Ford released photos and specs for their new Edge, becoming the first Ford to have a standard Ecoboost engine.
Riding on the same CD4 platform as the Ford Fusion and MKZ, the Edge come standard with a 2.0L Ecoboost making 245 horsepower and 270 lb-ft of torque. Also on offer are a 3.5L naturally aspirated V6 and a 2.7L Ecoboost V6, with power figures not announced for either engine. FWD is available on the base four, with AWD standard on the other engines. The sole powertrain is a 6-speed automatic.
Ford’s new adaptive steering system which can vary the steering ratio is available, as well as active grille shutters, start-stop, MyFord Touch, blind-spot monitoring, cross-traffic alert and a 180 degree front camera. Ford will continue to build the Edge at its Oakville, Ontario plant with sales starting early next year.
[Thanks to AutoGuide.com for the live shots]
Evolutionary not revolutionary. It will be interesting to see what the power figures are on the other engines.
Where did the trunk go?
Talk about vehicles I completely forget were made. I know of the escape and explorer bbut this managed to be so bland o never realized it existed
I’d likely forget it existed if a former boss hadn’t owned two of them. First was an SLE with 3.5 V6 and AWD the second was a refreshed model with EcoBost FWD. After bitching about fuel economy with the AWD she raved about the EcoBost.
If you made sure to get the minimum available wheel diameter and correspondingly fatter tires, would it deliver a cushy ride? It’s a 4000 lb. vehicle so I would hope so.
Pretty weak refresh. More of just a tweak to the front and rear.
Hopefully Ford put more into making a vehicle with actual quality over giving it flawed technology and an exhaust system that fills the cabin
Are you kidding me right now? I’m a GM fan, but in what way is this a refresh?
The 2011 Edge was a facelift because it used the same bodyshell, powertrains (although they added the 2.0T EcoBoost), et cetera..and even then the interior and electronics architecture were significantly updated. But this? There’s not a single panel or trim piece that’s carries over. The wheelbase is different. It isn’t even on the same platform as the outgoing Edge. How is it a refresh?
Sorta like that refresh GM did on their trucks right?
How about that refresh on the Malibu? Is that still a sore spot for ya?
So right now the Duratec35 is standard and the Ecoboost 2.0 is like a $900 option.
However, in the future the turbo will be standard and the Duratec35 will be an option? Or, is it just that Ford still won’t hook up the 2.0T with AWD and the 3.5L is living on for duty in that?
The 2.0T isn’t getting hooked up to AWD. It sounds like you can’t get a FWD Edge with a V6.
Mentally correcting for bloat and height, the design is very nice. But I can’t get past the fact that this sort of vehicle gets you the interior space of a well-packaged small hatchback with the size and weight of a large sedan. A 600-lb.-lighter Forester suffers in refinement compared to this thing, but thrashes it in terms of carrying capacity and practicality. And if you don’t want practicality, why the heck are you buying a CUV rather than some — any — more interesting type of vehicle?
This particular niche of crossover—which also includes the Murano and Venza—is really more of a fashion statement than anything. Small crossovers (like the Escape or the Forester you mentioned), tend to be boxier and cheaper-priced, and are therefore a lot more useful and economical for people that need two rows, but would like to sit higher than a sedan. But as long as there are enough sales to justify these fashion-statement crossovers, they will continue to be made.
This is a two row midsized crossover, of which there are few. The Edge, despite the current models cramped center stack, if the same size as my Equinox but with much better interior materials, better NVH and a killer V6 as standard.
For some reason I thought the 2.7 was a four, so that it’s a blown six is really in trudging to me. It’s a shame you’ll probably have to spend 40-50 to get one.
I’m shopping in this segment and my next vehicle was likely a 40k JGC Limited. I’d love to see how this options out for that same price.
CUV’s went from being practical to being bloated, fuel drinkers. The commanding seating position has translated into poor aero and horrible real world highway mileage.
I don’t think it’s even the aero aspect, moreso inefficient power-trains. By all accounts on the Theta forums, the 3.6 in the Equinox/Terrain get much, much better real-world mileage than the 2.4. My 2013 Equinox LT (2.4 equipped) gets 26-27 MPG during a highway roadtrip doing 70 MPH, but if I’m on back roads doing 45-55 MPH, it magically learns to get 30-32 MPG. Turns out, 184 horse power isn’t adequate to move 4,000 pounds (plus passengers!).
I wish Ford would give North America the Everest instead of this
http://www.themotorreport.com.au/content/image/2/0/2014_ford_everest_suv_01_1-0813.jpg
I really like Ford’s new designs *now*. But the company needs to be very careful and ensure that it doesn’t create designs that will look stale or outright ugly by the time they are replaced…
You should see what they did to the U502 for `16. Downright stupid.
Seriously!
I mean, how often are you going to need a net cutter sticking up from the bow and spoiling the looks *all* the time?
Do tell..
I like it better then the current Explorer
“I like it better than the current Explorer”
Same here. First of all, I don’t like plastichrome door handles, which you’re stuck with on the Explorer unless you opt for the poverty or interceptor specs with the black non-color-keyed door handles (and who the hell does *that* kind of cheap-out anymore). Also, i think the Explorer’s front end looks goofy. The grille-to-headlamp narrow and that prominent orange turn-signal section on each headlamp is atrocious. I think the interior materials feel cheap, especially compared to the Durango, and I don’t like the visibility (or lack thereof).
This Edge is, to my eyes, much better-looking…
“I really like Ford’s new designs *now*. But the company needs to be very careful and ensure that it doesn’t create designs that will look stale or outright ugly by the time they are replaced…”
*cough* Focus *cough*
What’s wrong with the second gen Focus? Beautiful vehicle.
Admittedly the Focus has never been my kind of car styling-wise, so like with every other car it’s subjective. As KSW said, I do like the new ones right now, but I just think they’ll look rather dated in 5 or so years. I think Mazda has done a much better job with the 3 – it has a certain elegance and timeless quality about it that I just don’t see in the Focus. I also think the Golf has a more timeless (although some say boring) feel to the styling. Hell, even the new Corollas look pretty darn good for what they are.
It seems Ford has brought their A-Game for styling on everything… except trucks and SUVs.
The Dodge trucks are the only decent-looking ones to me anymore.
Why does Ford keep using the 3.5 v6 in this class/weight of vehicle when they have the far better 3.7, it gets even more ridiculous with the heavier Explorer. Maybe if they gave the Eco-boost treatment to the 3.7 it might get better mpg because less boost required for cruising?
The 3.7 wasn’t designed to be an Ecoboost. The 3.5 was.
GDI and Turbocharging were talked about during design on the entire Cyclone range.
3.5L here is NA, not EcoBoost.
The Nissan Murano and Toyota Venza also have 3.5-liter V6 engines.
Probably capacity issues.
3.7 is in the Mustang, F-150, MKS, MKZ, MKT, Explorer Police (Standard), and Optional on the Taurus Police.
Also the 3.5 is pushing 290 hp in the Explorer, I don’t believe 10-15 hp would be that much of a difference at the end of the day.
EB 3.5 already gets 22 highway in the Explorer Sport, I’d wouldn’t expect MORE on a larger engine.
I had an Edge rental for 2 weeks (new, AWD, SEL trim) a few years ago and I thought the NA 3.5 was amazing. Very responsive, sounded good when pressed and returned 25 or so MPG average. I was in love with it. Not sure how many people who drive an Edge with that motor are really going to come away from it wishing for more engine especially given the modest towing capacity of the Edge which is what ultimately made my pass over it when I was shopping.
25 MPG… and the 184hp 2.4 I4 in my Equinox barely breaks that. Damn you, GM, damn you to hell.
Not sure of the point of keeping the 3.5L when the 2.7T will be over 300hp. If the 2.7T is the top motor in the Edge, I’m curious as to the top motor in the next MKX.
If this follows previous Ford CUV logic, the top engine will only be available on the Sport trim. The current Edge Sport has the same engine as the MKX. Unless Ford is going to stuff the 3.5EB in the MKX, which is doubtful, the Edge and MKX will have the same top engine.
One thing that is nice is the real buttons on the center stack
I am curious to see how Ford differentiates the new Edge from the Escape. I think Nissan has the same issue with the Murano, and Toyota with the Venza.
What is the point of these vehicles? A more refined 2-row crossover for an extra $5K? Isn’t that what the new Lincoln is supposed to be?
With the Escape running close to $40k loaded, it is tight for the Edge to squeeze in between the Escape and the Explorer, that’s for sure.
I don’t know, but I priced out an Escape Titanium, checked all the boxes and got it to $35K, There’s room for a $40K Edge
The current Edge is pretty difficult to find, at least around here, below maybe 38k, and it options well into 40k. The Explorer has exclusive rights on 50k+ territory, however.
They’re all larger than the other vehicles. You don’t feel it in the front because they all use weird space robbing center consoles( though the murano has gotten a little better), but you feel it in the back and trunk.
@Ion
+1 for the current Edge’s center console. I don’t understand who decided that needed to be anywhere near as wide as it is.
I can respond since I have the 2013 Edge SE FWD 3.5L ($25k A plan) and my wife has had 2008 2010 2012 2014 Escapes.
The smooth power and torque of the V6 and 6F50 six speed is vastly superior to the power train in the Escape (although the 2014 Escape is a big improvement). At 6’2″ and 185lbs there is more hip and shoulder room in the Edge. The back seats don’t even compare I frequently have two adults in the back of the Edge and they are much more comfortable then the Escape. There is also more room behind the second seat in the Edge.
I don’t need a 3rd row seat so I never considered the Explorer, besides that is just a mommy minivan on steroids.
The width of the Edge and 2nd row space are the big pluses for me for am Edge over Escape. Car seats and adults fit better in the Edge. I still prefer the Explorer over the Edge though. Edge prices are awesome right now though.
Thank you!
I saw one of these on my way home from work today. The owner replaced the Ford badges with Hyundai badges and the Edge badges with Santa Fe badges.
+100
Bravo.
I’ve had several Edge rentals a few years ago before the current platform became completely dated. I have to say I was impressed enough to price them out online – and then concluded they’re over priced for what you get.
The picture immediately started an old The Who song running in my head:
“Welcome to the new Edge…
Same as the old Edge…”
And now you’ve started that Imagine Dragons song (Radioactive) running in MY head
I literally just saw this in the tester livery on the road and trying to figure out if it was a Ford or Toyota. It’s a nice looking update and certainly seems larger than the outgoing edge. It’s definitely more Venza-like now than short and tall.
Those taillights. Hope they are not more of the same … overstuffed with massive numbers of LEDs. The Fusion has these. The brake lights are very irritating at night … causing you to take your eyes slightly away from the Fusion if it is stopping ahead of you. The Charger has the same issue.
It is almost as if the purpose of those is to get the vehicle noticed on the road with overstuffed LEDs in the taillights. So tacky. Makes me wonder if people driving a vehicle with such taillights have a personality defect that causes them to gravitate toward a vehicle with “look at me” taillights.
In fact, I am beginning to wonder if the over the top styling we see in Ford vehicles is actually from a “look at me” bag of styling tricks. Personally, I think anyone who need their ego stroked with a “look at me” styled Ford is a person who is suffering from psychological disorders. These people are willing to pay premium money for “look at me” styling on a vehicle with well below brand reliability. I think that must be Ford’s business model.
“Personally, I think anyone who need their ego stroked with a “look at me” styled Ford is a person who is suffering from psychological disorders.”
Entire brands have been built, and rely, on those “psychological disorders” – the big 3 Germans, for starters…
“It is almost as if the purpose of those is to get the vehicle noticed on the road with overstuffed LEDs in the taillights.”
The automotive equivalent of the “Tramp Stamp”?
Speaking of the front of the Highlander… and rear of the Cherokee.
It was way past time for a redesign though. Hopefully all the newer ones will have very specific trim level features like the current one, so you can tell what’s what from a distance.
The front/grill is more like the Santa Fe Sport.
With the current Ford Escape having more cargo capacity than the 2014 Ford Edge, I can’t really see how why the Edge is still relevant.
The Edge has more adult people capacity. I would buy an Escape, or C-Max, but the Edge is more comfortable and rides nicer (if you don’t get the Edge Sport with its ridiculous 22s).
That looks exactly like a Highlander… Where has all the designing and uniqueness gone???
I only just noticed, the letters of the name “edge” could lend themselves to some fun with the branding of various versions based on the drivetrain: eDge for a diesel, edGe for gasoline, EDge and edGE for diesel-electric and gasoline-electric hybrids, and Edge or edgE for the electric-only version.
Not that I know if they’re doing that already, or what fuels they have versions for; just that they could, um, “signal this information in a very compact way”, given that name. (Using different colouring of the letters, of course, not capitals like I did to illustrate above.)