Watchdevil Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Sounds like a repeat of the late 70s early 1980's to me... Back then Ford had a confusing array of same sized midsized sedans all competing for the same buyers. There was the LTD II, Fairmont and Granada. By 1984 the Fairmont and Granada was whittled down to the LTD, only to be replaced in 1986 with the Ford Taurus. The Ford lineup was finally focused on clearly defined single models which included the subcompact Escort, The Mustang, a Tempo, a Taurus and a Thunderbird... Then came the debut of the Explorer while Ford expanded on the Ranger and F150 truck lines. ... All those nameplates were big sellers in the 1980's through the early to mid 90's. The only difference now is that they are all SUV's and crossoevers... The Explorer is the stronger name equity that needs an update and it only makes sense to get rid of the Taurus X nameplate. Ford has the Escape, Edge, Flex and will soon have a unibody Explorer. I still feel the Edge, Flex and Explorer are all competing for the same buyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 I still feel the Edge, Flex and Explorer are all competing for the same buyers. Of course they are. But the one-size-fits-all model is no longer viable. If they don't like the ONE offering that Ford is trying to force them into, they'll probably end up in one of the many choices Toyota has right down the street that fits their needs more precisely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 (edited) Ford has so many vehicle in this segment but a successful 7-seater entry has been allusive. I'm not counting on the Flex being the next bing thing people hope it is and the Explorer concept is leaving me doubtful that they are handling this correctly. All my hopes are riding on the next Explorer as Ford's final bread & butter solution for a segment dominated by GM. Edited February 21, 2008 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Ford has so many vehicle in this segment but a successful 7-seater entry has been allusive. I'm not counting on the Flex being the next bing thing people hope it is and the Explorer concept is leaving me doubtful that they are handling this correctly. All my hopes are riding on the next Explorer as Ford's final bread & butter solution for a segment dominated by GM. Dominated by GM? It's not like Ford is a non-existent player in the 7-seater segment. Between the Explorer and Taurus X, they are selling well north of 10,000 7-seat midsizers a month. While some here might consider that a failure since it doesn't sell in F-series-like numbers, most automakers would still kill for that type of volume from ANY of their products. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Of course they are. But the one-size-fits-all model is no longer viable. If they don't like the ONE offering that Ford is trying to force them into, they'll probably end up in one of the many choices Toyota has right down the street that fits their needs more precisely. So that they can be confused with the RAV4, Highlander, and 4Runner? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 So that they can be confused with the RAV4, Highlander, and 4Runner? I think confused is the wrong word. Point is, if Ford only offered ONE midsize CUV/SUV, a LOT more people would be getting behind the wheels of RAV4's, Highlanders, and 4Runners, confused or not. With all of Ford's midsizers sharing platforms now (except the Explorer) anyway, the development costs are significantly lower than they would have been 10-15 years ago when you NEEDED huge volumes to make a profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordFanForEver Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 I still feel the Edge, Flex and Explorer are all competing for the same buyers. Its more like Ford dealers competing with other Ford dealers and LM competing with other LM dealers. But i will agree that Edge, Flex, Explorer and TX are all competing for the same buyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordFanForEver Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 (edited) Double Post Edited March 19, 2008 by FordFanForEver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintlaz1 Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 The Freestyle/Taurus X are crap. They are not appealing, I sure hope they stop making it by 2010. There is no need for it, why would you buy over an Edge or Flex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveTaurus Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 (edited) The Freestyle and Taurus X are "NOT" crap. I own a Freestyle, I can speak for it. I couldn't buy an Edge, because I need 7 passengers. Flex looks good, but in a boxy way. The Freestyle has (kind of) the best fuel ecomony in the midsize class crossover, matching the Highlander but larger than the highlander. And all 7 seats are extra spacious and comfortable. Very smooth acceleration and quiet. On the list of best crash protection vehicles. It got Volvo chassis and frame design; Volvo AWD and suspension components. The good features list go on and on and on.......... One thing the best of all, save a lot of money compare buying any other crossovers!! I look at my Freestyle as a hybrid; SUV space, style utility with "large" midsize sedan fuel efficiency. Possible over 32 mpg on highway (depends). Edited March 21, 2008 by LoveTaurus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 The Freestyle/Taurus X are crap. They are not appealing, I sure hope they stop making it by 2010. There is no need for it, why would you buy over an Edge or Flex. Because the Edge seats 5 and not everyone is after a Nissan Juvenile styling. Because the Flex is a big ugly expensive box too close to the Honda or Scion boxes and may go the way of PT Cruiser and HHR. Maybe. We shale see where the Flex is after 5 years of sales. I am certainly not convinced that it will sell anything like the Edge is years after its introduction. Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geauxtigers Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 The Freestyle/Taurus X are crap. They are not appealing, I sure hope they stop making it by 2010. There is no need for it, why would you buy over an Edge or Flex. I just bought a Taurus X last month for my wife and she loves it. If you get the second row bucket seats w/o console, it fits a perfect niche of mini-van style seating without the mini-van looks. Third row seating was an absolute must for us as well as the ability to freely move between the second and third rows. Sure there are other third row vehicles out there, but most require folding the second row seat(s) for access. If you add a couple of baby seats you also lose the ability to fold down those seats, making it nearly impossible for an adult to access the third row. I like the fact it has a fairly peppy engine and the safety stats are impressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintlaz1 Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I just bought a Taurus X last month for my wife and she loves it. If you get the second row bucket seats w/o console, it fits a perfect niche of mini-van style seating without the mini-van looks. Third row seating was an absolute must for us as well as the ability to freely move between the second and third rows. Sure there are other third row vehicles out there, but most require folding the second row seat(s) for access. If you add a couple of baby seats you also lose the ability to fold down those seats, making it nearly impossible for an adult to access the third row. I like the fact it has a fairly peppy engine and the safety stats are impressive. the car's styling is horrible, there is no need for it in the market have you seen its sales?t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geauxtigers Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 the car's styling is horrible, there is no need for it in the market have you seen its sales?t That's your opinion and quite possibly the more common one however I do like the styling. Back to my point. Even if I didn't like the styling, there aren't a lot of options outside of the mini-van world for 3rd row seating where you can access the 3rd row without folding a 2nd row seat. If you add a baby seat then you pretty much take away the ability to fold down that seat. The Taurus X gave us just that and I don't have to have a mini-van. Think of it as mini-van interior but crossover exterior. In that regard it's a win-win. We have the 2nd row bucket seats without a console. You can freely move between the 2nd and 3rd rows without folding a seat enabling easy access for my wife to multiple baby seats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintlaz1 Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 That's your opinion and quite possibly the more common one however I do like the styling. Back to my point. Even if I didn't like the styling, there aren't a lot of options outside of the mini-van world for 3rd row seating where you can access the 3rd row without folding a 2nd row seat. If you add a baby seat then you pretty much take away the ability to fold down that seat. The Taurus X gave us just that and I don't have to have a mini-van. Think of it as mini-van interior but crossover exterior. In that regard it's a win-win. We have the 2nd row bucket seats without a console. You can freely move between the 2nd and 3rd rows without folding a seat enabling easy access for my wife to multiple baby seats. I will give you that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordFanForEver Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 (edited) I will give you that. I think the TX is a nice looking Station Wagon ( i refuse to call it a CUV ) Edited March 24, 2008 by FordFanForEver 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.