igor Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...rticleId=121939 Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 Very good review. Didn't see a bad sentence. The Detroit News gushed over them as well: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic...0392/1148/rss25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 Damn the HP figures for the V6's they offer are pretty pathetic...only 175HP out of a 3.3L V6? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 3, 2007 Author Share Posted August 3, 2007 Damn the HP figures for the V6's they offer are pretty pathetic...only 175HP out of a 3.3L V6? yup - it is OHV .... the 4.0l is SOHC ... I think the mileage and refinement will be the achiles heel of these vans. Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 (edited) Stupid Ford giving away another segment. Ford passed on Iaccoca's original idea of a minvan long ago and he took his ideas with him to Chrysler. What a mistake! Iaccoca was right with the Thunderbird and Mustang with the Mustang still with us preserving the original formula that created the iconic legendary existance. Dodge is returning to it's original roots with the minivan as well as preserving the Jeep legacy. Ford lead with the Taurus long ago it it remains to be seen if the higher priced larger new version ofthe Taurus will have an impact or not. I think the original Taurus formula is more aligned with the Fusion than being the Volvo/Passat/Avalon Panther alternative. I suspect upon buyers finding out that the new Taurus is larger and costs more than what they are accustomed to with the Taurus name, they will really be expecting something more like what the Fusion is. Anyway, back to the Caravan I think Chrysler has made the right move to preserve the segment it pioneered. Getting rid of the dustbuster shuttle look will do wonders by focusing on a more space efficient package that is more competitive with import vans in this segment. It looks less like a van and more related to a crossover or SUV enough that it may find acceptance in cross-shopping with Crossovers and SUV's. Ford is now relying on numerous SUV/Crossovers that step away from the original Explorer formula which originated from the sudden interest buyers had with the small Jeep Cherokees of the 1980's. They serve to keep people from thinking about dustbuster shuttle minivans like the Windstar/Freestar were but are also more car-like instead of truck-like as the Explorer is. With Ford, I believe the poliferation of so many overlapping crossover models will be confusing to buyers with the Explorer, Edge, Taurus X and Flex when one unified model with the choice of five or seven passengers will do. If Ford wanted to offer that much variation, then perhaps they could have offered a unique model to Mercury and one to Lincoln. I would have given Mercury the exclusive to the Taurus X, while Lincoln would have gotten the MKX without a Ford Edge clone and have Ford formulated just an Explorer that represented an evolution and transition of the current model into a more car-like interpetation that buyers want while preserving the recognition buyers associate it's nameplate. Let the Expedition be the vehicle people can do heavy duty towing and hauling with. In my book the Flex would never exist. Edited August 3, 2007 by Watchdevil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted August 4, 2007 Share Posted August 4, 2007 The 3.3L / 4AT combo is a complete carryover from the last generation of vans. Its there to provide for a "value" line of the vans that are capable of moving under their own power, but not much else. That 3.3L 6 cylinder is very reliable, get decent torque (which is what their tune on it is all about) and is fairly quiet and behaved at most RPMs. The combination that I am most interested in is the 3.8L/6AT. The 3.8L is another carryover, with power numbers to prove it (just under 200 hp, and north of 230 lbs of torque). It's got the torque to match the competition, and enough cogs to keep itself in its narrow powerband. They've dispensed with their troublesome 4AT for this one and replaced it with the newer 6AT (which is essentially a rebuild and expansion of their existing 4AT with more robust internals and smoother operation). I believe that thst will be a nice overall combination and will manage half way decent mpg numbers. The 4.0L/6AT combo is essentially the same combo from the Pacifica. No one has jumped up and down with its praises, but, no one's complaining too loudly about it either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regfootball Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 i drove a 4.0/6sp pacifica and i really thought the powertrain was very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 So far the reviews seem to be very positive overall. Let's at least hope that one of the Big 2.5 can at least keep that market segment. My only disappointment is the carrry-over 3.3L, yes it'll be the rental/fleet engine of choice, and it's "Value", but this is one of those (typical of Ford) moves which hurts value perception. Other than that, the styling is a bit more cleaned up, and I appreciate the swivel chairs as an innovative feature. I'm interested in knowing what the Manual says if anything, that the chairs must be facing forward when the car is moving. Or how that would play out with crashes. I wouldn't be surprised if a 4.7L V8 version is released in a year or so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 Ford is now relying on numerous SUV/Crossovers that step away from the original Explorer formula which originated from the sudden interest buyers had with the small Jeep Cherokees of the 1980's. They serve to keep people from thinking about dustbuster shuttle minivans like the Windstar/Freestar were but are also more car-like instead of truck-like as the Explorer is. With Ford, I believe the poliferation of so many overlapping crossover models will be confusing to buyers with the Explorer, Edge, Taurus X and Flex when one unified model with the choice of five or seven passengers will do. If Ford wanted to offer that much variation, then perhaps they could have offered a unique model to Mercury and one to Lincoln. I would have given Mercury the exclusive to the Taurus X, while Lincoln would have gotten the MKX without a Ford Edge clone and have Ford formulated just an Explorer that represented an evolution and transition of the current model into a more car-like interpetation that buyers want while preserving the recognition buyers associate it's nameplate. Let the Expedition be the vehicle people can do heavy duty towing and hauling with. In my book the Flex would never exist. The only problem with that thinking is that there is no longer a big market for a single nameplate in this market any more, save a couple examples. The market is just going to get more and more fragmented and I'd rather see Ford offer "57 variates" of different products to appeal to the different demographics, vs trying every one to buy say an Explorer..instead of an Edge, Taurus X or even Flex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.