2005Explorer

Now I can see why Ford divorced itself from Bridgestone/Firestone. They are still building crap. Of course, Toyota will not get any blame for this. This will all be put back on Bridgestone/Firestone. BTW Bridgestone is a Japanese company...so who is the media going to blame this time? Ford?

There is nothing wrong with using this tag line to market the car, because they can back up the claim even if one wants to argue a percent here or a percent there. It goes very well with the other tage line, "The perfect family car." If Ford was trying to market a Pinto or a Bronco II using this tag line, then I would say, yes, they are lying (actually lying would be an understatement). Why can't some of you just face the fact that the new Taurus really is going to be a great car? I might be wrong, but with the right kind of marketing (and this kind is spot on) the new Taurus and it's cousins could prove to be very successful. They fixed the major issues with the 500, put a name on it that people know, and came up with very good MPG ratings even though power was improved substantially. I don't see how anyone could be down on this car other then styling and face it...it is a large family car...not a sports car. With fuel prices at all time highs and people still needing a vehicle with room...I think it is going to do fine.

Actually the 2002 Explorer had a different instrument cluster that was closer in style to the Gen. 2 cluster. It had the italic style letters and numbers with while needles. I believe the 2003-2005 had the upgraded one with orange needles, blocky font, and a little silver thrown in the middle to dress it up. The Mountaineer always had the same silver gauges from 2002-2005. I have a 2005 Explorer. As far as ease of reading goes, the instruments are excellent, however they look too basic for todays consumer who wants glitzy gauges.

The Chrysler 300 V6 model has crappy numbers especially for a car that was supposed to be so great. I wonder how the Hemi model will do under the new standards. Ouch.

All I am going to say is that if Ford sells Volvo or their share in Mazda they are loosing their minds, or really are completely bankrupt. Considering they are using safety technology from Volvo (AdvanceTrac RSC) and chassis designs from Volvo (D3) it would be crazy to sell them. One thing that Volvo has done for Ford is improve their safety image. Imagine if it is sold and then Ford has to start taking the Volvo improvements out of their vehicles. Not a good idea. I say sell whatever you need to sell, but Volvo and Mazda should be protected and used to benefit North American operations. Last, I would think Ford would want a HUGE $$$ for Volvo considering they would be loosing a lot of engineering and sharing capacity.

I predict that the Chrysler Aspen will beat the Lincoln Blackwood for the record of shortest nameplate life in the history of the auto business. You know with the Trailblazer getting axed soon and the Durango dying within the next year or so, Ford might be in a class of one with the Explorer and Mountaineer. As long as it is still hanging around that 10k a month sales mark, they might want to re-think their decision to move it to a car based chassis in 2009 or 2010.

It will sell just fine, provided...it drives well, is built well, and gets good fuel economy all for a decent price. Heck anything that gets from 35-40 MPG highway will sell well when fuel hits $4 a gallon. The Focus is really the only conventional vehicle that Ford sells that gets excellent fuel economy. The 4 cyl. versions of the Fusion and Milan do fine, but are not class leading. Believe it or not, I think high fuel prices might be something that actually helps the new Taurus and Sable coming this summer. One of the big reasons that SUV's and minivans got so popular is because they offer a lot of room for a family. The downside is that they never do as well as sedans on fuel economy. The Taurus and Sable have tons of room and still get good fuel economy. Will consumers that need room start to move back to larger sedans over CUV's, SUV's, and vans? You never know. Ford might be thinking this because of features like a rear seat DVD system that is going to be an option on the new sedans.

Actually I heard that is will be called Chrysler Holdings LLC, not that it makes much difference. So now one has to ask...for a corporate logo is the pentastar going to come back??? I think that would be kind of cool.

I don't know why, but your post made laugh this morning. I don't think you were trying to be funny, but I just pictured someone buying an 8.2L V-12 engine with current fuel prices. I think that would be the new definition of a gas guzzler. Just the publicity that Ford needs right now. They couldn't give them away and I think you would be lucky to get 6-8 MPG on a good day. Too funny!

WOW! TOYOTA WORLD DOMINATION It is amazing how people (especially Americans) have a total love affair with Toyota. You would think someday with something being so popular there would be backlash at some point. With Toyota however, I am not sure what it is, true they are reliable, but almost all brands are reliable today. They get good fuel economy, but all brands have models that get good fuel economy. I am guessing it must have to do with design and styling or the fact it is NOT a US company. Oh well, in 10-20 years there might not be a lot of choice, so we will all have to drive a Toyota. YUCK!

You know I don't mind the column shift at all on my '05 Explorer. Sure the '06+ looks sportier with the console shifter, but then you loose that nice big storage area that comes in handy. Also, in some vehicles with a floor shifter my right knee is always hitting it if they are not in the right place. I still think that Ford should have offered an optional column shift and 6 passenger seating on the new Taurus and Sable that are coming out this fall. The Taurus and Sable always offered a nice 6 passenger option before and when not in use you could still have an armrest and cupholders. Some have said that safety requirements have changed, but there are still vehicles on the market, (F-series, GM SUV's) that have this 6 passenger option. It is not the most comfortable space, but in a pinch it is nice to be able to haul 6 people and the 2008 Taurus/Sable are certainly big enough to allow this option. Also, a center front shoulder belt would be possible with the right engineering. I just think it would have given the new cars some more flexibility and doesn't GM still offer 6 passenger seating on some of their sedans? I know the Panthers still do.

What is known about this unibody Explorer that supposed to be in the pipeline? Some have stated that it too will be a D3 based vehicle, however I assume it will still offer some of the current advantages of the BOF Explorer it is replacing or there is no point in building it. I would think that it would offer a V8 option and possibly be a RWD based vehicle that is more geared to towing and some light duty off road use, much like the current model. If this is where it is heading then basing a Panther replacement off of it does not sound crazy at all. Somebody has to have an idea about this vehicle. If it is nothing more then just a 7 passenger car based crossover then it is pointless with the Taurus X and Flex on the market. Something has to be different about it, but what???

In this case would the Fusion, Milan and MkZ spit out a taco? (I honestly do think the CD3's are great cars and are well built, but I just had to say it.)

As far as selling off Ford Tractor Operations, it was probably a smart move by Ford back in 1991. We owned a lot of Ford products around the farm and they were good tractors, however as farms became larger and equipment became bigger, there was not room for a lot of competition in the market. Today, you have 3 major farm equipment manufactures in the world. 1) John Deere 2) CNH (Case New Holland) and 3) AGCO (Allis Gleaner Company). AGCO is by far the smallest of the 3 mega companies. CNH and AGCO are conglomerates that have been formed by the merger of many brands. CNH-Case, International Harvester, Ford, New Holland, Versatile (however the courts made them sell pieces of it when they merged), Flexi-Coil, Steyr, Kobelco AGCO- Allis Chalmers, Deutz Allis, Gleaner Combines, Hesston, Massey Ferguson, White, New Idea, Glencoe, Farmhand. John Deere- Well just John Deere! John Deere really is a success story when it comes to US industry. They have weathered every kind of storm in their path and seem to have a loyal following that no one can stop. Almost seems the way Toyota is going today. People are passionate about green and yellow. Brand loyality for JD is off the charts. So in reviewing where the farm equipment market is today I can honestly say I don't blame Ford for selling thier farm equipment division. They were actually starting to make their own conglomerate with Ford New Holland and Versatile back in the late 1980's, but the way agriculture was going they decided it was not in their best interest at the time. I guess in hindsight they could be the parent company of Case New Holland today, but the decision way back moved that ownership to Fiat.

I guess they must be a different breed. The '92 bodystyle actually dated back to 1980 and they are tin cans. In 1980 Ford needed to reduce the weight of their fullsized pickup and they did in a huge way. Granted they finally filled in the frame holes and added additional body bracing a few years later. I was actually happy to see the 1997 F-150 and 1999 SuperDuty come out because they finally got away from the tin-can bodies and built some solid trucks again. I have spent many miles in F-150's of that era, 1982, 1987, 1992 and a 1995. They were good pickups and did well around the farm, but were not well built. I still remember on a windy day the drivers door would pull out from the suction of the wind and you could see daylight. Maybe the heavy duty versions were better, but they had the same cab and tinny box, so I doubt it, but hey, if they like them who am I to judge.

Richard is there a GT500 around Sioux Falls? The reason I ask is because last night when I was in the city with some of my friends, We were driving up the short street coming out of the mall to 41st and right across 41st (and across from Sioux Falls Ford) there was a GT500 sitting on the corner of the parking lot for the motel (I forget the name of it) and there were kids all around it. Looked like it was drawing a small crowd. Anyhow someone's rich daddy let them take it to the prom??? I know I would never let a teenager drive a GT500!!! I didn't notice if it had SD plates so maybe it was not even from here. Well if that is the idea, then I would say it is a great plan. Much better then letting your products go stale. Keep introducing things and people will stay interested.

I would seriously question whether the Rondo has the same build quality as the Japanese built Mazda5. The Rondo might be an excellent vehicle. I have never driven one so I can't honestly say how great it is all I am going on is the reputation of Mazda versus Kia. As far as profits from Mazda go, Ford did recieve $22 million from their investment in Mazda over the last quarter. $22,000,000 is not a huge number in a billion dollar industry, however every penny helps. Ovaltine I have to admit I have never seen anyone as obessed with a brand as you are! People don't even get this obessed about expensive European sports cars! If I only read what you would have to say, I would think that Kia is the best vehicle that has ever been built! I know Kia has improved, but all I can think about is my brother's friends girlfriend and her Kia Sephia. She was all excited when she got it because of the great warranty. Well it is a good thing she had that warranty because I have never seen a car in the shop as much as that one was. The little car is long gone, fell apart, while even Chevy Cavaliers and Ford Escorts of the same age are still driving down the road today. Granted I am sure that Kia is much better today, especially since being bought by Hyundai, however I would be careful in saying that Kia quality equals Mazda quality at the present time.

This is probably the best indicator that quality is starting to improve. I would assume that the CD3's are helping a lot to reduce warranty claims.

I think that the new Taurus might do better then some think. It was a good car before just needed more power. Some will argue that the styling is not modern enough, but considering it's target market, it should do fine. At least it should prove to be a better seller then the current Five-Hundred. You would be suprised at how many positive comments I have heard and seen about the Taurus coming back. True it's nothing more then a much improved Five-Hundred, but the target customer for the 1986 Taurus is same EXACT customer for the 2008 Taurus, they are just 20 years older and moving into retirement. Also, you might pick up a few younger families along the way that really need the room of the new Taurus, but can't afford SUV fuel economy.

The funny thing is a small FWD economy car helped bring them back from the dead in the early 1980's and now they don't even build one. K-car, not much to look at and not that well built, but it was cheap, economical and sold well.

The guy driving the car sure looks angry! :angry:

Maybe I am just blind, but when I went to www.mercuryvehicles.com tonight I was really suprised how nice their website looks. I think it is WAY more attractive then www.fordvehicles.com is. It seems like it has been recently re-designed since I don't remember it looking anywhere as nice as this last time I checked it out. They also have a very nice 2008 Sable link. I was suprised how nice the new Sable really is after viewing all the pictures.

I still think they missed a letter when they named the Taurus X. I think the Taurus X should have been the Taurus XC. The first thing is that one letter standing alone does not look good and second of all it would have tied Ford more into Volvo. People would think more about the Taurus XC being something along the lines of the XC70 for example.

I drive a Ford probably because I grew up in a Ford family. My father who is now 70 always said he would never drive a GM product because you don't work your butt off to support the worlds largest corporation. Now, of course, they are no longer the world's largest corporation and soon Toyota will probably be the biggest auto company in the world. I like supporting the underdog as long as they have a decent, reliable and safe product. I agree that you should buy whatever you want. Being 30 years old, a lot of my peers tried to pressure me into buying a Toyota when I got my Explorer. I wanted a traditional BOF SUV and after spending a little time around the Toyota 4-Runner, I just felt more comfortable and secure in the Explorer not to mention the price was better. I felt it was a better value for my money. I still feel pride driving a product that comes from a company with a legacy like the Ford Motor Company. I guess you do have to narrow it down to whether you will purchase from a domestic automaker or not. Even though you said that does not matter, that is most peoples first critera. If you have enough confidence with the domestic automakers then you have to look at who offers the best value for your dollar. If you don't feel any connection to one company over the other then I think you will find in many vehicle categories it is pretty hard to beat Ford. The thing Ford needs to realize is that they were the only domestic automaker that actually attracted import owners in the 1980's and 1990's. I think they are more likely then GM or Chrysler to attract these people again if they continue to produce products like F-Series, Mustang, Fusion, 2008 Taurus and Edge. What won't attract them is some of their older products that are outdated and need to be replaced. I don't even need to tell you what those products are.

This is where the 4.4L V8 diesel F150 might come in to help save the day.