By on February 10, 2010

As our recent compact-ish CUV sales snapshot shows, Ford’s Edge has been losing its edge with consumers. And not to better looking cars with better ideas and more talent, but to its older brand-mate, the Escape. In order to keep up with its country cousin, the Edge has been updated for 2011, to offer a more contemporary corporate look, new powertrains and more. Where once only a 3.5 liter V6 (285 hp) was available, a more powerful 3.7 (305 hp) and the first US application of the EcoBoost 2.0 turbo four-cylinder (no stats released yet) are now optional. Where once the “Sport” trim was barely distinguishable, it now gets 22-inch rims and a blacked-out grille. And where standard models once sported ridiculously cheesy chrome grilles, the new 2011 Ford Edge now has an updated, yet equally giant and cheesy chrome grille. Because you can’t win them all.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

74 Comments on “Ford Sharpens Its Edge...”

  • avatar

    Has an Audi look to it. Looks better than before, definitely an improvement. Yes the grill is a little big, but overall an improvement.

  • avatar

    The big improvement is the interior, and (hopefully) the handlling.

    The Sport was already distinguishable via 22-inch wheels. If you see an Edge with huge wheels, it’s the sport.

    Hopefully they’ve also fixed the seal design in the AWD powertrain’s PTU. This has been by far the most common problem with at least the first few model years (too soon to say with the 2010). Some cars have required this repair multiple times. Otherwise the Edge has been very reliable.

    • 0 avatar

      I think 22’s on a truck this size are ridiculous. They should go with a good looking set of 20’s and black the grill out. I hate the chrome Gillete razor look.

      I think I’ve gotten past the big rim phase after being inconvenienced numerous times by corrosion related flats and $200 per tire up front costs from nails. Next time I buy a car, I’ll go with the stock AMG wheels.

  • avatar

    A new Ford post? uh oh…get ready for Z71_Silvy in 3..2..1..

  • avatar

    How is the current Edge “has been losing its edge with consumers” when it’s sales are up 25.5% over last January? Especially since the very CUV-Sales snapshot you provide doesn’t support this statement?

    • 0 avatar

      I’m guessing a lot of those January sales went to fleets… Edge is a fairly popular rental choice. In any case, Edge sold 88k units in 2009 (down about 20%), to the Escape’s 173k (+10%). Chevy’s Equinox sold only 2k fewer than the Edge, despite being introduced as a new model mid-year, while the CR-V (190k), Hyundai Santa Fe (90k) and Toyota Rav-4 (149k) all beat it handily.
      For a relatively new design in a growing segment, I feel comfortable calling the Edge an underperformer.

    • 0 avatar

      I doubt the Edge accounted for a large number of the fleet sales, my guess is that most of them were F/E – 150/250/350/etc. The Edge has a screaming hot lease deal right now (about $250 a month with only $2800 down, +++) and that has accounted for a lot of sales.

      The Edge also occupies an odd space in the market, it isn’t quite fair to compare it to the RAV-4 or the CRV, because those are the competition of the Escape, which handily beats both (when you throw in the Mariner sales). The Santa-Fe is a fair enough comparison, as would be the Nissan Murano, or the Toyota Venza. The Mazda CX-7 and Chevy Equinox (and it’s siblings) are all smaller, yet bigger than the Escape/RAV-4/CRV crowd.

    • 0 avatar


      I’m curious, do the Edge and Escape cannibalize eachother much in the real world? How do they tell you you to position the Edge vs. the Escape in selling?

    • 0 avatar

      BDB –

      No, they don’t cannibalize each other much. There is a pretty big price variance between the two for retail sales, a base Edge comes in at around $28K, with a base Escape coming in around $6K less. As far as how we differentiate them, we position the Escape as the affordable, fuel efficient choice for customers on a strict budget and the Edge as the option for those who need some extra space or for those willing to pay more for a premium ride and driving experience.

      The Escape is a great little CUV, great visibility,
      reliable efficient, and with surprising space inside, but there is a lot of engine noise (I think this is why some people like to say the engines are unrefined – they aren’t unrefined, just loud), and the interior is heavy on the hard plastics and fairly low on style. The Edge drives like a more substantial vehicle, is much quieter, and has more power. It’s like comparing the Focus vs the Fusion, both seat 5, but the Fusion and Edge do so in greater comfort than the Escape or Focus.

      The Edge’s biggest fault has been the interior, it was the last major new model to be released with the ‘old Ford’ style green backlighting, double DIN radio, and hard plastics everywhere. The biggest selling point for the MKX has been that you get the benefits of the Edge with a very nice interior, but now that both are being significantly upgraded there might be more potential cannibalization between the Edge and MKX than the Edge and the Escape.

    • 0 avatar

      Thanks NulloModo. I was wondering the same thing, you did a nice job differentiating the two.

    • 0 avatar

      Thanks, so back in the day the Escape would be the Focus wagon and the Edge would be the Fusion wagon. Of course you couldn’t charge thousands more if they were mere wagons! :P

      On the note of cannabilzation are you concerned at all about the new Focus going upmarket (it has to with the Fiesta pricing I’ve seen)? I think the worst case scenario is that the new Focus falls into the same trap of the Contour, just as it was pushed too close to the Taurus the Focus might be pushed to close to the Fusion. OTOH Americans might pay more for smaller cars when gas prices go up again.

    • 0 avatar

      BDB – Thinking of them as modern day equivalents of the Focus and Fusion wagons actually isn’t a bad idea. To take it a step further the Flex could be thought of as the Taurus wagon, and in it’s previous incarnation as the Taurus X, pretty much was the Taurus wagon. The Edge shares the CD3 platform with the Fusion, the Flex is a D4 vehicle derived from the Taurus’s D3 platform. The Escape rolls on the CD2 platform, which aside from the Mercury Mariner and Mazda Tribute, doesn’t underpin anything else.

      I doubt we will have too much issue with the Focus moving upmarket. The Fiesta will take over the value segment in the car lineup, and Ford wants to eventually push the Fusion a bit upmarket when it goes global with the adoption of the Mondeo platform in a couple years.

    • 0 avatar

      “Edge sold 88k units in 2009 (down about 20%), to the Escape’s 173k (+10%)”

      Which kinda says to me when it comes to tippy, overgrown station wagons, people still prefer form over function. “SUV” is a term largely still associated with subscriptions to “Wilderness monthly”, while saying you’ve got a “CUV” is like saying you read “Vogue for Men”. It’s well documented that most owners don’t need, let alone use, the capabilities of these vehicles so purchasing one is down to “Want”. And wouldn’t you “want” your neighbors to think you spend your weekends cutting down trees with your bare hands rather than selecting furniture sets from Neiman-Marcus ?

    • 0 avatar

      Thanks for the insight, Nullo. I really appreciate your posts, the view of someono who sees how cars get sold on the market everyday. I wish we had similar posters for honda, toyota, etc.

      If you ever talk to the product guys at Ford, tell them that the new Taurus looks great, but that damn giant console rules out anyone over 6 feet tall, as we have to bend our knee out slightly to drive, and the console gets in the way. I would buy one otherwise

  • avatar
    crash sled

    A 3-bar grille on a Ford? How innovative.

    They dumped the Excursion (an actual moneymaker) from the large end of their 4-SUV lineup, but then shoehorned Edge into the middle somewhere, and I doubt they even know where.

    The beat goes on.

    The 500 became the Taurus, probably a most intelligent streamlining decision overall. I’d suggest Ford consider doing something similar here. When you’re eating your own… it’s time.

  • avatar

    I always thought the Edge was a neat piece, but the problem was always the craptastic interior materials. Looks like Ford finally solved that problem.

  • avatar

    A nicely done mid-cycle update.

  • avatar

    Michael, +1 for the interior improvement comment. I very much liked the exterior before, but the interior looked like merde. This is a step in the right direction, but for a decently equipped one running in the mid 30’s, the value proposition needs to be higher. Ford is not a premium brand… yet.

    • 0 avatar
      Facebook User

      Yeah the old Edge interior was complete garbage. My grandparents-in-law have an 07 and its interior looks much worse than that of my parents’ 05 Explorer – much less soft-touch material, much bigger panel gaps, more edges that don’t line up, etc. It was truly a step backwards in term of interior design and quality.

      This new interior is a bit better but still far from perfect.

  • avatar

    I was amazed at the mishmash of hard plastic materials inside the Edge. I counted no less than 7 different hard black plastic textures and finishes. It seemed like Ford couldn’t decide which to use so went with them all. Any change in the interior would be an improvement.

    On the other hand the macho big shiny grill is a huge step backwards. Ford has to stop ruining it’s cars with window air conditioner sized grills lest it be mistaken for a GMC Terrain.

  • avatar

    I like it, and I like that Ford just keeps stepping up to the plate with real progress.

  • avatar

    i hated the last tail lights, these are a huge improvement, and the interior looks great in pics, but i still can’t stand those 3 bar grilles

  • avatar

    The 1970s called, they want their dark wood paneling back.

  • avatar

    Yikes, that’s a dark interior.

    Curious to see how it performs with the 2.0 and what the mpg is.

  • avatar
    crash sled


    I just visited the Ford website, and although it is in its typical state of disrepair and disfunction, I managed to (sorta) click into the King Ranch Expedition EL, and it’s base powertrain seems to be the ancient 5.4L, and no mention of the diesel offering, or even the 6.8L gas. That tells me that the Expedition today has not truly replaced the Excursion they abandoned, which was platformed on Super Duty, with all of the capabilities attached thereto, tow/haul and etc.

    About 3/4 of Super Duty’s sell as diesel, as I recall, and that’s the big selling feature, as it wsa with Excursion. Performance and capability are at a premium in this class. That’s what makes their original decision to dump Excursion so stupid. They only sold 40,000 or so per year, but those 40,000 were profitable to the tune of $15,000 per copy or so, which was a nice piece of change. It was boxy and mishapen, totally lacking in character, and steered like an ocean liner, but hey, it made money.

    No, Excursion was never gonna break into Suburban’s segment leading status, but cash is cash. You take it, even if you’re not best in class, and are a niche player. The Ford dummies listened to the greenie dummies, cancelled Excursion, and now they’re crying about being cash poor. How about the $1/2B per year of profit they gave up on Excursion, on low volume, even as they created another faceless SUV in the Edge… er, excuse me… CUV.

    • 0 avatar

      The Expedition EL should handily outsell the Suburban as it is, it’s a better vehicle in every metric except for horsepower.

      The Excursion was probably canned for CAFE reasons as much as anything else. Yes they sold well during the heyday of the SUV craze, but gas spike of ’08 killed Hummer as a brand, and would have killed the Excursion off as well if it had still been around – you can’t market a vehicle whose fuel economy is so bad that they choose not to print it on the sticker in a world of $3+ a gallon gas.

      For those that needed the heavy duty towing and wanted plush interiors, the updated Super Duty trucks supplied the demand, just without the third row seat, which apparently a lot of people can do without.

    • 0 avatar

      Soooooooo NulloModo, when can I actually go down to a Ford dealer and test drive a 2011 Mustang? I’d love to test a completely option-less V6 with the 6speed manual. I’ve heard they’re using the same six speed in both the V6 and V8 so it has to be a pretty stout piece. And have the dealers heard what kind of mix they’re gonna be getting when the new ones are released? All fully loaded V8 GTs or a decent mix for those guys who want the barest bones thing they can get their hands on?

    • 0 avatar

      Dan –

      Your best bet to find out when you can drive one is to call whoever your biggest local Ford dealer is and ask one of the salespeople to give you a call when they arrive. Different dealers are going to get them at different times. Down here in South Florida we usually get new models a month or two after dealers in the Michigan area or California get them.

      As far as what kind of mix the dealer will carry, that varies by region as well. In my dealerships region Ford requires that we buy a certain ratio of heavily optioned vehicles compared to entry trim vehicles, and we are definitely weighted towards the loaded models vs the strippers, but we always get at least a couple base vehicles.

    • 0 avatar

      I’m calling BS on the 40,000 sales/year. Even before gas prices skyrocketed later in the decade and even before the housing bubble peak when everyone could buy cars with bubble equity, Excursion sales dropped below 20K:

      1999 18,315
      2000 50,786
      2001 34,710
      2002 29,042
      2003 26,259
      2004 20,010
      2005 16,283

      In fact, the Excursion only sold above 40K in 2000, before the 2001 recession. A NYTimes article suggests Ford needed to sell 40K/year, which didn’t happen often.

      Someone else already pointed out your bad math — 40,000 at $15,000 profit/pop is only $600 million, not $1-2 billion.

      As for the Edge, it came out December 25, 2006 as a 2007 model, whereas the Excursion was killed as a 2005 model. The Edge has far outsold the Excursion, although the profit margin is likely much lower:
      2006 2,201
      2007 130,125
      2008 110,798
      2009 88,548
      2010 118,637
      2011 121,702

      The Edge sold more in its two slowest selling years than the Excursion did over the life of its program.

  • avatar

    I am very interested in the 2.0 Ecoboost to see hp/tq and mpg numbers. That would do nicely in the Fusion and Focus as well.

  • avatar

    I’d rather have a big chrome grille than a sh*t eating grin on my car (Mazda) or some big-ass oversized chevron even where it looks ridiculous (Chevy).

    The practice of having a “corporate look” to put on every single model is just a disease of the industry right now.

    I notice the new headlights look like the Taurus, and I’m liking that interior.

  • avatar
    Facebook User

    I find this new Edge very appealing, especially in Sport trim. If they keep the price at a point where it provides a good value proposition, I can see it being very competitive against cars like the Murano and Venza.

  • avatar
    crash sled


    Expedition can’t do what the Super Duty platformed Excursion did. Target buyer = horse-towing moneybags guy, or huge travel trailer moneybags guy. Diesel is everything, for this low volume but high paying customer.

    Yes, some abandoned customers swung over to a SD pickup, but many went over to Surburban as well, because they wanted interior space, and Hummer never provided space or capability, so it was never in this segment, and the situations aren’t analogous.

    Excursion didn’t need to be “marketed”, in $3 gas environments or otherwise. The customers who bought it don’t care about fuel economy.

    And it wasn’t cancelled because of CAFE, it was cancelled because Billy Ford Jr was feverishly responding to his own fears that he was losing his greenie cred at all the Manhattan cocktail parties he attends.

    You swing an ugly box body over onto a Super Duty platform, and you have Excursion, and likely clip your market share directly off Suburban.

    There is a time to simplify, if/when you cut out whole platforms, and there is a time to add complexity, if you can do it upon existing platforms profitably. Ford has missed the boat on both of these points, re the Edge addition and the Excursion excision.

    • 0 avatar

      The Edge has been a sales success, so it was hardly a bad decision to bring it out. Also, the decision to axe the Excursion isn’t exactly related to the decision to release the Edge, the models aren’t anywhere near the same segment.

      You are right in that the wealthy horse owner and big boat owner types liked the Excursion, but there weren’t enough of them around to keep the model profitable when SUV sales plummeted. I’ve had a few customers who were of the wealthy horse owner types, and the majority of them buy loaded up King Ranch or Harley Davidson 250/350/450s, and have no need for the SUV body style because there kids have long since left the nest. The Excursions we get traded in are usually owned by those who still have kids to carry around, and many of theme have never even been used to tow anything. A lot of them we downsize into a Flex and they are quite happy with them, some choose to stay with the full size SUV and the Expedition meets their needs.

      The argument that the Excursion somehow competed with the Suburban is also a bit off. The Suburban competes squarely with the Expedition EL, and in fact the Expedition EL has more payload capacity and greater towing capacity than the 1/2 ton Suburban. I’d forgotten about the 3/4 ton Suburban, but even that model doesn’t come with a diesel, and it’s towing capacity is only marginally superior to the Expedition’s.

  • avatar

    Wow. No one’s bitched about Ford upping the power on the Edge as opposed to pussifying their vehicles like GM has been doing. Now that’s progress!

  • avatar

    I’ve always liked the Edge, though not quite enough to consider it for our next car. I like the addition of the EcoBoost engine and that may add it to the list of potentials later this year.

    Oh and I enjoyed the closing: “And where standard models once sported ridiculously cheesy chrome grilles, the new 2011 Ford Edge now has an updated, yet equally giant and cheesy chrome grille. Because you can’t win them all.” So funny and so true.

  • avatar

    The sport’s interior is the same touch sensitive stuff ad the MKX. Why would anyone without an AARP membership buy the Lincoln.

  • avatar

    Like some of the other commenters, I liked the exterior of the Edge but found the interior to be severely lacking. The new interior update looks great. As for the exterior, I think I’m on the positive side of the fence. The oversized grille looks like what the Honda Crosstour tried but failed to accomplish. (I’m not a fan of the chrome top bar over the blacked out main grille on the Sport., however. It should all be blacked out!) I’ve always thought the Venza looked like a squashed Ford Edge with a more ridiculous (though smaller) grille. This mid-cycle refresh helps distance the Ford from the (copycat?) Toyota in my eyes.

  • avatar

    For practical reasons, I sometimes prefer the big chrome grille over the alternative: Painted surfaces that get chipped when driven on salted/sanded roads and behind gravel trucks.

  • avatar

    I think Ford has pretty tough competition for the Edge from their own midsize CUV/SUVs. All starting at $28-30K there is Edge, Flex, and Explorer. Both the Flex and Explorer offer more space, and I like the style of the Flex even more. It will be interesting when Explorer moves to BOF, creating less differentiation so I think it’s great the Edge will offer a 4cyl.

  • avatar
    crash sled


    The Excursion axing and the Edge program addition came within the same cycle window, more or less, and occurred within 2 years or so, but clearly the firm planning was on the table for both decisions simultaneously, and not even troglodyte Ford c/would ignore the cross platform effects of their decision.

    It’s pretty clear that they axed Excursion from the top of the 4-SUV scale, and added Edge to the middle of the scale, and the blogger is even implying that Edge is today stealing market share from Escape, which seems to prove the point… that Edge and Excurion are/were effectively if not intentionally both parts of Ford’s 4-tiered SUV offering. Excursion being a completely different customer base, and Edge being a subset of an existing customer base. Thus the genesis of my linkage of the 2, and the poor strategic decisions made here, imo.

    Excursion was plenty profitable, and the customer base was immune to gasoline cost, and the numbers I reviewed at the time said it was profitable at very low volume as well. They cleaned up on 40,000 per year… just cleaned up, and no reason why they wouldn’t do so at 20-30,000 per year ( if it even dropped that low, and I don’t think it would have), not for the guy who demanded 600-700 ft-lb of torque, as only the diesel can provide, and there was that many customers out there.

    Seriously, the program engineering was pennies when coupled with SD, and it rolled down the line right with Super Duty down at KTP. IT WAS THE PERFECT SCAM. Sell a marginal but profitable product that certain customers want, and clean up. Greenie madness, not economics, forced that cancellation. What Ford wouldn’t do for a stray $1/2B pure profit per year right now!

    I’d agree that Super Duty today is a fine product (although they’re having to eat their new diesel development cost now), and Ford likely retains a fair number of previous Excursion sales within SD, but can you seriously reconcile cancelling Excursion’s cheap program cost with the massive tooling and set up for Edge, and that square box sorta wannabe Landrover or Landcruiser or woody throwback Dr. Frankenstein thing they call Flex?

    How many platforms must they add before they figure out how to rationalize their platform offerings? Again, making the 500 the Taurus seems to be the only truly rational decision I can spot recently, maybe I’m not looking hard enough.

    Agreed that Surburban never truly competed with Excursion, but for those wanting a polished vehicle, and not requiring tow/haul, they always went for the polish of Surburban, and the fleets seemed to go that way as well, although not sure how Expedition’s doing these days.

    That was Excursion’s beauty… fugly as it was… it was cheap to put out… it had a steady niche… and it was a very profitable niche.

    When they cancelled Excursion, it was profitable. Bad move. You could cancel it anytime, today, tomorrow, next year, why do it in the midst of profitability? Running 500 fewer vehicles at KTP is the only choice to make… no plant closings… no nothing involved… you can do it whenever the profit switch turns red.

    Lack of profits is killing Ford these last few years, and decisions like this exacerbated it.

    Kill costs ruthlessly, but only kill when necessary, and when it doesn’t hurt you.

    • 0 avatar

      crash sled,

      how did you come up with 1-2 billion profit per year?

      According to your posts 40,000 units at a profit of $15,000 (40,000 x 15,000 = 600,000,000. And that’s best case scenario if there gonna be 40,000 sales a year.

    • 0 avatar
      crash sled

      Bimmer, my statement was “What Ford wouldn’t do for a stray $1/2B pure profit per year right now!”

      Yours and my arithmetic is correct, but you misread my statement. Glad to see somebody is checking, though!

      What do you think abou this? Would you walk away from a $1/2B in pure profit each and every year, even if you had to stare down the greenies in order to do it?

    • 0 avatar

      Crash sled, I don’t dispute your numbers, but think there is more to it.

      If what hapless posted is true, Ford dropped the Excursion to open up capacity for the Super Duty. So yes, Ford may have left a billion or two on the table, but may have more than made this up from increased sales of the Super Duty. Sure, the sticker price per unit may have been less, but so is the manufacturing cost when you’re not finishing off the back end of a vehicle.

      Another thing to consider is that Ford did something unusual for publicly-traded companies and took a long-term approach. Super Duty buyers are loyal and typically don’t buy on impulse, particularly in contrast to large SUV buyers. For a large percentage of potential Excursion buyers, the Expedition EL is a reasonable substitute. On the other hand, if your business actually needs a Super Duty, there’s not really another Ford product that can be substituted.

      So perhaps Ford determined that the best solution for long-term viability was to fulfill the needs of relatively loyal heavy-duty truck buyers, rather than rely on a quicker delivery of profits from Excursion sales. It’s a delicate balance (long-term viability versus short-term profits) and too much focus on the long-term can make a company unable to respond to trends and appear stodgy. However, it’s nice to see that companies appear to be putting more thought into this.

    • 0 avatar
      crash sled

      Buzzdog, what Hapless posted isn’t true, and since I helped prepare a portion of the program paper for that Super Duty program, and reviewed all of it, including the financials and the utilization down at KTP where Super Duty wsa assembled, I think I have a fair idea of the real status at the time Excursion was cancelled. This decision was not made for the reasons Hapless claims. It was a greenie public relations move… and a financially costly one.

      But hey, you can check the current status down at KTP (if it’s still open, God only knows what’s going on down there now), and check utilization, but I think you’ll find that they’ve been cutting back, and for years now. The pickup market has dipped markedly, especially F-150, which Ford foolishly targeted for 2006 sales of 900,000 just as gas skyrocketed. Super Duty is affected as well.

      Excursion was immune to that effect. Low volume. Narrow customer set. Hugely profitable. Next to zero engineering cost. Rolled down the line right with SD. A fugly box, and they were making cash off it, unlike so many other losers in their lineup.

      It was the perfect scam.

      That scam mated with sound business practice.

      Why cancel a winner now, when you can cancel ANY old time?

      Excursion buyers want 600-700 ft-lb of torque… and there is no substitute for this requirement… certainly not Expedition… with that raggedy 5.4L gas… and the equally raggedy 4R75 gearbox. “I love the smell of burnt transmission fluid in the morning. It smells like… like… like cash rebates on the hood.”

      Decisions like this one are why Ford tanked and approached insolvency, before the crash, years before the rest of Government Motors went under.

      You have to make money. Ask Mullaly. He’d be the FIRST guy to want that $1/2B every year, if Billy hadn’t been foolish enough to offer it up on the altar of political correctness.

      And imagine the outcry from the greenies now, if Mullaly attempted to recover that 40,000 market share, and introduced ANOTHER SUV to the lineup. Even if it made sense financially… that opportunity is gone forever now.

      Sad, but indicative of what’s gone wrong here in the North American automotive industry. We forgot how to be profitable. It’s truly Government Motors now.

    • 0 avatar

      Sorry crash sled…didn’t realize you had the inside track.

  • avatar

    I like the updated engines. The 3.5 goes from 263 HP to 285 with up to 27 highway MPG. The 3.7 with 305 HP is straight from the Stang and Lincoln lineup. The Ecoboost 2.0 liter L4 is a good alternative for those that don’t tow or need much in the way of performance but would like 30 plus MPG. Hopefully it outputs more than 200 ponies to cater to the weight of the Edge. The interior looks pretty good save the overly wide seat room stealing center console. The exterior doesn’t go far enough IMO with a Gillette shaver plus grille and the same plain boring egg like slab sides. At least you can tell the Sport model with it’s ricer oversized 22’s. Would hate to be the sucka that has to replace those bad boys however.

  • avatar

    I like the new exterior look, but the interior, while worlds better, strikes me of a convergence between a Yukon dash and an SX4 dash.

  • avatar

    Wow…I didn’t know I was so popular. You people just can’t get enough of me.

    As for the Edge…well…Ford did it again…they made an incredibly ugly vehicle uglier. Couple that with the Camry bland interior and Ford’s other 5-seat SUV, and it’s still clear that the Edge is redundant and useless.

    With products like these, Ford needs to change their name to Maytag…or Whirlpool.

  • avatar

    My wife has been wanting an Edge so we took one for a test drive. I really don’t like the way it looks but I was impressed with how it drove and how well it seemed to be put together. I do not understand the appeal of SUV/CUV’s.
    Sorry Ford fans but IMHO Ford has gone overboard with huge gaudy chrome grills.

    • 0 avatar

      CUV’s are like the US’s version of estate/wagons. Their also sort of a step up/down (depending on how you view SUVs) for former SUV owners. SUV utility and high ground clearance, but with car like ride and fuel economy.

    • 0 avatar


      Gaudy if Ford’s middle name. Both Ford and Lincoln have taken crass, gaudy grilles to a level unseen before. It is insulting to *real* designers call the people at Ford ‘designers’.

      And these painted “chrome” grilles will look like crap in 6-mo when they start to flake off.

  • avatar

    Hopefully, this is an improvement over the 2007 SEL Edge that Consumer Reports trashed. For me, it’s a bit too heavy (4500lbs w/3.5V6) to be considered in the same class as the Equinox – closer to a Santa Fe.

  • avatar


    This is a problem that doesn’t take rocket science.

    My wife has a hunger for these things.. but the analytical side of me doesn’t understand the point.

    Ya got the Escape, the Edge, the Flex and the Exploder.
    Each.. is within 500lbs of each other.
    Each has a 6cycl.
    Each can hold 6 pass, with the Flex and the Exploder being made for 8.. if you drop the back seats.. (and sit on the gas tank.)

    But honestly..
    Whats the reason to buy one.. over the other.

    And I know.. Toyota has the same issue, only that’s more compounded. (if one is on recall.. just dump it for one that isn’t. — HAHA)

    Its getting to the point that the Escape is as big as the last gen Exploder is (forget the comments about model bloat.)
    Exploder and Flex will be competing DIRECTLY (if only MARKETING from FORD and or the MEDIA could MAKE A PROPER AND CORRECT designation FOR WHAT A SUV v CUV is.)

    Clue.. one WAS built on the Ranger frame.. then on the F150 frame = SUV = body on frame.
    Other was built on the S60-80 frame. = CUV = CAR unibody.

    And the sport package on these things.. has been what it will always be. A tape and badge package.. only now it has a set of wheels and special paint. — so no real delineation to what SPORT is. Then again.. a vehicle of this heft.. shouldn’t SPORT anything.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ajla: This was the last BLS real wages release: 0.htm 2.4% decrease YoY for all...
  • FreedMike: +1 million!!!!!!! LOVE the unaccompanied test drives.
  • sgeffe: Not to mention that I’m sure the commie apparatchik in China will be taken care of!
  • mcs: I can see a lot of use-cases for it. Campgrounds usually have power enough to run a level-two charger. I’m...
  • dal20402: Yep, it hurts a lot if prices go up but wages don’t. But in this labor market wages are going up for...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber