Yukoner

Over the last few months I have been averaging 23 mpg with my 2WD Edge. My commute is mostly highway with about 25% city driving.

Here in Northern Canada we are selling more Rangers now than we have for years. If we could get one with an efficient diesel engine that was no more than a $2,000 option, I'm sure we could double our sales.

Perhaps I am unlucky but the 3 people I know that have an Edge (i'm one) currently have lost all their power steering fluid due to a leak. It has been -40C here for over a week. Is this just a fluke? Other than that I love the vehicle.

I really want to say something nice about the look but I can't. That front just says UGLY to me. Makes Kia look tasteful and well proportioned.

I liked that comment by "Ford 150" about a vehicle that beats the mileage of the Prius. Who cares if it only covers its costs. The PR alone would be great never mind fleet fuel consumption benefits. Ford has the ability to do this if they focused on a fuel miser. Lose everything that is not essential to getting from A to B. How about aluminum/plastic body, diesel power. Even though it wouldn't be for most people it would be nice to say that Ford is the fuel economy leader.

g48150, there are always lots of reasons why things CAN'T be done, but I'm sure somebody at one of the manufacturers will figure a way to make it work. I hope Ford is that manufacturer. As far as what is economically viable, do you know what the exchange rate will be in 3 years? If gas/diesel is $5 a gallon is $3,000 premium a vehicle too much? How much will we lose if we don't do it? Nobody said it was going to be easy!

If all you care about is minimum operating cost then reliability is a major factor. A $3,000 transmission can eat up 10 years of fuel savings.

At our dealership we get all 4wd with nice trim levels but we can't get enough of them. Our allocation is low so about half the time we have one or none on the lot. With the competitive Ranger prices and high fuel prices in Canada they are very popular. We would love to be able to get more.

I have quite a bit of time in Explorers from both before and after the redesign and I have to say I found the new ones a much nicer ride. However, I'm in the market for a used Explorer and I'm looking at 2004/2005 because I can't stand the new front end. I'm glad to hear it's not just me.

At our Canadian dealership we are still seeing a demand for wagons and hatches and the other dealers are not giving up any wagons they have. I wish Ford had decided to continue production of the 5 doors in parallel with the new model.

My wife runs a Ford dealership and has had lots of demo's but the most practical one she has had in the last few years was a Freestyle. We also have 3 kids, dog, active lifestyle etc. It has more usable space than the Explorer with way better fuel consumption.

I have to strongly agree with Old Fairmont Wagon's earlier post that a big part of the mileage solution is weight reduction. I would hope that if Mulally brings only one thing to Ford it is that weight is public enemy number one. Imagine if 20% of the weight could be cut out of each vehicle. That may seem extreme but look at what Boeing has done. Think big! Less weight means less material costs in each vehicle, smaller engines required for the same performance, smaller brakes, lighter suspension components etc, better handling and of course better gas mileage.

I was holding off possibly buying a Focus to see if the new one would be worth waiting for. It looks like I will be getting a 2007 5-door! (even though I'm pissed that they refuse to offer the 2.3 in that cofiguration) The new interior may grow on me and I like the rear view but the way that bulbous front is grafted onto what looks like the old roofline is ugly in my opinion.