By on July 8, 2019

2020 Ford Explorer

For four generations, Ford offered the Explorer with rear-wheel drive as standard. It went front-drive for the fifth.

Now, the standard drivetrain is rear-drive again. Back to basics, so to speak.

Except, not really. First-gen Explorers didn’t have infotainment systems, or 10-speed automatic transmissions, or available hybrid powertrains. Those staples of modernity have been added over the years.

Whether it was out of nostalgia or an attempt to capitalize on the resurgence of dinosaur-themed tent-pole cinema, or simply an attempt to make us overfed journos get a quick guffaw, Ford PR trotted out an early ‘90s example, complete with Jurassic Park livery, for us to gawk at (rumor has it we may be able to get behind the wheel someday. Fingers crossed). I opened the door and was greeted with what was the new-car smell of my youth. This Explorer needed no 10-speed, no Sync, no hybrid, to charm. Could the 2020 version do the same as it returned to a rear-drive base?

(Full disclosure: Ford flew me to Portland, Oregon, put me up in a nice hotel nearby in Washington state, fed me, and sent me home with a coffee mug.)

Ford is offering choice aplenty this go-round, with two gas powertrains and a hybrid unit (a first for Explorer). Trims include base, XLT, Limited (hybrids are only available in Limited trim), ST, and Platinum.

The event flow of this particular press drive meant I got several hours of seat time in the ST, supplemented by short loops in the 2.3-liter four-cylinder, the hybrid, and the Platinum, with one more spin in an ST for pics.

Replacing the Sport model, the ST offers up 400 horsepower and 415 lb-ft of torque from a 3.0-liter turbocharged V6 that pairs with a 10-speed automatic. I’m starting with the ST since I happened to have spent the most wheel time in one.

2020 Ford Explorer

The performance-oriented ST does feel quick relative to its size, and it handles well given the size and weight here (over 4,700 lbs, although Ford has worked to slim down the Explorer by a couple hundred pounds compared to the previous generation.). It’s no sports car, duh, but it’s entertaining enough to make the parent who traded in his/her Mustang feel a little less remorse. The steering is well-weighted, although feel is artificial. The soundtrack is surprisingly great, but much of the exhaust noise is sadly as fake as the news from that Web site your uncle keeps sharing on Facebook. The brakes do the trick well enough on a hilly, curvy backroad.

The ST I wheeled around Oregon and Washington was equipped with available 21-inch wheels and “performance” brakes. High-performance brakes are also available.

All-wheel drive is standard on ST models. Popping it into sport mode (other modes include normal, eco, trail, deep snow and sand, slippery, and tow/haul) does up the verve factor somewhat, and that seems to be the case across the board, but obviously more so in the ST.

It’s also standard on the Platinum, which uses the same V6 with lower power numbers: 365 horsepower and 380 lb-ft. On the road, the Platinum doesn’t feel that much slower than the ST, despite being a tad heavier. It’s ride and handling isn’t quite on par with the ST, but it’s not too far off.

2020 Ford Explorer

Dropping down to the 2.3-liter EcoBoost inline-four with rear-wheel-drive, the change in experience is predictable. For obvious reasons, it’s lighter than the Platinum or ST, but it didn’t feel quite as dialed in on the back roads as the higher-powered six-cylinder trucks. With 300 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque, it’s definitely not quite as quick to get rolling, but it’s still got enough punch for commuting duty.

The hybrid, mating a 3.3-liter naturally aspirated V6 to an electric motor for 318 combined system horsepower and 322 lb-ft of torque, serves up a similar driving experience to the rest, although it’s the least button-downed in terms of handling. The steering feel in both the Hybrid and the XLT felt even more artificial than in the upper trims, with less weight. Feedback is almost nil in the lower trims.

Speaking of handling, all trims displayed the body roll one would expect in a large crossover, although the ST unsurprisingly tamped it down the best, with the Platinum not far behind. Regardless of trim, the Explorer will ride, handle, accelerate, and brake well enough to satisfy most of suburbia, with the ST presenting a little more flair.

Ford did setup an off-road course to show that the Explorer is capable of playing in the dirt, but it was pretty easy-peasy. Still, I learned that the Explorer can ford (sorry) a decent amount of water. I doubt any owner will use their Explorer to tackle any truly tough terrain, but it will handle light off-roading just fine.

2020 Ford Explorer

Outside, the look is familiar but more aggressive, and it’s handsome. I especially like the blacked-out grille and wheels of the ST and the rakish look from the rear doors back. The headlights swoop back towards the windshield in such a way that the Explorer appears to have a prankster’s evil smirk when viewed from some angles.

Inside, the dashboard has nice curves that are marred by the infotainment system, which feels like an afterthought in both eight-inch and 10.1-inch size. I often carp about the tacked-on feel of so many of today’s infotainment screens, but this one literally looks like a tablet taped to the dash. I might be willing to live with the looks if the screen was easy to read at a glance, but there’s too much info displayed to allow for quick scanning, even though the font is large and legible.

It also would’ve been better if the navigation system didn’t steer us wrong at several points. I’m not the only journalist who was directed off the freeway by the nav, only to be sent right back onto the on-ramp for the same freeway, heading in the same direction. Ford promised us this was an early production glitch that will be fixed via software update.

The Explorer is slightly longer than the Hyundai Palisade, with less leg room and similar head room, and a tiny bit more cargo room beyond the third row. It’s a similar story when compared to Kia’s Telluride, but the Kia bests both for cargo volume behind the third row.

An available 12.3-inch digital gauge cluster looks cool, is easy to read, and provides neat little animations when you switch drive modes. It’s just too bad that both screens ruin the look of an otherwise handsome cabin.

2020 Ford Explorer

Available features, depending on trim, including power liftgate (with foot activation available), 18-inch wheels, 20-inch wheels, 21-inch wheels, Sync infotainment, navigation, digital gauge cluster, tri-zone climate control, push-button start, LED lighting, blind-spot information system with rear cross-traffic alert, lane-keep assist, pre-collision assist with automatic emergency braking (which includes pedestrian detection, forward-collision warning, and what Ford calls Dynamic Brake Support).

We’re not done. There’s more: Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, evasive steering assist, in-car Wi-Fi, 360-degree camera, trailer-sway control, dual chrome exhaust tips, LED fog lamps, rear climate control, heated steering wheel, rain-sensing wipers, capless fuel filler, remote keyless entry, premium audio, second-row captain chairs (with available heating), moonroof, leather seats, hill-descent control, satellite radio, and park assist.

Not all models have been through the EPA testing yet, but a quick search of the gubmint’s official FE site shows the rear-drive 2.3 at 21 mpg city/28 mpg highway/24 combined and the AWD version is 20/27/23. One of the V6s (presumably, the Platinum version, but I suppose it could be the ST, or both. Seriously, EPA, add a trim selector to FE.gov, huh? It’s 2019) is listed at 18/24/20.

One problem is the price. Base models won’t even be available for six months, and while the XLT I drove started at a reasonable $36,375 but, with options ladled on (tow package, driver-assistance tech, LED fog lamps, remote start) and the $1,095 destination fee factored in, the register rang at $43,115.

It doesn’t get better from there. The Limited Hybrid I drove? Nearly $60K with 20-inch wheels and the tow package, along with upgraded brakes. Starting price was $52K. The similarly-equipped STs (both had the twin-panel moonroof, performance brakes, Street Pack package, 10.1-inch infotainment screen, and premium audio) started around $54,000 and came within a whisker of $60,000 with options.

The Platinum I drove with 21-inch wheels, premium audio, and 10.1-inch infotainment system? Over $58K to start, and $61K with those and other options factored in.

Woof.

2020 Ford Explorer

Unless I am missing something, I can’t go online and build and price a competing Kia Telluride or Hyundai Palisade to over $50K, even ticking all the boxes on the Web site. To be fair, neither offers a hybrid. But Toyota’s Highlander does — and it took a lot of clicks to get that to $53,000.

That’s the big problem the Explorer faces. It looks good outside and the interior only suffers from one major blemish. It drives reasonably well in lower trims, despite steering that doesn’t communicate and some body roll. The Platinum is a step up, and the ST is about as sporty as a mainstream SUV this size can reasonably get.

That price tag, though. It’s true we’re working off of MSRP here, and incentives may change things down the line. Still, the Telluride and Palisade (review forthcoming) are both better all-around crossovers offering much of the same content for a lower price, even if they don’t offer performance versions or hybrid models.

The ST does stand out a bit, as it has no natural competitor other than perhaps the Dodge Durango R/T (the Durango SRT is a level above, performance-wise). Ford is trying to position it as a value alternative to sport/luxury SUVs bearing badges like Land Rover or Range Rover, but will the Beverly Hills set even look at a Ford dealer as they pass?

2020 Ford Explorer

On its own merits, the Explorer is a pretty good crossover. While enthusiasts might need to purchase the ST or Platinum to feel fully satiated, the 2.3 and Hybrid offering up a pleasant enough driving experience that will pass muster with most crossover shoppers not looking to drop the hammer.

As noted above, the problem is the money. With Kia and Hyundai offering screaming values while shedding their past baggage faster than members of the Windsor ballet shed clothes, Ford has an uphill battle ahead of it, methinks.

That’s a shame, because this new Explorer is quite likeable. Just not premium-price likeable. I did some Googling — a mid-trim 1990 Explorer tested by Car and Driver cost $22,115, or about $43,000 today. Slightly more than the optioned-out 2020 XLT I tested. That’s pretty reasonable.

Makes me miss that early ‘90s version even more.

[Images © 2019 Tim Healey/TTAC]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

58 Comments on “First Drive: 2020 Ford Explorer – Premium Pricing...”


  • avatar
    Lie2me

    Ford has always been real proud of their higher trim Sport and now ST Explorers. I can only assume these will be heavily discounted in time and a slightly used one a bargain. It’s nice, but I’m far more interested in it’s Lincoln cousin

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    The ST does stand out a bit, as it has no natural competitor other than perhaps the Dodge Durango R/T (the Durango SRT is a level above, performance-wise).

    Just an FYI Alex Dykes tested the ST and sort of saw it as splitting the difference between an R/T & SRT Durango in the performance department. He did praise what he saw as a strong RWD feel in the AWD ST Explorer.

  • avatar
    MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

    They are smoking crackrock with that pricing. A nice Telluride is TEN GRAND less, and IN ADDITION comes with that sweet 10yr/100k warranty, so you’re still covered when, let’s be honest, the FixOrRepairDaily will be costing you money on repairs at 80 or 90k miles.
    (and spare me the hate, I own Fords and speak from experience having bought other Fords brand new)

  • avatar
    ws358

    While this is a direct competitor to the Telluride / Palisade, the 2.3T Explorers are comparable to the 3.8L V6 in the Hyundai / Kia models. Those top out just under 50K, which is just above loaded 2.3T Explorers. Sure, the 3.0T and Hybrids and ST models are more, but then they offer more than those two competitors. Will be an interesting comparison test between Pilot / Pathfinder / Traverse / Telluride / Atlas / CX9 / new Highlander / Durango / Ascent.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    That infotainment screen is an abomination.

    I had to zoom in to the pic to convince myself I wasn’t being trolled with an iPad propped on the dash.

    • 0 avatar
      0Gravity

      Agreed. But you get that only if you pay $995 extra for the “Technology package” which adds that larger portrait screen, massaging seats, and 14 speakers instead of stock 12 speakers. In other words, that ugly screen is avoidable. The smaller stock one that’s horizontally oriented looks much better but it’s not getting as much press exposure because Ford chose the portrait ones for most of the high end tester cars. I would order mine without the tech package.

  • avatar
    dwford

    When you get to Platinum or ST levels, doesn’t it just make more sense to get the Aviator?

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      That’s a very, very good point

    • 0 avatar
      0Gravity

      While I agree that buyers in the Platinum and ST price range should consider the Aviator, my choice is still the ST because I prefer the vehicle looks over the Aviator. Also, a comparably equipped Aviator comes in around $9k more at $64,800 (adding AWD and Reserve 1 package) versus $55,600 for the ST which includes those features.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      “When you get to Platinum or ST levels, doesn’t it just make more sense to get the Aviator?”

      So you can pay more for a rebadge of the same vehicle?

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Probably the most egregious example of an iPad-stuck-on-the-dash I’ve ever seen.

    Also, the rear styling reminds me of the late, unlamented Scion iQ.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    I wish you would have answered the (to me) obvious question: why this vehicle over its FWD-based predecessor? And given these prices, what does it offer over a B-O-F based vehicle like the Chevy Tahoe or GMC Yukon. I understand that the Ford’s EPA numbers may be better than the GM warhorses, but, I imagine in real life use, the differences are trivial (other than the hybrid which saves fuel by not idling the engine).

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      To answer question 1, I don’t know what Ford would say, but they’d likely argue that the handling is a bit better, at least in the RWD models. It’s been a long time since I’ve driven a FWD Explorer, so it’s hard for me to make the comparison.

      As for BOF, the vehicles you mention are more in line with Expedition in terms of competitive set.

      • 0 avatar
        DC Bruce

        Thanks for your response, Tim. Honestly, I find that all these types of vehicles handle like (relative) pigs, so a degree of difference between two of them doesn’t register much with me. And, yes, my family vehicles are an ’08 Pilot and a ’15 GMC half ton crew cab pickup. The GMC at least has the virtue of the monster 6.2 liter engine, which, coupled with the 8-speed tranny, makes it surprisingly quick in a straight line. But, it’s still ponderous, as you would expect from a vehicle of that mass and ride height.

        Admittedly, I’ve never driven the “super-SUVs” from people like Porsche, AMG, etc. But I consider them to be the automotive equivalent of bumblebees: the amazing thing is that they can fly.

  • avatar
    ponchoman49

    Wow Ford must have contacted Barra regarding Blazer pricing because it’s equally as outlandish. The sad part is people will buy them and pay anything to get into another SUV.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      The Blazer is pretty ridiculous. It has almost as much interior space as a CRV for the price of a Pilot. I guess that works because Chevrolet is so much more prestigious than Honda. Really, the water in the pot is starting to boil and the dumber frogs are pointing at the water that isn’t bubbling and saying there’s nothing to worry about. Obama’s CAFE will render cars into luxury items no matter how long finance terms get. Then the brain dead frogs will be pointing at the jobs downtown that weren’t lost when people were reduced to foraging around their homes.

  • avatar
    jkross22

    Longer screen! With more tacked on look!

    At least Ford had the good sense to include buttons to control the basic functions and they FINALLY got rid of that atrocious instrument panel. Kudos for the effort.

    • 0 avatar
      Robotdawn

      Yeah, I’m torn between being proud Ford made a dash that doesn’t look like low-rent Mitsubishi and being appalled that they stuck a 10.1″ Walmart tablet (in portrait no less) in the middle of it.
      Good looking ride other than that though.
      I know “car people” love rear drive cars, but being from West Michigan I can’t imagine going back to suffering rear drive cars in snow. I know you can get AWD, but why pay for it when FWD works just fine? I mean, it’s a CUV, not a Camaro. Exactly how sporty do you expect it to be?

  • avatar
    dividebytube

    I wish they hadn’t used ST, and I’m not sure why they did, given that badging is usually associated with subcompact and compact cars.

    And that price is a bit eye-watering while its predecessors were good “bang for the buck” hot hatches.

    “Sport” or “SVT” or “GT” would have been better, but I suppose with the third they don’t want to step on the Mustang toes.

  • avatar
    Rocket

    The pricing is ambitious, but Ford earned that right by giving us upgrades you simply can’t get in any other mainstream competitor. I wouldn’t give it away, either. They’ll move a few ST’s and Platinums, but the base 2.3T will be where the volume is, and it is competitively priced. Over time, cash will start to be applied to the hood, and a loaded Platinum for the low $50k’s will be viewed as a certified bargain.

    The Telluride and Palisade comparison are fair, and Ford should be a little concerned, but the Koreans are just phenomenal values for the class. As for the comparison with the Highlander Hybrid, well … there’s no comparison. One is designed purely for fuel efficiency, and one is built for those looking to improve efficiency without compromising performance and capability.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Pricing is competitive with the 4Runner, Wrangler Unlimited and Grand Cherokee. But there’s probably more cross-shopping with Tahoes and Expeditions going on, than Korean FWD cross overs.

  • avatar
    RSF

    I’ve owned Ford’s since the mid 90’s and am convinced that, unless it’s a
    F-series truck, that quality is lacking. My F150’s are rock-solid in every way and have great fit and finish. My last two have been completely, 100%, trouble free for over 100k miles. Our Explorer and Mustang are quite the opposite. They are mechanically reliable, but everything else is just not engineered to the standard of the trucks. Squeaks, Rattles, Air Bag lights, and tons of small things that are just annoying are common.

    So, even though the trucks are very expensive I feel they are worth the money. $60K for an Explorer.. Not so much.

  • avatar
    R Henry

    Vehicles like this, and the prices they command, remind me of how hilariously prosperous Westerners have become. These are so far beyond what most people “need”…..and our “wants” take over from there. A turbocharged 300 bhp standard engine is now viewed as merely good enough for “commuting duty?” Wow!

    The Chinese manufacturers will find a way into the North American market when they can sell us a good looking basic SUV in this size with A/C, power windows, a decent radio, 200 bhp… and sold for $25,000 with a warranty.–essentially a newer Dodge Journey.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Can people really ‘afford’ these, or can they afford the financing? At the moment, financing is cheap. If that changes, that’s bound to take a bite out of sales for CUVs like this and $50,000 pickups.

    • 0 avatar
      James Charles

      R Henry,
      Its the same here in Australia.

      It seems the people whining about immigration, taxes, unfair global competition haven’t had it so good. I think many can’t see past their selfishness.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Only if it time warps back to 1978. There is, at least not outside of the posters on here, pent up demand for the modern incarnation of malaise era crapboxes. A 4700 pound car with 200 horsepower? Adequate? Maybe, but why? And it isnt like this has happened in a vacuum with horsepower booming while cars retained mid 80’s curb weights. This thing is over 1000 pounds heavier than a 1985 Chevrolet Caprice by my quick Googling.

      There just isn’t a ton of people out there saying “I really want less powerful cars”.

      The Chinese won’t be able to lighten these mythical 200 hp cars much given modern safety and infotainment systems. It just makes no sense. Why would anyone want a 4700 pound car with the same HP my Fiesta has? Let me get some of that sweet dial up internet too while we are turning back the clock. And that new coke…yum!

      • 0 avatar
        R Henry

        Thanks for supporting my assertions so completely. Yes, t’s all about what we “want,” not “need.” This, of course, enabled by 72 and 84 month financing!

  • avatar
    James Charles

    I see a few comments looking at the “high” pricing. This is to be expected as the US manufacturers chase a profit. I would think the cost of vehicle production has risen significantly in the US over the past decade and has accelerated since the imposition of metal taxes, trade wars, etc and the rising value of the US dollar since the US ended currency manipulation a few years ago (QE $80 billion a month of printed money flooding the US economy).

    The Big 3 are reliant on vehicles of this calibre. The Explorer looks really nice, but in Australia no one would pay $100k AUD for a Ford. To us an Explorer was a Grand Cherokee (90s) competitor, not a Landcruiser or Patrol competitor.

    The 3 litre V6 diesel would make the Explorer a nice option and create an economical tow wagon. But then again there are many better alternatives, BOF SUV wagons than the Explorer, at 2/3s the price, with diesel.

    Its a shame about the pricing vs its usefullness.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      They sell “Vehicles of this Caliber” because they operate in a vibrant economy where people are buying them. They will likely see some discounts eventually but the US consumer has no need of malaise era type relics and anyone unable to afford new would be well served via the used market now that cars last longer than ever.

      And for all the “What people need” nonsense, very few people in the first world need a Land Cruiser or Patrol. Furthermore, at the top end, at least in the US market none of these rigs (well maybe an Aviator black edition, but thats a different beast and not remotely high volume) approach Land Cruiser Pricing (A USDM Land Cruiser STARTS at 85,000 dollars).

      If you want the most useful vehicle for the cash, you buy a mid trim fullsized pickup in this country during Truck Month, or Truck O Rama, or whatever. You’ll get out for probably around 40 with a vehicle that will last you longer than a decade easily, haul your family in comfort, haul your stuff with ease, and likely meet any challenge you as a homeowner will throw at it. We live in great times.

      • 0 avatar
        James Charles

        Art,
        I hear what you are saying, but it doesn’t jell.

        Malaise era? WTF?

        First world? Australia has the highest average and median wealth globally. Has the highest rate of performance vehicles per capita ….. and sells more pickups per capita than the US.

        Ford, even in Australia is pushing at and beyond Toyota prices, for less reliable and poorer built vehicles.

        Ford is not a prestige brand to be a prestige brand one must produce prestige product.

        Ford is overpriced, you can invest in a higher quality Korean vehicle much cheaper, oh our Korean vehicles come from Korea, with the build quality.

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          Higher quality Korean vehicles? That’s funny. I own the Korean answer to the current Explorer. It will be getting the recall done on the knock sensors so that when the bottom end of the motor grenades due to them leaving metal in the crankcase hopefully it tells me and my wife can pull off the road. And this on a motor that has been in production more than a decade. Higher quality my foot. Meanwhile my first year production body and motor F150 has had a single recall for door latches freezing and my bargain Fiesta has had none. Keep your “Korean quality”

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @BAFO/JC/Big Al – The “marketplace” sets the price. Material costs, labor and development are irrelevant.

      The 4Runner is similarly priced (with less content, aging, etc) and it’s not made in the US. Nope, not even North America.

  • avatar

    Can you really compare this to Kia or Hyundai? Explorer is RWD and RWD platform is usually more expensive. Platform itself might be more premium because it was developed for Lincoln.

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      Yes — even thought they aren’t RWD, I don’t think that matters to most buyers, and many are going to spring for AWD anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Not sure why H/K are being singled out (aside from being the newest entries) when there is plenty of competition in the segment.

      There will be those buyers who don’t care about FWD/RWD and instead are looking for what provides the best combination of comfort, style, utility and price.

      But there will be a (smaller) sub-set of buyers drawn to the new Explorer b/c of RWD and what that provides (better driving dynamics and allowance for higher performance variants).

      These same buyers, however, may be more drawn to the base/lower trims of the upcoming Aviator and GV80, both of which offering much better interior appointment.

      At the prices Ford is asking for its upper trims for the Explorer, the interior should at least be up to the level of something like the Palisade or CX-9, but doesn’t seem to be case (again, the domestics falling short when it comes to interiors).

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    FORD HIT THAT CRACK PIPE HARD PRICING THIS OUT.

    Then again, this is not unusual for Ford garbage, with a network full of rolling dumpster fire dealerships, product/vehicle quality that is literally bringing up the rear just ahead of Jaguar/LandRover/RangeRover in terms of reliability on CR’s index.

    Ford has always been WAY TOO PROUD of their *mostly garbage grade vehicles, but this is next level stupidity by the current brain trust duo running FoMoCo of HACKett & Fartley!

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Once again, Ford releases a fairly middle of the road/mediocre vehicle that is priced well above what’s reasonable.

    For $60k you get dated styling (looks like the last generation with a tweaked front and rear), a so-so interior with an awful infotainment and screen placement, middle of the road handling/braking. Terrible owing capacity, and fuel mileage that isn’t that good.

    There are far, far better vehicles out there for what you would have to pay for this Ford. Once again they completely blow it.

  • avatar
    kosmo

    Tim: I know I’m banging a lonely drum here, but as with any vehicle of this type:

    1. Tow ratings, please.

    2. Does the rear seat fold truly flat?

    Also, has anybody noticed that it seems priced a bit high?!

    Thanks!

    • 0 avatar
      0Gravity

      5600 pounds towing, I believe. All rear seats fold fully flat. And yes, there’s been plenty of griping that the price is on the high side for the full spec’d ST and Platinum. Personally I think the twin-turbo 365-400 HP, 10-speed, RWD, and other improvements mostly justifies the pricing.

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      My bad for not including towing capacity. I always try to do that with crossovers, SUVS, and trucks, but I forgot this time. No chance to fold the seat.

  • avatar
    cprescott

    Yes, Fords ALL command a higher sticker price than they used to that was because Ford had Mercury and Mercury upped the price for virtually the same vehicle. Now that Mercury is gone, for has become the new Mercury and Ford has abandoned the low price point area to others. I lament this change as I was a lifelong Ford guy but abandoned the brand when it no longer was interested in building affordable, low content sedans.

  • avatar
    IBx1

    Oh wow, I was convinced y’all had just propped up an iPad on the dashboard but that’s actually the screen…


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Andre Robinson: It seems cruel to make a people finance their own replacement.
  • Hummer: What exactly are these “homophobic business practices”?
  • tylanner: This is much, much worse than a recall….
  • Andre Robinson: I agree. The most of the expanding populations of India and Africa will want our modern lifestyle,...
  • Andre Robinson: Sir, I have this nagging feeling… That you aren’t even Chinese!

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