silvrsvt Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I'm going to do this in gallons per 100 highway miles, which I'll abbreviate g/hhm. If 1 Focus takes 2.9 g/hhm, 2 take 5.9 g/hhm. Even the Expedition beats that by 15% (5.0 g/hhm). 1 Fusion: 3.4 g/hhm; 2 Fusions: 6.8 g/hhm; 1 Flex: 4.2 g/hhm So, if you CAN fit your 7 people into 1 Flex instead of 2 Fusions, you'll use 38% less gas on your trip. If you're looking at a 1000 mile trip (say, from San Diego to Northern California and back, a trip I've done many times), you'd save 26 gallons - $60. You also get to double the per-mile depreciation costs, and twice as many people have to volunteer for driving (effort cost) and buy them twice as much coffee, you have to find twice as many parking spaces, pay twice as many tolls, coordinate between drivers in the two cars... But the simple fact of the matter is that no vehicle outside of a fullsize van or maybe an Expedition can fit 7 people with luggage in it/on it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) But the simple fact of the matter is that no vehicle outside of a fullsize van or maybe an Expedition can fit 7 people with luggage in it/on it Some people are better than others at packing At 20 cubic feet in the Flex, you may only get 33% more space than a Fusion, but I bet it's more usable... it can be hard to fit square things into curvy trunk spaces. But I will re-emphasize... if you CAN fit 7 people (and their junk) in, you're much better in 1 large vehicle, even if you compare the largest possible (Expedition) to the smallest possible (Focus). The corollary is, if you can't, then obviously do what works! Edited February 27, 2009 by Noah Harbinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 I think Nick and i touched on this before...Yakima makes enclosed racks, streamlined etc...case solved......Flex with a rack like that would be perfect, comfortable and reasonably fuel efficient...Pioneer just can't seem to embrace the rack option....musty be the high sperm count Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Pioneer just can't seem to embrace the rack option....musty be the high sperm count I may have to to stay in a Ford product. I have 3 years. Who knows what's in the pipeline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 I may have to to stay in a Ford product. I have 3 years. Who knows what's in the pipeline. too tempting...get snipped....cap the pipelines....LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 too tempting...get snipped....cap the pipelines....LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donzuchowski Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 http://www.leftlanenews.com/ford-explorer-2011.html the ford explorer has lost it balls. it will be d3 based like the taurus... a front wheel drive explorer with all wheel drive..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 the ford explorer has lost it balls. it will be d3 based like the taurus... a front wheel drive explorer with all wheel drive..... with 300 plus HP and about 5-6 mpgs better Hwy and 6-8 city....still complaining? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) the ford explorer has lost it balls. it will be d3 based like the taurus... a front wheel drive explorer with all wheel drive..... Since the bulk of explorers don't leave paved roads, that shouldn't be a problem and those people wanting good towing ability will be pointed towards Ford's F Trucks. The Falcon based Territory replaced the Explorer down here about 6 years ago, it's also on unitary construction but can still tow 5,000 lb which is good enough for towing a 23' caravan. I'm sure a new D3 Explorer will take that further with better fuel economy winning a lot of new friends. Edited February 27, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Since the bulk of explorers don't leave paved roads, that shouldn't be a problem and those people wanting good towing ability will be pointed towards Ford's F Trucks. The Falcon based Territory replaced the Explorer down here about 6 years ago, it's also on unitary construction but can still tow 5,000 lb which is good enough for towing a 23' caravan. I'm sure a new D3 Explorer will take that further with better fuel economy winning a lot of new friends. thx J, had a pleasent caravan flashback from my Cooks Beach camping days.... :hyper: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 (edited) I think Nick and i touched on this before...Yakima makes enclosed racks, streamlined etc...case solved......Flex with a rack like that would be perfect, comfortable and reasonably fuel efficient...Pioneer just can't seem to embrace the rack option....musty be the high sperm count I've heard those things can reduce fuel economy pretty steeply... but I guess it'll definitely be more efficient than a 2nd car, if it comes to that. Edited February 28, 2009 by Noah Harbinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 I've heard those things can reduce fuel economy pretty steeply... but I guess it'll definitely be more efficient than a 2nd car, if it comes to that. So will the weight of 7 people in a car or CUV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Since the bulk of explorers don't leave paved roads, that shouldn't be a problem and those people wanting good towing ability will be pointed towards Ford's F Trucks. The Falcon based Territory replaced the Explorer down here about 6 years ago, it's also on unitary construction but can still tow 5,000 lb which is good enough for towing a 23' caravan. I'm sure a new D3 Explorer will take that further with better fuel economy winning a lot of new friends. The Territory is RWD and could be much better. It has a big torquey engine. There is no reason why you could not put an F-150 transmission in it. The weak point is the rear end and rear suspension. If you raised the ride height, you might be able to put a solid axle in from a truck. Maybe upgrade the brakes? If the Austrailians cared, it could get a huge tow rating. Stop worrying about the unitbody. It is only an issue if you are dumping heavy stuff into the back or jumping hills at high speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 So will the weight of 7 people in a car or CUV Cars are a lot cheaper and fuel efficient. Someone sould design a roomy 7 passanger car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Cars are a lot cheaper and fuel efficient. Someone sould design a roomy 7 passanger car. You could do that with a station wagon but then someone would have to hold the gas tank in their lap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Cars are a lot cheaper and fuel efficient. Someone sould design a roomy 7 passanger car. It's called a FLEX ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 the ford explorer has lost it balls. it will be d3 based like the taurus... a front wheel drive explorer with all wheel drive..... Yawn ! This is OLD news. When the concept Explorer America was shown over 12 months it was stated that it was unibody. Got to keep up with the times. If you want BOF, got Expedition or Jeep Liberty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 So will the weight of 7 people in a car or CUV Weight doesn't affect highway mileage all that much, and that was the topic of discussion... Aerodynamics, however, have their greatest effects at highway speeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 It's called a FLEX ! I said the exact same thing to myself before I read your post! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 (edited) The Territory is RWD and could be much better. It has a big torquey engine. There is no reason why you could not put an F-150 transmission in it. The weak point is the rear end and rear suspension. If you raised the ride height, you might be able to put a solid axle in from a truck. Maybe upgrade the brakes? If the Austrailians cared, it could get a huge tow rating. Stop worrying about the unitbody. It is only an issue if you are dumping heavy stuff into the back or jumping hills at high speed. Our regulations are like the UK and prevent vehicles under 3 tonnes towing huge loads like F150. The Territory was always intended as a soft roader and it has a ZF 6 speed AWD trans which is an absolute joy to drive especially with the 320 hp turbo 6 - you don't get much better than that. I'm pretty sure Dearborn has looked the Territory inside out and come up with an answer on D3 that will do just fine, as we've not seen the production version of the new unitary Explorer yet, we might all be be quite amazed at the end result. Edited February 28, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 It's called a FLEX ! I was thinking of something cheaper with better fuel efficiency, like a modern version of the Crown Vic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 Our regulations are like the UK and prevent vehicles under 3 tonnes towing huge loads like F150. The Territory was always intended as a soft roader and it has a ZF 6 speed AWD trans which is an absolute joy to drive especially with the 320 hp turbo 6 - you don't get much better than that. I'm pretty sure Dearborn has looked the Territory inside out and come up with an answer on D3 that will do just fine, as we've not seen the production version of the new unitary Explorer yet, we might all be be quite amazed at the end result. It was just an exercise on what could be done with the Territory. As for the F-150, I would be happy with half of it's tow capacity from an Explorer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 Weight doesn't affect highway mileage all that much, and that was the topic of discussion. So why doesn't a Crown Vic get similar highway mileage to a Focus. Of that's right, the CV has a V8 and the Focus has a 4 cylinder. Why, because a CV with the same 4 cylinder as the Focus can not get up to highway speed ! Several engineering studies have been done that show the single most important factor in fuel economy, city or highway, is weight. Many years ago, Ford Research actually built a Crown Vic mostly out of carbon fiber and other super light material. They showed it at the SAE conferences and some of shows. They put a 4 cylinder in it and it got mileage similar to an Escort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 So why doesn't a Crown Vic get similar highway mileage to a Focus. Of that's right, the CV has a V8 and the Focus has a 4 cylinder. Why, because a CV with the same 4 cylinder as the Focus can not get up to highway speed ! Several engineering studies have been done that show the single most important factor in fuel economy, city or highway, is weight. Many years ago, Ford Research actually built a Crown Vic mostly out of carbon fiber and other super light material. They showed it at the SAE conferences and some of shows. They put a 4 cylinder in it and it got mileage similar to an Escort. Ford has done a study and found the cheapest way to cut fuel consumption is to improve aerodynamics. The biggest external loss is from aerodynamic drag. The biggest internal loss is from the engine and can only easily reduced by cutting weight. The benefit to a hybrid is that you could down size the engine without down sizing the weight. You only need to down size the weight to cut the cost of the hybrid system. The most expensive change in a car is to cut the weight. But if you can do it cheaply, It saves you in every aspect of the vehicle. You cut one pound out of the weight of the vehicle, you can down sized everything from tires to the suspension to the engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 Ford has done a study and found the cheapest way to cut fuel consumption is to improve aerodynamics. The biggest external loss is from aerodynamic drag. The biggest internal loss is from the engine and can only easily reduced by cutting weight. The benefit to a hybrid is that you could down size the engine without down sizing the weight. You only need to down size the weight to cut the cost of the hybrid system. The most expensive change in a car is to cut the weight. But if you can do it cheaply, It saves you in every aspect of the vehicle. You cut one pound out of the weight of the vehicle, you can down sized everything from tires to the suspension to the engine. A lot of that is also tied up in entrenched marketing ideas about the external size of vehicles. Ford took the Mid Sized Mazda 6 and did a 2" x 2" expansion on it to create a Large mid Sized car. The market could relate to the change and accepted it as growth of an existing D sized car. Say you took a C1 Focus and did the same 2" x 2" expansion on it, you would end up with a car with similar internal dimensions to the Fusion but looking much lighter and shorter on the outside. Would people accept a large C sized car evolving into a genuine D sized car? It's an interesting thought and I wouldn't be surprised if it's used somewhere down the track. Getting people accustomed to better package and smaller cars is going to be the hard sell because cars are like an all you can eat buffet, unless you get lots of external size the buyer feels short changed. If future car buyers can be convinced they can downsize externally and not sacrifice any space internally, car makers can effect 200 to 300 lb weight savings with conventional fabrication materials. It's a good plan but would take a mountain of marketing money to sell to the buying public. 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.