On the downside, the driver’s seat is about as comfortable as the seats in the Canadair CRJ700 I flew down to ATL in. Which is to say, about like a wooden church pew. All the lumbar support of a Milkmaid’s stool. Maybe the Ford bottom cushion can be used as a flotation device? The interior is lifted to “barely Ok” status by the piano-black treatment in the Limited spec, and the fact that Sync is pretty darned cool. I imagine the lesser models are pretty awful. The ergonomics are just simply a joke.

All in all, a decent rental (in another universe from the Grand Marquis I got last week!), but I’ll be quite happy to get back in my Saab when I get home.

General –
As someone soon to be in the market for a small 3-dog capable vehicle, and occasional work commuter,I keep comparing my options in this segment (an CPO 08 or new 09) to a used X3. . . . but am afraid of potentially wallet damaging repairs. Haven’t driven one yet, that could be the clincher. Also comparing these against an Outback wagon, and a Jetta Sportwagen. I don’t really need the AWD, but it just seems to me that if you’re going to get an SUV looking vehicle, it should have AWD. My own hang-up I suppose. . . I’ve never gotten stuck in the snow in Pittsburgh.

Thing is, though, she also said in a separate conversation that she would totally be in the market for a compact luxury car–quiet, comfortable, but comparatively low gas mileage. But such a thing doesn’t really exist. Lincoln, are you listening? (I would ask Cadillac, but they’re too busy declaring bankruptcy to listen just now.)

A 3-series wagon has has operable rear glass, but the CR-V doesn’t. The RAV4 doesn’t. The Equinox doesn’t.

Oddly enough, by making it look truckier, it now stands out more, since the RAV4, CR-V, and Equinox are all getting more car-like. There is a utilitarian appearance here that (to my eyes at least) works well, in the same way that the 80’s Jeep Cherokee did. The Escape’s look is a bit fussier than the Classic Jeep, but at least it doesn’t look like it was excreted out the rear-most orafice of an animal, the way the Venza kind of looks.

Fords have always struck me as appliances, inside and out. I instantly find something to dislike about so many of their models after a few seconds behind the wheel. Cheap, plain ugly, designed by a committee (with no design sense), sharp edges to so many things you lay your hand on, acres of ugly-colored/textured plastics, mismatched panel colors, shitty fuzz for seats, and on and on.

I had a new Explorer for a day as a loaner last year. It was sad to see how they have not kept that vehicle up to the competition. It’s not like they haven’t had a few years to get it right. Everything I mentioned in the above paragraph applied to it. It’s amazing that they have sold as well as they have over the years. I bet a lot of it is due to import-aversion and its forget-me, boxy looks.

The CR-V and RAV4 are much more refined vehicles. I would jump on a used Pilot (if I needed me some V6 for a bit of light/medium towing) before I’d ever take that depressing plunge into an Escape. I do like the Flex, Mustang and F-150 – it’s obvious that they can do a good one if they want.

Ford has let this and other vehicles linger way past their sell-by dates. It hurts the brand as a whole more than they seem to realize. What’s even worse is that they have let the Escape go downhill in the handling department. Check out these choice words from Consumer Reports: “…lost agility and tire grip, negatively affecting handling and braking.” I mean, seriously, how does Ford let this shit get out the door worse than the year before? Did they cut corners (like I routinely cut my hand on Ford interior bits) on the tires and suspension? No thanks.

Ford used to sell, or try to sell, 2 door Explorers (and Mazda Navajo). Neither sold well. Mazda was limited to 2 doors only, which didn’t make them happy. So, I can see why Ford didn’t waste the development and tooling on a two door. I do agree, that is too bad; I prefer the two door look.

We just received new Escape Hybrids at work. Mixed driving is returning 28 MPG, with no particular effort to do better – just drive as you normally would. Switchover between driving modes is remarkably seamless. Interiors are improved from the prior ones, but +1 to the comments posted by those who say the improvements are best noted by comparing to the older models. Ford could have coughed up a few bucks to make it nicer, at least as an option. Many people often note that they would pay 200 bucks more for better materials. Just do it! Ford listened with the Flex, which has much better materials inside. Too bad a Escape intender is not likely to buy a Flex.

It’s been quite reliable. Yes, it’s noisy. Yes, the seats are hard as rock after 20 minutes. Yes, the interior is – erm, “utilitarian”. Yes, the PCV valve requires some patience and ingenuity to replace (give me a rubber hose and 10 minutes alone with the guy who put it where it is…)

But the practicality works for us. We haul home appliances, all manner of home fixup supplies, bicycles, dogs, etc. etc.. It has a modest tow rating, enough to rent a lightweight trailer for the few times we needed to haul something that would require an open bed. We climb into it after an outing in a local forest preserve and don’t care about getting a bit of dirt in it.

And it was cheap. Cheap is good for this purpose.

If it needed to be replaced, the same vehicle would be a strong contender.

I don’t see how having two doors is a benefit to any SUV, it doesn’t benefit styling, it doesn’t lower the cost much, and it makes it harder to access the rear area for passengers and cargo.

bodyonframe- The Expedition is ugly?, that’s one I’ve never heard before. It’s design seems innocuous.

“I’m 6′3″, but my 5′7″ coworker was complaining about the same thing the other day, so it’s not a height issue.”
It’s never about height, it’s about leg length. Or torso length for headroom complaints

The Escape has been one of Ford’s best sellers as of late.

The 08 and 09 dash hangs down very low and is very square, and I am always banging my shin on it as I get in the car. My poor shin remains bruised and scratched most of the time. I’m 6′3″, but my 5′7″ coworker was complaining about the same thing the other day, so it’s not a height issue.

The recycled material in the seats is impossible to clean if you get something on it. Water on a rag just seems to make the spot bigger. That’s bad with kids.

I’ve got no issues with transmissions. I’m sure it’s not up to BMW standards but I can’t recall any issues as described in the review. We got 4 cylinders this year and it is noisy, shakes when setting at idle, and gets less than 1mpg better than the 6 did, so go with the 6. It was always willing and competent enough.

In summary I won’t spend a bunch of time defending it, but I couldn’t blame you for thinking this might be a decent vehicle for your daughter.

According to the computer, about 25-26mpg in mixed driving. Auto btw.

no_slushbox
and all the extra features are going to stop working in a year or two, so why go for the loaded Escape.

huh? I have a loaded Limited and after 5 years everything still works just fine.

I went with RAV4 for 2 reasons:
– better gas mileage (I’ve got 4-cyl version)
– longer inside length in cargo configuration (177cm for RAV4)

It was about the same price back then. Mind, this is not relevant to modern prices.

BTW, I laugh at people who talk about HARD inside plastics. Seriously guys, my father cars had METAL dashes. The harder the better. What do you need to caress your dash for anyway?

The Gen I Tribute was better looking than the G1 Escape. But now the new Tribute seems tremendously bland compared to the Ford.

These are nice, simple tall wagons, that is all. I like the CR-V a lot but they’re pricey, and the stylized back end compromises the whole purpose of the U. I’d take an XLT with the sport package.

It will be interesting where they slot the new Explorer, moving to the Taurus chassis I believe.