In an era where Explorers are MIA and Expeditions can't make it out of base camp, Ford's cute ute is a mission-critical machine. If Ford's going to Escape its financial woes, their compact SUV has to at least keep the lights on. To find out if the new Ford Escape is "the end to boredom" (as the website proclaims) or simply "the end of the line," I ran America's most popular softroader up the Adirondacks, down the interstate, into Manhattan traffic and ‘round the ‘burbs.
Now that Honda's gotten edgy with the CR-V and Toyota's RAV-4 is too intelligent to be classified (says them), Ford opted to cowboy-up the Escape. To that end (front?), Ford added a shiny new chrome grill, hood and headlights; rounder wheel arches and new taillights– all designed to link the Escape to the Explorer. And there you have it: the Ford Five Hundred of SUV's. Or, as Ford puts it, "One look and you know it's built for people on the move."
Escaping the exterior's old ennui for the Escape's cabin is like putting your accountant on hold so you can talk to your tax attorney. Even if you forgive the interior's blandness as a reflection of the brand's utilitarian remit, the cost-cutting measures used to create the Escape's aesthetic sterility are both obvious and extreme. The center stack's plastic knobs are almost whimsically flimsy.
Ford is trumpeting the fact that all the Escape's controls respond with the exact same tactile feedback (a la Audi). This "switch-feel uniformity" is an admirable achievement for a mass market automaker. But it couldn't overcome the fact that the interfaces involved are made of plastic that Fisher Price wouldn't inflict on its core clientele. I might have been more impressed if the Escape's controls hadn't been arranged with meaningless uniformity (the volume knob is the same size and shape as the fan control) and mind-numbing symmetry.
The rest of the Escape's dash offers more of the same, with a ho-hum set of dials and a steering wheel made of materials that only a company that lost $9b in a fiscal quarter would dare use. I'm willing to tolerate cheap plastic where fingers fear to tread, but I can't abide nasty shifters and steering wheels that offer only slightly more haptic happiness than 150 grit sandpaper.
My steed was equipped with Ford's ancient and venerable 3.0-liter Duratec V6. With 193 horses motorvating 3547 pounds (plus driver), the powerplant proved both smooth and acceleratively adequate: slow but not sluggish. On the highways, the Escape attained 80mph quite easily, even considering the extra weight of the 4WD components. In the mountains, where the car was obliged to ascend gen-u-ine gradients, the engine's shortcomings were obvious.
On anything resembling a moderate slope, the Escape's four-speed autobox had to downshift to maintain speed. The puff problem reminded me of an underpowered Focus that I guided through the Albertan Rockies; I guess these things run (walk?) in the family. I can only imagine how hard that little Duratec would have to work to haul an entire crew, their luggage, whatever's on the roof rack and a bass boat (tow rating: 3500 lbs.) up those hills. Anyone attempting the same feat in the base model's 2.3-liter four would find themselves going nowhere slow.
The Escape's ride was reasonably compliant and its handling acceptable, though not class-leading in either respect. As with most SUVs, it's best to stay south of 80 mph in a straight line and avoid corners. On the upside, the 4WD Escape scythed through a light snow in upstate New York without any problems, which could well be the whole point of this exercise.
My tester stickered at $28k. That puts the Escape in a neighborhood crowded with well-established, highly evolved cute ute competition. After having driven the field I can report that the Escape isn't as refined or practical as the Japanese, as cheap as the Koreans, as hardcore as the German-Americans or as sexy as a packet of processed cheese. While the Escape is not so bad as to provoke derision, neither does it float to the top of the discerning buyer's list. The Escape is average in every way one can possibly imagine.
Except, perhaps, affordability. Let's face it: the Escape isn't destined to remain at that price point for long. Once a prison break of '08 Escapes clear the sales floor, it's only a matter of time before low-cost financing, dealer cash, customer incentives, employee pricing, special lease deals, etc. work their usual magic on the Escape's bottom line. At some point, it'll be one of the (if not the) cheapest vehicles in its class. At that point, I'd still rather be driving something else.
62 Comments on “Ford Escape XLT 4WD Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
If the interior is the sticking point that makes this thing undesirable for day to day schlepping, why wouldn’t one just go after the Jillyfied Escape from the Mercury “line”?
I can’t imagine a Mercury salesman refusing to take the price cut in the shorts if he’s pretty sure he’ll finally move a unit by doing so…
Typical Ford. Lets put some new makeup on the dead horse and continue flogging it hopeing that it will wake up.
What does the V6 in the RAV4 put out? Some thing north of 250 HP. For the same money? Is Ford kidding? Just how many suckers are there left out there.
In 2000 this was probably a good enough vehicle to hang. But 8 years later and no significant upgrades except trim. This is the core of Ford’s problems.
Actually, the 08 Escape already is cheaper than the 07, and even more so considering the added equipment. For me, the main deficiency is the drivetrain. The old 3.0 and 4spd auto just don’t cut it for me. I guess Ford needed to maintain some distance from the Edge.
As for the interior, it is light years better than the 07, and you get used to the controls, though getting the navi cleans up the buttons quite a bit. I have actually been cross selling the 08 Escape against the Edge – more equipment, very close to the same space for $5k less.
Pros:
Interior/exterior style
More equipment/less price
Residual values up 11 points over the 07
Cons:
Old school drivetrain
Don’t they make a hybrid? I like hybrids.
I liked last years front end better.
As for gradients, get real. The only gradient these cars will ever see is a suburban highway driveway entrance.
I’m glad i have no need for this type of vehicle.
The Escape went from kinda sporty to kinda stodgy. Either way, it’s ancient, which is so typical of rental, er, American car companies…I had to laugh when you said this thing stickered at $28K.
The front looks good–even the headlights, which thankfully aren’t those droopy pieces of garbage on every other vehicle. The rear looks like a Kia or something.
$28K? You can get an Xterra or FJ for that. Or any of a million Subarus.
I don’t know what Ford has been smoking, but I personally cannot stand even photos of their interiors lately. They look so bland and monotonous.
I’m amazed they changed the interior though. My sister went through two Explorers. 8 year difference and the same interior. And they wonder why they are losing market share.
The RAV4 V6 is rated at 269 horses. I think it is a little too much for a vehicle that size. Especially when you have to get 4WD with the V6 or get used to the vehicle steering itself when you hit the gas.
I like it other than the drivetrain. MSRP is pretty meaningless – figure $4,000 off that for a good ballpark figure.
I have no experience with a RAV4, though it does look good on paper.
On the CRV, the new ones are extremely unattractive – they have turned it into a girl’s car. My parents owned a 2002 CRV – drove it numerous times, and I could never understand why it is regarded so highly – poor ride, noisy engine, ugly interior, and while all of that is my opinion only, it confirmed to me people buy these things for illogical reasons. (My parents owned it because they both had knee replacements, and the seat height was perfect for them, and the only dealership in town is a Honda dealership).
When my Dad quit driving last year, we did get a ton for it when we sold it.
Sid Vicious “In 2000 this was probably a good enough vehicle to hang. But 8 years later and no significant upgrades except trim. This is the core of Ford’s problems. ”
Bingo You are exactly right. Well I guess they will handle this like the Ranger, or the Crown Vic or theTaurus or the…..
I spotted some union contract signing in the industry press a little while back: Ford will start to build a version of their 6-speed auto specific to the Escape in 2009. That also suggests the Escape will graduate to the 3.5 engine then as well. These will solve the largest problem set.
-Jeff
http://www.DrivingEnthusiast.net
Samir -
Great first review (I think), look forwards to many more!
mrcknievel
Mariner has just a thin veneer of fake aluminum on top of this horrible looking center stack. Improvement? The upcoming Escort shares the same “design”.
gcmustanglx – you are kidding, right? 269 horses is too much for a Rav4? What’s next – we should only have three wheels because that’s all you need to keep a vehicle upright? If low horsepower output was a virtue, I guess the Escape would be a saint.
Take a nice Mazda design and Ford it up to look like an Explorer. Looks like they are shooting for the big pig SUV crowd to squeeze out some additional sales. Isnt there one engineer/bean counter committee in the US that can design a decent looking dash ?
I am having trouble understanding why a 193 hp 3 liter six has trouble motivating this 3547 lb vehicle. I bought a 2001 3-series BMW wagon (ablut 3500 lbs) which developed 187 hp from a 2.5 liter engine and had no problem mounting hills; in unrestricted European trim it would hit 144 mph. Is the added drag from the boxy exterior so great that it uses all of the additional torque and cannot maintain highway speeds? I’d venture to say that the little BMW had more usable space, but still it make no sense that this car should be winded by 75 mph uphill that it cannot maintain 4th gear, unless the axle ratio is impractically high to gain fuel economy.
And the interior? Bold Moves (TM) in action.
For $28K this is WAY overpriced. However, at the $23K real transaction price it’s slightly more attractive. Unfortunately, it’s still competing with the CR-V and RAV4 and will get slaughtered in the market.
193 HP and a 4-speed auto just won’t cut it.
We’re currently shopping for a replacement for my wife’s 1997 CR-V. Out biggest complaint about the CR-V is that it has no power (127 bhp) and a 4 speed auto that has 1 too few gears. It won’t climb big hills in 4th, and in 3rd it is screaming along at 5,000 rpm.
The CR-V has been bulletproof for 130K miles, and it’s still worth 25% of it’s original sales price. Not bad for 10 years. Needless to say, she’s sold on Honda.
We checked out all the competing brands for a larger 3-row SUV:
The Explorer (Exploder) drinks gas and is unreliable. The Highlander’s 3rd row is a joke. The Acadia looks great, but the interior materials are obviously made to last the life of the loan. Add in GM’s notorious 1st year reliability (Hey, consumers are our test fleet!) and that’s out. Let’s see, that leaves….the Freestyle/Taurus X? Ummm, NO. We had a Taurus, so that name carries LOTS of negative baggage. weight. Tahoe? Yeah, 13 mpg at $3/gallon makes LOTS of sense.
Which brings us back to Honda. We’re buying a Pilot. For $30K out the door, a Pilot EX-L can’t be beat.
jwfisher
That is exactly the root of Ford’s recent problems – the Escape will get upgrades about the time the consideration of buying an Escape will strictly rest in the employee or loyalist camp. Ford did this with the Five Hundred too. How hard is it to get it right, straight out of the box.
Which reminds me – now that the sheen is off the Mustang (starting to stack up at area dealers), why haven’t the cheap plastics and 5-speed stick shift been replaced already? Those were 2 of the few criticisms of the car when it was introduced in 2004….they’ve had three years to fix it. And yet changes aren’t due until the 2009 model.
I SO want to root for the home team….but they continually make it impossible.
Why can’t carmakers just make good cars, and not worry about canabalizing other cars in the line? Sheesh, they have a good 3.5 V6, but they don’t use it. They are capable of good interiors, but they don’t use them. Why? Because adding a 3.5 and a good interior would threaten other cars in the lineup (Edge, Mercury, etc.). That is a rational justification for producing sub-standard vehicles. Sometimes intelligence can really make you stupid.
“Isnt there one engineer/bean counter committee in the US that can design a decent looking dash ?”
Its bean counter/engineer.
$28K better include a date with Jill!
To Ford’s credit, at least they didn’t bulk this thing up over 4000 lbs. Agree with other posts here, though – the Escape is simply not price competitive. Ironic as it was one of the (in not the first) affordable CUV’s. I thought it looked better before the makeover. Pity.
Great review! Informative and entertaining at the same time.
Even the photos of the interior are enough to make a person need to visit the gastroenterologist.
Once again Ford puts some lipstick on the pig and orders the salespeople to make it fly. Sad really. Can someone explain to me why the Taurus-X/Freestyle, Edge & Escape all exist at the same time? The price points are all within a few thousand dollars of each other. I’m sure that the marketing geniuses at Ford all have a wordy explanation of the different target buyer profile for each, but if you sweep aside the nonsense all you have left is a question.
Good lord… that base centre stack is just awful! Two sets of identically-configured knobs and buttons… and where’s the display? Up top? Ugh… that configuration is just an accident (or several accidents) waiting to happen with drivers getting distracted by their fans turning on high when they wanted their stereo louder and vice-versa.
And i’m really puzzled as to why Ford opted to go with neither the new car/crossover grille nor their new truck grille. This “eggcrate” grille is the odd man out in the whole Ford lineup. They must be REALLY concerned about cannibalizing sales of the Edge to make this mini-SUV so deliberately unattractive.
It would appear to me the Escape is precisely following the Ford mantra of neglect, ala Focus and Taurus.
Take a fundamentally good and once competive design, don’t change…don’t change, then too many years later throw too few dollars at an ill conceived “redesign” and ride it into the ground until you have to put barrels of cash on the hood to move any of them.
I trust no one is surprised by this.
mrcknievel:
If the interior is the sticking point that makes this thing undesirable for day to day schlepping, why wouldn’t one just go after the Jillyfied Escape from the Mercury “line”?
That line is not available in Canada, where I live. I drove this thing round trip between Montreal and New York. We only get Ford and Lincoln here, (almost) nothing in between. The only “Mercury” we get is the so-called Ford Grand Marquis. I’m not making that up.
nicknick:
$28K? You can get an Xterra or FJ for that. Or any of a million Subarus.
Indeed, it’s right in Subaru Legacy GT territory. That’s probably one of the best snow-belt cars you can buy.
The Escape isn’t horrible, but like the Ranger, Taurus, Focus, Mustang, etc., it is a former benchmark that has been allowed to age while others surpassed it.
There are a lot of options out there, all of them with a compelling reason that the Escape lacks. Even the Hyundai Santa Fe looks better at this point.
jwfisher:
I SO want to root for the home team….but they continually make it impossible.
I know what you mean. It’s just frustrating to see how close these cars are to competitive. Give the Escape that 3.5L Duratec you’re putting in the 2008 Mazda 6 with a competent 5-speed, get rid of the rear drum brakes, improve the quality of the shifter and the steering wheel (at least) and it would feel like an entirely different SUV.
$28k would get you a turbo Forester with 250hp and a few options, with better AWD and a lower CG and even a better interior. If it were cheap and nasty, that’d be one thing, but cheaply made and as expensive as its far superior competition? Not so much.
edgett: “I am having trouble understanding why a 193 hp 3 liter six has trouble motivating this 3547 lb vehicle. I bought a 2001 3-series BMW wagon (ablut 3500 lbs) which developed 187 hp from a 2.5 liter engine and had no problem mounting hills”
I have a feeling it might be relative to people’s preference and experience. In 2000 I purchased a Honda accord with a 3 liter 200 HP V6.it was marginally faster than my 91 140 HP 4 cylinder Accord which I thought drove like a rocket back in 1991. That car would be considered by many here a sluggard today. Now the I think Honda uses what was formerly the acura 3 liter or at least tuned to what was acura specs in 2000 to develope 240 HP. The Escape engine was probably fine in 2000 but its interesting that Honda and others have already adjusted their V6 to meet the markets higher HP demands while Ford just stays the same for years.
I thought the last iteration of the Escape was a much smarter looking design. This one looks like a clunky, childish interpretation of a foil razor. When the first Escape was launched, its interior was respectable considering the competition. This new one is unquestionably the bottom of the barrel for a 2008 vehicle.
For what it’s worth, I’ve been in the Escape Hybrid. It’s an amazing vehicle and fully front of the pack when compared the hybrid competition. Different expectations for hybrid vehicles, and the lack of hybrid SUV competition makes the new interior/exterior somehow less bad. Maybe the Escape should be a dedicated hybrid only model? Just thinking.
Well, this might very well be another example of Ford’s product neglect in recent years. On the other hand, cash is short at the Blue Oval and they’re probably tap dancing until they can bring out a truly new Escape.
As posted by others, the 6-speed automatic is scheduled for 2009. As for the new 250-hp V6, I’m willing to bet current production capacity won’t allow them to use it in the Escape right now.
I understand the new V6 is also headed for the Fusion and Milan in a year or two. The next-generation Mustang will also reportedly have this powerplant as a base engine. By then, Lincoln will probably have a 300-hp version.
Yes, it’s true: Ford has neglected its product since 2000. They need anwhole new line of cars and trucks – now. But the truth is, it’s simply going to take a while. A year ago, amid predictions by many that Ford was doomed, I said let’s see where they are three years down the road. That would be 2009. I’m still holding to that view. But I hope to God they don’t run out of cash before then.
Many comments have argued that Ford’s problem is it brings out vehicles thought to be “good enough” and then neglects to remedy shortcomings. I heartily agree. But are we correct? After all, we’re just ordinary folks who buy cars. Let’s see what a renowned expert said:
“Businessmen go down with their businesses because they like the old way so well they canot bring themselves to change. One sees them all about–men who do not know that yesterday is past, and who woke up this morning with their last year’s ideas.”
Who said that? Henry Ford.
Couple things on a pretty fair and nicely written review: Samir mentions in the comments that they did, in fact, downgrade from disc to drum braking in the rears for 2008 (indefensibly stupid considering Ford’s safety-minded marketing sell to this vehicles target buyer). Also, the real deal price for this vehicle in top flight trim is about 25K so the 28K comparisons to subarus of ANY spec are really not applicable. Still, even for 25K, it isnt seriously competitve. I paid under 20K for a new S trimmed AWD Tribute in 05 with leather and tow pkg and its been trouble free for 50K miles (at that kind of money, they can start to look REALLY attractive!)
I agree completely with BlueAdidas above that the outgoing design is far superior but overall, the last Tribute design just embarrasses all of them past and present. For the life of me I cannot understand why you need to buy an Escape in ‘LIMITED’ trim to get painted bumpers when you can get that (and a hell of alot more) in even four cyl trim at your mazda dealer in a Tribute. I had a long talk with the GM of a local mazda dealer and he admitted, without a push, that he is embarrassed to be selling this along side the CX7. He said, “Look across my lot and you can IMMEDIATELY pick out the vehicle that isnt a real Mazda.”
Ford, you arent fooling anyone with this (lack of) effort.
Although it may be true that this car will end up in suburban driveways, what people often forget is that suburbanites often flock to cottages and campgrounds on the weekends. This frequently entails 4 to 5 people, all their gear (including a torpedo on the roof), a tent trailer or a small boat. Having to do that with a vehicle as underpowered as this is a pain in the ass, is unsafe for passing on many roads, and lends itself to poor long term reliability (thrashing the engine and overheating the transmission).
Good thing it can be had cheap.
I've got pricing for this and about a dozen other 2008s in my database so far.
Comparing MSRPs to the 2007, the 2008 looks good.
But the 2007 comes with a huge rebate. http://www.truedelta.com/models/Escape.php
Let’s see:
Escape, Edge, Freestyle/Taurus X, Explorer, Expedition, Expedition EL, Flex (coming soon).
7 SUV’s.
Focus, Fusion, 500/Taurus, Crown Vic, Mustang.
5 cars.
Anyone see an imbalance here?
With the Escape, Edge, both seating 5, and the Explorer, Freestyle, Expedition, Expedition EL, and Flex seating 7, all Ford’s doing is cannibalizing sales from its own nameplates.
Throw in the negligible sales of the Mercury and Lincoln variants, and Ford’s got a mess on its hands.
Here’s an idea. Build three GOOD ones, and then sell them.
As I see it, Ford’s trying to sell 11 (or more, I lost count) SUV’s across three brands. There’s no way you can create market awareness for that many vehicles in today’s climate. I can’t recall the last time I saw any ads for the Freestyle, Escape, or Explorer.
Meanwhile, the Crown Vic molders and the Interceptor slowly fades away. The 500/Taurus gets no support, and the Mustang piles up on the lots.
“I am having trouble understanding why a 193 hp 3 liter six has trouble motivating this 3547 lb vehicle. I bought a 2001 3-series BMW wagon (ablut 3500 lbs) which developed 187 hp from a 2.5 liter engine and had no problem mounting hills; in unrestricted European trim it would hit 144 mph. Is the added drag from the boxy exterior so great that it uses all of the additional torque and cannot maintain highway speeds? I’d venture to say that the little BMW had more usable space, but still it make no sense that this car should be winded by 75 mph uphill that it cannot maintain 4th gear, unless the axle ratio is impractically high to gain fuel economy.”
Yup, gears. The Ford is geared way too tall for a 190Hp motor.
The same reason why my 2000 GMC Sierra with 3.73 gears can hit 0-60 in 6.9-7. seconds while the same truck with a 3.23 and 3.42 were 8+ seconds.
“But it couldn’t overcome the fact that the interfaces involved are made of plastic that Fisher Price wouldn’t inflict on its core clientele.” – Good One!!!! I just moved from Alberta, and I miss those mountains. They are prettier there than in Colorado.
At least they spared this car the new Gillette inspired grill.
Shin – without even looking it up, I would bet your BMW wagon had more torque. Also, it likely had more other advantages that translated to power on the pavement.
And finally, whoever pointed out that the domestics constantly make bad choices to avoid cannabalizing there other lines – you have an excellent point. In the computer industry they say that if you don’t eat your own young, someone else will.
Avoiding competition with your own line is only wise when your own line is what anyone else would consider competition. Make money first, then worry about cannabilization.
“$28k”
Walking around the dealer on Sunday so I didn’t get hassled; those new Tundra’s are cheaper then a Prius!
This Escape is the most expensive of the three vehicles!
This is a $16k vehicle we are talking about here.
Samir: a very solid review. Thanks.
Zarba: Great point. If the Escape were well executed, the Edge would be redundant.
Nice review. Disappointed that Ford still doesn’t get it. 28K? You can buy a turbo charged Mazda CX-7. 28K? You can buy a Rav4. 28K? You can buy a honda CR-V. 28K? Hyundai Santa Fe! It’s not that those CUVs are in similar price range, but their engines crank out more power AND use less gas doing it! CRIMINY!
I could see this car selling like crazy if it had no competition…but it DOES have competition. :(
Its not like me to come to Ford’s defense.. but escape is smallest entry in ford’s suv lineup and as such 3.5 ltr engine is completely unnecessary. Frankly, even 3.0 is a lot for it’s size. IMHO, 2.4 should do just fine…
Driving this thing with a 2.4? I don’t even want to fathom that.
Actually, my step-daughter (who lives in Florida) has a FWD Escape with the four-cylinder. She uses it for soccer mom duty. And it works just fine. She says it beats the four-banger Camry she had before it. Go figure. But she’s not climbing mountains in it.
Excellent review.
I drove an Escape V6 circa 2002, I really got a kick out of it. The handling was real nice for a CUV and the 200hp powertrain seemed best in class back then. But it sounds like the new Escape is just another neglected Ford product.
Course I’d love to see the Crown Vic get the lame freshening that this ride got. But that’s another story.
I thought the Edge would replace the Escape, but no…now we have how many Ford Crossovers?
1. Escape
2. Edge
3. Freestyle/Taurus X
4. Flex
I can see the Escape selling ok at a lower price point (and it will with rebates) but the Taurus X has gotta go.
And I still hear talk of canning the Explorer (and its factory) and using its famous (infamous?) name for another D3 chassis CUV. Something’s gotta give.
I wouldn`t buy this polyester smelling SUv even if you tied a Paris hilton` bra on the hood.I don`t even have to sniff around like a starving dumpster dog to smell the japanese chassis and body of mazda tribute. ford was even too lazy to work on make up, left the same mazda outfit, watered it down to more peripherial tastes , and by buying japanese hybrid system renamed it as their own know- how. an average next-to-dwarf japanese small SUV, that has been budweisered by ohv antiquities and Johny the Drumbraker.thanks god , there is no pure american platform down the crotch, that would most likely be designed by Tommy the Leafspringer on two marvelous orient express train rails.and guys, the fingers that are born to pick noses, or neighbours sheep from herd, are unlikely to be excited about mobile phone style buttons on dash, well, unless you have huge pictograms that are led- blinking, and beeping or better knight-rider style Steven Hawking robo-voice activated.
probably the root of evil starts in family—- or the lack of it. If ford fathers spanked their children as much as they spank their monkeys, maybe they would have grown up more responsible and achievement -oriented citizens who wouldn`t need to rebadge a mazda and sell it as all-yankee ford.sorry for being rude.
I’ll bet that less than 5 of the commentors on this article have actually seen/been in an 08 Escape.
Ford’s SUV/CUV lineup is actually well differentiated even though the prices overlap. While an Escape or edge each seat 5, the Escape is clearly smaller and MUCH cheaper (try $5k), hence it doesn’t need/can’t have the 3.5L V6. A 6spd auto will be nice. The Freestyle is similarly priced with the Edge, but is bigger inside and clearly more car like, and it seats 6 or 7. And the Explorer is a totally different type of vehicle and easily differentiated price wise with the V8. If any of you actually set foot on Ford lot and looked at these vehicles, you could easily see that they appeal to different buyers.
Let’s count Toyota’s SUV/CUV lineup: Matrix, RAV4, Highlander, 4Runner, Sequoia. Shall we add the Scions and Lexi also?
dwford: “If any of you actually set foot on Ford lot and looked at these vehicles…”
Now, why would we do that?
Let’s count Toyota’s SUV/CUV lineup: Matrix, RAV4, Highlander, 4Runner, Sequoia. Shall we add the Scions and Lexi also?
The proliferation of Toyota models has been remarked on quite frequently by writers and posters here.
There’s one thing that would make the Escape standout if Ford could source one…a torquey diesel. Decent mileage (which is rapidly increasing in importance once again as gas soars over $1.00 a litre) and the ability to yank a bunch of ’stuff’ from a standing start would be a good start.
$28K better include a date with Jill!
A date??? Hell, $28K better INCLUDE Jill…:-)
It’s hard out there for a blimp,
Cancelling platforms and getting money to pay the rent.
Toyota’s overcrowded SUV lineup doesn’t make a lot of sense either. At least Honda has it right: small and large (CRV/Pilot) and a premium version of each (Acura RDX/MDX). Toyota may be the worlds largest automotive company, but Honda get the most bang for it’s development effort.
That Ford’s SUV lineup is a disaster is obvious if only from the sales figures. The Freestyle is a flop, the Explorer is a sinking ship and the Escape is an aged drag queen with a new dress.
The only promising vehicle of the bunch is the Edge. Ford would be smart to follow Honda’s lead. One small, one larger. Complete new design every five years and always one of the best in it’s class. It is really a simple discipline, but difficult for an A.D.D. company to follow. If history is any guide, Ford will ride the Edge too long and run it down as well. The Escape was a competitive product when introduced. The Explorer replaced the Bronco and was a smash success. The Taurus broke new ground but was destroyed in a horrible redesign and then left to wilt. The Focus was an excellent entry hobbled by poor early quality and then left for dead.
I hope Mr. Savior From Boeing turns the ship around in time.
I’ve been perplexed about Toyotas lineup as well…but this has been the first I’ve seen it mentioned here (sorry I didn’t see the other threads commenting on it). I personally don’t understand the highlander. It’s nice, but the 4Runner seems much more solid. The strange thing is they really don’t compete against each other, in my eyes. One is definately targetting a different niche market than the other. The FJ Cruiser, targets yet another. It’s strange…but I don’t see them competing against each other. The Rav4 is smaller yet…so definately small cute-ute territory. I don’t think the matrix should even be considered on the list. And the Sequoia? Never been interested (the $50Kish territory is scary to me…it only take one piece of junk on the road to total any car…even the $50K ones).
The funny thing is, I actually like all the Toyota line SUVs (and trucks for that matter).
Side note on Honda…they have the CRV, the Element, and the Pilot. CRV and Element are in the same price range…but again, they feel very, very different.
Ford models have just seemed like bigger versions of the other. Though I haven’t really test driven the Edge (the reviews haven’t sparked any interest at all).
What’s an Explorer? That’s Fords SUV. What’s the Escape? A small Explorer. What’s the Expedition? A big Explorer. What’s the Freestyle? Who cares! What’s the Flex? Does it matter? What’s the Edge? Yet another overpriced Ford vehicle. :(