rmc523 Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 (edited) http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/compar...n_test/(page)/1 Vehciles Included: 2008 Hyundai Veracruz Limited AWD 2008 Mazda CX-9 Grand Touring AWD 2008 Toyota Highlander Sport 4X4 2009 Ford Flex SEL 2009 Chevrolet Traverse LT 2009 Honda Pilot EX-L 4WD I don't understand this reveiw/comparison. They take these "midsize" SUVs (at least 2 of which are considered "fullsize" everywhere else) to some island where they go offroading (albeit minor --as in not hardcore-- offroading). First off, about 95% of the buyers of any of these will never go offroad. I don't want to give away the winner here, but look at the comments on the winning vehicle. They complain about it's acceleration, etc (not that big of a deal to me, as that shouldn't be a determining factor in these types of vehicles anyways---more of a perk than necessity), it's noisiness, it's transmission (should give a clue right there), and it's fuel economy, then commend it on it's offroading ability/clearances, and say it won "because it felt more solid than its rivals." They don't mention any features of most of the vehicles outside of how some have better cabin room in various rows than others, etc. They admittedly put vehicles like Flex in an environment where it would never be, and then complain how poorly it performs there? And then they randomly add something about it's doors? Look at this paragraph for example: Off-road, the Flex’s meager 5.9 inches of ground clearance, its long wheelbase, and its numb brake pedal meant it felt out of its element because it was. It picked its way around a limestone ledge that the others tackled head on. To its credit, the Flex’s ride motions were expertly damped without doing an iota of damage to the ride. In truth, it would take a clodhopper’s hand to disrupt the chassis. A bonus: The Ford’s long doors made ingress and egress a snap. I mean come on.... I'm sorry, I'll stop now and let you read the article and make you own opinions..... Edited November 8, 2008 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 Are they that deseprate to knock the Flex? I mean come on. They're not trying to cover their bias here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 I would say that the biggest problem was how slow it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smok Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 This guy made me LMAO: "Ford Flex...cool styling? are you guys blind???" Anyhow, Ford calls this a crossover, which is by definition a unibody (non body on frame) suv. That is why they criticize the ground clearance. If Ford called a minivan, they would compare it against Carava, Odessey and so on...Ford is marketing this as a crossover. But they liked it, and they are right on. They said it's heavy, slower than the other, but very comfartable. The chassis was composed. Also beat ouy the Hyandai and Chevy. I still can't decide which one is uglier, the Flex or the Pilot. The Pilot is even ugly on the inside, that new center console is a clusterfu$k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White99GT Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 (edited) I still can't decide which one is uglier, the Flex or the Pilot. Seeing as how that, in my opinion, the Flex is probably the most attractive crossover ever built, and the Pilot the least attractive, that distinction is easy to make. The Pilot is far uglier... I read this article a while back, it only shows Car and Driver's complete lack of understanding about these vehicles. Complete idiots... Edited November 8, 2008 by White99GT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 The thing I find HILARIOUS, is that this comparison completely contradicts Consumer Reports. Consumer Reports was very disappointed in the new Pilot. Everything that C&D said was good, CR said was bad. They said the fit and finish was poor. They were not thrilled with the ride. The power was adequate. They also had the Flex being faster than the Pilot. They rated the Flex below only the Highlander, while the Pilot was way down at midpack. One favorred off-road, and one on. It think it is quite obvious which is which. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 Here's another thing I'll give CR credit for: They actually buy their vehicles off the lot. See, some poor schlub is going to get the press pool Flex after C&D trashed it on this island, and he's going to bellyache about this or that. Stupid journalists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenCaylor Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 The one complaint that I agree with them on was the lack of a telescoping steering wheel. Same problem with the Freestyle/Taurus X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 Off-roading a Flex? Morons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted November 8, 2008 Author Share Posted November 8, 2008 The one complaint that I agree with them on was the lack of a telescoping steering wheel. Same problem with the Freestyle/Taurus X. I do agree with that as well. Also the headrest complaints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 I thought the Flex was for those ex-Explorer/Expedition buyers who really didn't go off roading? Kind of a strange vehicle comparison when we know Ford is working on the D3 Explorer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted November 8, 2008 Author Share Posted November 8, 2008 I thought the Flex was for those ex-Explorer/Expedition buyers who really didn't go off roading?Kind of a strange vehicle comparison when we know Ford is working on the D3 Explorer. It basically is, and that was kinda my point....that the Flex (or really any of those, since most won't be used like that) shouldn't even be tested in that environment anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goinbroke2 Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 In other news, the f-450 diesel has poor slalom times when pushed above 100mph where it routinely misses cones. While mudbogging the focus is possible, the relatively small wheelwells limit tire size to 31X10X15's. The focus should have a lower gear for rockcrawling also as the crawl ratio is a substandard 12:1. After numerous attempts by various stunt drivers, it was determined that the mustang is too nose heavy for long distance jumping without first adding weight to counterbalance. Anything more than 80ft ended in the mustang landing particularly hard nose first. Fine journalism eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 In other news, the f-450 diesel has poor slalom times when pushed above 100mph where it routinely misses cones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted November 9, 2008 Author Share Posted November 9, 2008 In other news, the f-450 diesel has poor slalom times when pushed above 100mph where it routinely misses cones. While mudbogging the focus is possible, the relatively small wheelwells limit tire size to 31X10X15's. The focus should have a lower gear for rockcrawling also as the crawl ratio is a substandard 12:1. After numerous attempts by various stunt drivers, it was determined that the mustang is too nose heavy for long distance jumping without first adding weight to counterbalance. Anything more than 80ft ended in the mustang landing particularly hard nose first. Fine journalism eh? You should go work for one of these magazines, you'd do great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 It basically is, and that was kinda my point....that the Flex (or really any of those, since most won't be used like that) shouldn't even be tested in that environment anyways. My thoughts exactly, why can't they just accept that and see how hard Flex tries out of its environment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 In other news, the f-450 diesel has poor slalom times when pushed above 100mph where it routinely misses cones. While mudbogging the focus is possible, the relatively small wheelwells limit tire size to 31X10X15's. The focus should have a lower gear for rockcrawling also as the crawl ratio is a substandard 12:1. After numerous attempts by various stunt drivers, it was determined that the mustang is too nose heavy for long distance jumping without first adding weight to counterbalance. Anything more than 80ft ended in the mustang landing particularly hard nose first. Fine journalism eh? Very Funny The F450 doesn't miss cones in the 100 mph slalom, it hits every one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted November 10, 2008 Author Share Posted November 10, 2008 My thoughts exactly, why can't they just accept that and see how hard Flex tries out of its environment? I just don't understand why they even tested them there in the first place. Very Funny The F450 doesn't miss cones in the 100 mph slalom, it hits every one of them. I'm sure that's what he meant. And to be honest, that's how I read it even though it was typed improperly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Off-roading a Flex? Morons. That's the sigment that Ford put the Flex in. Toyota didn't do that with the Venza. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 But they forgot to test these vehicles on one all important area that is near and dear to the hearts of true old school SUV fans from the snow belt - how do they perform with a 7 foot wide plow hanging on the front? Can they push a 3 foot drift? Is rear ballast (for the red necks at least - how many cinder blocks are needed in the back) necessary? How do they perform on the interstate with the plow in transport position? Come on, hang a 7 foot Meyer on a Venza. See how it performs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 But they forgot to test these vehicles on one all important area that is near and dear to the hearts of true old school SUV fans from the snow belt - how do they perform with a 7 foot wide plow hanging on the front? Can they push a 3 foot drift? Is rear ballast (for the red necks at least - how many cinder blocks are needed in the back) necessary? How do they perform on the interstate with the plow in transport position? Come on, hang a 7 foot Meyer on a Venza. See how it performs. It's a car, not a C/SUV. :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 It's a car, not a C/SUV. :shades: Just being sarcastic. But back in the late 70s I did see a Dodge Polara with a plow on the front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Just being sarcastic. But back in the late S I did see a Dodge Polars with a plow on the front. Ahhh... the good old days.... And I would bet that it could push more snow than any Toyota truck today!!! 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.