The objective things that make the Explorer have the worst in class interior are the glaring panel gaps, the horribly obvious carpet seam when you open the passenger door, the horrible implementation of the 360 camera on the 12" screen, the laggy and ugly digital cluster...
The ST gets great makes from me in chassis, driving dynamics, performance, steering wheel, and exterior looks, but that's about it. Sit in a palisade or telluride or GC L and they're in another league, it feels like comparing an old Kia to a Bentley. Sit in pathfinder and be blown away by how everything just works. Where we went wrong was sitting in an expedition after an explorer, THAT interior quality gap is about big as the canyons they call panel gaps on explorer. It's a real shame, because I really, really like explorer ST. The ST guys did almost everything they could right (would have preferred the 10r80 vs the weak 10r60), but the regular explorer team that made that interior... Frankly they should be jettisoned.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. The automakers pushing artphone like tech into cars only works IF ITS GOOD. If it's anything less than amazing, consumers will be disappointed, because we are used to great UI on smartphones. Even the apple experience is OK nowadays. What really kills me is Ford knew how bad the 12" screen software was. Lincoln had the chance to use it and declined because it was so bad. The premium model decided to use the smaller screen, that's how bad that software is.
I get that I'm being hyper picky, but I feel like these are things that they should have gotten right, especially at $60k.