Jump to content

FORD FLEX SAVES FUEL DURING DECELERATION WHILE MAINTAINING BEST-IN-CLASS DRIVEABILITY


range

Recommended Posts

just me, or is everyone/ anyone else experiencing BON issues...man yesterday was grey screen day....P, where do you think the extra 300lbs is on the flex? did the reveiwer ( fat? ) stay in the car at the weigh station?..............I repeat...shipping weight 4500 and change....perhaps a full tank weighs 300lbs...who knows.....

 

 

It's a conspiracy. The shipping drivers and Ford have a deal to agree that is the shipping weight to save Ford money on shipping costs. In return, Ford gives the driver a portion of the savings on their end. Shhhhhhhhh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's a conspiracy. The shipping drivers and Ford have a deal to agree that is the shipping weight to save Ford money on shipping costs. In return, Ford gives the driver a portion of the savings on their end. Shhhhhhhhh

who knows...but one thing is for sure...even 4500 is porky....weight sooner or later will be adressed, it has too, less weight means better economy ...regardless....I wonder if the eco boosts will be lighter drivetrains?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is the Freestyle you are comparing it to? Since I will assume you are comparing to the base model Freestyle to make your argument look better, the Freestyle does (did) not have:

 

Fridge

Vista Roof

3.5L

AWD

Navigation system

DVD entertainment system

Power folding second row

Power lift gate

19 inch wheels

dual zone electronic automatic temperature control

as much width

as much length

as much room

as many luxury and comfort items

 

And you are complaining about a 700 lbs in weight difference?

 

Doesn't matter...even the "lightweight" Freestyle scored just as well as the goofy Flex in the crash test ratings. Just because a vehicle is heave, doesn't mean it is safe. The Flex is about 500 pounds too heavy. Ford could have had better MPG numbers had they put a little effort in keeping the weight down. But instead, the target was matching the competition...not beating them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter...even the "lightweight" Freestyle scored just as well as the goofy Flex in the crash test ratings. Just because a vehicle is heave, doesn't mean it is safe. The Flex is about 500 pounds too heavy. Ford could have had better MPG numbers had they put a little effort in keeping the weight down. But instead, the target was matching the competition...not beating them.

 

Well I suggest going forward that when you complain about Ford products, you put the competition into perspective before you start bellyaching. Weight gain is an industry wide issue. Not just a Ford problem. The constant clamoring for quiet and well assembled interiors adds weight. Couple that with stability control, whiplash reducing headrests, curtain airbags, front side airbags, rear side airbags and tire sensors. Well there's your problem.

Edited by Michael Reynolds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see any advantage over a minivan and I don't see anyone trading in a gas guzzling SUV to get one. So who is the customer that is supposed to buy this vehicle.

 

I don't see anyone rebutting my assertions about mpg with the Flex, nor have I seen an argument why someone (except those looking to carry 7 people on a regular basis) would choose the Flex over a minivan or trade an gas guzzling SUV in on a Flex.

 

Maybe it will become the vehicle to have for taxi companies.

 

People who hate sliders. People who used to drive Yukons and Suburbans. People who are AWD/safety conscious. People who don't like minivan-type seating and interiors. They're all Flex-market.

 

The Flex fuel economy is competitive, your assertions to the contrary. You seem to find it rewarding to be re-minded of this; people repeat behavior only if there's a reward of some kind. FWIW, our reward for engaging with you is putting together an analysis of what's right with Ford and how they're working on the future. Plus, there's the added frisson of getting to play Bitch-slap the Moron, on occasion.

 

Anyway, the Flex will not be a large seller, because it's a $30-40,000 vehicle, not a $20,000 minivan, but it doesn't have to be, it just has to be profitable. Maybe after another 4-5 months we'll have a better idea of how it's doing relative to its competition in a flaky market.

 

Taxi? Not so much. The Flex should do really well with livery companies — no sliders, nice luxury, Whether taxi operators will go for a Flex when they can buy cheaper 300's and minivans, is a question for you to ponder. If a hybrid Flex appeared, it might do well, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter...even the "lightweight" Freestyle scored just as well as the goofy Flex in the crash test ratings. Just because a vehicle is heave, doesn't mean it is safe. The Flex is about 500 pounds too heavy. Ford could have had better MPG numbers had they put a little effort in keeping the weight down. But instead, the target was matching the competition...not beating them.

agree to a certain extent...problem is one you have already complained about....add aluminum, carbon fibre and lightweight materials comes at a price.....the days of lightweight cars has pretty much gone bye bye thanks to mandated regulations unless one sends MSRP's stratospheric...and please stop comparing the X's weight to the flex's...two different beasts COMPLETELTY.....compare the X to the Taurus wagon....

Edited by Deanh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good job.

 

But don't you think that one of Ford's brand new seven seat station wagons is going to impact the sales of their other, brand new seven seat station wagon?

two different beasts P, does that mean the Explorer and Expedition warrant comparison as well? you REALLY need to sit and drive both...they could NOT be more different....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright so we've established that the Flex is a 'pig' compared to the Taurus X.

 

What I find amazing is how that pig manages to up the much lighter Taurus X by 1 MPG City. Even with the fuel saving tech, you would think something so heavy wouldn't be able to exceed the Taurus X's fuel economy.

midget was driving ( less weight )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But don't you think that one of Ford's brand new seven seat station wagons is going to impact the sales of their other, brand new seven seat station wagon?

 

 

Although it might "impact" the other, for Fords sake isn't it better to lose the one sale of a Ford product to make another sale on a different Ford product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...