FStephenMasek

Job 1 should have already been built. Are there any production line photos? What about final specifications?

I think Job1 is early next week. It will be interesting to see if they have a production version at the Orange County Auto Show next week, as they would have to send it in an airplane.

I'll bump this, as the second page is somehow not showing....

What about Toyota bring in pickups without boxes which they install here, or the reports of Sprinters coming in as "kits?" For anyone who has not read it, the Friedman's Free To Choose is an excellent book, and it includes a good discussion of why tariffs are harmful.

I just found pricing! A loaded Titanium long wheelbase wagon with the 1.6, 17" wheels, towing package (to get upgraded battery, etc.), overhead console, MyFord Touch, and remote start has an invoice price of just $29,506: http://autos.aol.com/cars-Ford-Transit+Connect-2014-Titanium_w_Rear_Liftgate__Wagon_LWB/options/ I do see (DISC) after the 1.6, so the information above that it has been discontinued may be correct. I wonder if they are planning a diesel engine for the USA?

With "job one" just 3 weeks away, why don't we know the weights, engine ratings, and EPA mileage ratings?

Four cylinder engines sound OK, and eight cylinder engines sound the best of common designs, but I find the sound of most six cylinder engines to be annoying. Perhaps the new ford V6 with two turbochargers will sound better. If not, I'll just keep buying vehicles with V8 engines.

I saw it on the rotating stand at the LA Auto show yesterday and came away with a negative impression. One with AWD and the top package has an MSRP of $45,000, and I just do not see that much more value over a Taurus / Sable. The 2008 Malibu has a much nicer and more expensive looking interior. The features it has which are not offered on the Taurus and Sable (telescoping steering column, better headlights, rain sensing wipers, cooled seats, etc.) are probably worth $5,000. The trunk and trunk opening is significantly smaller than those on the Taurus and Sable, significantly lessening the utility of the car. Rather than waste their effort on this, Ford would have benefited by adding the features from this car as options on the Taurus and Sable, and re-doing the interior of those cars.

The car does look good in the photos from the Batman movie filming location. Thankfully, it is not a copy of anything else, since many other new cars look very similar. I am glad to see that they kept the large trunk of the Taurus/Sable, instead of following the trend towards tiny trunks on large cars. No only is the large trunk very useful, it enhances the proportions of the car. I think I would prefer that the trim around the fog lights and the lower grille to be body color, but I'll have to see the actual car at the LA Auto Show to decide. The talk of the DI 3.7, the automated manual transmission, the TwinForce, and superior fuel economy all suggest that Ford will have a product which stands out from the competition. The Lincoln dealerships are already highly rated for service, so let's hope that the advertising is as good as the car. I hope you don't try to teach such foolishness to any children you contact. Also, what on Earth does such nonsense have to do with the new MKS?

Now let's hope that Ford not only runs that commercial heavily, but that every single person at all of the dealerships is trained to make sure to let every prospective F-150 customer know that the F-150 beat the Tundra in the NHTSA test. Of course, the problem will be knowing what to say if they bring up the lack of stability control on the F-150. I don't have a good idea for that, so le't hope that Ford corrects that deficiency immediately.

Think of it this way - if it is a good vehicle and you are old enough to know the old Ford names, will the name Flex stop you from buying one?

The success or failure of the Five Hundred will depend on how is sells with the general public, that is, people who are generally uninformed, not car enthusiasts. To a typical customer who needs a large car (perhaps even a family which realizes than having two or three children does not require that they buy a 5,000 or 6,000 pound truck): - absolute top safety ratings and stability control - decent interior space expected in a full-sized car -a huge trunk and split folding rear seat to allow them to carry almost everything they might ever need to carry, from recreational items, childrens' things, or business items -decent power and efficiency with the 3.5 & 6 speed -quiet -nicely finished inside and out, with plenty of handy storage spaces (something blatantly lacking on the Lucerne) -a good four wheel drive system available at a reasonable cost (lacking on Lucerne, Azera, and Avalon) -a reasonable price -Ford parts and service prices, not high Asian / European prices -handy features such as Bluetooth available from the factory Ford attended to visible and hidden details much better than I had expected. The perforated leather seats, leather covered console lid, and new cluster really were needed, and even the fake wood looks better. It is amazing that the Ford people made so many body and suspension revisions, rather than just changing the engine and transmission. My main concern is that the console seems to be the same width, and I see no mention of a telescoping steering column, so I still might not fit comfortably. Now if the dealers will only bother to sell it, instead of just pushing trucks. Me too. My record collection isn't large, but all are in pristine condition (the cartridge is worth more than the turntable).

Wow! They did far, far more than I thought they would, with significant changes to the suspension, body, and so forth in addition to the new front and rear styling and 3.5 / 6 speed. Now if we could just see that new interior.

Good and helpful post. Yes, the IRS will generally provide a better ride, and ride is a key selling point. It seems that all of us agree that if it has an IRS, it needs to be a modern control blade system. Has anyone also thought about the fact that it will also have stability control, no matter what the rear suspension?

The 2002 Mountaineer is an example of a sub-par IRS design, but it was still better in most every situation than the '96 Impala SS which it replaced. As I mentioned earlier, I have driven the new Mustangs (most recently over the Thanksgiving holiday) and the solid axle shortcomings are still very evident. Of course, the 2006 Explorer is significantly better than the 2002 Mountaineer.

Thank you - your points were very well stated! Did you notice that there has not yet been any meaningful reponse to my experience owning both types of vehicles? I have driven roughly 750,000 miles since I obtained my license in 1975, and can state categorically that solid axles are inferior. Besides that expereince, the laws of physics must be considered. Perhaps the solid axle defenders are arguing that a good solid axle may be better than a bad IRS, but nobody here is suggesting that Ford install anything less than an exellent IRS in their new vehicles.

You did not address my real world experience with both designs. No posing in that. Ford would ignore what all of the competion is doing at their great peril. Do you think that all of the companies building cars with independent rear suspensions are silly fools who are wasting money? In addition to every rear wheel drive Bentley, BMW, Cadillac, Chrysler, Dodge, Maseratti, Mercedes-Benz, and Rolls-Royce car, the new GM full-sized cars and Camaro will also have independent rear suspensions. The independent rear suspension is one of the best features which sets the Explorer and Mountaineer ahead of the competition (e.g. the 4Runner). Ford is the only company still trying to sell solid axle rear wheel drive cars (Mustang, Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, Town Car).

Let's use the $1,000 figure. Is anyone seriously arguing that people would not buy the Interceptor if it cost $36,000 instead of $35,000 (a 2.8% difference), or $41,000 instead of $40,000 (a 2.5% difference)?

1) It seems that the real cost is just $300, as posted above. 2) I have rented and driven the new Mustang, and it suffers from the shortcomings of a solid rear axle. I do have plenty of experience with solid rear axles and independent rear suspensions, having owned and driven for many years and miles the following vehicles: 1970 AMC AMX (360 automatic) - solid axle with leaf springs and factory torque links 1979 Pontiac Trans Am (400 4-speed WS-6) - solid axle with leaf springs 1979 Pontiac Lemans four door (heavily modified, hot-rodded V6) - solid axle with coil springs 1984 Pontiac J2000 Sunbird (turbo, 4-speed) - semi-indpendent twisting beam rear axle, excellent handling, good ride 1988 Pontiac Bonneville SSE - independent rear suspension, superior ride and handling 1994 Ford Thunderbird LX V8 - indpendent rear suspension, excellent ride and handling 1996 Chevrolet Impala SS - solid axle with four links 2002 Mercury Mountaineer RWD V8 - independent rear suspension, but still rode rough 2002 Mercedes-Benz C230 (still own) - independent rear suspension, excellent handling, relatively good ride 2005 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx - independent rear suspension, but rough ride, last FWD car will ever own 2006 Ford Explorer EB RWD V8 (still own) - independent rear suspension, better than 2002 design

How much more, percentage-wise, could an IRS cost? Isn't a far better ride over uneven surfaces and better handling worth a meaningful amount, especially when almost no other cars still have solid axles? GM will have an IRS on their new full-sized cars and it would be very easy for the GM salespeople to demonstrate the superiority of an independent rear suspension to prospective customers.

What a nice surprise that they continued where they left off with the 427 concept. Of course, it must have a higher roof and an independent rear suspension to be a production model. However, the key word is concept. Unless Ford starts building cars like this very, very soon, they will probably run out of money and be gone forever. How soon? What do all of you think? Given thier dire financial situation, it seems to me that they had better have this and other substantial and stunning (nothing less will do) new products on dealer lots within 18 months. Of course, GM is coming out with a whole new line of rear wheel drive cars. If Ford thinks they can wait until they see the GMs selling well, I wonder where they think they will borrow even more money? I am almost sure that the revised Five Hundred will have fender vents, and they do seem to be in style.

Interior and Exterior: Exterior - The new exterior looks like just the improvement it needed. I see fender vents under the disguise on the front fenders (in the photos on Left Lane News). Interior - The big problems with the current design are the overly wide center console, lack of a telescoping steering column, narrow driver's footwell, and plain/cheap monochrome surfaces. However, a change to the console, steering column, dashboard, and floor under the carpet would fix those things, so most of the interior could and should stay as it is. We'll soon see how serious they are about staying in business.

If you have not already done so, this site has a link to download the order guide so that you can make sure that the XLT has what you want. I was all set to order a 2007 XLT V8 when I discovered the dealer closest to my house had several 2006 EB V* Explorers on the lot. Just by chance, that was also the day Ford came out with a $3,500 rebate on the 2006 models.

Yes, Oldracer has another point - you can buy an Explorer for an excellent price. I bought the 2006 EB V8 for $6,000 below MSRP, and there are surely still 2006 models on dealership lots, probably at even better prices (make sure to deal with the fleet / Internet department). As for the ride, it is good sometimes, and rougher than I would like at other times. I wish it rode like out 1994 Thunderbird LX V8 which also had an independent rear suspension. However, mine has the tow package. The Ford literature gives no indications that the springs and shocks are different with the tow package, but I suspect that they may be different. The ride is better than that of the 2002 Mountaineer V8 I owned, and the 2006 Explorer is radically quieter.

Yes, I know that GPS sensors will work inside of the car near the windshield. However, the XM antenna really does need to be outside of the vehicle, so I put them both there. Plus, the GPS antenna has a better chance of picking up more signals if it is up on the roof. I have the Bluetooth unit behind the dashboard under the far right side HVAC vent. One of the most significant features of the AVIC-Z1 is the optional XM-NavTraffic function (I just used it today for the first time to decide to avoid a lengthy stretch of clogged freeway). It also has a hard disk to store the maps and music (it will automatically load a CD to the hard disk).