rmc523
-
Posts
25,385 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
123
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by rmc523
-
-
Yes. The Solara was discontinued. So the truth of the matter is, it really WASN'T any sort of competition for the Mustang.
I know it wasn't. IMO I don't know who would compare this: to this:
-
When VOPC is contacted they say my vehicle order in "UNSCHEDULED, UNCLEAN"
What does that mean?
Thanks
My guess would be it's unscheduled to arrive/be cleaned at the dealer?? :shrug:
-
every product, every couple of years!
I think models should have a 4 yr lifecycle with MCEs every 2 yrs. Minor upgrades could take place every year. Ex: new car 2004, MCE 2006 (possible engine upgrades as well), new car 2008.
It may be more expensive to have such short lifecycles, but it would keep the product fresh and people interested.
-
Wow, that's impressive. Talk about a product people want (granted it's limited production, so we dont know how many COULD be sold if there were higher production numbers).
-
The truth is it was fine by me buddy. But in the past when I have pointed out that people cross shop the Mustang with other cars on the market it was made clear to me by numerous posters around here that you can't really cross shop the Mustang or compare it to anything because it's in a class by itself until the Camaro comes back. Now I know what a load of s*** that is but apparently it passes for logic around here at some level. That's the only reason I said anything. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if someone cross shopped a Mustang and a Solara.
They won't be able to do that much longer, Solara is gone.
-
The Fusion is not rated for higher MPG than the Camry, in any configuration. The numbers in your post are the old EPA ratings for the Fusion and the new (lower) EPA ratings for the Camry. The ratings for the 2007 Fusion I4 based on the new rating system are 20/29, not 23/31 (which are the ratings from the old rating system). The 2007 Fusion V6 is rated at 18/26 for FWD and 17/24 for AWD.
The Avalon, based on fueleconomy.gov, is rated at 20/28 for 2007.
I got these numbers off the Ford/Toyota websites. I didn't even think about the new ratings for 08 vehicles when I posted these. I'm sure the websites will be updated soon, after which, I'll update the #s on this topic.
According to the Toyota website, Avalon #s are 19/28.
Most of these are 07 models, so (most of) the #s would represent the old rating system anyways.
-
Not that I doubt your numbers rmc but go ahead and take down those Mustang vs Solara comparison because the first thing 90% of the guys around here will say is that the Mustang has no competition, that it is in a class by itself and can't be compared to any other car on the market. So lets be consistent shall we?
I got the #s off of the Ford/Toyota websites, so whatever is displayed there is shown here.
I just compared them b/c the Solara was the CLOSEST thing to Mustang. I know that the ONLY way they are similar is they both have 2 doors, 4 wheels, a hood and trunk, and an engine. that's about it.
I'll put them in a separate category though.
-
It looks good!
Thanks!
-
And Mike Rowe is driving the F-150 and turns to the camera and says....."Did I just hit something???"
Haha!!
-
Has Ford made any announcements about the wheelbase options for the 2009 F-150? I would like to see the return of an 8 ft. box on a 139 inch wheelbase.
I would assume the options are about the same as currently offered.
-
Excerpt from Edmunds review on 7-25-07
"What Needs Work:
Very poor braking distance;...the MKX takes 146 feet to stop from 60 mph, a function of too much weight, insufficient braking power and hard tires. Not only does the MKX fail to measure up to virtually every other luxury crossover, even the 7,550-pound Ford F-350 Super Duty pickup stops in 4 fewer feet."
Hmmm, where have I heard that before? No chance this was an early production model I'd hazard to say. I just hope they get it right the 2008.
They complain about the silver painted plastic parts in the MKX, yet the black plastic is OK in an SRX. The guages are plain? Would adding a few extra lines help that much?? The SRX interior puts the Lincoln to shame?!? I hardly think so. Other than the few minor complaints they had, they seemed to like it.
-
Ford does OK comparing Toyota/Ford car fuel economy
(italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine)
Focus (07): FWD , AWD
Duratec 20 I4 - 27/27 , -
Duratec 23 I4 - 23/32 , -
Corolla:
I4 Man - 28/37 , -
I4 Auto - 26/35 , -
---
Fusion:
I4 - 23/31 , -
V6 - 20/28 , ?
Hybrid - Coming!
Camry:
I4 - 21/31 , -
V6 - 19/28 , -
Hybrid - 33/34 , -
---
Mustang:
V6 - 19/28 (18/26) , -
4.6L V8 - 17/25 (17/23) , - ( / ) = auto
5.4L V8 - 15/21 , -
no Toyota competitor
---
Solara:
4-cyl - 21/31 (22/31) , - ( / ) = auto
V6 - 18/27 , -
no real Ford competitor
---
Taurus:
V6 - 18/28 , 17/24
Avalon:
V6 - 19/28 , -
---
Yaris:
no Ford competitor (yet)
Prius/Matrix:
no Ford competitor
Corolla edges out Focus, I'm not sure, but I thought I heard 08 Focus #s will be better than 07 #s.
Fusion beats Camry, albeit w/ less powerful engines. Fusion Hybrid is coming!
Avalon barely beats out Taurus (I'd take Taurus)
-
Ford also doesn't do bad compared to Toyota Trucks: (with the limited data there is, being the truck segment)
(italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine)
Ranger: 4x2 , 4x4
I4 - 21/26 , -
3.0L V6 - 16/20 , -*
4.0L V6 - 15/20 , -*
Tacoma:
4-cyl man - 23/28 , 19/23
4-cyl auto - 21/27 , ?
V6 man - ? , ?
V6 auto - ? , ?
Sport Trac:
V6 - 15/21 , - *
V8 - 15/21 , 14/20 *
---
F-150:
not listed
Tundra:
V6 - 17/20 , - *
4.7L V8 - 15/18 , 15/18 *
5.7L V8 - 16/20 , 14/18*
---
Super Duty:
No Toyota competitor*
---
E-series:
No Toyota competitor*
Tacoma 4-cyl beats Ranger, no Tacoma V6 figures available. V8 Sport Trac in a class of its own sort of.
No F-150 figures available b/c of the class, same w/ Super Duty/E-series.
Tundra wins only because no F-150 figures available.
*Win by default, because of lack of FE figures on company websites or no competition by the other manufacturer
NOTE: I compared Ranger AND Sport Trac to Tacoma, because Sport Trac has a Crew Cab available. Maybe Ranger shouldn't be compared to Tacoma because of its' size?
Car comparison coming...
-
Ford does pretty well agains Toyota SUVs/crossovers:
(italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine)
Escape: FWD/4x2 , AWD/4WD/4x4
4-cyl (man)22/28 20/26 , 19/24
V6 18/24 , 17/22
Hybrid 34/30 , 29/27
Rav 4:
4-cyl 24/30 , 23/27
V6 22/29 , 21/28
---
Edge:
V6 18/25 , 17/24
Highlander (08):
V6 18/24 , 17/23
---
Explorer:
V6 15/21 , ?
V8 15/21 , ?
4-Runner:
V6 18/22 , 17/21
V8 17/20 , 16/19
---
Expedition:
V8 14/19 , ?*
EL:
V8 ? , ? (not listed)
Sequoia:
V8 15/18 , 15/18*
Land Cruiser:
V8 13/17 , ?
---
Taurus X:
V6 16/24 , 15/22
Flex:
V6 ? , ? (I'm guessing similar numbers to Taurus X)
No Toyota competitor to Taurus X (unless compared to 3 row Highlander) or Flex
---
Sienna:
V6 19/26 , 18/23
No Ford competitor.
Rav 4 beats Escape, except for Hybrid (no Rav 4 hybrid)
Edge beats Highlander
4-Runner easily beats Explorer's lousy FE
Expedition beats Land Cruiser easily, ties with Sequoia. *
No Toyota Flex or Taurus X, as stated above.
*Expy 1mpg better hwy, Sequoia 1mpg better city
Car/Truck comparisons coming...
-
Ford does pretty well agains Toyota SUVs: (italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine)
Escape: FWD/4x2 , AWD/4WD/4x4
4-cyl (man)22/28 20/26 , 19/24
V6 18/24 , 17/22
Hybrid 34/30 , 29/27
Rav 4:
4-cyl 24/30 , 23/27
V6 22/29 , 21/28
---
Edge:
V6 18/25 , 17/24
Highlander (08):
V6 18/24 , 17/23
---
Explorer:
V6 15/21 , ?
V8 15/21 , ?
4-Runner:
V6 18/22 , 17/21
V8 17/20 , 16/19
---
Expedition:
V8 14/19 , ?*
EL:
V8 ? , ? (not listed)
Sequoia:
V8 15/18 , 15/18*
Land Cruiser:
V8 13/17 , ?
---
Taurus X:
V6 16/24 , 15/22
Flex:
V6 ? , ? I'm guessing similar numbers to Taurus X
Toyota competitor to Taurus X/Flex -- None (unless you compare Taurus X to 3 row Highlander)
*Expedition/Sequoia tie, Expy 1mpg better hwy, Sequoia 1mpg better city
-
The star could be used for most cars, while the square emblem could be used for sportier models, such as Cougar. (maybe? just a thought)
-
The star is similar to the emblem Lincoln used on the '56-'57 Premiere. I have a diecast '56 on my shelf. I do like the drawings. The Megellan and Cougar concepts are very nice.
Thanks.
I see what you're saying about the Premiere logo.
-
You thought that was bad? Check out the new Chery Amulet crash test
What is wrong with these Chinese auto companies? Do they not care about passenger safety at all?
-
When are the SD trucks going to get a center console and ditch the column shifter? The upfitter switches should be in the center console as well.
I agree. It could be only on the high end models like F-150. It'd make those top end models look even more luxurious (they're already amazing!)
-
I would love to see it get hit by an F-150. It would be total death and devestation, mangled bodies, blood pouring along with anti-freeze, a possible implosion of a metal catastrophy.
I laughed, but then realized how bad an accident like that could be.
On a lighter note, didn't this car get 0 stars -- I would hope so thats absolutely ridiculous.
They wanna sell this 'BS'6 here? Whoever had the 'Brilliance' idea to design a car that seriously injures/kills its occupants should be fired (unless they dont sell it at all yet, then I'll let it slide as 'testing')
-
Yeah, it crossed my mind that the hinges would need more area than just over the wheel wells. That and I like the idea of the rear seat being snugly set further behind the rear door.
I didn't even notice that you changed the headlight too. It looks good, it works better with the different/smaller grille than the normal MKR headlights.
-
I am in the market for a new vehicle to replace our 2001 Ranger 4x4 and I was going to go the way of an extended cab pickup either Ford or Chevy. However I am starting to consider either a sport trac or the avalance.
Since I don't know much about either one I was looking for a little help on this forum.
Any thoughts will be appreciated
Thanks
It depends on what you would be using the vehicle for also, I would think. If you just used the truck for occasional towing/hauling, I would think that you wouldn't really need the more capable Avalanche. I would go test drive each and see what you think after that. You may find one more comfortable than the other, etc. I personally haven't driven either, I have driven an Explorer, however, but I assume they drive a bit differently.
-
...but LOL I do prefer the door handles abutting for a true suicide door look :reading:
I like that. It looks like you changed the back of the rear door, maybe it would be necessary though for suicide doors to not have the door go over the wheel well?
-
Couldn't it be a powertrain mule for an MkS?
Why would they do that when they already have MKS mules running around?
Driving on I-275 North today going through Livonia just south of 7 Mile, in lane next to me a 2008 Taurus passes me with heavily camouflaged front end and dual exhaust and tail pipes. It was definitely a test mule, and if front end had not been so camouflaged, I would have thought Ford was just testing new drivetrain using Taurus as platform. But the heavily camouflaged front end leads me to speculate further. Wish I could have taken pic of it, but any ideas about what this may mean. Looks to me like Ford is already hard at work changing present Taurus and maybe going to even more powerful engine. Or maybe Ford is just trying to completely camouflage everything they are doing as these vehicles are tested in public. However, I do doubt if present Taurus will be in its present form for 3 years at the outside.That is interesting. When you say dual exhaust I assume you mean one pipe on each side as opposed to the current 'dual exhaust' with two on one side. I hate that look, I prefer the more symmetrical 1 (or 2) pipes on each side. Granted, the Taurus is not a sports car, but why not make it look better w/ a true dual exhaust?
SOLD OUT in a month
in Competing Products
Posted
It is ugly, but still impressive that it would sell out that quickly