Kammback on an Explorer?
 

Would a Kammaback work on an SUV? It seems like a bit of a stretch...

Explorer Kammback
 

It seems it should help, based on what the people on here have done with minivans. But to start with, you should have a 2WD rather than 4WD, 2-door rather than the heavier 4-door, and the 4.0, not the 5.0 engine for the best FE.
I don't know which years were the lightest weight.
Ray Mac

Sure it would work.

But don't expect a miraculous change - something on the order of a few percent improvement from a small to moderate extension.

Kammed Explorer
 

SUVs pose conflicting challenges for streamlining.While their huge frontal areas and large drag coefficients would benefit the most from streamlining,their relatively straight sides and roofline and full-frontal-area-wake require enormous extension of the body,with curved taper to both roofline and body sides to realize any real benefit.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

A friend has a Toyota Highlander,and we're considering a receiver-hitch,cargo-box-based boat-tail extension,to push his highway mpg from 28,to 32,which will require about 30-inches of additional length,psychologically quite a hurdle!

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I'm pretty confident that a boat-tail is one of the few things that would actually help your Explorer,you'd just have to weigh out the reality of additional length.

Any updates? I have a 2wd KIA Sportage that should be squeezing more than 22 mpg with It's 2.0. I cut the front springs and installed a slanted grill block and my best tank is 25 mpg. My next trick will be an air dam and partial belly pan. I also want to relocate the spare tire and remove the swinging rack. The only way to help my city miles will be to reduce the 2 ton weight as much as feasible and the wheels might be the best place to start.