By on February 11, 2016

Ford SUV Leader

Mark LaNeve, Ford Motor Company vice president of Marketing, Sales and Service, told attendees of a media breakfast at the 2016 Chicago Auto Show that his company will be introducing four completely new SUVs to its global portfolio.

The new SUVs will compete in market segments where the automaker currently has no product.

LaNeve based Ford’s enthusiasm about truckers on two demographic groups, baby boomers and millennials, and not on current low gasoline prices.

It turns out that as millennials age, they actually do buy (and personally value) cars. Baby boomers like ease of entry, or so Ford thinks.

My older friends dislike climbing up as much as they don’t like stooping down.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

102 Comments on “CHICAGO: Ford Will Introduce Four All-new SUVs...”


  • avatar
    VoGo

    So many SUVs. Who does Ford think they are, BMW?

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      How many does GM have?

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        By my count:
        1. Trax/Encore
        2. Equinox/Terrain
        3. Traverse/Acadia/Enclave
        4. Tahoe/Escalade/Yukon
        5. Suburban/Yukon XL and Escalade XL -you could also call this 4(a)
        Depending on how you view it, the Cadillac SRX is either 2(a) a variant of the Equinox or (6) its own platform.

        So if Ford is truly adding 4 new SUV models, that would bring them to 9 vs. ~5 for GM.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          I can see this:

          1. EcoSport
          2. Escape/MKC
          3. Edge/MKX
          4. LWB Edge thing
          5. Bronco
          6. Explorer/Aviator
          7. Expedition/Navigator

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I’m hoping Bronco especially if it closer to the Wrangler end of the off-road spectrum but not durability and interior comfort end of the spectrum.

        • 0 avatar
          outback_ute

          They also have the Captiva in two and three row configuration, and the Colorado 7 medium BOF wagon.

          Ford already has the Everest medium BOF SUV on the global market, that I would regard as separate from a swb ‘proper’ Bronco.

          What other segments are there? Coupe versions of everything? A Wangler or BOF Suzuki Jimny competitor? Counting hybrids separately?

  • avatar
    Rday

    I like CUV’s too especially when I sat in the new RAV4 hybrid. My GF will be opening a practice up in the San Bernardino mountains and will need to have AWD for all the show and ice. I am sure she will get the RAV hybrid since she has been driving a Prius V and it has been bullet proof reliable with all the miles she has on it. We are over 70 so we want a vehicle that is not too low and not too high. Companies that build these kinds of vehicles will get our business and we pay cash for what we buy.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    @Rday
    Your GF is over 70 and she’s *opening* a practice?
    Rock On!

  • avatar
    kmars2009

    A new Explorer(Everest based) and Lincoln Aviator(also Everest based) are 2 (AWD) I can think of, coming out for ’18. I can also see them doing a small CUV built off Fiesta for both divisions, but that’s just rhumor.

  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    I can think of five.

    1. Ranger-based Bronco/Everest

    2. 2018 F-150-based Expedition/Navigator

    3. New Explorer/Aviator

    4. New B-segment CUV (new version of the EcoSport)?

    5. New Escape model? Current one is getting up there

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Mhm, wonder how many we’ll get -here-.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        We’re getting 1, 2, 3, and eventually 5. AFAICT, the only reason the current EcoSport isn’t sold here is because it has awful crash ratings, and since subcompact CUVs are the hot new segment, there’s no reason Ford wouldn’t want to improve it for the N.A. market.

    • 0 avatar
      derekson

      They’re talking about new models they don’t currently sell at all, not revisions.

      So it’s probably your #1, the Aviator (part of your #3), the EcoSport/new american name (your 4), and the fourth is likely a small EV around the size of an Escape but on a “skateboard” type platform with the battery in the floor.

    • 0 avatar
      rockets

      I think all 5 above, eventually. Can’t wait for the Bronco/Ranger.

      • 0 avatar
        npaladin2000

        I don’t see the Bronco getting anywhere. No one ever manages to dethrone Jeep, it just doesn’t happen. Nissan (Xterra) has tried, Toyota (FJ) has tried.

        Many cars have tried.
        They tried and failed?
        They tried and died.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          It’s really not impossible to take a slice from jeep, it’s just that the companies build lame products in response.

          You need immediately recognizable styling, something with so much consistency that you don’t need badges on a brand new vehicle for consumers not in the know to immediately recognize the product, the Xterra did not have this, FJ did not have this in the American market.

          A way to immediately get consumers to take notice is to offer two solid axles, you can’t talk crap about that in anyway for an off-road vehicle designed for the masses.
          Removable roof is fairly note able, not required but immediately brings a lot of brownie points.

          A V8 with the aforementioned aspects would steal countless sales from the Wrangler, there is no two ways about it, a V8 priced to sell would eat the wrangler alive, this is a subset of buyers that take great pride in the engine sound, especially with no top.

          And then you have size, why are all these off-road competitors only offering midsize vehicles, you better be damn serious about your vehicle if your going to take wrangler head on, there is a lot of room for a fullsize and a compact off-roader, and they are completely empty segments.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Ford is benchmarking the Rubicon, so they are at least doing their homework properly. The Bronco *should* have best in class offroad capabilities. I don’t know if it actually will, but that’s the goal. I wouldn’t expect a V8 though.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            bball,
            I agree that Ford will find it challenging to eclipse the Wrangler with a Bronco.

            It will need either an expensive Raptor’esque IFS or a live axle up front for starters.

            Ford will then need to have very poor build quality, ie, agricultural like the Wrangler so it can produce the Bronco cheap enough.

            I would think the Bronco would be a Ford version of the FJ Cruiser with eye candy looks to make it appear macho.

            I would not attempt to take on the Wrangler.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The build quality of the Bronco will be better than the Wrangler. But that isn’t difficult. It will take on the four door Wrangler because Ford doesn’t have a choice. But if you come at the king, you best not miss.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          It doesn’t have to dethrone the Wrangler. All the Bronco has to do is sell enough, in combination with the Ranger, to keep Wayne fully utilized. The name means something to people and Ford should be able to sell a decent amount.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Bball,
            How is what you are describing different from the FJ Cruiser?

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            The retro FJ was never the ICON the Bronco is. (See what I did there?)

            “The Bronco’s been discontinued. We’re trying to shed that whole fugitive on the run thing. This is the Escape!”

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Hopefully the sheet metal doesn’t rip like the FJ.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Would the FJ Cruiser still be around if it shared it’s underpinnings with the Tacoma (or 4Runner) and was built in the same factory?

            The FJ is also a two door vehicle (I know it has those clamshell rear doors) that wasn’t big enough to compete with the 4 door Wrangler.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            There’s an idea. Should have made a two door 4Runner, and called it the 4Runner FJ, or FJ Runner. Success!

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            FJ did share its underpinnings with the 4Runner (at least I’ve been led to believe). As far as I’m aware it just had too many faults and did little(if any) to improve on the capability of the 4Runner while gaining a lot of problems the 4Runner didn’t have.

            The plastic silver painted bumpers were an awful idea that are commonly trashed and just makes the whole design look cheap, if they had used actual metal it would have been worlds better.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            “The FJ cruiser is built by Toyota subsidiary Hino Motors” I wonder if that’s part of the problem. Wiki also sez it does share lots of underpinnings with the 4Runner via the LC Prado.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            It’s a Land Cruiser Prado with a new top. It’s related to the Tacoma and 4Runner. However, it was built in Japan, at a Hino factory, instead of the US with US volume products. Or even with the 4Runner in Japan.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            It’s certainly not a bad platform to start on, but they seem to have focused on design and left actual capability as an after thought.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            FJ never really did it for me. Lousy visibility and less cargo/people room than the 4Runner without a big payoff in actual geometry (approach/departure/breakover). In fact despite looking all macho, in terms of angles and ground clearance, it is just about identical to my much more pedestrian looking third gen 4Runner. The interior was a bit try-hard as well, although the wash-out floors are welcomed. What it did have is a manual transmission option, which is awesome.

            Trying to copy the old FJ40 by emphasizing aesthetics is just totally wrong. The FJ40 had an awesome glass-filled greenhouse and dispensed with any sort of aesthetics in favor of simple/utilitarian design. That rugged simplicity is then interpreted as aesthetically pleasing.

            Don’t get me wrong, FJs are seriously well built trucks, aside from that fender bulge issue on trucks that get pretty seriously beaten on (bottoming out front suspension a lot). Mechanicals and suspension are both made for the long haul.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I see the Bronco as being a more off-road oriented 4Runner.

          • 0 avatar
            npaladin2000

            Better hope that’s what Ford sees too ;-)

          • 0 avatar
            outback_ute

            Toyota did a proper swb Wrangler-size version of the Prado/GX, hardtop of course, until recently. That they don’t sell it any more says something. I don’t know if they still build it for other markets.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Drzhivago138,
      A Bronco/Everest I think is a sure bet. I’m hoping anyway.

    • 0 avatar

      A little CUV would be interesting. Even Renegade is just too large, and I Encore is just ewwwww. Ford, please build us a mini-Escape. But provide a decent 1st gear ratio.

  • avatar
    NotFast

    Escape ST and Escape RS!

  • avatar
    energetik9

    I vote for a high performance, sport SUV, something along the lines of a BMW X5M. Throw the Mustang 5.0 in there to provide a better option than the Jeep SRT or whatever it is. Call it a Ford GT-X.

    And no, I don’t see any possibility of this.

  • avatar
    brettc

    I’m guessing the Ecosport will be one of the 4. Just found out about that thing the other day and it looks interesting.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      I dunno; some of the reviews I’ve read from the UK and Europe have been pretty unfavorable.

      • 0 avatar
        outback_ute

        Probably will evolve into two separate products (BRIC vs ROW or 1st vs 3rd world) for the next gen, you know, One Ford…

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          “One Ford” is not about eliminating market-specific vehicles. If it was, they’d drop the F-Series since it’s pretty much North America-only. It’s about eliminating redundancies and duplication of effort* such as using different platforms for the same class of vehicle. It’s about ending nonsense like the North American midsize vehicles being built on a completely separate platform than the midsize vehicles in the rest of the world. There was literally no good reason for the previous Fusion to be on the NA-only CD3 platform while the Mondeo everywhere else was on the EUCD architecture. There was no reason for the Escape to be CD2-based while the Kuga was built on C1. There was no reason for the North American Focus to stay an uglified carried-over C170 while the rest of the world got the (significantly better) C307.

          *see what I did there?

          • 0 avatar
            outback_ute

            I wasn’t commenting on just market-specific vehicles but western vs developing markets. Eg the Ecosport was developed for India but is too crude to do well in Europe for example and arguably harms Ford’s brand. On the other hand the next Fiesta will be too expensive to compete in India, which is why the Figo was developed, based off the superseded Fiesta platform. Ford talked up having only one car in each segment but it is not realistic.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    “It turns out that as millennials age, they actually do buy (and personally value) cars.”

    I like how there are constant studies on Millennials stating both this and the exact inverse of this, RE: cars, home ownership, independence.

    We’re a hard group to figure out – mostly because we’re idiots with the attention spans of gold fish.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      It’s like how nobody can figure out whether eggs are good or bad for you.

      • 0 avatar
        derekson

        Eggs are definitively one of the healthiest foods you can eat if you actually look at the science and understand statistics and the faults of the observational nutrition studies that led us down the mistaken road of dietary fat and cholesterol as evils. The nutrition dogma massively lags the science, but this is a settled question.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        Also coffee.

        RE: Eggs. The egg -whites- are the good part. All of the healthy and fewer of the calories and cholesterol! They just don’t make good omelettes (I’ve discovered recently) because there’s not enough holding them together.

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          the medical community has recently acknowledged that dietary cholesterol doesn’t amount to a hill of beans w.r.t. serum lipids. honestly I think Ancel Keys should be dug up and shot.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            One egg, 6 in tortilla, some salsa on top – it will make you glad you got out of bed that morning. It’s become my daily routine.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I ain’t eat no brekfix since 7th grade :(. But that sounds like a nice soft dinner meal I had a couple weeks ago while recovering from mouth surgery.

          • 0 avatar
            derekson

            Ancel Keys is possibly worse than Hitler. He’s caused uncounted millions of people to become obese and diabetic and suffer and die earlier because of his irresponsible approach to science.

        • 0 avatar
          RideHeight

          Eggbeaters make great omelets if you add spinach and parmesan! Protein, yums and negligible carbs.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Ah, cheese! That’ll be the sticky element. I was thinking too healthy and only put some basil and some bacon bits.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            I got my cholesterol down to poster boy levels and then carbs rose up to smite me.

            I’ve now gotten my glucose down to ~115 in the mornings and 135 evenings. I’m waiting for the next shoe to drop. Glutens? Prions? Bunions?

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          Eggs are good. The whole thing. If you go throwing them in butter and serve with sausage everyday, well, not so much. I eat at least two eggs everyday. They are goodness.

          • 0 avatar
            derekson

            “Eggs are good. The whole thing. ”

            Yup. All the nutrients are in the yolk. It’s the best part. Throwing it away is insanity!

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          CoreyDL,
          To make your omelette hold together is simple, just add egg yolk. Use water and don’t use milk.

  • avatar
    Wheatridger

    Yes, Ronnie, I’d love a chair-height car– like my old Subaru Forester, but not a Forester. My GTI, as much as i love it, requires me to drop my butt into a bucket. My Tiguan demands a climb up, like getting onto a pigmy horse. Today’s auto market is bifurcated into a two, with many too-tall choices and a few too low. Something’s missing in the middle here. Where’s the Golden Mean? Gone the way of the Middle Class, apparently.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    Here is how I see 4 new SUVs that fill gaps in their line up.

    1&2. Explorer/Aviator since it will be returning to a RWD based vehicle. Which begs the question are they going to loose some of the current customers that keep it at the top of the midsize SUV sales charts? The Edge could capture some of them but they still haven’t given us a 3 row version.

    3. Bronco, they don’t have an off road focused competitor to the Wrangler.

    4. Sub Compact?

    The upcoming Expedition/Navigator will slot into the same segment as the outgoing vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      I think there has to be a LWB Edge or Flex replacement coming. Ford has a LWB Edge in China, and it would make since for us to have it here.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        a three row Edge would step on the Explorer’s market segment.

        count me in as one who’s a bit bummed that the Flex has been less than successful. Though I don’t understand why; at first people were bitching at how expensive they were for even a base model, but that hasn’t hurt sales of the Explorer.

        maybe they should have kept the name “Fairlane” from the concept; I was at CES 2008 where there was a customized Flex in our booth, and everyone who asked about it thought “Flex” meant it was a hybrid or flex-fuel or something.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          I love the Flex. My wife likes it as well. We had decided on options to order one a few years ago, but the dealership had a CPO MkT that had been on the lot for three months. I made an offer and bought that instead.

    • 0 avatar
      krohde

      Where do you get that the Explorer is returning to a RWD platform? The current one is the segment leader and just got a full redesign. Regardless of the platform, Ford has a car in that segment so that’s not part of the new 4 vehicles.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        It’s not a redesign, just a facelift. But I agree; Ford would be stupid to abandon the sales success that the Land Rover-esque Explorer has become. I do think that an F-150-based Bronco is forthcoming. Assuming Ford’s fleet MPG is up to snuff, a Bronco design seems like it would pay for itself in very short order. Just ask FCA, who has people paying ridiculous prices for the relatively-agricultural rig that is the Wrangler…because it’s iconic and there’s nothing else like it.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        No Ford does not have a SUV in the midsize RWD tow your mid size trailer segment, think 5-7K range. It has been reported here among many other outlets that Ford is going RWD based for the next Explorer and the return of the Aviator. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/10/exclusive-lincolns-upcoming-rwd-crossover/

        The existing Explorer was a stop gap rush job. It has not been redesigned it was just a refresh and with the rest of the products that share its platform going away it needs to find a new home, hence the new RWD platform.

        Fact is the people who care which are the primary drive wheels in their AWD/4WD vehicle are would prefer RWD based over FWD based. The vast majority just care that it is AWD/4WD. So the few that really really want a FWD SUV can probably be sold on the Edge/MKX.

        • 0 avatar
          outback_ute

          Can’t see them going rwd when that would require a new platform versus just stretching an Edge.

          After the ‘poor full size SUV sales’ story from the other day, would there be a market for a 3/4 ton SUV? Can’t see it happening. On the other hand, how about a triple cab F250? Do they sell a twin cab Transit, that has 7 seats!

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            The RWD thing comes from the same “deep inside Ford source” that leaked the GT. There is a gap in Fords line up and a bit of overlap at the same time. The Edge and Explorer are pretty close together so give us the long awaited LWB 3 row Edge for that crowd and a RWD based Explorer with tow ratings exceeding the current Explorer’s 5,000lb. Bump it back near the the previous Explorer’s near 8,000lb rating.

            The “poor full size SUV sales” are because that is how the mfg wants it. They have consciously raised the base and high end prices. They make more per unit and despite the resulting lower sales they still make as much money and the lower the CAFE hit.

            The 3/4 ton market hasn’t been covered by anyone for a number of years. With the convergence of the two models bringing out a Super Duty-ised Expedition would be cheaper than before. Those that have been hanging on to their diesel and big block Excursions and Suburbans because there is nothing on the market that can replace it will be certain to be interested. Plus there is the crowd that has to have the current biggest baddest. With a GVW exceeding 8500lbs it would be CAFE exempt. Start the pricing at 60~65K and let it get too close to 6 figures when you check every box.

          • 0 avatar
            outback_ute

            I know they are unrelated vehicles but the Explorer is effectively a 3-row Edge now. Not sure how things would work out.

            If Ford builds the next gen Ranger and Everest/Bronco that could cover the towing marjet as it is about the same size as the old style Explorer and tows 3 tonnes/6600-ish pounds, down 500 kg from the longer WB pickup. Maybe that could end up wearing the Explorer name?

            I don’t see the numbers for a 3/4 ton SUV, it is not just actual sales achieved but incremental sales over F250 etc if they don’t build it. There must be a pretty small number of people who don’t buy a F250 in absence of the Excursion. Maybe the profit margins are sufficient to make up for the low volume.

            Will the new super duty pickups be a lot more shared with the F150 than the current model?

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          Whuh? What “stop-gap rush job?” the ’16 is a typical mid-cycle action (MCA.) A minor restyling with some equipment upgrades. Fusion and Escape are MCA for ’17.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            I’m not talking about the refresh I’m talking about the entire vehicle. The last generation Explorer was originally supposed to run for another year and it’s replacement was not originally going to be based on the FWD car platform. It was to continue in the vein of the original versions, RWD based with greater than 5,000lb tow capacity and an available 2 speed transfer case. Then $4/gal gas came along and they hurriedly created today’s Explorer and discontinued the old one a year early. So yes, today’s Explorer is a stop gap, rush job.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      The other option made more likely by the fact that the Super Duty and F150 are coming back together again is a return of something in the Excursion class. They sort of replaced the Excursion with the Expedition EL so they may now combine the two with an CAFE busting HD version using a F250 front clip and solid rear axle. GM abandoned the nominal 3/4 ton SUV market a few years ago and used Excursions are highly coveted. So there may be some pent up demand that can be filled relatively cheaply.

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    A tasteful sub-compact crossover below the Escape is in order. Other than that, Ford has a very competent CUV lineup. I struggle to see where they think they need to add four vehicles.

    Maybe a reincarnated Bronco is one of them as well?

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    It seems to me that there is a difference between a CUV and SUV and many are confused what each one is.

    Sort of like calling a pickup a van or for that matter a CUV a truck.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      I can kind of understand the difference between a crossover and an SUV. A crossover is more of a soft-roader, essentially a tall wagon, and usually unibody. Body-on-frame, ladder-frame vehicles are SUVs. Rugged unibodies like the Grand Cherokee and Range Rover, which have capable 4WD systems with low-range gearing, sort of blend the difference, but fall more on the SUV side.

      • 0 avatar
        krohde

        While I agree with you, I don’t think Ford is differentiating between SUV and CUV in this announcement.

        • 0 avatar
          Kyree S. Williams

          Oh, definitely not, and outside of enthusiast semantics, it’s really not a distinction that matters. CUV, SUV, same thing, as far as buyer are concerned. The two I think will definitely come to play are a sub-compact CUV below the Escape and a new Bronco. If a redesigned Expedition and Navigator are included, and are counted as two separate vehicles, that would be the four.

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    Automotive News has an item/pics re: gen Ecosport testing in the US. That one is a given, as is a Ranger platform mate Bronco. The Aviator would also be another “new” product in a segment where there is no current entry. The fourth product is kind of a wild card. Its been reported Lincoln won’t go below the MXC, but who knows with everyone else doing it already. So a Lincoln Ecosport is one possibility or a “coupe” version of the Lincoln MKX (eg BMW X6).

  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    I want a new and improved FLEX…NOW..NO compromises.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      Sadly, the Flex (probably) will be a one-and-done in the annals of Ford history. Those that have one love it, but there aren’t enough new buyers. Hopefully, though, the next Explorer will be a bit longer to make up for not having two full-size CUVs. Maybe the same size as the current Lambda CUVs?

  • avatar
    Chets Jalopy

    Aluminum Excursion. Because no one has said that yet.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      Welll…since the 2018 Expedition is going to the F-150 body, and the F-150 cab will be shared with the Super Duty next year, you could concievably make such a beast. F-250 SuperCrew + Expedition EL body = Excursion.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        if you’re talking about those things which were photographed a couple of months ago, I actually saw one on the road recently. They have cut- and riveted-together body panels which look like they were pulled from both the F-150 and hacked up from the current Expedition. I’d wager they’re mules for testing something powertrain or chassis related, it sure didn’t look like anything intended for production. I mean, look at this thing:

        http://www.autonews.com/gallery/20151019/PHOTOS01/101909998

        the rear quarter windows don’t even fit right, and the ass looks like it’s about to fall off.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          I should expect the rear quarter panels on the mule to be a slapdash job–they’re the only pieces not in production. We can assume that on the final production model, the front doors will be shared with the F-150, and possibly the rear doors, but probably not the front clip (unlike the mule) and definitely not the rear.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            I don’t think you can assume that. The current Expedition shares practically nothing with the F-150, so why assume the next one will just based on some slapped together mules? I mean, these were mules used for testing stuff which ended up in the 2011 Explorer:

            http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s–KuBQq2tO–/18nda2lhkvbiujpg.jpg

            http://jalopnik.com/5067729/first-photos-of-new-car-based-ford-explorer

            Those were bodged-together unions of the Flex and the Taurus X. And that’s what “mules” are. existing vehicles modified to fit new stuff under the skin. GM was testing the Volt’s drivetrain using old Malibus, ferchrissakes. AFAIK the next Expedition is slated for 2019 or 2020, so it likely hasn’t even passed basic design yet.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Yes the current Expedition shares very little with the current or last F150, however when it was introduced it shared a lot with the then current F150. Ford just hasn’t invested any money in it in a long time. I fully expect it to share a lot with the current F150 once again. The volume is too low to not borrow heavily from the current F150 parts bin.

  • avatar
    carcurmudgeon

    I’m thinking about buying a Flex…perhaps this is a good time to snap one up before they go?

    Ford doesn’t seem to have done much with pushing the Flex (and yes, it’s a dumb name..Fairlane is way better) as its minivan alternative, which is really what it is. The reviews I’ve read are uniformly very positive, with the one sour note being the MPG.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Bark M., United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic

Get No-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners Automotive News in your Facebook Feed!

Already Liked