2005Explorer

So who are the pessimists and Ford haters around here going to pick on when Ford is gone??? :lol: Dang that is funny that Nissan sales have been in the gutter as well and they are the most anti-gay auto company. You would think their sales should be WAY up when all the religious right are looking for a new car. Be a good conservative and send your money to France.

CNN article: http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/19/autos/bc.t...dex.htm?cnn=yes MSNBC article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16697719/ The steering defect has been reported to cause accidents. Read and comment.

Wouldn't that pretty much be a new Explorer? Granted I would expect the new Explorer to have more traditional SUV styling, but a 3rd row Edge would be pretty much an Explorer with a car chassis.

I don't know if the Five-Hundred deserves to be bashed as much as some do. Yes, it's boring to look at and yes it is underpowered, but other then that it is probably one of the better full-sized FWD cars on the market. I have ridden in a 2006 Five-Hundred and a 2006 Impala and I don't care what anybody on here says, there was NO COMPARISON at all. The Five-Hundred was a way nicer, quieter, and smoother ride. The Impala still goes (thump, thump, thump) on highway seams. I was on the same road in both and when you are in the Five-Hundred you do feel like you are riding in a Volvo. I don't think that is a bad thing for it's market. The restyle and engine should help, but I agree with the people that say the engine and improved looks should have came sooner. Sooner as in when the car was first introduced. I understand that the engine was not ready yet, but shame on Ford for that one. In the end however, there would be an easy way for Ford to get people off their back when it comes to Five-Hundred sales...fleet baby...FLEET IT OUT! It's been working wonders for the Impala's sale numbers!

I think you will see a response to this vehicle quicker then you think and it's not the Edge, Freestyle or Fairlane. In fact, I don't really see any of those vehicles as a perfect market match for this vehicle. They are all targeted towards different markets. Edge (smaller sportier CUV), Freestyle (bet it's history by 2010), and the Fairlane (Going after the Caravan crew). So what does that leave you with? Explorer. It will be interesting to see what direction Ford takes with the next Explorer, but my guess is it will be marketed directly at these vehicles. Some will say that Ford will be too slow to this market to make an impact. Well the same thing was said when Ford built the first Explorer. The Jeep Cherokee preceeded it with a 4 door model by many years. I don't think I have to explain how that turned out. Maybe Ford should have canned the Fairlane project and the Edge and put everything they had into a new crossover based Explorer and got it on the ground sooner. I think at the time though Ford felt like there was still a market for a midsized BOF SUV so they did not do that. It can be hard as hell to forcast 2 or 3 years out what will be the hottest trend at that time.

No because the driver of the Fit could have chosen a larger vehicle themselves. No one is forcing a tiny car on anyone and I don't really see why they are that popular. It is not like the fuel economy is that great. Heck a Ford Focus, which is quite a bit bigger then the Fit still gets 27 city/ 37 highway. Compare that to the Fit which gets 33 city / 38 highway. The Fit weighs about 300lbs. less the the Focus so you would assume it would do WAY better on fuel, however it does not, at least not on the highway. The only way you could charge someone with voluntary manslaughter is if pickups, SUV's, and large cars were illegal to purchase. Last time I checked they are perfectly legal to purchase and drive.

When compare the Fit to other vehicles on the road (F150, Silverado, Suburban, Expedition, Explorer, etc.) it is a death trap. Even compared to larger cars (Five-Hundred, Crown Vic, etc.) the poor Fit does not stand a chance in a collision. Tiny cars are always going to be dangerous no matter what you do. I don't think Honda intentionally tried to make the Fit unsafe, it is just hard to design something to be safe in high speed collisions when there is nothing around you. In the real world it comes down to size and weight on which vehicle is going to win in a collision. If my Explorer gets hit by a big truck, I am done, if my Explorer hits a Fit, they are done. For the most part, crash test ratings don't apply much in the real world. Sure, they improve the vehicle and allow the manufacturer to make it as safe is possible, but in the real world, bigger always wins. It comes down to what you value. If you want great fuel economy (for the most part) you have to sacrifice size. Size is the best indicator of real world safety. And again, no matter what vehicle you buy there will always be something bigger out there unless you buy a semi. The only difference is that if you buy a Fit everyone will be bigger then you!

My guess would be that the new Explorer will replace both the current truck based model and the Freestyle since it will basically be a larger 3rd row equipped Edge based on a D3 platform. Escape, Edge, Explorer, Expedition seems like enough models to cover all the bases. I see the Fairlane going after a traditional minivan customer and the next Explorer going after the midsized SUV customer. Ford will need to find a way to fit a V8 in the car based Explorer however. The Duratec 35 might be fine for a base engine, but if they are going to compete, it will need a V8. I am guessing although it will be D3 based, it will resemble an SUV a little more then a CUV like the Edge. Honda Pilot comes to mind. The fact is that the Expedition is probably the only truck based SUV they need to offer at this point. I love my Explorer and I love the option of doing light off road driving if I want, but the way the market is changing a BOF Explorer does not make a lot of sense anymore. My guess is the next Explorer will go head to head with the GMC Acadia.

When were these words spoken? They're desperate in Dearborn. Fords, Lincoins, and Mercurys are dead in the water. Sales have bogged down to a twenty-year low. Smaller big cars, rebates, even fresh front-drivers have failed to snag the public's fancy. The dealer body is so disgruntled that a few shameless retailers have proposed a merger with Chrysler. Around the glass house (Ford's world headquarters), they're singing a tune slightly different from the one you hear on TV. More like, "There could be no tomorrow even half as bad as today." All is not lost, however. There's still hope. As a matter of fact, this hour of desperation has rocked the Ford boat hard enough to shake some good sense into the organization. Planners are paying heed to critics. The company president has gone on record espousing fun-to-drive cars. Car and Driver, March 1981 WOW history really does repeat itself! :o

So here is the real question: Head to head equipped the same which is the better car Sebring or Fusion? I'd take the Fusion just on the styling alone, however is there a reason other then styling that makes the Sebring better? ride? handling? performance? interior? chassis? What does the Sebring have on the Fusion (other then fleet sales) that would make it sell so much better? That is my question.

Anyone want a 2006 DCX product? Looks like they have a few yet to sell. (recent photo of the Michigan State Fairgrounds)

I notice a lot of people think that Ford might be in trouble because of the new Silverado/Sierra twins and the new Toyota Tundra, but it seems to me the company that should really be worried is DCX. Although the Ram has never been nearly as popular as the GM and Ford pickups it is still an important product to them. Their last redesign was in 2002 and received a very minor facelift since then. There are all new products from GM and Toyota and a significantly re-designed Ford Super Duty either here or on the way. Ford is already saying that the F-150 which was last completely re-designed in 2004 will be updated again soon. (2008?) My question is when is the all new Ram truck coming out? It seems like they better have a significantly redesigned model ready to go for 2008 or they are going to see their market-share shrink back to pre-1994 levels. Of course, as far as the pre-1994 Rams were concerned I always wonder how they could sell any of those ugly, poorly built trucks (other then the Cummings model).

True, they are both doing bad right now. The only amusing thing is that DCX was the automaker that could do no wrong to the media (and many others around here) until just a few months ago. It is not really that DCX products are terrible, they just ended up in the same situation as Ford did. They are living on trucks and SUV's. When the bottom fell out on that market it impacted them more then other companies that have a better product mix. DCX is even more reliant on trucks and SUV's then Ford. However, trucks, especially pickups are still very important to these companies. Ford is getting a lot of criticism for having an "old" F-150 on the market since the new Silverado and Tundra are coming out. Why doesn't DCX get criticism for the Ram? It came out 2 years before the current F150. Also, a new Ford Super Duty is almost here and we have heard a lot about an updated F150 coming soon. It seems to me a new Ram better be coming soon or they can kiss that market good-bye as well. Maybe a new Dodge pickup is coming next year, but if it is, I sure haven't heard anything about it.

I have to agree with you on this. Just get it out and focus on building a new Focus that will entice people to go down to their local Ford dealer when they are shopping around for a compact car. It is nice to see however that Ford has decided to spend the money to at least keep the current Focus in the mind of the consumer. They could have saved the money and just sold the current model with no changes until the all new one was ready. I think maybe they learned a lesson with the Taurus. If you do nothing you will end up destroying the nameplate. Coming out with a updated Focus that really does look different and has some improvements show they don't want it to slip too far before the new one is ready so at least I give them credit for that. Who knows, it might end up being a nice attractive little car once the cammo is taken off. We should see soon.

Then why do you even take the time to post here or read the boards? I think we get the idea that you hate Ford and all Ford products. It seems like you would enjoy yourself a lot more if you spent time at message boards for companies that have products you love. If your main purpose here is to drive people away from Ford this is probably not your best place either. Everyone falls under 2 catagories here...1) People that like Ford and 2) People that already hate Ford and believe everything they build is nothing but junk. After spending time on here and reading many posts, those 2 groups are never swayed one way or the other. Trying to make someone like a product or someone hate a product by using a message board never seems to work very well. I guess you can call it trolling or not however you see it. Whatever it is...most words around here fall on deaf ears unless you support that person's position.

Although the Fusion is definitely no 427, I would not call it a FWD "econobox" When I think of a FWD econobox I think of a K-car, Cavalier, or an Escort.

I think the 300 is still selling fine in most areas, but just like Ford, good sales with the Mustang and Fusion are not enough to offset the truck and SUV loss. In fact, DCX relies even more on trucks and SUV's then Ford does. I did a inventory search of our Dodge and Chrysler dealer in Sioux Falls, SD. I was suprised at how many 2006 models they have in stock. I check that from time to time whenever I hear about all the 2006 leftovers DCX has. It seems like lately the numbers of 2006 in inventory is actually going up so I assume DCX is trying to unload as many of them as they can. It seems like 2007 would be a dismal sales year for them if they are still selling 2006's at full pace this close to the first of the year.

By the way...when is the "all new" RAM truck coming? They are still running with a slightly facelifted 2002 model and I have not heard anything about a new one. Seems like they should have a new one ready to go by at least 2008 if they are going to compete. The Hemi can't work it's magic forever.

Minivans that look like spaceships? Didn't GM try that already?

No, but they own a pretty good chunk of it. Enough to have controlling interest.

This is interesting. Have they finally sold all of the remaining 2006 models and now are trying to fill their inventory back up? I could have swore I read somewhere in just the past few days they still have a huge number of 2006 models still sitting around. Also, this seems to go against the earlier news they were reducing production to bring inventory back in line. Ford has made some bad moves over the past few years, but at least when Explorer sales fell they responded by closing a factory and reducing output, when Grand Cherokee sales fall...DCX responds by building more? Huh...maybe someone has the answer, I sure don't. It seems like you would want to keep production in line with demand so you can actually sell the vehicles for a profit. Couldn't this backfire? How do they expect to move all of these vehicles?

I don't know. I have a 4.0L SOHC in my Explorer and if conditions are good (meaning I am not going against a 40MPH wind, driving up-hill, or towing) I can get right around 20MPG highway. I don't think there is another midsized BOF (truck based) SUV that does much better then that. I do agree with your point it could be more fuel efficient, but I don't see the 4.0L V6 being any worse then other V6's when used in "truck based" applications. A lot of the poor mileage has more to do with the fact of a heavy frame, poor aerodynamics, 4x4 driveline (if equipped), and final gear ratios, then the fact the 4.0L is a gas hog. However to gain the upper hand in the marketplace you have to do better then your competition if you want to outsell them instead of just matching them, so your point is taken. The only recent experience I have had with a competitors V6 is driving a friends 2006 Grand Cherokee with the 3.7L V6. There is NO WAY I would trade my 4.0L for the Chrysler one. If you thought the 4.0L was a little harsh, you haven't heard anything yet and the torque curve of the 4.0L seems a lot stronger. Japan seems to do much better in V6 truck engines, however I have not spent time in one so I can't really comment. I just go on what I read.

History will show the that S10 was a much more successful product then the Colorado. Again, I would argue the main reasons the Ranger still outsells the GM models is because 1) Reputation and 2) the 5 cyl. engine. You have no idea how many people in the US are turned off by a 5 cyl. engine. I think it would be selling better if it still had the 4.3L V6 in it.

Well I think the people who think the Ranger should have gotten a new dashboard do have a point. My Dad bought a 2005 Ranger SC 4x4 last summer and it is a nice little truck. Plenty of power, decent 5 speed auto tranny. He paid $18,000+ or - for a $24,000 truck thanks to the Family Plan. Sure it has a new steering wheel and more modern gauges, but I could SWEAR the dash is straight out of a late 90's Explorer! The only difference is the color of the trim around the radio and a new groove down the center of the passenger airbag cover. In 2006 when they updated the front end they could have done interior improvements for a small amount of money. With that said it is pretty sad that the Ranger has a more attractive dash then the Chevy Colorado considering the Colorado has a 10 year newer interior design. Of course, I think the real reasons that the Ranger still outsells the much newer Chevy is because 1) The Ranger has a very good reputation as being a tough reliable little truck and 2) Truck customers don't like the idea of a 5 cyl. engine at all. No matter what the specs might say on paper, the 4.0L SOHC V6 feels more powerful and tows better then the 5 cyl. in the Chevy. Something about 5 cyl. just does not do it at all for the US pickup customer.

The Chrysler dealer in Sioux Falls, SD (population150,000) has 24 300's in stock. 3 are 2007 models and 21 are 2006 models. I thought the 300 was supposed to be number 1 hottest selling car at Chrysler. 48K for an MkZ? That seems WAY high. Considering the base price of the FWD model is $29,890 and the AWD model is $31,765 you would have to be adding around $18,000 +/- in options to get to the price you are quoting. Is that even possible??? I assume however the people that will pay a premium for a re-badged Fusion are the same kind of people that will pay a premium for a re-badged Durango. :happy feet: