By on December 17, 2015

2015 Ford Edge (6 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge Titanium AWD

2-liter EcoBoost turbocharged I-4, direct injection (245 horsepower @ 5,500 rpm; 275 pounds-feet @ 3,000 rpm, 93 octane)

Six-speed SelectShift automatic transmission

20 city/28 highway/23 combined (EPA Rating, MPG)

18.7 on the "Why Is My Fuel Economy So Freakin' Horrible?" cycle (Observed, MPG)

Tested Options: Equipment Group 302A – $5,645; 20-inch wheels – $995; others – $600.

Base Price (SE FWD): $28,995 (U.S.)/$33,789 (Canada)

As Tested Price (Titanium AWD): $44,785 (U.S.)/$50,289 (Canada)

All prices include $895 destination fee (U.S.) or $1,690 destination fee, PDI and A/C tax (Canada).

As soon as I finished my time with the 2015 Nissan Murano, my mind immediately wandered to the new Ford Edge.

You see, the Murano is fantastic. It’s effortlessly comfortable. The ride is sublime. When you’re driving the Murano, everything is damn-near perfect. But the Murano could only be considered pretty by someone subjected to the “Ludovico Technique” and thousands of flashing images of the Infiniti QX56 QX80.

The Murano is the violently green neon dress and pink knee-high boots to the Edge’s fitted black number and Saks Fifth Avenue pumps. At a black-tie affair, one of those is going to stick out, and for all the wrong reasons.

Yet, looks can be deceiving. It was underneath that retina-burning attire I found an incredibly comfortable, competent crossover in the Murano. It’s hard to fault it with your eyes closed.

Now it’s the Edge’s turn. Would I find the same characteristics in it that made me fall in love with Nissan’s lifestyle-mobile?

2015 Ford Edge (17 of 43)

Exterior
From a distance, the Edge won’t be confused for anything else.

Since the first generation made its way to public roads, Ford’s middle child has tried its best to visually blend the lines between the Blue Oval’s cars and trucks. Up front, the Edge has always worn a version of the trademark Gillette barred grille, linking it closer to Ford’s trucks, but its headlights have slowly metamorphosed from an F-150-esque shape to that of the Taurus and Fusion.

Just like the first Edge, the design blending continues in the second generation — and to great effect. The 2015 Edge gets a new version of the barred grille — continuing its visual link to the F-Series trucks and larger Flex — nestled in a hexagonal surround seemingly pulled directly from the Taurus. Also up front on our Titanium-trimmed tester are a pair of pentagonal LED “signature” fog lamps in faux brake duct housings, standard on SEL and up models, and LED daytime running lights in the headlight housings. HID headlights are optional, even this high up the trim range, and came fitted on our tester as part of a $5,645 equipment group.

In silhouette, the Edge continues to feature aggressively raked front and rear glass, giving it a shape unlike anything else in the segment. Our tester came with stylish chrome trim surrounding its side glass and matching optional 20-inch polished aluminum wheels (Titanium models usually come with 19-inch “luster nickel-painted” aluminum shoes). Those large, round pieces of metal didn’t handicap its ride quality as much as I thought they would — but more on that later.

2015 Ford Edge (18 of 43)

The rear is vertically split by a LED light bar connecting the tail lights on Titanium and Sport models and the license plate is mounted high up the tailgate. Further down, standard twin exhaust tips poke out through a faux diffuser.

Overall, the Edge scores high in the yuppie dink polls thanks to its styling, though it’s definitely not as offensive bold as the Murano. The Edge also looks expensive — because it is. As tested, our Titanium tester tips the financial scales at $44,785 — $5,360 more than the Murano I tested earlier this year.

2015 Ford Edge (23 of 43)

Interior
Compared to the Murano, the Edge is more luxurious to look at on the inside, but to the detriment of comfort.

2015 Ford Edge (34 of 43)

For starters, while the seats in the Ford are much more pleasing to the eye, they can’t hold candle to the comfort offered by the Zero Gravity seats in the Murano. Nissan has a strong seat game, though, so I won’t fault Ford for not keeping up with the needs of my backside. Also, the cockpit in the Edge feels ever-so slightly more snug in a visual way — and I liked it. I felt more a part of the car.

The materials on the dash are decidedly more upscale. Instead of uber-fake grains, Ford gives you simple satin-finished plastics that are less likely to scratch than their brightly polished counterparts (though, there are a few of those as well around the cup holders).

2015 Ford Edge (32 of 43)

And that gorgeous burnt-orange/brown leather is everywhere. As far as interior colors are concerned, this nails it — though, I personally wouldn’t have it in a vehicle painted black.

Powertrain
For 2015, Ford gave the Edge additional motivation options in a new twin-scroll 2-liter EcoBoost four cylinder and a 2.7-liter EcoBoost V-6 in the Edge Sport. Our tester came with the former, producing 245 horsepower and 275 pounds-feet of torque — but only when you fill the tank with premium dino juice. If you opt to run regular pump gas, the engine won’t mind, but it won’t produce the numbers quoted either. If you want to insure yourself from the complexities of turbocharged engines, Ford still offers the normally aspirated 3.5-liter V-6 as an option.

Back to that 2-liter EcoBoost engine in our Titanium model: the experience is a mixed bag.

On one hand, it’s really hard to fault the new mill from a drivability perspective. When mated with Ford’s SelectShift six-speed automatic and all-wheel drive, the little four pot is as smooth as any turbocharged mill can be. The Mercedes-Benz 2-liter turbo used in the CLA and GLA are downright agricultural in comparison, and the Ford mill is almost on par with V-6 smoothness thanks to what I’m sure is many cubic feet of sound deadening material.

But, there’s a cost associated with that smoothness: fuel economy.

Most of my time with the Edge was spent in city driving, but even then, I should have achieved better than the 18.7 mpg reported by the on-board trip computer. For comparison, the Murano with its V-6 engine and CVT transmission delivered 22.4 mpg in slightly less city-centric driving.

2015 Ford Edge (24 of 43)

Infotainment
The 2015 Edge itself might be all new, but its infotainment is not.

SYNC in the 2015 Ford Edge is not SYNC3. We are still in the MyFord Touch era here. That said, I still don’t understand the derision hoisted upon “SYNC with MyFord Touch”, as it’s marketed, by people who shall remain nameless. Yes, it takes some getting used to and it might even be a little slow at times, but have you tried the infotainment systems from the Japanese brands — Honda, Subaru, Toyota, et al? I’d rather be stuck with this version of SYNC for the rest of my life if it meant never having to use Starlink ever again. And don’t even get me started on Honda’s apparent inability to manufacture a volume knob.

However, even this version of SYNC is not long for this world in the Edge. The 2016 model brings the newer version to dashboards. So, instead of asking me what I think, go to a Ford dealer and try them both. Chances are dealers will have both 2015 and 2016 model year Edges on hand.

As for the 12-speaker Sony audio system, it sounds good when being fed high-quality tunes as far as I could tell, but I’m no audiophile.

Perceived quality, and not the J.D. Power kind

So, remember that post from awhile back? You know, that one.

Well, as many of you guessed correctly, those photos were taken of this particular Edge. Here are all of them.

2015 Ford Edge (42 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (41 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (40 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (39 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (38 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (37 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (36 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (35 of 43)

2015 Ford Edge (33 of 43)

So, there are two possibilities here: 1. Either this is a pre-production model in a media fleet (which multiple sources have told me should never happen); or, 2. This is a production vehicle (which it should be since we are getting this car at the end of the 2015 model year run) with a few problems.

Also, I want to make it very clear to you — TTAC’s B&B, our more casual readers, and those at Ford who’ll be re-evaluating my future press fleet access — that I’m not doubting the quality of the Edge. Panel fitment is one of those things that can take a lot of time to get right, and a first year run of a new model is going to have some teething issues.

What I do want to highlight is perceived quality on what’s a near-as-makes-no-difference $50,000 top-trim crossover.

If someone is going to drop a significant amount of their income on a new vehicle — which can be the second- or first-most expensive purchase of their lifetime — they expect a certain level of quality, perceived or otherwise. I have no doubt the Edge is a quality product in the “mechanically sound and reliable” sense of the word, but I’m not sure the general public would be so forgiving.

And they haven’t been. Since I started at TTAC, I’ve received more emails about Ford panel fitment — mostly on Mustangs — than any other common thread. It might be time for Ford to renew their focus on perceived build quality, if for no other reason but to have its vehicles show better on a dealer’s lot.

2015 Ford Edge (10 of 43)

Drive
The Ford Edge, when ignoring the dismal fuel economy, drives better than you’d expect with its large-diameter wheels and skinny tires for shoes.

When I expected Ford’s crossover to be crashy, it smoothed out the bumps. When I expected it to rock to and fro on undulating pavement, it stayed fairly flat. And when I expected the engine to crank and groan as many overstressed turbocharged four-cylinder engines do, Ford showed me that an automaker can build a small-displacement turbo that doesn’t act like a frenetic baboon.

Ford’s crossover did require a little more effort than appreciated to turn the tiller. The steering wheel, for whatever reason, offered up more resistance than found on the much bigger, much more truck-y Cadillac Escalade I recently drove. For a vehicle targeted at moms as much as it is dads, I think it could be a little lighter.

In a nutshell, though, I can put my conclusion of the Edge in three sentences:

The Edge is 9/10ths as good as the Murano.

But I’d still buy the Edge.

And I’d recommend both — though I’d tell people to get the 3.5-liter V-6 Edge instead simply based on fuel economy.

Buying a car is as much an emotional decision as it is a practical one. While the Murano is almost everything I’d want a crossover to be, it doesn’t have the one quality I truly crave: good looks.

And it’s with that I’d hitch my arm to the girl at the black-tie affair wearing the black dress — because it’s easy to stick out when you don’t belong, but much harder to do when you fit in.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

148 Comments on “2015 Ford Edge Titanium Review – Manufacturer of Doubt...”


  • avatar
    VW16v

    Sounds like Ford has not been a sponsor on TTAC for sometime now.

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      He made believe that he thinks the Ford is a “quality product in the ‘mechanically sound and reliable’ sense of the word.” What more do you want?

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      As much I pitch b!tches about some things on TTAC, it’s one of the very few sites currently available offering reviews of NEW vehicles by relatively independent reviewers (granted, with normal human biases intact) who often DO NOT follow the lame a$$, old & corrupt tradecraft of glossing over major (or minor) vehicle faults (such as the ones Mark listed/documented here; Derek’s truthiness regarding the Fiat based Jeep Cherokee and atrocious build quality of the 2013+ Lincoln MKZ; Ronnie’s detailed report on roof structure deformations on those same MKZs; Jack’s relentless & warranted criticisms of things GMC, Porsche, Cadillac, Lincoln, Nissan, etc.) because of manufacturer bull$hit ad $$$ that are contingent on BS reviews that conveniently ignore such defects & flaws.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Umm, what is going on in Image 46? It looks like the door seal pulled off or something.

    • 0 avatar

      Yeah, it came off. I put it back on. It came off again.

      • 0 avatar
        tedward

        My brother in law has had that exact same trim piece come off on his escape. Along with numerous plastic covers all throughout the car. He’s also over ten on the recall count by his own measure, although I feel that the recalls aren’t nearly as concerning since ford is stepping up with those.

        It’s a very nice car otherwise, the nicest focus basically, but the panel gap and self destructing interior would drive me absolutely insane.

        • 0 avatar
          zoomzoomfan

          My wife and I considered the then-new 2013 Escape when shopping for a CUV in December of 2012. We ended up going with a Mazda CX-5, and I’m glad we did. Part of what swayed my decision is that the CX-5 had zero recalls at the time of our shopping and the Escape was currently under a stop-sale due to the fire risk (although the dealer was more than happy to sell us one…).

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Quality isn’t Job 1 anymore:

      http://www.edmunds.com/ford/mustang/2015/long-term-road-test/2015-ford-mustang-gt-self-clearancing-trunk-deck-lid.html

      There aren’t many cars on the road today with fit issues like this Mustang or your Edge. What’s gone wrong at Ford?

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Consumer Reports, which has a massive sample size of Fords/Lincolns with which to compile their annual Reliability Index, has Ford literally (*yes, LITERALLY -Archer voiceover) bringing up the rear (PHRASING) in such rankings, and based on MAJOR problems with MAJOR COMPONENTS (things such as motors, cooling systems, TRANSMISSIONS, electrical -NOT electronic, apologists/propagandists – system problems, etc.).

        Ford is not much better than Fiat, Jaguar and other perennial quality/reliability losers on that index.

        That doesn’t matter as much in a “everyone rides!”/”what’s my monthly payment?” debt-soaked economy UNTIL IT DOES.

    • 0 avatar
      NoGoYo

      That’s unacceptable.

      I put up with that on my 20 year old T-Bird, but the door seal coming off on a brand new car would be an instant trip back to the dealer for me.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    The loose door seal would bother me. Most of those panel gaps wouldn’t. But then, my expectations are set by cars that cost half what this does.

    Despite clinging to the same basic shape since 2006? when it debuted, the Edge still looks fresh to me. The interior design and materials are a quantum leap over the sad, brutally cheap dash plastics of the ~2009 rental I experienced. $45K for a luxo CUV with the same overworked 2.0T that can’t quite seem to motivate the Fusion with proper gusto doesn’t sound like a good deal to me, even if those are Canadian dollars.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    So…

    …it looks good inside and out…

    …but is massively overpriced (as are most Fords)…

    …has a complicated and likely long-term you reliable hamster mill under the hood..

    …has less utility & comfort than many lesser priced competitors…

    …and has fit & finish that makes it look as if it were slapped together by monkeys.

    Sounds about right.

    When all gets right with the world again, and the debt-binge, pickup truck and price-it-like-a-Range-Rover-Ford-CUV party ends, Ford will find itself in dire straights yet again.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      “…has a complicated and likely long-term you reliable hamster mill under the hood..”

      should read “UNRELIABLE hamster mill under the hood…”

      Please note that nary a single Ford has rated average or better on Consumer Reports Long-Term Reliability Index.

      Almost all vehicles produced by Ford are either “below average” or “well below average” in CR’s long term reliability rankings, owing such a sorry showing to MAJOR problems with MAJOR COMPONENTS 9things such as motors, cooling systems, TRANSMISSIONS, electrical -NOT electronic, apologists/propagandists – system problems, etc.).

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      For $45K, you should be buying the MKX AWD with the 2.7TT.

      A $44K Edge with the 2.0T is about as dumb as an automotive purchase gets. If you must have a CUV with a blue oval on it for $45K, the Flex Limited Ecoboost happily sits on the same lot.

      • 0 avatar
        Spartan

        $45K gets you an MKX AWD 2.7TT with one, count it, one equipment package. 101A. You get no other options. It’s a little over $45k at $45,720.

        You’re also not very likely to even find such a vehicle on a lot. If you want a nicely optioned 2.7TT MKX, you’re looking at paying in the mid $50k range, which puts you in an XC90, which will be a better driving experience with a nicer interior and obviously better seats.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          All I need is 101A + the Select Plus Package. It’s $46.5K. The dealer by me will order it and they’ll sell it to be for $41K. I’d also argue that the MKX with the 2.7TT, AWD, and almost no options is better than the Edge 2.0T AWD with a ton of options.

          And everyone leases these anyway. I’d pay the extra $50/month on a lease for the MKX.

          If you want to stay in an Edge, the 2.7TT AWD Edge Sport with 401A is the same price as this.

      • 0 avatar
        johnny_5.0

        For $45K I’d take an Explorer Sport over this any day of the week. The base version on that is already reasonably well equipped.

      • 0 avatar
        05lgt

        I’m not having this at this price. That’s RX 350 AWD money, but with the Lexus’s lower depreciation accounted for you could add options to the already nice(er) L badged car.

  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    When you say the old Edge had headlights in an “F-150-esque shape,” you mean the first model before the refresh, right? That was in 2007–the F-150 didn’t have headlights in that sort of step-down trapezoid shape until 2009. If anything, the ’09 F-150 had Edge-esque headlights.

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    I feel like the Murano is rightly-priced. It’s “fashionable”, very comfortable for five, and a shade over $40K will get you a fully-loaded example. The Edge might drive somewhat better, but why it costs, on average, $3K-$4K more is beyond me. I checked out a few examples myself, and that price disparity is certainly not justified by the build-quality (quite the opposite).

    Most Fords are overpriced, quite frankly.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      This is one example where you’re better off buying a domestic for resale value. The resale value on the Murano is terrible (unless you’re buying used, in which case it’s great).

      Also, Fords rarely sell for list price. Chances are you could get the Ford reviewed for the same price as the Nissan.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      The new Murano must be a simply vast improvement over the last (gen 2) one. I found it rode horribly, and was about the most jiggly car I have ever been in, upset at the slightest bumps.

      I hated the CVT as well, but that’s more of a personal preference.

  • avatar
    Steve_S

    The only thing about the Edge I like over the Murano is the 2.7l engine with a real auto. Otherwise I’d take the Murano. Some like to fit in with the herd and some like to stand out. if you are with the herd get the Edge.

    Or better yest skip them both and get a Sorento SXL and get 3 rows.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Do the door handles feel any better, the example at the auto show made me fear the door handle was going to fall off into my hand in several pieces when I let go.

    Additionally what happened to the Titan review I heard about 1-2 weeks ago?

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      It’s got the newer corporate Ford-brand door handle design, which up to now has also been used on the Fusion and Mustang…so unless the issue is simply affixing it to the new Edge’s body panels, the door handle is something they should have figured out by now.

      The door handles on the one I looked at seemed fine.

    • 0 avatar

      I didn’t notice any issues with door handles.

      Yeah, the Titan review. It’s coming. Things have been quite hectic behind the scenes lately.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    This is a well researched and detailed piece.

    “And I’d recommend both — though I’d tell people to get the 3.5-liter V-6 Edge instead simply based on fuel economy.”

    For the tested price of $44,7 why isn’t a V6 standard? This is something I would put to Ford. Just a tad redonkculious.

    also

    “18.7 on the “Why Is My Fuel Economy So Freakin’ Horrible?””

    Fuelly has data saying real world mileage for the first generation Mercury Mountaineer 5.0/AWD is between 13.2 and 15.8 (ignoring one claiming 17.5 with only 4 fill ups). So going transverse FWD, losing four cylinders, and adding turbo magic only yields a gain of 2.9 – 5.5mpg? Really?

    What if the rear wheels could be turned off by the driver and then enabled the 3% of the time AWD (or 4×4) is necessary on most US roads… could we crack 20mpg/avg?

    http://www.fuelly.com/car/mercury/mountaineer/1997

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      I’m unsure how Mark got such low fuel economy with the 2.0T Edge. Alex got close to 25 MPG in his review. That’s closer to what I’ve seen in the 2.0T Edge (FWD or AWD doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of difference).

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      And losing an actual frame for a cheaper unibody construction, so much for saving consumers money and being more efficient.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        This is a better vehicle for the average consumer than the BOF Explorer. It’s safer, handles better, utilizes space better, and gets better gas mileage. No, it doesn’t tow as well.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Because turbochargers are magical unicorns & everyone (especially NormArea51) knows that they allow 3 and 4 cylinder motors to obtain the power of 8 to 10 cylinders and the fuel economy of 2 1/2 cylinders while pushing/pulling even 3,500 to 4,800 pounds of plastic and metal and aluminum.

      And heatsoak is a myth, manufacturers always spend the necessary coin to design and incorporate extra robust cooling and lubricating systems to ensure that turbocharged motors will be as long-term reliable as any normally aspirated motor from one of the better manufacturers! /sarc

      Turbos are used in million mile diesel tractor trailers dontchyaknow!!!??? /sarc

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Norm is back ya know. I can’t wait to hear some new tales about life beyond the moon.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Modern turbocharged engines are super, SUPER sensitive to driving style.

        I have a Forester XT. If I baby and hypermile it, and think carefully about momentum, I can get it to return 19 mpg in the city and 25 or more on the highway — not that bad for a turbo CUV. But it’s usually driven by my wife, who “just drives” and is usually in a hurry. She’s in the boost between 2500-4000 rpm pretty much any time she’s on the gas. She gets more like 15 in the city and 19 on the highway, which is utterly atrocious for a four-cylinder, 3500-pound vehicle even if it’s shaped like a brick and does 0-60 in 6.5.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          My best friend has an MY11 Legacy with the old trans, I wanna say the mileage is about 24-5/20/16.

          Achieving 19 city is a slight improvement with the CVT and all but I’m not too impressed if mileage is what we’re after.

          I have another friend with an MY12 or 13 Impreza 5 door with the CVT (the first year of the new trans). He was stoked when the computer reported 32 all the way to Canada but in the city I think he told me its about 19 to 20.

        • 0 avatar
          Wheatridger

          Compared to my GTI, with a 2.0T that regularly yielded high-twenties MPG with my lightfooted, frugal habits.

          My savings must have just about paid for the $600 valve cleaning I just had done, manually scrubbing away carbon gunked on the the intake deposits at 80K. But on the bright side, its timing chain didn’t need replacement, which might have cost twice the valve cleaning. The point is, you have to pay to play. Modern engines eliminate some old expenses and add new ones.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Another of the many b!tches I’ll pitch; many automakers and suppliers need to get some reliable system in place to prevent carbon build up on the backside of valves in DI motors.

            Electronic port fuel injection was one of the largest leaps forward in terms of motor starting reliability, running reliability/efficiency and long-term ease of maintenance/reliability, but some DI (non port) systems are a step back as of now.

        • 0 avatar
          orangefruitbat

          That sounds pretty lousy. In my XT (90% city driving), I get a pretty consistent 24 mpg. And I don’t hyper-mile it.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      Even my (recently-sold) 2011 BMW X5, which had a larger 3.0-liter turbocharged I6 conservatively rated at 300HP and 300 lb-ft of torque, averaged 19.8 MPG in mixed driving. Of course, that was on 91-octane fuel. It sounds like this car would barely beat out my much-heavier, much more powerful X5 *with* premium fuel. But we know from the 2.0T EcoBoost’s installation in the Fusion, Escape, MKZ and MKT that its fuel-economy ratings are, shall we say, optimistic. Ford’s EcoBoosts seem to be more about how to game the EPA tests than how to get customers the same power in a thriftier package.

      Funny enough, on the previous Edge, I seem to recall the 2.0T EcoBoost, which was released later in the game, being a premium option over the standard 3.5-liter V6. This time, they have it reversed, with the V6 costing extra money. I wish they’d do that on the Mustang, because I find the 2.3T EcoBoost to be both underwhelming and thirsty. The 3.7-liter Cyclone V6 is, for all intents and purposes, a better real-world engine…but if you want *any* options at all on the Mustang, even leather or MyFord Touch/SYNC3, you have to upgrade to the EcoBoost.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Alex got 24.6 MPG with the Edge 2.0T. My wife’s MkT 3.5TT was at 19.7 MPG last time I drove it (she drives almost exclusively in the city too). I’ve gotten better MPG with the 2.0T Edge vs Fusion. The Explorer with the 2.0T was atrocious.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          To be fair to Ford here (Me? Fair? Wtf?), with this year’s winter gasoline blend switchover, I’ve been getting noticeably worse fuel economy on the last 3 or 4 fill-ups, with my worst yet tank range (on my 10 year old car) on my last tank.

          Not sure if this is a Michigan or wider geo (refinery) thing (that would extend to Eh? Canada).

          • 0 avatar
            wmba

            Well, last summer in Nova Scotia, the province where Mark lives, our gas station pumps ran out of gas.

            All our gasoline, no matter what brand, comes out of a tank farm in a shut down refinery run by Esso (Exxon) in Dartmouth NS, a couple of miles down the road from where Tim Cain hangs out in Eastern Passage as he told us today. Esso’s registered name is Imperial Oil Limited here, lest we forget our colonization by the past outstanding entrepreneurs of Standard Oil a hundred years ago.

            The gas itself arrives from Texas by tanker, and has one outstanding attribute. It is ethanol free. Only two grades, 87 and 91.

            Why ethanol-free? Because the Nova Scotia government decided to not force gas stations to spend the money on E10 compatible tanks, pumps and fittings.

            The gasoline itself, funnily enough, is tested by a Federal Government agency, to ensure it meets their standards before being fully pumped from tanker to shore. See, that’s the division of powers/responsibilities between our provinces (sort of like states) and the national Canadian federal government.

            Two tankers in a row failed to meet standards. Way off standard, just hoping to unload a load of old rope, unaware apparently that they couldn’t pass off goat urine as gasoline. So, gas stations ran out of gas as we waited on the third tanker with the real juice. Gasoline from the biggest refinery in Eastern Canada, just 250 miles away in another Canadian province New Brunswick, could not be trucked in because it was all incompatible E10.

            The conspiracy theories flew fast and loud, as you would expect. Still, our lawnmowers and snow-throwers don’t have fits because they’re getting good old straight gas, with none of that there cornjuice in it.

            However, one source of supply and you live on the, ahem, Edge, when things go wrong.

            And who knows whether it was winter blend or not that Mark used. Nobody tells you when they switch over.

            That Ford 2.0t, now new and improved with twin nozzle turbo, loves to swill the dino juice. Always has, always will. They need to stop putting new cylinder heads on that old Mazda MZR block. Remember how Mazdas used to also guzzle before SkyActiv? Rust and poor mileage were always the complaints. Same MZR engine – it don’t work quite right somehow, senor.

            The 2.3 in the Mustang is the old Mazda 2.3 from the CX-7. Remember that beast? Looked good, drank gas. 2261 cc of pure fightin’ powah, now with Ford exhaust manifold in head.

            And Ford, for whatever reason, doesn’t design their body panels to snap together with a good fit. Everyone else has mastered the trade except Ford. Seems endemic to the Escape made in the US as well as the Edge assembled in Oakville Ontario – in the Escape the dash is usually off to one side, let alone the drunk-fitted sheetmetal on the hatch.

            Avoid like the plague.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            E10 seems to get a ton of blame for fuel system problems, but I am not sure I buy it. Here in the Great State of Maine, just to the west and south of the Maritimes, our state government mandated E10 many years ago (idiots). And I, nor anyone I know, has had any particular problems with fuel systems. I have a ton of small engines, large engines, even the 46 year old carbs in my Triumph, and never a problem with any of them. I don’t even bother with Stabil in the winter. Just park them in the fall and they start right up in the spring. I don’t think it is Ethanol, I think it is some of the other ingredients in the witches brew that is gasoline in this country. That varies WIDELY by location.

            All of the gas in my area also comes from the same tank farm here with one exception. We have ONE station that pays to have 93 trucked up from MA, otherwise it is all 87, 89, and 91, and I believe it is all Irving Canada produced gas. And as I mentioned, corn juice in all of it. Which bugs me from an efficiency standpoint.

          • 0 avatar

            This definitely wasn’t on winter blend. I actually drove the car months ago but only had time to finish up the review today.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            Heck, I’m a card-carrying member of the Big Corn Ethanol Conspiracy (and you guys know how we make money hand over fist with our 175-ish acres of corn) and even I don’t use E10 if the price isn’t right.

        • 0 avatar
          Kyree S. Williams

          I don’t think they ever should have put the 2.0T in the D3 / D4 vehicles like the Taurus and Explorer.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I’m with you 100%. It was a dumb move.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            1,800 to 2,000 rpm @ 75 mph from a V6 often yields better fuel economy than 75 mph @ 2,400 to 2,800 rpm from a 4 banger, irrespective of vehicle size.

            People don’t believe me when I tell them I averaged a solid 31 mpg in a rented 2014 Dodge Durango 3.6 liter over 900 miles @ 76 mph (granted, 90% freeway).

            The Durango weighs 5000 frickin’ pounds and is by no means slow even with the “lower spec” Pentastar V6 under the hood (the 8 speed ZF clone tranny helps a lot).

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            Just because Ford can’t get it right doesn’t mean the concept of turbocharging is faulty for fuel economy. Both Saab and now BMW managed to make amazingly fuel efficient turbo engines. And once you are used to the instant torque of a modern turbo, those V6s feel gutless at low revs.

            I certainly have no complaints with my M235i – 30mpg on it’s first round trip to MA. And that with the “inefficient” manual. The 8AT drops a bunch of rpm off at highway speed. At rather higher speed than the posted limit at that. The 2.0T BMWs are astounding – the last 328i I rented was doing nearly 30mpg in suburban Atlanta traffic, and 36 out on the real highway. And nobody would ever call that car underpowered.

          • 0 avatar
            derekson

            “Just because Ford can’t get it right doesn’t mean the concept of turbocharging is faulty for fuel economy.”

            Is the problem with Fords not hitting EPA fuel economy numbers possibly linked to their touchy throttle pedals? I feel like when I drive a Ford the gas pedal is way too sensitive and the tip-in is just way too aggressive. It makes the cars feel more powerful than they are to the typical driver who isn’t cognizant of this fact, but it makes it harder to drive smoothly and presumably it results in more people using a higher throttle position more of the time.

        • 0 avatar
          TrailerTrash

          bball…thinking you are correct. My MKS with 67K and a 3.5 ecoboost is running 93 and averaging 24.6 MPG with 50/50 city/urban.

          I do drive better these days and do not push into the turbo often…only up ramps and bridges.
          Our 13 Escape 2.0 ecoboost ave 28…give or take a number.

    • 0 avatar
      mason

      Our 08 Mountaineer AWD with the 3v 4.6L gets an honest 17mpg in mixed driving. We’ve done several cross country road trips over the years and eclipsed 19 mpg. Hand calculated, driving within 5 mph of the speed limit. For a large vehicle it has always done quite well.

      • 0 avatar
        NoGoYo

        My old T-Bird with the 2 valver gets at least mid-teens despite my lead-footed habits, and would probably get a bit more if I had a 5 or 6 speed transmission instead of a 4 speed.

        It’s amazing how efficient the 4.6 was.

    • 0 avatar
      TOTitan

      Ive got a 16 Golf sportwagen with the tsi 1.8L turbo 4. I drive the piss out of it and get 22-24 in town and 30 at 80-85 mph hwy. The tsi is one sweet running motor and the rest of the cars build quality is exceptionally good. I wasnt even planning on buying one but when dieselgate happened I found a dealer that was willing to give me a good trade in on my 12 tdi and a good deal on the Golf. Im glad I did it….the GSW SW tsi is exceptionally good.

    • 0 avatar
      grein002

      Well, first of all, absolute mpg differences are deceptive – at relatively low mpg levels, small increases equal large reductions in fuel consumption. In this case, using your 13.2 number, that 5.5mpg difference equals a fuel consumption reduction of almost 30%. Assuming the fuelly numbers aren’t representative of this one city-intensive test, the reduction would be even greater (if he gets 20mpg, it is a 34% reduction). To put it another way, using the 13.2 number and 15,000 miles per year means a 334 gallon reduction in fuel consumption. Not arguing other issues (up front cost, reliability, etc.), just pointing out it is a bigger difference in economy than it may seem.

  • avatar
    nickoo

    Id probably get a jgc if i wanted a 2 row utility vehicle. I would go durango if i wanted 3 rows in my ute. Not that i would expect them to be great but at least they would be fun to drive and i could say, “well its a chrysler, what did i expect?” when problems popped up.

  • avatar
    gasser

    Is it only me or is $45 large a lot of money for a non-luxury brand?? I am in my 60s and for that kind of money, I expect luxury, reliability and build quality, This means no return visits to the dealer to glue on the weather stripping. The gas mileage reported is about what I expect for this size/weight vehicle. Nothing in this article makes me want to buy either the Murano or the Edge to replace my 2009 Lexus RX350. After visiting the L.A. Auto Show, nothing Lexus has makes me want to replace my aging SUV/CUV either. I guess that I am left with downsizing or buying used. I am however, unimpressed by Ford’s record with Consumer Reports and probably wouldn’t buy any used Ford SUV.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      It’s not you.

      I love (bromance) bball, tresmonos, etc., but Ford is OUT OF THEIR MINDS in pricing many of their vehicles, no matter what they say.

      And Ford has let quality, reliability and fit/finish go down the tubes.

      But Ford gets mad love on TTAC because Alex, Mark and the Beauty Brothers are crazy, mad Ford lovers (Michael Karesh had a HUGE Ford Boner, too).

      At least Aaron, Mark, and now departed Derek Kreindler (Lincoln MKZ woes) fairly disclosed Ford/Lincoln’s horrendous build quality.

      Ronnie also had a thorough & fair extensive article complete with detailed photos of the ridiculous roof defects with the new Lincoln MKZs with the full panoramic glass roofs.

      (And Mark thoroughly detailed the numerous inexcusable defects with this overpriced Escape, to his credit).

  • avatar
    NotFast

    Other outlets are testing the 2016 Edge, how did you guys get shortchanged?

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    If the price was converted into AUD it would be $70 000, the new Ranger for the around the same price is a far better package than this.

    The interior I do like, expecpt for the terrible brown leather.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Sorry, I should of stated Everest instead of Ranger as a better vehicle. The Ranger is better anyway as it can off road.

      • 0 avatar
        wmba

        Yeah, nothing like an old rear beam axle pickup truck to beat the Edge in ride and handling. You’re out of your ever-lovin’ mind if you believe that, as usual.

        I read the Oz press online and the Ranger/Everest interior is made out of Nissan grade grey plastic, and the driving dynamics are just not in the same league. Unless you have successfully hypnotized yourself, which based on the past four years of overbearing fluff you pass off as the only automotive truth extant, seems quite likely.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

          Perhaps he should “of” realized, most of us are on to his BS. Why he keeps trying it, I dont know.

          Kinda like how Nissan has “Innovation that Excites!” Lol yeah, I can hardly contain my excitement for a gutless-wonder lawnmower engine attached to a rubber band transaxle, all surrounded by cheap materials that would make a ’96 Kia Sephia blush. Oh, be still my beating heart!!

          One reason to buy a $60K Ford with 13 mpg and build quality that would shame a Russian tractor? The 6 speed wont take a total §#¡Г on you like that damned CVT will when attached to something with more than 120 hp or more than 2k lbs. Ill take a poor fitting piece of trim over a $6,000 repair bill any day.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Johnnie,
            It isn’t BS as you would like to attempt to troll.

            What amazes me is most of you guys have never experienced the vehicles we have. But, yet pass judgment.

            I stand by my comment, I do believe the Everest at $42 000 USD is a better more versatile package than the Edge.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            “What amazes me is most of you guys have never experienced the vehicles we have. But, yet pass judgment [sic].”

            Just wondering, have you firsthand experience with the new Edge? The Edge and Everest are not really comparable vehicles.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The Everest isn’t a more versatile package for suburban mom with two kids duty.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          wmba,
          I do look forward to your entertaining attempts at a troll.

          I’m actually amazed you know what a live axle is ……….. I think you know.

          The Everest is a far more capable vehicle than the Edge. Here it starts at $42k USD, which is comparable to the Edge.

          The Everest can tow well, is an excellent off roader as well and can do this “stuff” in comfort.

          Are you saddened that we do get some vehicles that you guys wish you could recieve?

          As a bonus it outstrips the Edge in FE by a large margin, probably even when towing.

          • 0 avatar
            Quentin

            By and large, Americans have no need for midsize towing and off road capability. Most of us want as much space inside as possible (not an advantage of BoF) and an AWD system that we don’t have to turn on and off based on the weather (also not an advantage of most “capable” transfer cases.) Fuel economy matters, but not enough to deal with lazy diesels and their problematic emission equipment.

            I own a midsize SUV with a manual two speed transfer case, locking rear differential, 10″ of ground clearance, and great approach/departure angles. I appreciate what it can do, but I’m not blind to the negatives that go along with that capability. My personal preference doesn’t drive the market and for some random person asking, I’d recommend a CUV unless they fully understood the compromises that come with off road capability.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Quentin,
            I don’t disagree with your comment, but it is quite outdated, maybe twenty years ago when most any vehicle with 4hi and 4lo had manual locking hubs and manual tx case.

            Look at the Grand Cherokee in the US it sells quite well. This is the level of the midsize off roader SUV nowadays. They aren’t agricultural.

            The trend of refining and improving performance started as I stated twenty years ago. This refinement has now moved onto the midsize pickups.

            BOF SUVs (as opposed to CUV like this Edge) are quite an acceptable alternative vehicle.

            Not all have limited space inside, look at the Prado for example.

            Off road, most of these vehicles excel now.

            I really do believe the Everest will sell quite well in the US. But just don’t call it the Everest. This must be Ford’s worst naming convention.

            We in Australia do lots more off roading than you guys in the US, this is a given if you look at the country and what delights it offers for off roaders, everything from massive beach drives, to expeditionary off road adventure that can go for weeks. So, diesel is a must.

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          The Edge, is really rubbish. I suspect most of the Ford collection will go south of the current 6th place, Ford now holds. Especially when news gets around about it’s financial dealings here and the closing down of the factory

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Have you driven the new Edge?

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Have you been burning for a new Ford Everest?

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @BBall,
            Have driven a 2 litre Ecoboost, was in a brand new Mustang in Hawaii, saw Edges in same place.
            2litre Ecoboost was offered in the base Falcon, but never sold
            Was not impressed with the Mustang build quality or the Ecoboost

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Well, I wouldn’t be so quick to call it rubbish then. However, I wouldn’t buy it with the 2.0T either. Especially not in AWD form.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @BBall,
            Going by the very average build quality in the Mustang and the less than stellar performance of the 2 Litre Ecoboost, I would. People here prefer diesels anyway, they actually tow things with them

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The amount of people that tow in the US with small and medium sized CUVs is very small. Because of that, the increased cost of a diesel engine isn’t worth it. Just look at the Edge as what it really is: a Fusion wagon.

            The Edge Sport I drove recently didn’t have the same issues as Mark’s. Oakville Assembly should be ashamed of this vehicle.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @BBall,
            Ford’s problem here is very few want Mondeo/Fusion anything. Just adds to the many problems it has here.
            Ford’s lineup looks OK in a Commercial, but reality is different. I suspect they need to work on the electronics/mechanical aspects. Jeep or FCA did not , but looked OK, and have paid the price here.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @VoGo

            LOL.

            I’m burning for an Everest in the same way I’m burning when I take a piss.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Australia has what, 1.1 million new vehicle sales a year? The best selling car there moves less units in a year than the F150 does in some months. Ford is just going to give you whatever they can sell profitably someplace else. They can only care about the Australian market so much.

            Ya’ll buy compact cars and small/midsized trucks. Ford has the Focus and Ranger (the Ranger makes up 1/3 of Ford volume in Australia). They aren’t expecting you to buy an Edge. They sell more of them in the US then they sell vehicles in Australia.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            I used to think that the US led the English-speaking world in its production of annoying under-educated faux-patriotic blowhards. Then I started meeting Aussies.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @BBall,
            Ford is doing the same in the US, giving you what sells well elsewhere.,except US Pickups. We are the largest market for its Ranger( gives you an idea of how many they sell Globally). People are not buying Fords, except the Ranger here.
            Cars are the same as in the US, but segment, lags behind combined SUV/ Pickup market 52% of the overall market

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “I used to think that the US led the English-speaking world in its production of annoying under-educated faux-patriotic blowhards. Then I started meeting Aussies.”

            Ouch.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Actually bball,
            You are incorrect regarding he Edge as the Edge was seriously looked at as a replacement for the Territory.

            The fact is we buy more SUVs and 4x4s with hi/lo than the US does per capita.

            We might have a small market but it is the most competitive. Not just in models, but model variants.

            You seem to be one of those upsizers, bigger is better. A larger market doesn’t necessarily translate into a better market, with greater variety.

            The F-150 is not competitive in the Australian market against the Thai sourced Ranger, it would be a loss for Ford to bring them here as our market is too competitive, as it is for the Edge. We have a better alternative in the Everest.

  • avatar
    tresmonos

    RIP OAC body shop.

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      ” used to think that the US led the English-speaking world in its production of annoying under-educated faux-patriotic blowhards. Then I started meeting Aussies”

      No US production of Typhoon Tom’s is world beating. No competition at all

  • avatar
    eamiller

    I had one of these as a rental from National over Thanksgiving. Basically a base titanium trim. It didn’t exhibit any of these panel or gasket issues. I’m guessing it was an early build 2015, as it had over 20k on the clock.

    I quite liked it, though I wasn’t a fan of the brake pedal modulation. Almost no pedal feedback with very grabby feel. Made it tough to find a good modulation spot without whipping people’s heads in the car.

    The 2.0T is fine unless you put your foot down. It was definitely lacking top end punch. Around town though, the relatively quick torque availability is nice. The 6-speed transmission was a willing partner, even with the paddle shifters, however, it’s missing about 2 gears.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Sounds like he shouldve tested your rental, which I brlieve to be a more accurate example.

      Ok, Turbo haters, here is some food for thought.

      2.0T produces V-6 like HP (or a V-8 of not long ago). You drive it like you stole it, wringing every ounce of power out of it, yes it will drink petrol like its goin out of style.

      Drive it like a 4 cyl, only getting heavy into the turbo when passing, merging, or if he/she (your love) says “I need you…now.” itll return decent MPG. In everyday commuting, itll be fine. If you love to “race” everyone from redlight to redlight, “win” your commute by passing as many cars as you can before you swoop in front of someone to (barely) make your exit, dont b¡Г€ when you have to deal with MPG in the teens.
      (Im not suggesting our dear author beat the crap out of his tester, I just think he got a particularly bad example of the breed.)

      The power is there when you need it, the MPG is there when you dont.

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        “The power is there when you need it, the MPG is there when you dont”

        That is the prevailing theory, but unfortunately a number Ford vehicles do not seem to be adhering to it:

        http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2013/02/consumer-reports-finds-small-turbo-engines-don-t-deliver-on-fuel-economy-claims/index.htm

        http://www.edmunds.com/ford/f-150/2015/long-term-road-test/2015-ford-f-150-massive-road-trip-sets-new-records-and-ups-the-average-but.html

        http://www.edmunds.com/ford/f-150/2015/long-term-road-test/2015-ford-f-150-oregon-road-trip-leg-5-a-231-mpg-exception-trip-summary.html

  • avatar
    probert

    ….and in conclusion, KIA probably has something better than both at a very fair price.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      If nothing else, I’m fair (many will claim otherwise, but that’s due to the fact they only speak of my criticisms).

      Ford’s saving graces, and where they either lead or compete at the top of vehicle segments, are in the very important areas of suspension tuning, NVH, and styling.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Ford has excellent NVH people that are good at convincing bean counters to open the checkbook. Obviously they need to throw more cash in some other places.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          Ford really has very good suspension engineering on many of its vehicles, which is a primary reason that they’re so competitive in Europe and other parts of the world where a taut, precise yet supple ride is so much more appreciated/valued than it generally is in the U.S. (Camry is derided in many of these same nations where Fusion/Mondeo is praised – for good reason).

      • 0 avatar
        TOTitan

        Your fine DW….kinda like the Autoextremist (Peter De Lorenzo) of TTAC.

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    “I have no doubt the Edge is a quality product in the “mechanically sound and reliable” sense of the word, but I’m not sure the general public would be so forgiving.”

    Don’t be so sure. Ford is still riding on a perception of “pretty good” reliability from 10 years ago, but that perception is fading fast. Pretty much all of Ford’s recent launches, but ESPECIALLY the SUVs have had horrible quality problems out of the gate, and as DeadWeight already said, it’s MAJOR mechanical and electrical issues across the board, NOT “MFT is slow and I don’t like it.”

    Read the stories of Edge owners having to slam their doors shut, over and over and over and over, because the car randomly thinks that the door is not closed and turns on the interior lights and chimes the door bong sound – while you’re driving.

    It’s getting to the point where a Volkswagen is the safe choice.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      My parents have a Ford far less than ten years old. 75K (aprox) miles an 0 mechanical issues thus far.

      You can fix confused door sensors with a spray of WD-40 in the latch. Slamming the doors over and over is like kicking a vending machine that is unplugged…good luck with that stupidity.

      Giving credit to an idiot (dead meat) ruins your credibility. He says whatever he thinks will ruffle the most feathers. He has repeatedly made up “facts” that cannot be backed up, except by him. He pretends to be this all-knowing, all-seeing expert when really he couldnt tell you the difference between a Focus and a Corvette, as his many mistakes can attest.

      He’s the internet’s version of radio’s “shock jock,” one who will say ANYTHING to get you to remember him longer than three seconds after you turn the dial or turn it off…only getting rid of dw isnt quite as easy. Making fun of his stupidity is very easy, though. Why, every time I see an “extended length Tahoe” that isnt a Suburban, I laugh so hard, I crash and burn…still laughing as the flames invelop my brand new ATS-V (lol no, but I damned near would just to piss him off).

  • avatar
    gasser

    And people wonder why the GM twins of Terrain/Equinox are selling. Its called value. If its just so-so, at least you’re paying a so-so price. Lots of cash on the hood and plenty of almost nothing down leases, and by now, reasonable build quality. Maybe the fun to drive is zero, but for most of us, that $500/month payment is just out of reach.

  • avatar
    Crosley

    I called it on being a Big3 product when that horrible fit and finish was first teased.

    After tax, title, and license, at least in my state it would be just over $50k as tested. It’s a rental car as far as I’m concerned, I’d love to see who actually buys these.

    It didn’t seem like very long ago $50k bought a lot of car.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    Our ’10 Edge Limited has averaged 17.6 mpg over the past 120k miles. We’ve had three unexpected breakdowns…..all over-heating related. We’ve replaced the dual fans twice (trailer package) at $1200 each time…last week we had a phantom overheating/breakdown where the mechanic couldn’t replicate the issue.

    We’re trading it in on Saturday for a Japanese-based brand, probably Lexus.

    The Edge was our first domestic-based vehicle and most likely our last.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      I love it when people share their real life experiences getting absolutely raped after being tricked into the “domestic quality has caught up with Japanese quality!” false narrative, and this is especially true of those paying premium $$$ for Ford & GM garbage sh!tcans.

      However, I don’t love hearing this because I am cheering against Ford & GM, but because if they don’t get their sh!t together soon – especially given the opening the hideous styling that many Japanese makes have given them – they will not come stave off death or come back from the dead the next time there is a deep auto sales downturn.

      GM and Ford are pretty much bottom of the barrel in terms of intermediate and long-term reliability/quality across their model lines when measured against the Japanese (they’re both arguably slipping backwards again on a relative basis) and they’ve had 40 some years to address this fundamental, core, critical issue.

      It’s pathetic.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        I have no idea why FCA escapes your wrath when their general quality is likely even worse than what you’d get from modern GM and Ford.

        About the only thing they have going for them is that they haven’t gone full-hog for turbos (yet) and they aren’t priced deep into WTF territory like Fords and Cadillacs.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          I have to be consistent, and in doing so, FCA is near Ford based on CR’s Reliability Index.

          BUT, there’s a more nuanced story with FCA; strip away Fiat products and post 2011 Chrysler, Jeep & Dodge vehicles fare quite well in the MAJOR component index (motors, transmissions, cooling systems and electrical systems).

          More specifically, I’d put the motor, transmission, cooling system, suspension and electrical system reliability of +2012 Chrysler & non-Fiat Jeep products up against any GM or Ford and expect to win.

          Pentastar 3.6 is rock solid, and their V8 offerings are stout (even the 2.4 liter shared by Hyundai & built in Dundee is decent).
          Chrysler transmissions have improved dramatically.
          Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge (non-Fiat) have stayed away from DSG transmissions and turbochargers.

          More anecdotally, the more than a dozen or so people I know with 2011 to 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokees (4), Durangos (1, a 2014, but with near 40k miles), Wranglers (3), 300s, Challengers (1), etc., have been nearly all very well-served and are very happy with their non-Fiat Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge products.

          I’d take a 300 with any motor over any Cadillac, a Jeep Grand Cherokee over any Ford or GM equivalent, a Challenger or V8 Charger over any GM or Ford equivalent (save a 5.0 2015 Mustang), or a 2014+ Durango over any Ford or GM large SUV. I’d also take a ecodiesel RAM with coil suspension (probably in Tradesman trim) over any F Series or GM truck.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            That is interesting.
            I’m the opposite.

            I’d take Ford or GM pickups over any Ram trucks any day. Mind you, I’d be reluctant to buy any 2015 Ford or GM 1/2 ton because typically new model domestic vehicles tend to be riddled with issues.

            When it comes to HD pickups I’d stay away from Ram as well. I’ve heard way more nightmare stories about Ram even when one adds Ford’s 6.0 PowerStroke to the list.

            There isn’t a single vehicle on the FCA lot that I’d want. The Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon does pique my curiosity but any time I sit in one that feeling goes away.

            The only products on the Ford lot I’d consider are pickups and the Mustang. Over at the GM dealer I’d only consider pickups and the Suburban.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            The thing GM does best is pushhrod V8 pickups with the Z71 package.

            In fact, GM has taken the pushrod V8 to an area many thought not possible in terms of power, efficiency, torque, reliability, etc. as of just a decade ago.

            It’s subjective, though; I feel that RAM absolutely nailed the ecodiesel, especially on a value basis in lower trim packages, in their new truck (this will be especially more true over time if their new transmissions prove as reliable as GM transmissions – GM’s best attribute (one of GM’s few good attributes).

          • 0 avatar
            Davekaybsc

            You may be giving Jeep a bit too much credit. Chryslers seem to be doing okayish in the last few years (aside from numerous woes related to the ZF 9-speed, which to be fair to them, everybody is having problems with that POS autobox, including stalwart Honda.)

            The Jeep Grand Cherokee though… eh not so fast. True Delta’s scores for the ’14 and ’15 JGC are pretty terrible. Some 60% of problems reported by owners are related to the engine, electrical, and AC systems.

            Contrast that with the 300, where the majority of complaints seem to be centered around trim pieces falling off.

          • 0 avatar
            ponchoman49

            Two fellow co-workers have Rams, one is a 2011 and the other is a 2012. Both have had numerous problems and the 2011 is already starting to rust! No Rams for me

          • 0 avatar
            SCE to AUX

            @DeadWeight:

            I think the 2.4L engine “shared” by Hyundai and FCA started out as nothing more than the block and cylinder head. Their designs seem to have diverged after 2009.

            The Hyundai version is fairly smooth and quite off idle, while the FCA version is rough and raucous at all speeds. I’m no fan of the FCA version.

            As for FCA transmission improvement – their 9-speed is universally criticized, while the 8-speed is praised. My limited experience with them matches the reviews.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            DeadWeight – I was excited about the Ram Ecodiesel but it didn’t have the cargo capacity in the configurations I want.

            Same can be said for the Titan XD. Initially i was excited about it and the Cummins V8 but once again. Capacity isn’t there. my current truck sits at 1540 lbs cargo and I often am at its max and occasionally am well over.

            My next truck would need at least 1800 lbs.cargo in a crewcab 6.5 box 4×4. That rules out Ram, Titan XD,and any GM 1/2 ton without a tow package.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Re: “rock solid” pentastar

            FCA extended the warranty on all 3.6 pentastar engines made from 2011-2013 for cracking heads, despite initially claiming that the issue only affected an early batch of 2011s. Add to that Chrysler’s traditionally poor electricals, and fast wearing suspensions and transmissions, I really don’t see how there’s much to recommend. I agree that they are interesting and appealing vehicles at tempting prices, but that’s as far as it goes.

          • 0 avatar
            heavy handle

            gtemnykh,

            re: “Chrysler’s traditionally poor electricals”

            Which tradition is that? I’m asking because Chrysler has gone through three different styles of electricals in the past 15 years. They upgraded to Mercedes-style wiring/connectors under Daimler, and now they are switching-over to Fiat-style wiring, which is more generic-European.

            The pre-Daimler stuff was very similar to the other Big 3 stuff. It looked like a Hollywood representation of a mad scientist time bomb. You could tell that the team that wired the power windows was not allowed to talk to the team that wired the radio, and nobody ever had the whole system laid-out at once in a lab during the design phase.

            The Daimler stuff is a lot more integrated, with logical runs, but it coincides with the epoch of networked cars, which a lot of shadetree mechanics do not like. Now you have more than just power going over wires, you also have data.

            The Fiat stuff is a continuation of the Daimler stuff, philosophically, but it’s more generic. Instead of thinking “that’s a Mercedes connector,” you think “Jaguar also uses those connectors, and Opel, and Peugeot, and Volvo…”

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            The tradition of underspec’d wire lengths leading to shorts in door harnesses, poor waterproofing leading to pcm/tipm faults, mistakes in wiring diagrams used to diagnose said faults. Want me to keep going?

          • 0 avatar
            sgeffe

            Late to this party here, but the ’80s Fiatsler already HAD their turdo experience, and none too good! (Well, mixed bag–a Turbo Timer was your friend!)

            And the ZF 9-speed slushbox in the Cherokee isn’t the picture of greatness, but that unit has been panned in other applications (Acura!! Seriously?!) as well.

  • avatar
    Brian E

    $45k is crazy for this thing. It’s within a stone’s throw of well-equipped versions of much nicer vehicles or probably more useful three-row crossovers. Who’s buying these? Do they all come with $10k on the hood?

  • avatar
    TrailerTrash

    Many reviewers are making big noise about the poor fitting and creaking around the shift panel dash and cup holder area. Nasty to say the least.
    This plus the rattles everywhere from roof to dash area, Gets to them after a short driver. Irritating at this price.
    Fit and finish everywhere inside and out was comical.
    This must a sign of something wrong at the plant

  • avatar
    andyinatl

    Wow… what a steaming pile of garbage. The fear of potential issues is what held me back from buying a Ford Flex and steered toward a 10 year old (at the time) LX 470. My now 12 year old LX 470 has been absolutely flawless, with all its weatherstripping intact. And gaps are very much perfect, thank you.

    • 0 avatar
      RideHeight

      Amen. After a decade now of having to feel increasingly dubious about my rampant J-car bias Ford comes roaring back with this thunderous POS to put me at ease.

      Tradition. It’s important.

    • 0 avatar
      Exfordtech

      Anecdote alert. Currently have an ’08 Taurus X. Approaching 180k miles with nary a hiccup. Picked it up at the end of 2010 with 20k on it. So far one set of brakes, Front struts, 2 sets of tires, 1 coolant flush, 1 set of spark plugs, oil changes, air filters and tire rotations. Trans fluid is original, still as pink as new on the stick and the 6F50 shifts flawlessly. Nothing leaks, nothing creaks or rattles, and all trim is still attached as it should be. Perforated leather seats are worn, but everything else is rock solid. Consistent 25 mpg at 75 MPH on the highway, and 20 around town. The 3.5l V6 has more than adequate power. When it’s time to replace it or more likely relegate it to full time transport duty with the dogs, we’ll be looking at Flex/Explorer with the 3.5 or MKT with 3.7.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        I have 75K on my 2010 MKT. My wife still loves it. I did do a transmission/PTU fluid change when I purchased it because it has the tow package, and I don’t know what the previous owner towed. I also had the dealership take care of the Trans Range Sensor before I took deliver because I knew it had been an issue with some of the vehicles, and there was a TSB for it. I would recommend going with a MKT 3.7 if you can find one (most are 3.5TT). The engine is better and the Lincoln can often times be found for less than the equivalent Flex/Explorer.

        • 0 avatar
          Exfordtech

          Yes, don’t see the need for the turbo, and I have noticed the MKT is usually selling for less than the Explorer, Flex seems to have a small but devoted audience that keeps the used prices up. Hit ’em where they ain’t is always my philosophy on used cars.

  • avatar
    tedward

    Everyone is posting here as if ford cars have no redeeming factors. Trim and fitment issues are infuriating, true, but they have been knocking it out of the park in other very important respects and the bigger reliability issues may just be related to their aggressive roll out of new drive train tech and the consolidation of their one-ford vehicle fleet.

    The annoying stiff they can fix if motivated to do so, and only after future refreshes must likely. The drivetrain flaws do get addressed outside of redesigns, we’ll see how ford’s behavior stacks up in this regard after we watch Toyota and Honda go through their own turbo roll outs.

    I wouldn’t own one right now, but only bc of issues I would overlook if there wasn’t competing product out therewith similar strengths. I think ford is really close to greatness in short, the products just need more time on the vine (and a less tacky interior, but that’s me).

  • avatar
    rev0lver

    Mark, you must have done the photo shoot on the weekend. Otherwise, I would have noticed you there. My old office is in the Marshall Building at the NSH.

  • avatar
    ponchoman49

    Those 20″ tires certainly did not help your mileage or ride and quietness. My buddy has an AWD 2014 Taurus with 19″ rubber. It was atrocious for ride quality, rode noisier than other cars we drove with smaller tires and felt down right scary on icy or wet roads going around curves. He replaced the 19″ with 60 series 17″ Winter rubber and the difference is almost shocking. Not only does the car ride better but it handles the slick roads with ease and rides noticeably quieter. yes some of this can be attributed to tire design etc. He also picked up nearly 2 more MPG on the exact same daily route. This fits with the new Edge and the 2 liter turbo. A friend has one, now with 12K miles but in a lower trim and it has I believe 18″ tires. He averages around 21 MPG with some city driving or about 2 better than this test vehicles. And that is during warmer weather months just as in this test. And he does not drive with a light throttle foot either!

  • avatar
    legacygt

    Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Finally, a reviewer has recommended the NA V6 over the Ecoboost 4 for fuel economy reasons. Things have gotten a little better since for put the 2.0 Ecoboost in the Explorer but not much. These smaller turbos are just overwhelmed by these larger vehicles. They work magic on the EPA test cycle (it shouldn’t require a cynic to realize that Ford is pushing them to pad their CAFE numbers) but they don’t match up in the real world. They simply spend too much time with the turbo spooled up and they end up drinking more fuel than the V6 which is appropriately matched to a car with the mass of the Edge or Explorer. I would love to see some head to head comparison but I bet that similarly equipped Edges with the V6 would provide a more satisfying drive AND better fuel economy than the smaller ecoboost.

    • 0 avatar
      Rnaboz

      We have a 2015 Edge Titanium AWD V6. We have over 14k miles and our average is 22.5mpg. I didn’t want the turbo for 2 reasons: 1) Questionable reliability hauling sooo much weight over its lifetime (we keep our cars till they die). 2) My 2013 MINI Cooper S already requires premium fuel and I did not want 2 turbos in the house.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Im not a turbo fan, but if someone drives a 3.5T F150 and a 6.2 F150(RIP) or a 2.0T Edge against the 3.5 Edge and they legitimately prefer the turbo version then I won’t disparage them. I just won’t understand it.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    I’ve always liked the Edge, and for a while it was easy to find loaded out versions on rental lots. However the sticker price for what it is has always turned me off.

    $45K to $50K buys an awful lot of CUV.

  • avatar
    Sigivald

    “but have you tried the infotainment systems from the Japanese brands — Honda, Subaru, Toyota, et al? ”

    Hey, now. Leave Subaru out of this.

    (I have recent experience test-driving a Crosstour, in my parents’ Camry Hybrid, and their Outback 3.6R Limited.

    The Toyota and Hyundai are both *abysmal*, as you imply.

    The Subaru one is honestly perfectly good – it compares favorably with the system in my Volvo, and I thought that Sensus was the best of all the info/nav systems I saw in any of the luxury brands I test drove [Audi, Mercedes, BMW, Volvo].

    So unless it’s only the Limited that gets the good infotainment, Subaru shouldn’t be in that lump.

    And also, in this price range, you can get the *nicest possible Outback* and still save some cash, as far as I can tell.

    The nicest possible Outback is REALLY nice.)

  • avatar
    theonlydt

    Had a few of these now as rentals. A few thoughts:
    – Generally impressed with how it drives
    – My fuel economy was consistently 25mpg (US). It’s about how you drive it.
    – I noticed the panel gap issues, but no trim fell over
    – However, I pulled over on the highway because the hood was fluttering so much at speed I thought it wasn’t latched down. Turns out the clamshell shape catches the wind and it’ll flutter above 70mph.
    – Seats always give me backache.

    Unlike others here I have no hatred for small turbos. I like it in the edge, I like it in the fusion. Europe had them years ago – they’re just as proven as any engine. (most issues seem to be DI related anyway).

    My money wouldn’t go to the Edge though. I’d save $20k and take a CX-5.

  • avatar
    rbg

    I am literally shocked at the price on this vehicle. It’s a pile of junk for 45-50k, and I was a loyal Ford owner for many years, having owned quite a few. I think they have millennials convinced they are a quality brand, but this is not an example of quality. For the last 2 years, I’ve driven a CRV base awd model as a daily driver. I’m in sales and put a lot of miles on. The CRV has been 100% reliable. I’ve driven it 57k miles, replacing the air filter and a set of tires.
    It gets 27mpg on average combined. I leased it, and will buy it at lease end unless I’m offered a new deal to walk away, mainly because I’m way over my 15k/year lease. The CRV or the new Pilot is a far better value than any comparable Ford. The UAW has NOT learned a thing. I’m done subsidizing their lavish retirement benefits, while they give us crappy crap for 50k!

  • avatar
    Compaq Deskpro

    My first reaction was “that’s some pretty good panel fitment”. Until I saw the flopping rubber, I expected you to praise Ford on it. Those panels certainly look better than my Challenger’s. I actually never paid attention to panel fitment until that last article, so I went and looked for it and now I can’t unsee it.

  • avatar
    pupeperson

    My wife bought a 2015 Edge Sport when they first became available. I don’t know exactly what she paid for it, but since she got the first one in our area, it was probably too much — $48k or so. That said, it’s quite a little car! So far, w/ the 2.7 TT and AWD, she consistently got over 27 mpg on 91 octane fuel until we put the winter tires on it — 26.1 now on winter fuel and the winter tires. That’s 90% highway, half of that freeway at 70+ mph and the rest 2 lane at 65 or so. It runs like a top, very smooth. It will accelerate like a late 60’s early 70’s muscle car and drives much better. At speed (130mph or so) it’s very solid on the road with no hood flutter or rattles or shakes of any kind. Only problem she’s had so far was a squeak in the panoramic sun roof that I fixed with a little graphite lube. The fit and finish to my eye are quite good. Overall, we’ve been very pleased with it…no gripes or warranty issues or anything over the 21,000 miles we’ve had it. The only issue I have with it is that it has about as much compression braking as a diesel … like none at all, but that’s getting pretty nit-picky. Contrary to many of the posts above that appear to find the Edge sub-standard or deficient in many ways, ours to date has been everything we expected it to be and perhaps more. Just sayin’


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Corey Lewis: I think they are ExtremeContact Sports. I’ll be using 93.
  • Corey Lewis: Dealer just issues a temp tag. The Texas ones are good for 60 days.
  • Corey Lewis: It was dark back there and I was more tired than anything. I did scoot too far back though. Nobody...
  • ajla: @Dan: I think every TTAC commenter has replaced their vehicle over the past 20 months so you pretty much have...
  • ajla: 0. What kind of Continentals? 1. What octane are you planning to use?

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States