The Chicago Mercantile Exchange just announced that it is merging with the Chicago Board of Trade Company to create a “juggernaught” in the world derivatives market. These markets allow farmers to hedge their bets, insuring their crop at a given price for a future harvest. Automakers have no such luck. They pour billions of dollars into developing a product and gamble that it will succeed in the market place. Recent Death Watchee Ford has made such a gamble with its new crossover vehicle, the Edge. Some say it must sell, or FoMoCo will bust out. Ford’s betting the proverbial farm on red. But is the Edge a sure thing?
Looks-wise, the answer is maybe. Sporting a grill that would make Chad Johnson jealous, the Edge is as all up in your face as any vehicle on the road. The Edge even goes a step farther than the similarly blingtastic Fusion grinning with a huger chrome three-bar snout and wrap-round jeweled lights. The side view is a mish-mash of Nissan CUV’s past, with the front quarter panel aping Infiniti’s FX and everything from the A-pillar back looking very Murano, albeit with a touch of Acura MDX thrown in fo’ flavor. The rear is my favorite angle, subtlety working the best bits of family DNA (think Focus). The mean-looking trucklette rides on mirrored 18” wheels, attempting to tell all who see that even though the SUV is dead, it’s not.
The Edge’s interior is the biggest surprise; most pieces are straight up binnage (door handles and locks from the Mustang, waterfall jacked from the Freestyle), yet they are elegantly presented and surrounded with better-than-Ford-Average plastics. Marketing speak told tales of how the interior aesthetics were modeled after an urban loft. Never mind the fanciful rationalization, just color me pleased.
The seats are from Mazda’s CX-7. While they feel hopelessly out of place in a harder riding CUV, they are comfortable and appropriate here. The killer app: the Edge's epic front sunroof and rear moonroof, separated by only a foot of fabric. Both are best enjoyed from the cozy, reclining rear seats. Those who follow cars shows know that for more than a decade, manufacturers have been threatening to release a modestly priced ride with an all-glass top. Ford (nearly) delivers.
As the Edge sits on the same CD3 platform as the fine-handling Ford Fusion (a stretched and widened Mazda 6 platform), one would expect sporting pretensions if not outright sportiness. Ford apparently agrees with Frank Zappa that America is great because of our collective ignorance. The ride has been softened and frankly dulled. I’m not disagreeing with Ford or Frank; leaving the Edge tuned like a Zoom-Zoomer would only exacerbate our aching collective backs. On highways and suburban byways, where all Edges will live 99% of their easygoing lives, the ride is competent, compliant and downright pleasant. It is only on swooping, challenging back roads — where Ford’s PR wing elected to turn us loose — that ride sloppiness and handling limitations became apparent, and quick.
Luckily, the brakes are the same awesome stoppers found on the CX-7. The nanny is a hard mistress as she actually applied the brakes under full acceleration. Enthusiasts and wannabe enthusiasts might balk, but I guarantee the Edge will never dog Ford with Explorer-style rollover headlines. Besides, you can switch it off.
The go-pedal is connected to the new Duratec 3.5L 60-degree V6 found in the Lincoln Zephyr, er, MKZ. The 265hp and 250lbs.-ft of torque is enough to adequately motivate the 4200+ pound lil’ brute. Again, enthusiasts can decry the lack of power all day long, but for what the Edge wants to be (and who it wants to sell itself to) the mill is just fine. I did, however, decry the lack of oomph to my Ford peeps and asked why there is no SVT/SHO/HO/V8 version available for alpha male soccer marms. My query was met with knowing smiles and disingenuous shrugs. You read it here first.
The six-speed automated cog-swapper– the mechanical fruit of a joint venture with GM– is a winner. Ford claims 24mpg for the AWD Edge on the highway, which is good for an angled two-ton brick (though they were suspiciously silent about the around town numbers). Best of all, kick-downs will let the engine blast up to the 6,250rpm redline before shifting. We like that.
But do we like the Edge? Ford’s marketers mentioned a mythical man named “Phil” at whom the Edge is allegedly aimed. He’s 31, childless, active and on the go. In other words, he’s me. And I ain’t buying. If I wanted to sit in a highchair, I’d grab a CX-7. However, Element-owning Boomers who are tired of cruising PT just might snap-up the Edge up in droves. Ford’s sure hoping the roulette wheel comes up as red as their recent financial statements. Or Blazing Copper Metallic, to be more exact.
[Ford provided Mr. Lieberman's airfare, transfers, accomodation, meals, beverages, the vehicle reviewed, insurance, taxes and a tank of gas.]
77 Comments on “Ford Edge Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
From Ford’s web site: FWD EPA 18/25, AWD EPA 17/24. Numbers aren’t far off from other crossovers or minivans of similar weight. By contrast, the slightly lighter Freestyle with the smaller 3.0 and CVT is 20/27 FWD, 19/24 AWD.
Jonny, does the Edge have what it takes to bring Ford back from the brink?
The Edge looks promising, but all of this model proliferation makes it difficult to feel sorry for Ford (or GM, for that matter) as the “Deathwatch” articles tick off these companies’ supposed demise. Does Ford REALLY need an Edge AND an Escape AND a Freestyle? Granted, the sizes and capabilities are slightly different, but one has to wonder how incredible a vehicle could be produced if all of the resources were focused on one product, rather then three.
“The side view is a mish-mash of Nissan CUV’s past, with the front quarter panel aping Infiniti’s FX and everything from the A-pillar back looking very Murano, albeit with a touch of Acura MDX thrown in fo’ flavor.”
I appreciate the deconstruction, but I think you over-analyze. One glance at the Edge from any angle reveals the Edge to be unique. The overall shape is tight and self-contained and is probably will be a fave of industrial designers and automotive designers.
I don’t know about the rest of this car, but from the looks of the exterior alone it is bold and different. More so than most any other car on the road anyway.
it’s a nice looking car, but what’s with the lip on the rear bumper? makes it look like the car had been rear ended by a peterbilt.
it won’t be the hit the Mustang was, and it won’t be Ford’s K car, but it will help. the lack of a 3rd row (which i find ridiculous but then i don’t have a team of rug rats) might be a negative in this market segment.
i think they need to offer a killer warranty, better than Hyundai’s, to draw in buyers.
Hi Johnny,
Why would you pick the CX7 over the Edge is the question that is unanswered in the article? Care to explain?
a_d_v_a: Sure — Size-wise, the Edge and the CX-7 are the same, though because of a different floor plan, you sit a bit higher in the Edge. According to evesdropping, the CX-7 sports the Mazda6 floorpan while the Edge uses the one from the upcoming Mazda CX-9.
Confused? Good. The CX-7 is much sportier with a bombastic turbo, weighs less and costs less. Though, the Edge looks 1,502 times better has a better interior and that fricking ludacrously cool "Vistaroof."
Still, for ME, engine and handling trump all. Which is why I wouldn't get an CUV.
For the childless? A vehicle that large?
Wow.
The first wave of “3rd-Row” converts were burned bad by a feature that wasn’t usable as advertised (especially compared to the minivans most were coming from), and got in the way when you wanted the cargo space. Ford is smart to leave it out.
The design has been toned down a bit too much for this segment. Other successful vehicles in this niche have more of an ‘edge’ to them to make them stand out from SUV’s of the same size. The Lexus RX, Murano, Element, and CX-7 all have some new (at the time, maybe) design element that made them stick out. This Ford does not. Ford is close to be sure, I just think they left the Edge in the rock-tumbler a bit too long.
As for a V-8, didn’t Ford just kill developement of their V-8? Can the 4.6L fit in the edge? Maybe they are planning on upsizing the V-6 to closer to 4L like the new Nissan VQ, which is still sized at 3.5L but with significant room to grow.
As for a V8, or a high-output model — when I asked the Ford Boys, they quickly transformed from serious car-marketers to grinning children.
Remember, these guys all live around Detroit. Which means they want cars that light up Woodward Ave. more than you do.
carlisimo:
Phil is thinking about having children.
The Edge looks like it has taken styling cues from the Fairlane concept…is there room for both?
I’m guessing the hinted-at V8 option may be the previously-retired Yamaha (Taurus SHO) V8 that was revised for the XC90. In 4.4L XC90 trim it is good for 311 horsepower and 325 lb-ft, which would provide a nice increase in thrust from the new 3.5L V6. The Edge’s new 6 speed GM/Ford automatic is capable of handling the extra torque with no changes.
This alleged single guy, “Phil,” wants an “almostaminivan?” Pardon me, I meant to say… “crossover?” Why? Is he feeling left out when his married buds cruise around in their “almostaminivans?” Excuse me, I meant to say… “crossovers?”
This vehicle is a good example of why I like Ford. They do have new product. They do stretch to do new things. Over on the TWAT nominations, I’ve seen the Five Hundred come up as a nominee but I actually like that vehicle, it has clean lines and good interior room. Ford builds a real hybrid. GM is same-old, same-old all the time.
The Edge is an attractive vehicle. A very attractive vehicle. I particularly like the dual-sun/moon-roof option (I’ve ridden in vehicles equipped with those and they give riding in the car a whole new dimension). I believe Liebermann when he’s singing its praises and I acknowledge the shortcomings he mention them but no vehicle is perfect.
But I’m not buying one. I figure its primary competition are things like the Rav4 and I’d rather have the Rav.
The Edge is 25% heavier than the Rav4 and several inches larger in length and width. Spec for spec, the Rav4 is a winner. Better fuel economy, w-a-a-y better performance, better turning radius and, in spite of the Edge’s edge is mass and volume, the Rav4 is the same, better or very close in every interior dimension and capacity. The Rav4 can do 7 passengers (if two are Hobbitts, I suppose). The only standout area for the Edge is its 33% larger gas tank and, with that weight penatly, it’s apparently going to need it. The Rav4 MSRPs for less (although Ford may do givebacks that give the Edge the advantage).
The vehicle weight bothers me quite a bit. I’m a repeat Toyota buyer. I find 4-cylinder Camry performance to be perfectly satisfactory. Whenever I see that Ford or GM has brought out a new vehicle, I look for the 4-cylinder option. When I saw that the Edge is standard with a six, I thought, “Why no economical 4?” The answer, as usual, and as with the Impala, is in the weight. At 4000lbs curb weight, it requires 250 hp to move adequately. When they finally admit them, it’s EPA city numbers are going to be poor.
Now, Ford may think the Edge is aimed at some mythical guy named “Phil” but I would hope they’re aiming cars at me and they aren’t going to win me over with cars that aren’t engineered to squeeze maximum interior space and performance out of the package.
Now, Ford may think the Edge is aimed at some mythical guy named “Phil†but I would hope they’re aiming cars at me and they aren’t going to win me over with cars that aren’t engineered to squeeze maximum interior space and performance out of the package.
What’s the bigger market for any auto manufacturer, the enthusiast that seeks performance/handling above all else, or the everyday driver that pegs performance several steps down on the ladder? Most drivers don’t concern themselves with 0-60, 60-0, or 1/4 mi. times, or slalom speeds and lateral grip.
I still think the jury’s out on this one. I’m sure FoMoCo can easily sell 150,000 of these things each year (especially the first year) which will help, but at the end of the day, don’t the pleasant, innoffensive lines of this car look kind of bland? That’s why I can’t wait to see one in person to see how true that is. Because if Ford just built another “equal to” car that doesn’t really surpass any of the competition in terms of style, quality or dynamics, then what incentives are going to bring people in the door en masse? What will convince people they need this instead of a Honda?
Hopefully. Ford is aiming a little higher than “perfectly satisfactory”. Or “appliance”.
What will convince people they need this instead of a Honda?
What Honda? The CRV is smaller, with no V6 option, and the Pilot is a big truck. The Edge spilts the middle so I would think it may find a home, even to Honda intenders.
God, I love marketers. Phil should buy himself a WRX wagon. It will be easier to get the mountain bike on the roof rack, it will hold just as many kids, and it goes like hell.
I actually like the Edge, though. Very nice looking, and a reasonably attractive interior. If I was in the market for an overweight, tall station wagon it would be on my list. Alas, I already have a Forester, and will probably have it for another ten years.
New2LA:
Interesting.
In the Hyper-active Copper Metalic Sunfire Double-Scream paint, the car is anything but bland.
However, in Acura MDX Gray, it does turn invisible.
I thought the Edge looked pretty sharp in black, though. Black and Chrome always looks good, however.
I think the styling of this car is a huge step up for Ford. When you look at the uber-vanilla Fusion/500/Freestyle designs that have come out lately, this thing is downright extreme. This will help Ford’s image and will meet target sales #’s, if at the expense of other Ford vehicles aka Escape. If Ford could just create a vehicle at least as good as this in every segment and update them regularly, they could just pull out of the mess they’re in.
Does Ford REALLY need an Edge AND an Escape AND a Freestyle? Granted, the sizes and capabilities are slightly different, but one has to wonder how incredible a vehicle could be produced if all of the resources were focused on one product, rather then three.
Well, Buzzdog, I guess they figure if Toyota can do that why can’t they?
Freestyle is pointed straight at customers who need a minivan but don’t want to be seen in one. It’s also the stand-in for the Taurus wagon when it goes away since its styled like the Five Hundred. Edge is kind of like the wagon version of the Fusion but kicked up a few notches. Escape is pointed at people who are too poor for an Explorer or want an “real” SUV with better gas mileage.
Johnny -
As far as I can tell ‘donks’ are cars, not wheels.
As for the Edge, I can say that it looks infinitely better than a freestyle. Otherwise, I can’t get too excited about it.
Ford has so many market segments rotting on the vine, it’s hard to understand why they want to try to get into what is already a crowded CUV market. I’m a little older (35) than the target market, and I already have a couple young kids, but I am so over the SUV/CUV thing I could puke.
Ed S.: the 4.6L is a huge motor, open the hood of a 1995-2002 Continental and see how well it works in FWD applications. The 4.4L Volvo-Taurus motor probably won’t work either. Not to mention the heads/intake are licensed by Yamaha, its likely an expensive motor to mass-produce.
As for a V8, or a high-output model — when I asked the Ford Boys, they quickly transformed from serious car-marketers to grinning children.
We gotta find out if that direct-injected, twin turbocharged Duratec V6 is actually gonna happen. If it really makes 350+hp with no problems, that’s gonna scream.
Well, it sounds like a nice ride. Hopefully the Escape’s days are numbered, Ford has too many cute utes. If they put this much effort in their cars, they wouldn’t be on Death Watch.
Johny: I am very pleased to hear your positive review of this product. Too bad they have not hit the dealers yet. We just replace my wife’s Highlander with a Morono uhhh.. Murano. Well that gives them 3 years to make improvements and fix problems. Hopefully they last that long.
My name is not “phil”, but I’m definitely considering buying this. I’m 27, married, don’t have kids yet but hoping, and make enough money to reasonably buy any car under 50,000.
Personally (I hope I don’t get too much crap for this) I like the CUV things. RAV4, Murano, CX-7, Santa Fe, and now the Edge are all good looking vehicles in my mind; and I want the ability to load some big things in my vehicle yet still get decent gas mileage.
Sure I don’t NEED an CUV. I can get almost all the same utility from a big station wagon. I also don’t NEED a TV, but I’ve got three of them in my house. It’s naive to think people should only own what they need. If that were true, we’d all be living in one room huts without entertainment of any kind.
I personally just think station wagons look dorky. It could just be my age and the resulting association with wagons, but that’s what I think. I guess I could sum it up by saying station wagons are like fanny packs: sure they’re usefully, but they both look lame.
This is just my opinion. Please don’t take this as an attack on people who own/like station wagons. I also love Neil Diamond music, so I’m not saying I’m the arbiter of cool, it’s just this car buyer’s opinion.
It’s not a bold move but it appears to be a competent one; granted its 3 years late. This competes with the CX-7, Murano, and to some extent the new Rav 4. It’s adequate and I would have looked at it as well as the CX-7 three years ago when I bought my Murano. It should sell well for Ford but they need to kill the Freestyle and downsize the Escape to not have these three compete with each other.
As far as marketing this to a 31 year old single male? Are they stupid? The market for this is white collar youngish married couples starting a family or already with a small family as well as baby boomers. 30 something single guys will usually fall into the rugged outdoor types so a Wrangler or maybe an FJ or the sport types with 2 seaters, coupes or sport sedans. Granted you have a mix (knew a guy in his 20’s that just loved Bonnevilles – don’t ask me why), some early 30’s are probably in a 3 series or a variety of other vehicles but most will not want a crossover I’m thinking. I sure as hell would never have gotten one if I wasn’t starting a family.
This may also capture some people downgrading from larger vehicles although its hard to go small if you are used to big.
Nutbags:
The Murano is an excellent vehicle; I’d be surprised if the Edge wound up being better. Just don’t expect to tow very much or go off road with it. I had one for three years and it was very good to me.
I’m also concerned about the lack of third-row seats. If it only seats five, why would Phil need something as big? Dean offered the WRX wagon, and there are quite a few other small-utility/sport-wagons that appeal to the sporty and utilitarian characteristics Phil might aspire to.
GM’s new Outlook/Acadia/Enclave does have a spacious third row (not just for hobbits), WAY more room, a similar curb weight, a similar 275hp 3.6L, the same 6 spd auto, and the same fuel economy ratings.
A direct-inject Duratec 35 should be able to put down 300-320hp numbers without forced induction. The GM 3.6L hi-feature SIDI (direct inject) due out in the 2008 Cadillac CTS is ~315hp (85hp/L) and the 2.0L SIDI turbo (SKY Redline/Solstice GXP) is good for 260hp (130hp/L) which would put a 3.5L twin-turbo direct-inject in the 450hp range in equal tune. I can tell you that the 2.0 turbo is not at the bleeding edge and GM’s 100,000 mile warranty is proof.
Direct injection is a great development
Just to clarify Phil a bit more.
He’s thinking about getting married, is maybe already married, could be gay (and dating Dave), but attached. Kids are in the cards but not the immediate future.
Just to clarify the market a bit — Ford feels that the CUV segment is where the growth in passenger cars is at. Looking at Cowbell’s comments above, they might be right.
Car-based utes sold as well as dirt-hauler based utes for the first time.
It was actually quite like a General Patton speech. “We’ve got the right product, in the right market at the right time in history.”
I think the “lack” of 7-seats will actually help the Edge much more than hurt it.
I think 3rd-rows should be confined to mini-vans and Suburbans.
I think a lot of things.
JL: I used to think that too, but the RAV4’s third row is actually a decent kiddie hauler. (the front two rows of seats adjusted forward accordingly)
Course, the 3rd row in the Explorer and Freestyle is pretty nice, nice enough to upsell to a customer who frequently needs to carry extra passengers. The Edge should be fine with two rows.
Jonny, I think you mean “dub”, a “donk” is a tricked out car with huge wheels.
Looks nice, maybe my father (50s) has been looking forward to these.
“It is only on swooping, challenging back roads — where Ford’s PR wing elected to turn us loose — that ride sloppiness and handling limitations became apparent, and quick.”
Jonny,
I live in Marin and am familiar with those roads on and around Mt. Tam where the Ford folks let you run the Edge. In fairness to FoMoCo, the number of cars you could drive up there that would leave you with a sh*t eating grin at the end is pretty limited, wouldn’t you say? Maybe they were hoping the pretty vistas would make up for the handling shortcomings?
Rainmarin
“We’ve got the right product, in the right market at the right time in history.â€
CUV’s are what’s now. If Ford wants to succeed, they needs what’s next.
Ford is late to this segment, but they are acting like they invented the market with this Edge and it’s eventual platform siblings. I mean, I guess they had the freestyle… but it’s not like they realized they had it.
The “Crossover” market will suffer the same fate as all the other trucksters for parents in “parent-denile”. Cool for a minute until people realize they aren’t fooling anyone anymore.
Wagon’s = mommy mobiles = not cool.
Minivan’s = the new wagon = not cool.
SUV’s = the new minivan = not cool.
Crossovers = the new SUV = guess?
Build a useful car that will stand the test of time, or build something bat-shit-crazy that can’t be pidgeonholed, instead of focusing on hitting the “hot” market segment.
rainmarin: There are way more than a handful of cars that would leave me looking like I just happily ate shit (what a weird expression).
I can think of three, maybe four Ford products right off the top of my head.
Trouble is, they all start with the letter Mazda.
I think Phil is named Suzanne. She likes SUV (a la monster truck, Navigator or Tahoe) but she is also likes practicality. She will settle for a slightly smaller, slightly more efficient SUV-like vehicle. Like an Edge. Because it’s cute and a little more nimble.
Suzanne is my wife. And she always wanted an SUV. In the end we bought a Murano, which looks and fells on paper quite like an Edge, softroading 250 hp 3.5Lv6 4,000 lbs. Same category, same idea, same purpose.
Phil is driving an Acura RSX or a Mazda3.
I can think of three, maybe four Ford products right off the top of my head.
Trouble is, they all start with the letter Mazda.
Hmmm…. how about the 550hp Ford GT or Mustang GT500?
Ford GT — out of production
GT500 — initial tests (I spent about 30 minutes driving it around the hills) indicate no, but I was in the convertible, so… but the answer is, “probably not.”
2001 Escape owner, not by choice, car was a hand-me down.
I was excited about the Edge, and am surprised they consider their target customer a single urban male, since I read an article a while back how the Edge interior was basically designed for fat people.
With a wife and a kid, and maybe another one the way sometime, I will wait and look at the 08 Fairlane, which I would assume will be on the 07 auto show circuit.
3rd row in an Edge? Funny, if you played around with the pre-release Edge/MKX configurators, a 3rd row was listed as a possible option. And the Mazda CX-9, the Japanese triplet of the 3, does have a 3rd row in a relatively short space, so it’s certainly possible. Toyota did the same thing with the Highlander, retrofitting a 3rd row.
Where does that leave the Freestyle? uh…
Hey Johny, Dave here. Just to let you know Phil and I broke up. My choice.
Anyway, this is the 2nd TTAC Ford review that hasn’t shredded the vehicle (Mustang GT convertible being the 1st….). What’s up with that??!?
Please to see this car may do all right. I think the styling does a great job straddling quietly competent and in-your-face. Remember your payment may end up taking 60 months, so you don’t want it to look too dated.
Some of the comparisons given to this vehicle have their owns faults – blandness (Highlander), cheap materials (Equinox), funky dash depth (Murano, RX350)….I think if the quality is close to class leading Ford will have a huge hit.
I hear all the “holier-than-thou” performance folks here shooting down the whole CUV class. While I’d love to buzz around in a Mazdaspeed6 wagon, at 6′3″ 190lbs many of the fun wagons don’t fit. Never mind decent legroom for my kids.
The Edge, Element, RAV4 and numerous others, as competent people/material haulers, will be around for a while. In the Edge’s case, I just wish it weighed 500 lbs less.
nice review JL. I havent seen the Edge in person but after driving the CX7 and owning a Tribute as the “other” garage space occupant, I am interested. As many crossovers as there are coming out, surprisingly few offer the right mix to make them truly stand out. The new mariner and Tribute look positively elf-like and rumor has that they will be decontented to make them less attractive and more price specific. This Edge, beleive it or not, may be just the ticket….if they keep the price in check.
After owning a Mazdaspeed6, I missed the strong consistency and trailering ability of a V6 and for me, thats the dealbreaker on the CX7 when recently considering trading in the tribute. If this new 3.5L lives up to its billing, Ill pass on the CX7 and enjoy the hell out of that panoramic roof option. Couple questions though on the edge: Any trailering abilities mentioned? Does the rear glass open independent of the whole hatch (very useful feature)? and Finally, do they offer the keycard option from the CX7 withOUT the whole damn “$4K technology package”?
They want “Phil” to buy it because he’s a trend guy. If other people see “Phil” driving this, they’ll like the car, too.
I fit a lot of the “Phil” description. And I think the CX-7 is better, but I’m not buying either. I have an old Jeep for hauling days.
Thanks Ford.
JL:
You, nor TTAC, have ever tested the 500hp Supercharged GT500. You did test a regular GT convertible, but they aren’t exactly the same thing.
I have to agree with tms1999, Phil is really female and likes being above the traffic.
Present tense, she drives an RX300 and will only look at an Edge like thingy if they really smarten up the inside.
Dave, you said:
Anyway, this is the 2nd TTAC Ford review that hasn’t shredded the vehicle (Mustang GT convertible being the 1st….). What’s up with that??!?
Did you miss Jonny’s rave review of the Freestyle?
Carlismo, you said:
For the childless? A vehicle that large?
Wow.
Just because people don’t have children doesn’t mean they don’t have friends. I’ve been driving a wagon for 3 years and before that I had a mid-sized SUV (Mitsubishi Montero) for over 7 years. And no kids, ever.
Seriously, I think a glance back at recent history is in order. Ford neither invented nor was particularly noteworthy in the SUV business (Bronco, Bronco II) until they came out with the Explorer circa 1990. It was the right vehicle at the right time and they sold like earplugs at a Britny Spears concert for years. In fact, I would argue that you can date the rise of the SUV to the introduction of the Explorer – before then, SUVs were pretty much bought by off-road enthusiasts or people who lived in rural areas of snow belt states.
So, it seems that Ford may intend this to be the ” Explorer” of this decade. Can it do it? I don’t know, but from appearances, this does appear to be a – dare I say it? – Bold Move.
Kaisen,
I tested the GT500 Convertible. Heard the whir of the supercharger as I blasted around Malibu. Was curious to where the 500 horses got off to, etc.
I just didn’t write about it, as I had about 15 minutes in the driver’s seat and 15 minutes as a passenger.
However, I will be getting a GT500 shortly for a proper test.
Anyhow, I’m well aware of the diffference between the GT and the GT500
I hope you ‘right’ about it soon
Memo to Cowbell and Phil: Anyone who has a problem with wagons owes it to themselves to:
1. Go to your local Subaru store and test drive an Impreza wagon. This ain’t your father’s wagon.
2. if you want a first class interior and can spring for the extra cost, then go next to your local Audi store and test drive an A3 wagon. Manual or formula one style gear shifting, whatever you prefer. Picture the family truckster that Chevy Chase as Clark Griswold drove the family around in National Lampoon’s Vacation movie. This ain’t it.
3. Then test drive this Ford. I’ve done 1 and 2. They have alot to offer. Haven’t driven this “crossover” Ford. But it would have to beat the Subaru and Audi for me to consider it.
Then again, I’ve got no use for an SUV or a “crossover”. To each his own.
Audi wagons are the best, I would have gone for a 2004 S4 Avant if they didn’t cost so much. V8 goodness, recaro seats and a manual, yum!