Wiring for Explorer for Brake Controller....

[HersheyGirl]

OK, I just got a new to me 1999 Explorer AWD with the tow package. WHERE is the prewired plug for the brake controller located? I have done a quick look and have not found it, and I can't seem to find were it is located online either. Can someone tell me were it is located? Thanks.

[byrdr1]

IF you have the 7pin wiring..

It should be up under the dash to the right of the brake pedal almost above the gas pedal it will be a female plugs that matches the male plug of the brake controler wiring. Thats what i had on my prevoius Ford and the one i have now.
Plug and play basically.. Hope this helps. it will also be push-pluged int the metal frame under the dash..
I trying to see if i have pictures on a ford or at least a website with pictures. If I find one I will post it.
randy

[byrdr1]

http://www.etrailer.com/faq_fbc.aspx
follow this site it has a picture of what I was typing about and some good directions.

[HersheyGirl]

That looks like great information...thank you so much.  After the weather improves, I will get out and look again.  It has the 7 pin plug already installed....I followed it up to the rear taillight and it looks like it was done in the factory.  I hope I can find that plug as I already bought the adapter.  Thanks again.

[austinado16]

Be real careful owning an Explorer.  They are top heavy, only built on the little Ranger pickup chassis, and are easily rolled.  When they roll, the roof caves in, generally killing one or more of the occupants.

For the 3-4k that thing is worth, you'd be much better off in a '95 and later Yukon, Tahoe or Suburban.  They get better mileage and are built for towing, and stopping what you're towing.

[tlhdoc]

Be real careful owning an Explorer. They are top heavy, only built on the little Ranger pickup chassis, and are easily rolled. When they roll, the roof caves in, generally killing one or more of the occupants.
 
For the 3-4k that thing is worth, you'd be much better off in a '95 and later Yukon, Tahoe or Suburban. They get better mileage and are built for towing, and stopping what you're towing.

Gee, why are you comparing a full size SUVs to a smaller SUVs.  How about comparing a Trail Blazer to the Explorer.  The Trail Blazer doesn't even have a frame, it is a unibody.  My Explorer is not the same frame as the Ranger pick up, which by the way does have a frame and can tow more than an S10.  You are really funny, saying that a Suburban, Yukon and Tahoe get better mileage than an Explorer.  Friends of mine that are Chevy people (they own a Yukon Denali for towing) got a good laugh out of that too.  They get 12 mpg not towing and only around 10 when towing.  I get 15 to 18 towing and 22/23 not towing.  My Explorer is a V8.  It has a 7300 pound towing capacity and has good stopping power.  It is fine that you like the larger Chevy vehicles, but why try and scare someone about their vehicle.  Why dump on them.  You shouldn't drive any SUV/Truck like it is a car.  It is not. There are many brands out there and people like different things about different brands.  That is why there are so many choices.  I guess if you had your way everyone would have to drive a full size Chevy SUV for towing a PU trailer.  I am guessing you know more about pricing than the NADA guide does too.

[austinado16]

Gee, why are you comparing a full size SUVs to a smaller SUVs.  How about comparing a Trail Blazer to the Explorer.  The Trail Blazer doesn't even have a frame, it is a unibody.  My Explorer is not the same frame as the Ranger pick up, which by the way does have a frame and can tow more than an S10.  You are really funny, saying that a Suburban, Yukon and Tahoe get better mileage than an Explorer.  Friends of mine that are Chevy people (they own a Yukon Denali for towing) got a good laugh out of that too.  They get 12 mpg not towing and only around 10 when towing.  I get 15 to 18 towing and 22/23 not towing.  My Explorer is a V8.  It has a 7300 pound towing capacity and has good stopping power.  It is fine that you like the larger Chevy vehicles, but why try and scare someone about their vehicle.  Why dump on them.  You shouldn't drive any SUV/Truck like it is a car.  It is not. There are many brands out there and people like different things about different brands.  That is why there are so many choices.  I guess if you had your way everyone would have to drive a full size Chevy SUV for towing a PU trailer.  I am guessing you know more about pricing than the NADA guide does too.

Good grief.  Climb down out of your tree.  Explores roll easily, cave in when they do, and people have been killed.  Look it up......even the "late model" ones do it. Last time I heard, U-haul wouldn't even rent a trailer to someone if they were going to tow it with an Explorer.

Here in central/southern CA a perfect, rust free mid 90's Yukon/Tahoe/'Burb go for $3,600-$6,000 all day long.  The Vortec engines get very good mileage, especially considering it's a real truck.  My '90 Suburban gets 18 on the highway and I can get 15 towing.

Everyone's got a different vehicle preference, so we can all drive what we want. Isn't that special.

From the USGOV website listing fuel mileage:
1996 Explorer 4x4 w/ v-6: 14mpg/19mpg
1996 Explorer 4x4 w/ v-8: 12mpg/17mpg

1996 Tahoe/Yukon 4x4 w/ v-8: 12mpg/16mpg

Those figures seem to always be on the conservative side, but it does seem apparant that both rigs get nearly the same mileage....although there is that whole fact that the GM product is a full size truck.

[tlhdoc]

Good grief. Climb down out of your tree. Explores roll easily, cave in when they do, and people have been killed. Look it up......even the "late model" ones do it. Last time I heard, U-haul wouldn't even rent a trailer to someone if they were going to tow it with an Explorer.
 
Here in central/southern CA a perfect, rust free mid 90's Yukon/Tahoe/'Burb go for $3,600-$6,000 all day long. The Vortec engines get very good mileage, especially considering it's a real truck. My '90 Suburban gets 18 on the highway and I can get 15 towing.
 
Everyone's got a different vehicle preference, so we can all drive what we want. Isn't that special.
 
From the USGOV website listing fuel mileage:
1996 Explorer 4x4 w/ v-6: 14mpg/19mpg
1996 Explorer 4x4 w/ v-8: 12mpg/17mpg
 
1996 Tahoe/Yukon 4x4 w/ v-8: 12mpg/16mpg
 
Those figures seem to always be on the conservative side, but it does seem apparant that both rigs get nearly the same mileage....although there is that whole fact that the GM product is a full size truck.

First off we are not talking about 1996 models. There have been changes as the years have gone on. You must have the magic Suburban. Is it 4 wheel drive?  Is your mileage on the flat or do you get that towing in the mountains?  What size engine and if you want to compare a Suburban to a Ford you should compare it to a Ford Excursion. I don't know why you are saying that the Suburban is a real truck. Are you implying that the Explorer isn't? It is built on a frame. It isn't a unibody vehicle. Why don't you talk about the Blazer/Trailblazer. They are closer to the same size. Not everyone wants a big tank that they can't park in one spot at the store. Friends of ours have 3 older Suburbans, big blue (has a topper), little blue (no topper) and brown. I called them and none of theirs gets any where close to what you are saying. When towing their trailer they get 8 mpg. I do agree with you that the figures are on the conservative size. I get much better mileage than what the government says. You are also correct about UHall. They will not rent to someone with a Ford Explorer. They will rent to someone that owns a Mercury Mountaineer or a Mazda Navajo. They are the same exact vehicle as the Explorer, just a different skin and name. I wonder why Ford has sold so many Explorers if they are such death machines??? I also noticed that you didn't post the government mileage on the Suburban, which you claim gets better mileage than the Explorer.

[tlhdoc]

Good grief. Climb down out of your tree.

Maybe you live in a tree I don't.  Bottom line, the poster asked a question about wiring and not advice on which SUV to purchase.  There is no reason for you to try and scare them about owning an Explorer.

[wavery]

Gee, why are you comparing a full size SUVs to a smaller SUVs.  How about comparing a Trail Blazer to the Explorer.  The Trail Blazer doesn't even have a frame, it is a unibody.  My Explorer is not the same frame as the Ranger pick up, which by the way does have a frame and can tow more than an S10.  You are really funny, saying that a Suburban, Yukon and Tahoe get better mileage than an Explorer.  Friends of mine that are Chevy people (they own a Yukon Denali for towing) got a good laugh out of that too.  They get 12 mpg not towing and only around 10 when towing.  I get 15 to 18 towing and 22/23 not towing.  My Explorer is a V8.  It has a 7300 pound towing capacity and has good stopping power.  It is fine that you like the larger Chevy vehicles, but why try and scare someone about their vehicle.  Why dump on them.  You shouldn't drive any SUV/Truck like it is a car.  It is not. There are many brands out there and people like different things about different brands.  That is why there are so many choices.  I guess if you had your way everyone would have to drive a full size Chevy SUV for towing a PU trailer.  I am guessing you know more about pricing than the NADA guide does too.

HEY!!!!  who brought S10s into this discussion.....are you just lookin' fur trouble???  :J

BTW....my S10 was easy to wire......I think....what was the topic again :eyecrazy:

[tlhdoc]

HEY!!!! who brought S10s into this discussion.....are you just lookin' fur trouble??? :J
 
BTW....my S10 was easy to wire......I think....what was the topic again :eyecrazy:

Nope not looking for trouble.  In fact I almost purchased an S10 from a guy at work, but someone else beat me to it.  S10 was brought in because Ranger was brought in.  
 
PS: My Explorer was very easy to wire.  It came that way.

[austinado16]

Mine's a 1990 "1500"=half ton, SLE, 4x4, with 4 speed automatic, and 5.7 liter throttle body injected (non-vortec) 350 cubic inch V-8, 34gal fuel tank, front and rear a/c, cruise and power everything including the mirrors.  If I drive the speedlimit the mileage on the freeway is very consistant.  It's very hilly here on the coast, so no matter what direction I go, there are multiple 1,500' 6-7% grades and many more smaller ones. Currently, something like 250,000mi on the odometer, still on the original engine and I had the original 700R4 trans rebuilt at about 240,000mi.  There's nothing special about it and the mileage is consistant.  If I drive it hard, or fast, sure, I can get 11 with it.

I use it for what it is......a truck that can haul stuff.  Be it my 8yr. old daughter and 6 or 7 of her friends (it seat , our family and another family on a road trip somewhere, take us to the lake with watercraft, to the mountains 3-1/2hrs away at 8,000' skiing, hauling cars, camp trailer, etc.  We do not drive it as our daily commuter, but when we do use it locally, it's never a problem to parallel park, or park anywhere else.

You have to watch when comparing these GM products because many are the "2500's" that have 454 cubic inch V-8's.  The 454 will pull a house off the foundation, but at 8mpg.

I simply listed the '96 info because the are cheap as chips right now and I think they're a great buy for what you're getting.

The gov. website figures for the '99 4x4 Yukon is 11/15.  I'll be in reality they get closer to 20 on the highway in overdrive because they're only turning about 2,000rpm on the freeway.  The figure for the 'Burbs is actually better: 12/17, but that's for 2 wheel drive.  It doesn't give a 4x4 figure.

I'm not trying to scare anybody.  The poster can do their own research to see the crash history of Explorers.  Why do so many sell, even to this day?  Because American consumer's have short term memories, want to look like their neighbors, and think, "ah, that won't happen to me."

About a year ago a local TV and radio sports news caster was killed in his '99 Explorer.  He and his family had just moved out of state.  The whole family was on board.  On the freeway a tire failed (sound familiar?) and of course this is all it takes to upset the center of gravity of an Explorer.  So at freeway speed, it rolled umpteen times, and of course the A pillars collapsed and the roof caved in killing the husband (driving), severally injuring his wife and one daughter (broken pelvis's, head injuries, etc., and one daughter not too bad.  Pretty sad and so much for their great new life.

[HersheyGirl]

Well, thanks alot for the information.
 In the East here, you can not touch any thing with AWD or 4x4 for under $8K with under 100K miles on it....unless it is less than a 95.  This is a big Explorer area and  we have not had, or at least that I have heard of, accidents with roll overs in any SUV.  Maybe we just don't drive as fast as the west coast does.  I don't know.  Explorers come very highly reccommended here in PA.  
 I just sent to the Salvation Army my 94 Chevy G-20 van....talk about a big van to drive and park.  It had the 5.7 V-8 and I only got about 12mpg intown and about 9-10 mpg towing.  It was very top heavy as it was a hightop van...but I never had a problem with it even coming close to rolling over.  I wanted something I could use as a spare car, to tow with, to be able to drive in snow and ice in, to let the kids drive in and feel safe with them driving it, and a car that I could park in a regular space in. This Explorer is just that car for me.  All cars have their horror stories, they all should be band from the planet.  There will always be accidents and people will die...that is just a risk you take.  Life is a risk.  Get over it.   I did do my homework, and I did make a very informed decision about what car to buy, just because I don't agree with someone else doesn't make me wrong or have a short memory......
 All I asked was a question about wiring....

[austinado16]

Clearly, "it can't happen to you" and this is all because "we drive so fast" on the west coast.....we're funny that way I guess.

But here's what I found with a quick search:

The safety of the Ford SUVs became a nationwide concern in 2000. More than 200 deaths and 700 injuries in the United States were blamed on Ford Explorers rolling over after the tread separated on Firestone tires with which the Explorers had been equipped.   
In 2005, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety issued a report finding that the two-door, two-wheel drive Ford Explorer made between 1999 and 2002 had the fourth highest rate of driver death of the 47 SUVs that were part of the study.   
Ford Explorer Rollover Lawsuits - Summary    

In November 2006, a jury awarded the Oklahoma family of a teenager who died in a Ford Rollover accident $15 million in a lawsuit against Ford. The jury found that the teen was killed because the Ford Explorer's roof was too weak to withstand a rollover.    

In early 2006, further support that the Explorer is unstable and can flip over during sudden driving maneuvers surfaced in an Explorer rollover trial in Mississippi. Ford's test results of replacement tires for the Explorer, introduced as evidence in the trial, indicated that the vehicle is unstable not only on Firestone tires but also on tires made by Goodyear, Michelin's Uniroyal, Continental and other manufacturers. Some of the failed tires had been approved by Ford as replacement brands.    

In September 2005, a Texas jury found that Ford Motor Co. should pay $42 million to the family of a 10-year-old boy who was killed when he was partly ejected from a Ford Expedition in a 2004 rollover accident. The boy, Matthew Marroquin, was wearing his seat belt when the vehicle's side window shattered and the boy hit the ground as it rolled, his family said. The suit is one of a growing number claiming automakers should have used stronger glass in side and rear windows to prevent ejections and partial ejections. The family's attorneys said laminated glass would have protected the boy.    
   []   
    12/3/07 Case Update:
The California Superior Court granted preliminary approval to a settlement in class action lawsuits by owners of model year 1990-2001 Ford Explorers in four states -- California, Illinois, Texas and Connecticut -- against Ford Motor Company alleging Ford made false claims regarding the safety of these Explorers.    
[]   

In March 2005, a jury found Ford responsible for the deaths of Corina Garcia and Diana Alicia of Crystal City, Texas. The jury was presented evidence that the 2000 Ford Explorer was defective in its design because Ford used tempered side glass instead of laminated safety glass. Available for decades, laminated glass substantially reduces the risk of passengers being ejected in a rollover accident.    

In August 2004, Ford settled a rollover death case involving its Explorer as a jury was considering whether to award punitive damages. Earlier, the jury in Fort Meyers, Florida, awarded the family of victim Bob Miller $5.3 million in compensatory damages. Miller was on his way home from his roofing job and was wearing his seat belt and a hard hat when a tire lots its tread, causing the Explorer to swerve and then flip over.    

In June 2004, a jury in San Diego, California, returned the first plaintiff's verdict in a lawsuit challenging the safety of the Ford Explorer. The plaintiff, Benetta Buell-Wilson, was left paralyzed when the roof of her 1997 Ford Explorer caved in after it rolled over when she swerved to avoid an object in the road. Buell Wilson charged that the Ford Explorer was unstable and had a weak roof

[Azusateach]

I've got to ask ...

How does all of this answer the original question of wiring?

What's the purpose here?  

People will buy what they want.  You can shake your head & mutter under your breath, "I told you so", but ultimately the choice of cars is just that -- a choice.  

Let's give it a rest.

BTW, I think the wiring question was answered on the first page ...