akirby

Yes it would and that's why it's the only viable scenario for keeping the Expy and or Navi. But with a shrinking market the business case is probably slim so they have to decide if it's worth keeping at all.

According to Biker16 the European market is perfect and every vehicle they make is a home run and Ford is stupid for not selling all of them here.

If it's unacceptable to you don't buy it but it's perfectly acceptable to most buyers. And you're not going to be able to get much more power out of that platform - they had to totally redesign the front clip just to keep it from exploding with the current 365 hp. You'll have to wait for a new RWD platform to get much more power and it's unclear whether that's in the cards or not.

Everybody understands that minivans have more utility than crossovers or suvs and station wagons ride and handle better. People buy crossovers and suvs because they prefer the styling and/or the taller seating position. Some people simply do not like the look of minivans and station wagons. It's that simple. And who are you to tell people what vehicle they should be driving? You don't know their motives and even if you did it's none of your business. Why aren't you driving a Prius instead of a Corolla? It gets way better gas mileage and it's a hatchback. You're obviously driving the wrong vehicle.

It's not MY spin - it's the media spin created by the IIHS press release wording. I don't have any problem whatsoever with the test. If all the IIHS wanted to do was help the mfrs make safer vehicles then they could have just released the test results to the mfrs. Or they could have just released the test results without labeling them as poor or marginal or unacceptable. Or they could have given the ones that passed 6 or 7 stars and left the old ones at 4 and 5 stars. I don't understand why this isn't obvious to everyone.

What have the democrats offered the last 4 years that's any better?

That's the wi-fi hotspot feature where the car becomes a wi-fi hotspot for other devices using a 3g or 4g data connection. The OP was asking about the feature to connect the vehicle to another wi-fi hotspot which would only really be used by the mft web browser which isn't available yet.

The 3 most common headline verbs are Fail, Flunk and Struggle. i rest my case.

I'm pretty sure that someone sitting on top of you ramming your head into the pavement fits that exception to being the aggressor.

Your conclusion and the average consumer's conclusion may be totally different. Show a consumer a test report that says a vehicle scored Marginal or Poor and tell me how they're supposed to respond? And what about Brady's headline: Four luxury sedans fail new Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash test That's how consumers will be presented the test results and that's the impression they will get.

What they said....... 2 stars imply an unsafe vehicle - period. Like jpd80 said - just raise the bar to 7 or 8 stars so that existing 5 star cars are still 5 star cars but the ones who can pass the tougher test get more stars.

And you don't see the contradiction in that?

It doesn't bother you that a really, really safe 5 star rated vehicle that was a top safety pick last year is suddenly touted as being unsafe now? Spin it all you want, that's the net result of this new test.

Understood but I think we hit that plateau about a decade ago or more when we added dual airbags and crumple zones and painted bumpers. Since then I think it's just been the normal rise in the cost of goods. I could be wrong - I don't think I've seen actual repair cost averages.

What does someone's opinion have to do with his actual fiscal accumen? Nothing. You hate anything labeled Republican or Conservative and you do nothing but look for ways to attack or criticize. Others do the same thing with Liberals and Democrats. It's turned into a game of college football where your team is right and your team must win so you support everything your team does and you attack everything the other team does. And that goes for both sides. It serves no purpose other than to prevent us from getting to a common ground and actually solving problems. If the Republicans got off their religious high horse and stopped talking about gay marriage and abortion (which have nothing whatsoever to do with running the country) and the Democrats would stop hating rich people then we might actually be able to have some bipartisan solutions that benefit the country.

Maybe the better question is whether insurance premiums have gone down as cars have gotten safer? I know mine haven't. This gives them an excuse not to lower premiums as cars get safer. If their costs go down due to fewer injuries but their premiums stay the same, who pockets the difference? It would be much better if they used absolute numbers rather than relative measurements. Let's go back to the old 5 star rating system from 10 or 20 years ago. Why not just add stars as cars get better? So a car that was 5 stars in 2002 would still be a 5 star today but newer cars may be 6 or 7 stars now. It keeps the relative rankings intact. Resetting the bar forces car mfrs to keep up or risk sales from poor public perception - even though the 2 star cars of today are much much better than the 5 star cars from 20 years ago. And those expenses get passed on to the customers. That's probably good when you're talking about percentage improvements in the double digits but at this point we're talking about tiny fractions of improvement in real world outcomes and at some point it's simply not worth the cost.

Until they get the web browser enabled - not much.

Strange that no source is given or even hinted at and no more information provided than what we've seen here months ago. I have no doubt that we won't see any "halo" cars right away because it's not financially responsible at this point. But I'm not sure that the proposed lineup is accurate either.

I have one although I've only used it a couple of times. They work great, especially the swing away models so you can open the rear without removing the bikes or the rack.

In other words you're just arguing semantics for no good reason.

Trailer tow should give you the hitch and everything except the ball. Trailer tow PREP only gives you the wiring and the tranny cooler IIRC.

As opposed to the Democrat's version which is also unrealistic and unsustainable?

It's not that easy to just "pull an engine out of the factory" and you also have to remember this affected tens of thousands of customers, not just one or two. What they should have done is make sure the customer has a nice vehicle to drive while waiting for repairs and may throw in something extra for the inconvenience. No mfr is equipped to fix something like this overnight.

I think trailer tow prep only includes the wiring harness and possibly the tranny cooler.

Exactly my point. Any time one side brings up a possible solution it gets shot down by the other side and we never get anywhere. We need bipartisan solutions.