Edge gets comparo'd at MT...

[Edstock]

"The only person these abominations (Edge, Taurus X) appeal to are Ford loyalist(sic)."

 

Abominations? In your twisted, myopic vision, definitely.

 

Normal people seem to find the Edge and MK X quite acceptable, as well as the Taurus X. Examples of automotive abomination that most would agree with are Yugos and Trabants. Even a dull, awkward turd like the new Sebring is not an abomination.

 

Thanks for playing

 

[Deanh]

gonna go off on a little tangential tirade here....does anyone remember a positive Ford reveiw in any magazine of late? is it just me or have they all become Japanese and import worshippers? They seem to LOVE every BMW that comes down the shute...I've driven the Bimmer "crossover????" and the Edge actually compares well. As for the Murano and Highlander.....Murano is ok, Highlander is a flimsy piece of garbage, go ahead slam the door...but lightness equates to better fuel economy, but guess what, I'm guessing some of the Edges pork is due to thicker gauge metal and probably better protection in an accident. Quick question...out of all the vehicles in the so called test...which one would you replace the Dummies with la familia in? I am sensing a true biased with so called writing experts lately, if it;s not imported or Japanese they seem to get trashed partly due to non world clas performance stats, my suggestion is to drive them all ones self...unfortunately reveiws tend to narrow and influence decisions and the so called Experts are way too concerned about extreme numbers like 0-60, skidpad and braking.Wake-up people these are NOT everyday numbers based on day to day driving.. and before someone poo-poos that statement Ford could go the way of BMW and have exceptionally soft pads and discs to lower braking #'s...but then what would people say about constatly dirty front rims and brake jobs that replace the discs and pads together...can we say $$$$$$ plus? And as for the fuel economy...on what octane? Some of these cars get a little better mileage on MORE SPENDY Gas! Vehicles are a series of trade offs, and unlike some of Fords products I am actually semi impressed with the Edge effort....areas for improvement for sure, but extremely competant compared with the scribes darlings.

[kyle]

FWIW, the small rants that the editors at MT had are easily addressed or can be easily addressed without a lot of expense.

 

yah you are right....let's see they did not like the weight, rear storage capability, interior materials, brakes and transmission ratios-not to mention lack of manual capability

 

1. weight and rear seat can be easily fixed by knocking out the back glass! not expensive and you don't have to buy the $1400 sunroof.

 

2. interior materials-just take it over to the vinyl shop-those guys are dying for business and have them spray it on the interior doors and instrument panel.

 

3. brakes-go to pep boys-cheap right?

 

4. transmission ratio-send off to india and let them reprogram the damn thing.

 

michael you are right they are all cheap fixes-if you designed them in-not now-especially the weight-you just don't knock off 200lbs. ford's recent vehicles have definitely been on the heavy side and it hurts a variety of performance items.

[RichardJensen]

They did it with the explorer in 1995, it went above and beyond any other mid sized SUV when it was introduced.

The Explorer was not launched in 1995.

 

And thus you undercut whatever credibility you hoped to achieve.

 

Not to mention that the Explorer is generally acknowledged to have pioneered the current concept of the SUV as a 4-door truck-based wagon with passenger car amenities.

[kyle]

As for the 3 seat thing, if you want one of those, get a Taurus X for crying out loud..The Edge is more or less a sporty SUV vs those two

 

when can you get one of those taurus x you keep going on about? hummmm.....

 

yah I know if we are not with you we are against you rant....heh I like the edge-think it will do fine-disappointed in a few things-but no way in hell would i even consider buying a taurus x. A cx-9-yah-but I think the hyundai is a hell of a product for the money.

 

this is the problem when ford could launch a vehicle in the old days and it would sell like crazy because you did not have the competition that you have now. we get to benefit by getting a better product.

[ZanatWork]

They Taurus X? Who would buy that over a new Highlander?

 

 

I would. The power issue was the only real gripe I had with the Freestyle. After driving a few, I'd own one in a heartbeat (if I could swing another car payment right now).

[kyle]

...unfortunately reveiws tend to narrow and influence decisions and the so called Experts are way too concerned about extreme numbers like 0-60, skidpad and braking.Wake-up people these are NOT everyday numbers based on day to day driving.. .

 

yah braking-who gives a damn right? do you know how much airbags cost today? and how about a good attorney?

 

they actually liked the 0-60 times so what is the point there? don't think that has much to do with skidpad numbers but won't argue with you. just wish some of you would take off your blue shaded sunglasses that you got from ford 10 years ago and maybe think they are capable of doing a better job.

 

because if that is the best they can do on ford's most expensive non-truck-non high performance car-then I guess I am just a little disappointed.

[RichardJensen]

ford's recent vehicles have definitely been on the heavy side and it hurts a variety of performance items.

Before you say that again, compare the weight of the Fusion/Milan/MKZ with the Camry, Accord, and ES350.

 

Then compare the weight of the Freestyle with the Lambdas (and compare the overall width, height, and length of same).

 

Then compare the weight of the Five Hundred/Montego with the Chrysler 300.

 

Then compare the weight of the Mustang GT to the Nissan 350Z

 

Ford's vehicles have not as a general rule been significantly heavier than the competition.

 

Furthermore, those on the board who believe that everything can be achieved without compromises should join me in reality for an afternoon or two.

Edited February 27, 2007 by RichardJensen

[Michael Reynolds]

yah you are right....let's see they did not like the weight, rear storage capability, interior materials, brakes and transmission ratios-not to mention lack of manual capability

 

1. weight and rear seat can be easily fixed by knocking out the back glass! not expensive and you don't have to buy the $1400 sunroof.

 

2. interior materials-just take it over to the vinyl shop-those guys are dying for business and have them spray it on the interior doors and instrument panel.

 

3. brakes-go to pep boys-cheap right?

 

4. transmission ratio-send off to india and let them reprogram the damn thing.

 

michael you are right they are all cheap fixes-if you designed them in-not now-especially the weight-you just don't knock off 200lbs. ford's recent vehicles have definitely been on the heavy side and it hurts a variety of performance items.

 

LOL....

 

I'm all for a weight loss, but I don't expect much especially when the Edge is best in class from a crash prospective.

 

Ford Loyalist, ha that couldn't be further from the truth.

Edited February 27, 2007 by Michael Reynolds

[wescoent]

I would. The power issue was the only real gripe I had with the Freestyle. After driving a few, I'd own one in a heartbeat (if I could swing another car payment right now).

 

Hands down agreed here as well. This was flat-out the WRONG group of vehicles to compare. Apples and oranges.

 

A proper comparison test would look like this:

 

-Ford Edge

-Nissan Murano

-Mazda CX-7

-Acura RDX

 

All 2-row car-based crossovers between $28,000 and $32,000 aimed more for sport and style rather than utility.

 

On the other hand, another comparison would look like this:

 

-Ford Taurus X

-Honda Pilot

-Toyota Highlander

-Hyundai Santa Fe

-GMC Acadia

-Saturn Outlook

-Mazda CX-9

 

All THREE row crossovers aimed more at families who need the room and extra seats. I believe with the new 3.5L V6, the Taurus X will compare VERY favorably in this group.

[Deanh]

yah braking-who gives a damn right? do you know how much airbags cost today? and how about a good attorney?

 

they actually liked the 0-60 times so what is the point there? don't think that has much to do with skidpad numbers but won't argue with you. just wish some of you would take off your blue shaded sunglasses that you got from ford 10 years ago and maybe think they are capable of doing a better job.

 

because if that is the best they can do on ford's most expensive non-truck-non high performance car-then I guess I am just a little disappointed.

hey, yes it could be improved, maybe a little to do with being a little porky, but pace off 15 feet, it is a car and a bit, and in day to day irrelevent, those are extreme numbers, and I guarantee you couldn'y mimic them in the same cars and said numbers are pretty much never even approached in real day to day driving, if they are then you are driving like a blimmin idiot and not leaving enough space between you and the car in front ...probably because you are on a cell phone...I'm kidding, but seriously cell phones put drivers in a lot more danger than 15 feet of braking capability..at the hands of a professional driver no less...

[Bagrah01]

Here we go.....

 

Walk into a Chevy showroom and what do you have:

Uplander (soon to be ax'd), Trailblazer (soon to be ax'd), Equinox, Tahoe and Suburban

Ford's offerings:

Escape, Explorer, Expedition, Expedition EL, Taurus X, Edge and Fairlane (upcoming)

 

So you mean to tell me out of all that product NONE of it can be considered as an alternative to the Highlander and/or GM Triplets?

 

Any vehicle and be cross shopped with any other vehicle in its price range. Furthermore, I was replying to a previous statment that said the Edge shouldn't be compared to the Highlander or Pilot. If your looking for a CUV thats was my basis for that statement. Who would spend their hard earned money on a subpar product, when you can get the benchmark for the same price? Only a Ford loyalist. At one time I was the biggest Ford fan but I saw through the bull$#*%.

 

Yeah, you give me a break! Processes undertaken to build a 150K exotic car for a very short run, can not be applied to a mass market'd people mover.

 

Sorry, but the process should be similar if not the same. How do you know you have created the benchmark until to you compare it to its competition. Why not do it in the engineering phase. Seems to work for the F-150. When nissan created the previous model Altima, in 2002, did they say lets out do just the Mitsubishi Gallant, No. They created the new bench mark, 3.5 L V6 with 250hp and 0-60 under 6 seconds. Its funny I think thats the car that walked Nissan away from bankrupcy. But what do I know I just see the big picture.

[RichardJensen]

Wonder what the 30mph to 0 figures are.

 

Also: The Edge has an integrated ladder frame (a la the LR3 and RR): I'm not entirely sure why it has this, but I would expect that this accounts for a substantial part of the weight differential. Seeing that the Mazda6 was probably never designed for this kind of use, in order to build this Edge, certain compromises on weight probably had to be made.

 

As for the braking, I don't know what's up with that.

[bec5150]

Now, what was BEC saying about the Edge.

I have sat quietly and let the future I predicted take place...

[Bagrah01]

Here we go.....

 

Walk into a Chevy showroom and what do you have:

Uplander (soon to be ax'd), Trailblazer (soon to be ax'd), Equinox, Tahoe and Suburban

Ford's offerings:

Escape, Explorer, Expedition, Expedition EL, Taurus X, Edge and Fairlane (upcoming)

 

So you mean to tell me out of all that product NONE of it can be considered as an alternative to the Highlander and/or GM Triplets?

 

Any vehicle and be cross shopped with any other vehicle in its price range. Furthermore, I was replying to a previous statment that said the Edge shouldn't be compared to the Highlander or Pilot. If your looking for a CUV thats was my basis for that statement. Who would spend their hard earned money on a subpar product, when you can get the benchmark for the same price? Only a Ford loyalist. At one time I was the biggest Ford fan but I saw through the bull$#*%.

 

Yeah, you give me a break! Processes undertaken to build a 150K exotic car for a very short run, can not be applied to a mass market'd people mover.

 

Sorry, but the process should be similar if not the same. How do you know you have created the benchmark until to you compare it to its competition. Why not do it in the engineering phase. Seems to work for the F-150. When nissan created the previous model Altima, in 2002, did they say lets out do just the Mitsubishi Gallant, No. They created the new bench mark, 3.5 L V6 with 250hp and 0-60 under 6 seconds. Its funny I think thats the car that walked Nissan away from bankrupcy. But what do I know I just see the big picture.

[Bagrah01]

The Explorer was not launched in 1995.

 

And thus you undercut whatever credibility you hoped to achieve.

 

Not to mention that the Explorer is generally acknowledged to have pioneered the current concept of the SUV as a 4-door truck-based wagon with passenger car amenities.

 

No you moron the exlorer was launched in 1990, I owned three 1990, 1993, 1994. At one my mother, sister, and myself each drove one. The first new model was launched in 1995. Yes the explorer set the curve in 1990 but it re-defined it 1995, but you wouldn't know that would, you being true blue and all. So who's crediablity is undercut.

[RichardJensen]

I have sat quietly and let the future I predicted take place...

Would that be the 'future' where supplies are tight and the production mix was too heavily weighted toward the cheap models?

 

It's funny how ever since the article stating that Ford had too many SEs showed up, people have stopped predicting a failure based on price, and have started predicting failure based on magazine comparos.

[RichardJensen]

The first new model was launched in 1995.

Yeah. That was not a 'new' model, it was just a serious update of the existing model. Less was changed for '96 MY than for the '06 MY.

 

One of the updates involved significantly weakening the roof structure to either save cost or weight. Ford hit new lows with the '96 Explorer. A model that was significantly LESS safe than the model it replaced.

[pcsario]

Would that be the 'future' where supplies are tight and the production mix was too heavily weighted toward the cheap models?

 

It's funny how ever since the article stating that Ford had too many SEs showed up, people have stopped predicting a failure based on price, and have started predicting failure based on magazine comparos.

That doesn't prove anything. Similar things were being said about the 500 at launch, and look how that one ended.

 

The Edge losing a comparo is far more important. What makes you think if a magazine came to that conclusion, the average customer won't get to a similar result with their own comparison?

 

People won't cross shop the Edge and the Santa Fe? Riiight...

Edited February 27, 2007 by pcsario

[ANTAUS]

I'm not sure why some people age getting a bit bent out of place on a comparo, when it's being used as the gospel by the same people who usually discredit the rags.

 

Case being, you can use any piece of information to try and spin the story to how you wish to interpret it. It's just like religion...it is interpreted by just about anyone, to pretty much substantiate whatever point someone is trying to make.

 

And just like the typical Toyota driver and/or political party pvoter) no matter how much you show their vehicle is no longer as reliable as it once was, and your showing them the data, they just don't believe it.... their faith is just too strong for them to listen.

 

The focus is, is the Edge selling.....

[RichardJensen]

That doesn't prove anything. Similar things were being said about the 500 at launch, and look how that ended.

Actually, no such 'similar things' were being said about the Five Hundred at launch, and at the end of its first full year on the market it was within Ford's sales target.

 

BTW, I love how you say the Edge needs to be a 'hit', but never put any kind of meaning into that word.

 

You may as well be saying, "The Edge needs to be supercalifragilisticexpialidocious."

Edited February 27, 2007 by RichardJensen

[pcsario]

Ford stated similar things for the 500 at launch, stating higher demand for the most expensive variants Vs. the base 500's. I recall you and others also spinning that into "WOW THE NEW FORD IS SELLING GREAT!!!" when no one --not even Ford-- is/was saying that.

 

Everyone knows what a hit is. The Mustang was a hit. The Explorer used to be a hit. The Taurus was a hit.

 

Your definition of "success" is laughable and encourages mediocrity.

 

Every flop in history might as well be called a success based on your monthly excuses.

Edited February 28, 2007 by pcsario

[RichardJensen]

Similar articles were published at the 500's launch stating higher demand for the loaded models Vs. the base 500's. I recall you and others also spinning that into "WOW THE NEW FORD IS SELLING GREAT!!!"

 

A hit is a hit. The Mustang was a hit. The Explorer used to be a hit. The Taurus was a hit.

 

Your definition of "success" is laughable and encourages mediocrity.

 

Every flop in history might as well be called a success based on your excuses.

Welcome to revisionism 101:

 

The only two articles discussing product mix at the time of the D3 launch concerned early demand for the Freestyle vs. the Five Hundred, and AWD vs. FWD. At one time Ford was backlogged on AWD orders, and they did adjust volume for the Five Hundred downward and the Freestyle upward early on in production. You can go read the Auto News archives for confirmation.

 

Oh, and thank you for clarifying your definition of hit. I will have to file this definition of hit along with the proof you have furnished that Ford makes money on $11k Focuses.

Edited February 28, 2007 by RichardJensen

[pcsario]

Do I really need to explain what a hit is?

 

Here, might not be the best definition but it's a quick one.

 

A hit could be the effort from any automaker that's making everyone pay attention.

 

They "hit" the nail on the head. They surpassed everyone else and/or delivered something special that's garnering lots of talk/$$$.

 

A game changer, etc. The fruits/rewards from going beyond the "bububu good enough" mentality.

 

Again, Explorer, Mustang, Taurus, etc. I'm even providing Ford examples to make things easier.

 

Forget it, this is like trying to explain a joke.

 

If you didn't get it in the first place, chances are you either never will, or are just playing mind games.

 

BTW, all the proof you need are FOE financial reports, every car they sell outside the wealthy european countries is sold at a loss according to your logic, because they're also cheaper. Lets recall your side was saying not too long ago (before the Saturn announcement) a car like the Astra would've to cost more than 20k if sold in the US because a calculator told them so. Don't even try to pretend you didn't saw anything like that because I recall you even posted in those threads.

Edited February 28, 2007 by pcsario

[Edstock]

"4. transmission ratio-send off to india and let them reprogram the damn thing."

 

No, reprogramming doesn't work; you have to change the gears.