips I have seen to date don't beat the X3 M40i. The 2018 X3 is 186″ L x 75″ W x 66″ H and weighs ~4300 lbs. The 2018* Edge is 188″ L x 76″ W x 69″ H and weighs ~4400 lbs. I wouldn't say the Edge is substantially bigger than the X3. But I get your point. I was not expecting the Edge ST to match the lighter and more powerful X3. My speculation game was more along the lines of how close do we think it can get........... * I am assuming the 2019 will not change As far as launch control goes several of the car testing websites/magazines have found that just brake torqueing the ZF 8A equipped BMW's produces similar times (sometimes better) to those produced using launch control. Otherwise I agree on all your points. I am "hoping" Ford did some "bench marking" when it built its own 8-speed and the ZF was on that comparison list. I am also well aware of BMW's power rating shenanigans. The 3820 lb. 340i xDrive 8A with "320 hp" runs the 1/4 in 12.7 @ 109 mph.