The price advantage is something that cannot be ignored with Ford few models.

Crysler and most of GM are worse than plague

The recent gas prices have not yet forced me to reconsider anything under a V6 … Simply because of my requirements.

I like the car, for 2010, i may return the 06 Fusion and pick this one up.

so please get off your high horse.

And in a related story, The 2009 Chevy Traverse FWD gets the SAME EPA mileage as the FWD “Flex” and the 2009 AWD Chevy Traverse gets BETTER EPA mileage then the AWD “Flex”. All while having a HIGHER tow rating than the “Flex”. The “flex” is not so flexible.

Ford wins the mediocrity award once again!

If you bothered to research,

Edmunds also had a real story (not just press release coverage) about the ford flex.

http://blogs.edmunds.com/greencaradvisor/2008/07/ford-flex-may-have-superb-aerodynamics-but-fuel-economy-is-nothing-special.html

Where edmunds even got ford to comment about the MPG ratings.

heres a quote that edmunds got from ford “As for mileage, he conceded, “your point’s a valid one. At the end of the day, the fuel-economy figures in that segment are very similar.” ”

so please get off your high horse.

It is not a CUV…it is a station wagon.

I keep thinking we’re on the tipping point of an era where physics will triumph over style and Cd (and “effective frontal area” — Cd x area) will be an actual purchase stat for customers, not just for some magazine reviews. But that era hasn’t come yet.

Its on the way. Car design is like fashion, the 20 year cycle is evident. Wretched excess from the 50s (everyone has tailfins), 70s (everyone has a bro-ham) and 90s (big wheels and SUVs) will make way for clean and purposeful lines.

I’d expect to see aerodynamics, carbon footprints and fuel economy to be big selling points in the future. Look at the old car ads from the 80s, wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of that ad lingo comes back too.

RobertSD, really? I didn’t know that. That was short. Pity, I kind of like it and it’s Taurus sibling.

Despite opinions to the contrary it is not an ugly vehicle, although I’m sure color and trim selection makes a difference. It is not an Aztek, an Echo, or a Gremlin, although Pacer comparisons might apply.

I’ll also add my voice to those about ragging on Edmunds. This is a great site. Love most of the editorials and some of the comments. But when comes time to researching a vehicle for purchase, where else is a common consumer to go?

the article you linked was hardly a edmunds review/report on the car.

The interior is great. Very roomy, with nice materials and terrific seats.

I see this as an alternative to an Expedition or Tahoe…it offers better fuel economy, more manageable size, very nice interior and MUCH nicer styling. The main problem is that between an imploding housing market, rising gas prices and more bad news about banks and credit unions every day, even people who can afford this vehicle are hesitant to sign on the dotted line.

Indeed. And since the frontal area is huge, the Cd is only half of the equation. I keep thinking we’re on the tipping point of an era where physics will triumph over style and Cd (and “effective frontal area” — Cd x area) will be an actual purchase stat for customers, not just for some magazine reviews. But that era hasn’t come yet.

Anyway, I’m just saying, maybe lighten up a bit? It’s never nice to come across as a snob.

(full disclosure: i took part in the consumer comparison test that edmunds put on a couple of months ago, i’m the graphic designer from worcester. i must say, it was a fantastic experience and i left with alot of respect for their staff.)

p.s. not that I’d choose to purchase it, but I do appreciate the design of the Flex.

I like this site but also happen to think Edmunds is a great source for car reviews. The business ethics model here is idealistic and admirable, But Edmunds is actually driving the new cars which is nice.

Sometimes it’s enjoyable to read a review of the product rather than the another Death Watch.