Minivan

[BORG]

Ford and GM have forsaken the minivan, should they reconsider or move on with CUVs? How is growth in this segment now that fuel economy favors the traditional family hauler?

 

The minivan follows a VERY specific formula that is not satisfied by the Flex or any Lambda product and I'm wondering if there isn't a desire to return to this segment.

[Deanh]

Ford and GM have forsaken the minivan, should they reconsider or move on with CUVs? How is growth in this segment now that fuel economy favors the traditional family hauler?

 

The minivan follows a VERY specific formula that is not satisfied by the Flex or any Lambda product and I'm wondering if there isn't a desire to return to this segment.

I beleive the flex will have it covered pretty much adequately....I am curious at TOTAl minivan sales though, especially since they seem to have been waning for years.......

[96 Pony]

I'll have to wait and see the Flex as it appears it could be a good minivan alternative.

 

Saleswise I know minivans as a whole are down although Chrysler YTD retail is up 8%.

[Explorer4X4]

Yes. Simple, import the Galaxy (European Ford).

[Edstock]

I'll have to wait and see the Flex as it appears it could be a good minivan alternative.

 

Flex and Transit Connect and Edge covers a lot, IMHO. Especially if the TC takes off, and Ford offers the other TC versions with regular roof height and windows.

 

Sure, Ford will lose some sales, but for what it would cost to get a slider vehicle to do battle with the Odyssey, IMHO, that money should be spent on a new Lincoln, because there's probably more growth potential.

[theoldwizard]

They all ready are with the Flex !

 

And the reason the Flex will not be as big of a success as it could be as that Ford does not want to admit that it will competing against minivans and therefore won't have a lot of minivan functionality like sliding doors ! I know sliders don't "look cool" (but the cool suicide doors have been dropped also) and it would cost a ton, but sliding doors should be an option for those customers that want them.

[NickF1011]

They all ready are with the Flex !

 

And the reason the Flex will not be as big of a success as it could be as that Ford does not want to admit that it will competing against minivans and therefore won't have a lot of minivan functionality like sliding doors ! I know sliders don't "look cool" (but the cool suicide doors have been dropped also) and it would cost a ton, but sliding doors should be an option for those customers that want them.

 

I could see sliders coming later if demand for the Flex warrants it. It was said that sliders were considered, but they decided to use that budget toward further upgrading the interior. Looks like it paid off because the interior looks absolutely top notch.

 

As for suicide doors, they are completely impractical for a family vehicle. Even worse than conventional doors. I run into the same problem with the half-doors on extended cab pickups -- when you get out of a parking space next to another vehicle, the front and rear passenger need to get pretty cozy with one another as they squeeze together to shut the doors again.

Edited March 13, 2008 by NickF1011

[Deanh]

They all ready are with the Flex !

 

And the reason the Flex will not be as big of a success as it could be as that Ford does not want to admit that it will competing against minivans and therefore won't have a lot of minivan functionality like sliding doors ! I know sliders don't "look cool" (but the cool suicide doors have been dropped also) and it would cost a ton, but sliding doors should be an option for those customers that want them.

funny, but i have a BUNCH of Econoline drivers /owners that PREFER the barn doors over the slider....aparently their major gripe is drooping and size of the opening, that said I think a slider or suicide would have been a coo....just for ease of access to the rear seat......perhaps it compromised rigidity too much........and please QUIT with the "make everything an option"....simplicity in ordering IS the key....more options, more not taking delivery from the lot and too many factory orders with cancellations,vehicles gathering cob webs and forcing REBATES!

Edited March 13, 2008 by Deanh

[Pioneer]

I could see sliders coming later if demand for the Flex warrants it.

 

I agree. I think Ford should offer them, as well as an extended length option. It would be cheaper than designing a whole new vehicle and cover all the bases. I would be the first one to place an order.

[battyr]

I refused to vote. I want to buy a minivan from Ford, but Ford would lose money selling it to me.

 

The sliding doors cost more to build but people won't pay the extra for it. Best is if Ford waits until the CUV become so common that people won't pay a premium for it. If Ford does make a minivan, it would make a mistake to copy Chrysler. They would have to find a niche that they could charge a premium for. Maybe they could sell a RWD SUV with Van doors?

 

Before Ford can bring out a minivan, they need a common Platform to base it on. The European S-max and Galaxy vans are too narrow for American tastes. A wider van won't sell in Europe. The new Flex would be ideal, but Ford would have to invest money in getting the weight and cost down a little. I believe this is unlikely since Ford is putting money into a new RWD Platform. Also, they do not want to bring anything out that could steal sales away from the Flex.

 

I thing rather than bringing out a minivan like Chrysler, they should take what they already produce improve on them and make them for the international market.

 

Transit connect could be Americanized when the Focus MK III comes out and sold in low numbers as cheaper than the caravan. When the EUCD based Fusion comes out, the Galaxy could be sold in small numbers as sportier that the Caravan. Maybe a premium RWD van off the RWD Taurus. Maybe they can come out with something really creative and different as the next generation Transit for a big minivan.

[BORG]

Ford Flex

 

Dimensions

 

Exterior

Length: 201.8 in. Width: 75.9 in.

Height: 68 in. Wheel Base: 117.9 in.

Interior

Front Head Room: 41.8 in. Front Hip Room: 55.5 in.

Front Shoulder Room: 58.4 in. Rear Head Room: 40.5 in.

Rear Shoulder Room: 58.1 in. Rear Hip Room: 55 in.

Front Leg Room: 40.8 in. Rear Leg Room: 44.3 in.

Luggage Capacity: 15 cu. ft. Maximum Cargo Capacity: 83 cu. ft.

Maximum Seating: 7

Performance Data

 

Performance

Base Number of Cylinders: 6 Base Engine Size: 3.5 liters

Base Engine Type: V6 Horsepower: 262 hp

Max Horsepower: 6250 rpm Torque: 248 ft-lbs.

Max Torque: 4500 rpm Maximum Towing Capacity: 4150 lbs.

Drive Type: FWD

 

Honda Odyssey

 

Exterior

Length: 202.1 in. Width: 77.1 in.

Height: 70 in. Wheel Base: 118.1 in.

Curb Weight: 4691 lbs. Gross Weight: 6019 lbs.

Interior

Front Head Room: 39.2 in. Front Hip Room: 57 in.

Front Shoulder Room: 63.5 in. Rear Head Room: 39.6 in.

Rear Shoulder Room: 63.1 in. Rear Hip Room: 64.4 in.

Front Leg Room: 40.8 in. Rear Leg Room: 40 in.

Luggage Capacity: 38.4 cu. ft. Maximum Cargo Capacity: 147 cu. ft.

Maximum Seating: 8

Performance Data

 

Performance

Base Number of Cylinders: 6 Base Engine Size: 3.5 liters

Base Engine Type: V6 Horsepower: 241 hp

Max Horsepower: 5700 rpm Torque: 242 ft-lbs.

Max Torque: 4900 rpm Maximum Payload: 1322 lbs.

Maximum Towing Capacity: 3500 lbs. Drive Type: FWD

Turning Circle: 36.7 ft.

Fuel Data

 

Fuel

Fuel Tank Capacity: 21 gal.

EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)

Automatic: : 17 mpg / 25 mpg

Range in Miles: (City/Highway)

Automatic: 357 mi. / 525 mi.

 

Chrysler Town & Country/ Dodge Caravan

 

Dimensions

 

Exterior

Length: 202.5 in. Width: 76.9 in.

Height: 71.4 in. Wheel Base: 121.2 in.

Ground Clearance: 6.1 in. Curb Weight: 4621 lbs.

Gross Weight: 5700 lbs.

Interior

Front Head Room: 39.8 in. Front Hip Room: 57.6 in.

Front Shoulder Room: 63 in. Rear Head Room: 39.7 in.

Rear Shoulder Room: 64.7 in. Rear Hip Room: 64.8 in.

Front Leg Room: 40.6 in. Rear Leg Room: 36.3 in.

Luggage Capacity: 32.3 cu. ft. Maximum Cargo Capacity: 140 cu. ft.

Maximum Seating: 7

Performance Data

 

Performance

Base Number of Cylinders: 6 Base Engine Size: 4 liters

Base Engine Type: V6 Horsepower: 253 hp

Max Horsepower: 6000 rpm Torque: 262 ft-lbs.

Max Torque: 4100 rpm Maximum Payload: 1200 lbs.

Maximum Towing Capacity: 3600 lbs. Drive Type: FWD

Turning Circle: 38 ft.

Fuel Data

 

Fuel

Fuel Tank Capacity: 20.5 gal.

EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)

Automatic: : 16 mpg / 23 mpg

Range in Miles: (City/Highway)

Automatic: 328 mi. / 471.5 mi.

 

 

 

The biggest difference between the Flex and the Minivan is the cargo capacity which is substantially lower, otherwise passenger space is similar give or take in certain dimensions.

Edited March 14, 2008 by BORG

[Admiral]

Ford focused on the American minivan segment at one time? News to me.

 

The Aerostar was a turd.

The Windstar was undersized and lacked key features.

The Freestar was, see above.

[Edstock]

Interesting. The Odyssey has 9.4" more rear hip-room. Flex: 55" Honda: 64.4" The Flex is 75.9" wide, the Honda 77.1, or 1.2" wider. Is it the difference between a "van" interior and a "car" interior?

[LSFan00]

If Ford would just worry about small cars and trucks I'd be happy. And by "worry" I mean "focus on bringing their own really good models here."

 

The 250HP (!!) minivan segment will be receding rapidly. Dimensions, HP, and sales are all going to be decreasing so no, I don't comprehend why Ford should next focus on duplicating and competing with the Odyssey/Sienna/Sedona/Chrysler's.

 

Even with Chrysler focusing on cheapening up all of their products, importing seats from Indonesia (seriously), and generally proceeding further down the road to oblivion, there are other more pressing markets in which Ford's products are wholly in need of attention.

[BORG]

Interesting. The Odyssey has 9.4" more rear hip-room. Flex: 55" Honda: 64.4" The Flex is 75.9" wide, the Honda 77.1, or 1.2" wider. Is it the difference between a "van" interior and a "car" interior?

 

Edmunds doesn't specify exactly what they mean by 'rear', whether it's the 2nd or 3rd row.

 

Ford has always said that the Flex is not a replacement for the minivan despite the rehtoric in the media declaring the Flex to be Ford's answer to their canceled minivan.

Edited March 14, 2008 by BORG

[01FOCI]

Ford needs to have a minivan but to keep it cost competitive it needs to share a platform with an existing or near future platform. It needs not be designed by the same "focus" groups who in the past told Ford that a 2nd slider was not a must have... BIG mistake as we all know. With the forthcoming ecoboost engines I think we could see a return of a fuel sipping 4cyl that would be a BIG bonus in the reality of $4 gas. With the weak dollar Ford could capitalize on this but who knows if it will continue this way in the long term.

[danup]

It would take too much cash--cash better spent on Ford's current and upcoming products--to build a *star that wouldn't get its head kicked in by Chrysler and Honda, and it's not a big enough market to support a bunch of crappy half-efforts anymore.

[ANTAUS]

I think the most will agree, do we have FAITH that Ford can build a competitive minivan ? They had 3 tries, Aerostar, Windstar, Freestar...do we need a 4th ?

[silvrsvt]

I think the most will agree, do we have FAITH that Ford can build a competitive minivan ? They had 3 tries, Aerostar, Windstar, Freestar...do we need a 4th ?

 

I always read that the Windstar was pretty good minivan, outside of the 3.8L/Tranny problems that also where inhertant on the Taurus

[Edstock]

IMHO, Ford could do better spending the money on a Fusion coupe and a Fusion station wagon, or on a wagon version of the next Focus.

[01FOCI]

I always read that the Windstar was pretty good minivan, outside of the 3.8L/Tranny problems that also where inhertant on the Taurus

 

 

I would have to agree, it was a nice design and competitive at the time, it was the engine/tranny issues with a lack of Ford acknowledgment of the problem that bombed it and future sales. Who cares how "great" the freestar may have been when many people had super negative experiences with its predecessor . I remember reading far to many "its only got 37K miles and needs a new engine" complaints and Ford wrote them off as the exception not the rule they were to become.

[Edstock]

 

With that rear slider, it sure looks like a minivan alternative.

[jpd80]

With the adoption of C1/C2,

Focus, C-Max and Kuga can be built down the same line.

 

 

 

[Biker16]

I think the most will agree, do we have FAITH that Ford can build a competitive minivan ? They had 3 tries, Aerostar, Windstar, Freestar...do we need a 4th ?

do we have faith ford canh do anything but make the F-series?

 

things change.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

I don't see the 250HP large minivan segment falling too fast. The vehicles are WAY too practical for their use and just won't fade into the night like the large station wagon did. If you're loading and unloading 3-4 kids at a time, a minivan is the only way to go that makes practical sense. What has hurt the minivan just as much as the move to CUVs and SUVs is the shrinking size of the US family. People just don't tend to have more than 2 kids anymore. I'm far the exception than the rule with my 4 (yes, we added one last week). That's also why we have two minivans. And, to that note, when you need a minivan, you need it to be capable. It has to be able to safely merge onto the highway with a double stroller in the back, 4 kids (2 in car seats), the support gear for a newborn and a toddler still in diapers, all your groceries, two adults up front, and whatever else your shopping trip included, while also carrying every airbag imaginable, providing 4-5 starts of crash worthiness from every angle, have enough power points to recharge two cell phones, run two DVD players, and an i-pod, support dual air conditioners, and still provide enough seperation for each of the kids to stop the incessant fighting you get when they have to touch. That, my friends, requires a nice V6 with a good, broad torque band. That's why we love our Sienna. That 3.5L DOHC iVVT engine has gobs of power and the 5AT that its mated to has great reliability and intelligence.

 

I can see where a hybrid minivan would get a lot of attention. The batteries could be kept in trays under the floor. The engine up front could be a 2.5-2.7L I-4 with a motor/generator, CVT and regenerative braking. If they could manage a consistent 25 mpg in the city and maybe 30+ on the highway, they'd sure sell a lot of them. Given the load requirements of a large minivan, a small diesel would also work well. Would definitely do well on the highway and would still perform well in the city with its gobs of torque.