By on November 21, 2013

2015-ford-edge-concept-live-08

When Ford first introduced the Edge crossover, it was targeted primarily at North America but the dramatic increase in sales of crossovers and SUVs around the globe, particularly in China, has changed the company’s focus with those vehicles. ”We no longer look at SUVs as a regional product,” Ford’s chief marketeer Jim Farley told journalists Tuesday at a preview the night before the Los Angeles Auto Show.

 

Currently SUVs and crossovers are red-hot, and unlike the stereotype of Americans in big SUVs, passenger utility vehicles are particularly popular in China and Russia, which helps with Ford CEO Alan Mulally’s “One Ford” philosophy. The company says that it’s about halfway through with globalizing its utility vehicle offerings. The Edge slots in between the larger Explorer and the smaller Escape/Kuga.  The new Edge is expected to be available as a 2015 model.

The Edge concept is filled with features like autonomous driving and parking, allowing drivers to park their vehicles with a remote control without even having to be sitting in the car. The Edge Concept also has a sensor-based obstacle avoidance system that steer a vehicle around potential collisions.

The interior features a 10-inch touch screen, a leather-wrapped steering wheel and hand stitching on the instrument panel. Some features formerly controlled by the MyFordTouch system, which has given some consumers problems, now have mechanical switches.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

55 Comments on “Los Angeles 2013: 2015 Ford Edge To Go Global...”


  • avatar

    A Brazilian, on seeing this, would be forgiven if he exclaimed, “Olha, um EcoSport gigante!”

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    The Edge and the Murano are two hot-selling competitors, and they are both about to enter their third generations. Meanwhile, I’m so glad that Ford didn’t resort to its habit of recycling a car’s body for a redesign, because it would be really stupid for the Edge to use that same body a third time in a row….

    • 0 avatar
      whynot

      The Edge is entering it’s second generation. The current one is just a facelift.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        Well, in an automotive landscape where refreshed cars are marketed as complete redesigns, I’m inclined to agree with you—but then the 2011 and later Fusion *does* err more on the side of a redesign since it got all new electronics and interior panels, and most of the exterior was reworked. The same is true of other Fords that have shamelessly re-used the bodyshells of their predecessors, including the Panther platformers, Expedition/Navigator, F-Series, Explorer, Fusion, Mustang, Ranger, E-Series, Taurus, MKT, et cetera.

        And while we’re on the subject, I think it’s finally time for the MKX–if there is another one–to get its own bodyshell. Part of the reason Lincoln has struggled is because half of its cars have looked exactly like their Ford counterparts.

        • 0 avatar
          whynot

          I won’t comment on the interior (I don’t remember either version’s interior all that well) but most of the exterior is the same. The new Edge basically got a new fascia (and even then a lot of it followed the lines of the older Edge, just look at the edges of the headlights for example) and a new tail lamp design. Standard facelift stuff. Everything in between is identical. The vehicles you mentioned had much more extensive redesigned despite using the same platform.

          As for the MKX I agree and considering the MKZ and MKC chances are good that the MKX wouldn’t share the same bodyshell if they were to make another one (which I think they will).

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The Edge interior was significantly upgraded for the 2011 model. MFT debuted in the Edge, so the IP and dash was all new as well.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    It was about time this thing got a redesign! Of course once past concept phase all of those neato self-parking things will go away. I think the styling is an improvement, but my goodness does it need window tint.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Yes, its been basically the same car since 2006. The facelift in 2011 helped, but I didn’t like some of the center stack choices. The haptic feedback buttons made me angry, and the placement of the hazard button meant you accidently touched it while using the touchscreen. Better styling and the return of actual buttons makes this nothing but a postive for the Edge.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    How does this even exist alongside the explorer? They look exactly the same, similar size everything.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Ford’s crossover strategy is confusing sometimes. The Escape, Edge, Explorer, and Flex all overlap in some ways. The Explorer, built on a different platform, feels so much bigger and is over a foot longer. Realistically, the next Explorer will probably have even more in common with the Edge than it does now. I also suspect the Explorer is too big for anywhere but North America.

    • 0 avatar

      Edge is 2 rows of seats and Explorer is 3 rows. Also, customers who prefer CUV/cars will find the Edge to be much more to their liking, while the Explorer sits like a truck (still drives like the large car platform it’s built on). I’m in sales with Ford and I agree on the exterior and on paper there isn’t too much difference, but most customers are polarized to one or the other and they aren’t switched as commonly as you might think after people drive them.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        People tend not to move between them unless they have a reason, like a growing family. The Edge has been the most car like out of all the Ford CUVs. If Ford can continue to move 125k+ Edges a year in the US, it won’t matter if there is overlap with the Explorer. Between the Escape, Edge, and Explorer, Ford will sell over 600k CUVs in the US this year.

        The Edge and Explorer will be on the same platform eventually. The CD4 platform that the Fusion is on now will be the basis for everything midsized and up.

    • 0 avatar
      That guy

      The Edge does somewhat overlap both the Explorer and Escape, but it sells too well and for too much money for them to kill it. As long as they’re making money on it, they’re happy.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        The Explorer is actually quite a bit larger than the Edge, and is meant to seat more people. It’s like the Nissan Pathfinder versus the Murano, or the Toyota Highlander versus the Venza. As far as the Edge and Escape go, they are similar in size—especially with the latest Escape—but the Escape is narrower and they offer completely different driving experiences.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          The Explorer isn’t that much bigger than the Edge if you look at the measurements. The wheelbase is only an inch longer and its only a couple inches wider. The biggest different is the Explorer is over a foot longer than the Edge. The Explorer also weighs quite a bit more due to its D3/4 roots.

          The Explorer does feel like a MUCH larger vehicle than the Edge though.

          • 0 avatar
            Shawnski

            The Edge is more upscale than the Escape, without being a family truckster like Explorer. Huge rear sear, great for parents with teens, or empty nester parents with aging parents.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    That rear shot looks atrocious, but other than that not bad.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Seriously though, did we just say “screw that” to aerodynamics and forget things tall and wide cost you in performance and fuel economy? This Edge (and others like it) has the face of a Peterbilt and is about half as high.

    • 0 avatar
      Kenmore

      I loathe and fear this trend to put locomotive fronts on anything tall because it’s always accompanied by a compensatory chopping of the greenhouse and asinine increased slanting and enlargement of the windshield to, I presume, regain some aerodynamic.

      Why, why, why? Is it really driven by pedestrian safety mandates or is it.. *puke sounds*.. “styling”?

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      Some of us like tall and wide and the market bears this out. C/SUV owners are OK if mileage is adequate. A bigger engine takes care of performance. I see a lot of C/SUVs with the horsey set. It might be nice in theory, but a needle nosed C/SUV with a box for a body would make for one ugly vehicle. Me? I’m waiting for dad to sell his Suburban LTZ.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Perhaps if that’s what the C/SUV fans want, from a purely objective standpoint I think mileage should increase with time and technology, not remain stagnant.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          C/SUVs have become more fuel efficient. The Explorer grew a size and gets better mileage than it did before.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            1999 Ford Explorer V6 4×4 vs 2014 Ford Explorer V6 AWD, EPA city mileage has only improved by 3mpg and mixed mileage by 4.

            While certainly an improvement I personally expected more from the loss of two cylinders and the magic of DI and 90 spd trans-axles.

            http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=15522&id=33748

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The 3.5 Duratec doesn’t have DI. The Explorer is also MUCH bigger than it used to be, especially weight wise. The better comparison would be the Edge. That is 6 MPG better combined. I’ll agree with you and say the differnce should be more pronounced, but its the same with almost every vehicle. The 1999 Honda Civic got 27 MPG combined while the 2013 Civic gets 32 MPG combined.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            True, but in the case of Civic its still a small FWD I4, so a smaller mileage gain is technically an improvement. The difference between BOF Explorer and Edge/Explorer is much greater. I think if Ford wanted too they could have realized better performance gains but that would have come at the expense of weight and height.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Ford tried a lower and possibly more efficient route with the Taurus X. It wasn’t exactly a sales success. When they butched it up, lifted it, gave it the Explorer name, more horsepower, and better styling, Ford sold 200,000 units instead of 50,000 units.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Current auto sales are at least partially fueled by cheap credit and 96 month loan terms, both of which were not present when the Freestyle/Taurus X launched. Would Taurus X succeed in this market? That’s a good question I can’t answer.

            “While the renaming of the Five Hundred as the more consumer-familiar Taurus did boost sales of that model, sales of the Taurus X plummeted, although this was partially due to the automotive industry crisis of 2008–10, of which Ford was relatively healthy from compared to fellow Detroit “Big Three” automakers General Motors and Chrysler, as well as a general decline in sales of SUVs and SUV-like crossovers.”

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus_X

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I would have liked to see the evolution of the Taurus X. I think the idea of it is better than the current Explorer, but I don’t know what the sales result would be.

            People seem to like the CUV in SUV clothes. The Explorer has become Cain, killing its brothers Flex and MkT. Its transaction prices are creeping into luxury vehicle territory with significant and increasing volume. I can’t see that the Taurus X would have ever done that. The Taurus X was Volvo and the Explorer is Audi.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Sad but true.

            I’d love to meet some of the people in Ford’s focus groups, and then silently murder them before they can make it to the focus group meeting.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I keep trying to get in the focus groups. It never works. The best I can ever get is driving school at the proving grounds. I’ll take it though.

          • 0 avatar
            whynot

            For those of you calling for a new Taurus X Ford already has a product for you. Its called the Flex. It is virtually the same size but actually has styling to it (for better or worse).

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Whynot-

            I own an MkT. The Flex still exists, but for how long? The Freestyle/Taurus X was basically a Taurus or Five Hundred wagon. The Flex and MkT have a longer wheelbase than their sedan cousins. They are also close to being extinct.

            Their volume has decreased significantly since the Explorer was released. The 3.5EB going in the Explorer, and with more HP, has hurt sales of those two models further.

        • 0 avatar
          johnny_5.0

          To be fair about your ’99 to ’14 comparison, the new model gets that better mileage while weighing over 500 pounds more and has a sizable power increase of 130hp. I’m pretty sure if the current Explorer only weighed ~4100 pounds and the market was okay with a 160hp V6 you’d see a combined rating increase of way more than 4mpg.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Since 1999 retail gasoline has more than tripled, keeping a basic design strategy of lower weight and focusing on low revving fuel efficient engines of reasonable power would have allowed buyers to have the type of vehicle they want (SUV) without paying at least double the 1999 fuel price after the 3 or 4mpg mileage increases. Instead we do the exact opposite.

            http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/facts/m/2012_fotw741.html

            Incidentally, the difference between the published curb weights between a 2014 Expedition and 2013 Explorer is only 1084lbs. The Edge is much lighter at a difference of 1725lbs.

            http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2013/ford/explorer/specifications/exterior.html

            http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2014/ford/expedition/specifications/exterior.html

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Every manufacturer builds these snub-nosed CUVs, yet people on the internet still tell me that a car can’t have a formal roofline these days because that style hurts fuel economy too much.

      • 0 avatar
        Kenmore

        The height of absurdity with this is reached in full-size pickups.
        It’s easily possible to buy one I need climb up into while ducking my head to clear the roof.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          The coupe/fastback roof kills trunks too.

          I was parked between an older Mazda 626 and a Lexus LS460 today. The Mazda has a bigger trunk opening and much lower lift over height. 14 cubic feet of cargo, with tons of it jammed under the rear window.

          I guess people that carry luggage and passengers these days buy CUVs though. The back seat and trunk on nearly every modern sedan is just vestigial thing.

          • 0 avatar
            Kenmore

            Interesting… it’s as if the sedan and coupe have become the sacrificial lambs of CAFE to make up for all the pickup and S/CUVs being sold.

            Even with the repugnant minimizing of greenhouses (speaking of vestigial) sitting atop these glacial, blunt-nosed bodies trucks and other tall vehicles are aerodynamic jokes.

            I imagine that corporate slack has to be somehow accounted for and sedans/coupes are consequently purged of every ergonomically friendly aspect in the process.

  • avatar
    Quentin

    WTF is with all the ipads in the back? The middle one looks like it is controlling the HVAC. How do those iPad holders hold up in a crash? (I was just thinking this as my 1 year old clattered to the ground in the living room holding my iPad and hitting herself in the face.)

    The interior front is probably the first Ford interior I’ve liked in a while. Stylish, but not overly busy like most of them seem to be.

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    Ooh, suedey-soft surfaces throughout

  • avatar
    slance66

    Front end is much, much improved. From ugly as sin to good looking. Rear view is improved as well.

    Doesn’t look anything like an Explorer however, where do people get that? Grill is different, creases along the side in the Explorer are not present on the Edge, D pillar is at the rear in the Edge and is moved forward in the Explorer (like an old Bronco).

    If this new Edge resembles anything (besides the old one) it would be the Evoque and 2014 RR Sport. Especially from that rear 3/4 view.

  • avatar
    RobertRyan

    Front end looks poor and garish. Engine lineup pretty poor as well.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    Perhaps I’ve been soured by my wife’s ’10 Edge Limited…her’s feels so heavy to drive and maneuver. Perhaps it’s the 20″ chrome wheels. I expected better than 17 mpg. In 100k, the only thing it’s needed was a cooling fan assembly, tires, and brakes. And the rear seat dvd has never worked fully well despite 4 trips to the dealer.

    The panoramic sunroof is spectacular however.

    • 0 avatar
      Lie2me

      That’s the same feeling I got with the Edge. I stayed with the Escape because of how light and nimble it is compared to the Edge without being that much smaller

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      The 20s don’t help, but the Edge is still a big, heavy vehicle. However, the Edge has gotten much better since the 2011 refresh. The engines have had HP boosts, and the 2.0T actually does well in the Edge. With the 3.5, I’ve always been able get the same MPG out of an Explorer, Flex, or Edge. I even get better than 17 MPG with an MkT Ecoboost. The 2.3T should be a perfect fit to replace the 3.5 in the Edge.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • J & J Sutherland, Canada
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India