Ford rolls out new Escape & Marineer

[pcsario]

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic...UTO01/701260454

 

"Customers want products with striking designs, better fuel efficiency and even better value," Alan Mulally, president and CEO, Ford Motor Company, told employees at the plant's launch celebration.

 

Well, at least they got one of the three goals right.

[waymondospiff]

What a poorly written article. Could the author jump between topics any more?

 

Anyway, this struck me:

On Friday, Ford also said the new Mariner and Escape would have three-year resale values 10 to 11 points higher than previous models.

Lower price/less rebates will help, yes, but what else would raise the resale of the "new" E/M/Ts? The all-new drivetrain? Oh wait. How about the all-new exterior...oh, never mind. It has to be the class leading interior, right? Ahem. The technological tour-de-force that improved performance and fuel economy? Hmmm...probably not that either.

 

Well, what does that leave us with? The same happy but flawed little runabout from early 2000.

 

Sure the Escape is nice, but nearly every other small SUV had simply walked away from it in design & execution.

 

Scott

[RichardJensen]

Actually lowering the price was the smartest thing they could do.

 

It no longer is tasked with being Ford's ONLY CUV between $20k and $30k, as the Edge is now available.

 

And the interior is actually a huge improvement over the existing model. Drum brake regression aside (previous Escape had std. drums on the rear wheels, don't forget), the additional safety equipment, refreshed exterior, lower price, and better interior puts the Escape where it should be.

[sranger]

Actually lowering the price was the smartest thing they could do.

 

It no longer is tasked with being Ford's ONLY CUV between $20k and $30k, as the Edge is now available.

 

And the interior is actually a huge improvement over the existing model. Drum brake regression aside (previous Escape had std. drums on the rear wheels, don't forget), the additional safety equipment, refreshed exterior, lower price, and better interior puts the Escape where it should be.

 

 

Yep, I have a 2005 Mariner with rear drums and it can stop about 15 ft shorter than the "new" 2008.... One has to wonder why....?

 

The New Mariner/Escape will have to be bargan basment ( can you say blue light special ) just to keep sales flat...

Edited January 27, 2007 by sranger

[Hugh]

The more I look at this Escape, I have to remind myself that this is a holdover much like the 08 Focus. It is due for replacement (possibly EUCD) if the rumprs are correct.

 

So the Focus goes to C2 and the Escape (whatever name they choose) will be replaced 2010 or so. The interior looks great and the exterior works better then the 08 Focus (as holdovers go) IMO.

 

Have more standard safety equipment (Yes, yes, yes I know, drums on the limited.) and a LOWER price. You got to market this guy if you want to sell it. I don't know how they'll do that compared to the competition in this class.

Edited January 27, 2007 by Hugh

[RichardJensen]

The New Mariner/Escape will have to be bargan basment ( can you say blue light special ) just to keep sales flat...

It just means the incentive and resale (calculated off MSRP) values change. ATPs might move up, but they're unlikely to move down.

[DCK]

puts the Escape where it should be.

 

And what is that? Completely uncompetative compared to its competition?

 

I mean really?

 

The people in charge of this disgrace should be shot.

[Michael Reynolds]

Speaking of drum brakes there was a small snippet in MT about the useage of them on some of the new Silverados. I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

I'm glad to see a price cut, because quite frankly it was needed.....a bit more would have been nice but I guess one has to start somewhere.

[BORG]

I think the new Escape and Mariner are updated to maintain loyalty rather than fetch new marketshare. The Escape has been a strong selling product up until recently so there has to be a large audience out there that needs convincing to stick with Ford. They did a good job with the update but much of Ford's leadership in this segment has defaulted to the Edge. The Escape also needs to increase its value quotient since it's competition is much more modern and better equipped.

[sranger]

It just means the incentive and resale (calculated off MSRP) values change. ATPs might move up, but they're unlikely to move down.

 

I guessing about 3-5K off he already lowere MSRP to move them in and large numbers... Ford will probable lose about 2K per car...

[RichardJensen]

Yeah. Because that's what Ford's all about these days. Selling tons and tons of cars at little to no unit profit.

 

Heck, that's why they're still building the Taurus.

 

Oh.

 

wait.....

[Extreme4x4]

Come on Richard, you have to remember that many of the posters here cannot even fathom that Ford may be changing the way they do business.

 

They are continual "glass is half empty" types. Ford has done things a certain way in the past, and they just do not see any possibility that it could change................... ever...................... no matter who is running the show. Even with anecdotal evidence of change (the pricing, risidual, lack of incentives on new products). They immediately look past that, and use phrases of "but................. but................... but................. etc."

 

I think they will be surprised. (however, they won't admit it for another 10-15 years)

[sranger]

Come on Richard, you have to remember that many of the posters here cannot even fathom that Ford may be changing the way they do business.

 

They are continual "glass is half empty" types. Ford has done things a certain way in the past, and they just do not see any possibility that it could change................... ever...................... no matter who is running the show. Even with anecdotal evidence of change (the pricing, risidual, lack of incentives on new products). They immediately look past that, and use phrases of "but................. but................... but................. etc."

 

I think they will be surprised. (however, they won't admit it for another 10-15 years)

 

Look, I am simply basing my opinion on personal experience.

 

The 2005-2007 Escape/Mariner models typically were sold, at least according to Ford, with a hefty rebate on the hood. When I bought my 2005 Mariner, its MSRP was $25,910.00. I paid $19,000 + Tax Tag and title or $20,186.00. There is NO WAY I would have bought it without that heavy discount. If the dealer told me I would have to pay near MSRP, I would have laughed and went with another brand with higher resale value, more performance and quieter ride. I really do not like the Mariner all that much because it is so loud at highway speeds. I can live with it, for now, because I got it so cheap.

 

Now I have to wonder why you two guys think that people will suddenly be willing to pay more simply because they changed the sheet metal a little, made the braking far worse and lower the MSRP a little?

 

I know the general public can be quite uneducated at times, but I think (hope) they are smarter than that. This really comes to light when you realize that the competition has significantly improving their offerings in performance and comfort.

[2005Explorer]

What is the whole obession with needing 4 wheel disks on a non-performance vehicle? You do realize that around 80% of braking effort comes from the front disks anyhow. Yes, 4 wheel disks are superior, however when it comes down to real world performance I don't see where a vehicle with rear drums is going to be dangerous.

 

My father just got a new 2007 Fusion SE V6 and the first thing I noticed is that he did not get ABS on it. I told him that he should have gotten ABS, he said his last car had it and he HATED it. Of course, he just turned 70 years old and I would assume he is more comfortable without it. No matter how hard he tried to break the old brake pumping habit he couldn't and found it harder to control in wet conditions.

Edited January 27, 2007 by 2005Explorer

[sranger]

What is the whole obession with needing 4 wheel disks on a non-performance vehicle? You do realize that around 80% of braking effort comes from the front disks anyhow. Yes, 4 wheel disks are superior, however when it comes down to real world performance I don't see where a vehicle with rear drums is going to be dangerous.

 

First of all I do not believe I ever said the rear drums were a problem. My 2005 mariner has rear drums and can still do a 60-0 stop in around 130ft. So, I have to wonder what else FORD did to the 2008 Escape/Mariner to cause it to add another 20ft to the stopping distance? Is it heaver? Softer Front Shocks? Weaker front calipers?

 

Somthing had to change...

 

However, I doubt that rear drums could ever be an improvement over rear disc...

[2005Explorer]

However, I doubt that rear drums could ever be an improvement over rear disc...

 

I was not trying to argue that rear drums were an improvement, I was just trying to state that fact that rear brakes have very little effect over stopping distance. I agree, Ford must have done something to the rest of the vehicle or to the front brake system, like reduce rotor size or venting, etc, to get those results. Also, your right, suspension re-tuning might also be a problem. I am not exactly sure what happened there.

[bystander]

And what is that? Completely uncompetative compared to its competition?

 

I mean really?

 

The people in charge of this disgrace should be shot.

 

Oh, Don't be so harsh. The '08 Escape may still provide some healthy competition to those low cost Korean SUV's.

[Hugh]

I was not trying to argue that rear drums were an improvement, I was just trying to state that fact that rear brakes have very little effect over stopping distance. I agree, Ford must have done something to the rest of the vehicle or to the front brake system, like reduce rotor size or venting, etc, to get those results. Also, your right, suspension re-tuning might also be a problem. I am not exactly sure what happened there.

This may not mean too much; the Escape Edmunds tested was a pre-production model (as was the first Fusion C&D tested and their Edge and MKX as well).

 

I want to see testing on a production (one everyone else can but) to get more concrete numbers.

[DCK]

Come on Richard, you have to remember that many of the posters here cannot even fathom that Ford may be changing the way they do business.

 

They are continual "glass is half empty" types. Ford has done things a certain way in the past, and they just do not see any possibility that it could change................... ever...................... no matter who is running the show. Even with anecdotal evidence of change (the pricing, risidual, lack of incentives on new products). They immediately look past that, and use phrases of "but................. but................... but................. etc."

 

I think they will be surprised. (however, they won't admit it for another 10-15 years)

You're right we should just totally ignore the fact that the product is completely uncompetitive in its class and focus on that even though it will still have the worst residual value in its class(well you can add in Hyundai and show how much of a joke Ford has become) but not as bad as before, or we can ignore the fact that it is totally uncompetitive to see that Ford priced their completely uncompetitive product to undercut the competition.................we'll a shitty product should undercut its competition. It is called being real, I mean first of all focusing on the bad is what make the right changes happen the next time, NOT DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND BEING OKAY WITH WHAT IS NOTHING MORE THAN DECENT.

 

Then you want to bring up the fact that people like me who bash Ford's new escape/mariner launch(I do because they are very uncompetitive and are nothing but a joke) are simply ignoring the new management change and realizing that things are/have changed at Ford and it will take time to hit the showroom. No I am not, I know things changed and better products will show up in the market place under the management that actually has a sense in running a business and not the crap that came out under Billy Jr. But that doesn't take away the right to totally bash half assed, completely uncompetitive products Ford will continue to launch that came to reality under people who lack any clue I.E. Bill Ford Jr.

 

ESPECIALLY if people like Richard still love to defend how Bill was such a good CEO. People want to defend Bill Ford and you don't complain then don't get your panties in a bunch when I want to totally trash another shitty product coming out of Ford that was created under Bill's Leadership. I am simply going to keep pointing out how much of a total failure he was at running FMC, and will continue to do so as long as Richard and the other people with the blinders on continue to fool themselves into thinking Bill Ford was a good CEO, the CEO that ran Ford into near Bankruptcy with Sales at record lows, and record loses on the financial side. Then People want to bring up "ooh but ford has changed just wait" SO WHAT?????? People like Richard want to have it both ways, they praise the failure of Bill ford and then get upset when people bash the current uncompetitive products and tell us to "wait things are changing" Just another example of Bandwagon fans with no minds. Flip Flopping on their opinion when ever Ford takes another course, my opinion has never flip flopped on Ford and I have always thought Bill was a complete failure and demanded he step down before he stepped down and am happy with Mullaly, but it doesn't change that it is what it is.

[Kokomo M/W]

You're right we should just totally ignore the fact that the product is completely uncompetitive in its class and focus on that even though it will still have the worst residual value in its class(well you can add in Hyundai and show how much of a joke Ford has become) but not as bad as before, or we can ignore the fact that it is totally uncompetitive to see that Ford priced their completely uncompetitive product to undercut the competition.................we'll a shitty product should undercut its competition. It is called being real, I mean first of all focusing on the bad is what make the right changes happen the next time, NOT DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND BEING OKAY WITH WHAT IS NOTHING MORE THAN DECENT.

 

Then you want to bring up the fact that people like me who bash Ford's new escape/mariner launch(I do because they are very uncompetitive and are nothing but a joke) are simply ignoring the new management change and realizing that things are/have changed at Ford and it will take time to hit the showroom. No I am not, I know things changed and better products will show up in the market place under the management that actually has a sense in running a business and not the crap that came out under Billy Jr. But that doesn't take away the right to totally bash half assed, completely uncompetitive products Ford will continue to launch that came to reality under people who lack any clue I.E. Bill Ford Jr.

 

ESPECIALLY if people like Richard still love to defend how Bill was such a good CEO. People want to defend Bill Ford and you don't complain then don't get your panties in a bunch when I want to totally trash another shitty product coming out of Ford that was created under Bill's Leadership. I am simply going to keep pointing out how much of a total failure he was at running FMC, and will continue to do so as long as Richard and the other people with the blinders on continue to fool themselves into thinking Bill Ford was a good CEO, the CEO that ran Ford into near Bankruptcy with Sales at record lows, and record loses on the financial side. Then People want to bring up "ooh but ford has changed just wait" SO WHAT?????? People like Richard want to have it both ways, they praise the failure of Bill ford and then get upset when people bash the current uncompetitive products and tell us to "wait things are changing" Just another example of Bandwagon fans with no minds. Flip Flopping on their opinion when ever Ford takes another course, my opinion has never flip flopped on Ford and I have always thought Bill was a complete failure and demanded he step down before he stepped down and am happy with Mullaly, but it doesn't change that it is what it is.

Bill Ford=Clueless , I have to agree it was long overdue

[WC-MAN]

2007 Honda CRV EX, a completely redesigned vehicle with all the latest safety and tech features $24050.

 

2007 Ford Escape XLT, same ol same ol, Auto, $22945

 

Not many people are going to think $1105 is worth THAT much.

 

I love the Mercury Mariner commercial that is running now talking about how the Mariner is winning Honda and Toyota owners. Okay, if yo believe that, I have some Barbary Apes who are excellent rocket scientists I'll sell you.

[grbeck]

2007 Honda CRV EX, a completely redesigned vehicle with all the latest safety and tech features $24050.

 

2007 Ford Escape XLT, same ol same ol, Auto, $22945

 

Not many people are going to think $1105 is worth THAT much.

 

Very true...what people seem to forget is that a $1,105 price differential isn't all that much when spread out over 36-48 months. It is not that much more per month. It would be different if customers waited until they have the cash to buy a vehicle outright, but that rarely happens anymore, especially in this price class.

 

I remember seeing an old television ad for the 1960 Ford Falcon. During the ad, the announcer boldly declares that the Falcon is "$72 DOLLARS LESS THAN IT'S REAR-ENGINED COMPETITOR" (the Chevrolet Corvair). Superimposed over a shiny two-door Falcon are the words "$72 DOLLARS LESS."

 

Now, I'm sure that $72 was a fair chunk of change in 1960 (I don't know what the inflation-adjusted figure is). And I'll bet that more people paid cash for a new vehicle in 1960 than they do today. But that type of mentality is outdated for the way the majority of cars are sold today.

 

My wife and I would be perfect Escape or CR-V customers. We make a decent income, but we don't pay cash for our vehicles (like most buyers). The bottom line is that we can afford that $1,105 price differential if we believe that the CR-V is a better vehicle than an Escape.

Edited January 28, 2007 by grbeck

[sranger]

My wife and I would be perfect Escape or CR-V customers. We make a decent income, but we don't pay cash for our vehicles (like most buyers). The bottom line is that we can afford that $1,105 price differential if we believe that the CR-V is a better vehicle than an Escape.

 

 

Good point. I would also add that if you can afford to pay cash, you would easly spend what ever it takes to get what you really want... ( I.e. the best in class )

 

This is my whole point. To sell the Escape/Mariner, you have to be 3-5K UNDER the selling price of the much more up to date Rav4, CR-V, Santa Fe, Outlander, CX-7, etc...

 

Ford and all other manufactures need to understand that more an more people read these types of reviews. The internet has made comparing cars extreamly easy and quick. My Mother, who hates computers, will go to Edmunds when she is thinking about a new car and read all of the reviews. Fair or not, when your product finnishes dead last in these head to head tests, your product loses a larger number of potential customers. But more importiantly, you lose customers who are willing to pay more to get more and what you are left with are the bargan hunters. That is not exactly good for the bottom line...