D32 Minivan back on?

[rkisler]

You bring up a good perception, the 4x8 space requirement. One of my friends uses his minivan weekdays for his contractor duties, and pops the seats in for Sunday outings.

 

Perhaps Ford sees several distinct camps here:

 

1. There are the working folks who prize space, economy & utility. The Transit Connects would suit them well.

 

2. The strictly people mover folks. As long as the kids can use regular seats (or just boosters), the Flex will suit them well.

 

3. Hauling a 5-6 person family plus a larger boat or RV? An F-150 (or maybe an optioned F-100) would fit them well.

 

4. Medium --> Large family with all babies/ toddlers.... this is the one area where a used Sienna makes more sense than a new Flex/ Transit/ F-150.... so Ford may well just sacrifice these sales for a while. Those that want a little bit of everything would fit into this category too.

 

BTW, my 3.0L 05' Sienna has never gotten better than 21mpg avg.

 

There could be some fracturing in the market, particularly toward more efficient people carriers, but I still think a lot of minivan owners want the capability to do anything. One trend that could ease this somewhat is the availability of rental trucks at fairly cheap rates, particularly from lumber yards directly.

 

The TC is cute, but I think it will turn out to be a bit crude in some aspects compared with the Odyssey/Sienna luxury haulers.

[rkisler]

According to Igor a few months ago, Ford is shooting for 30 mpg in the Explorer 2.0 EB

 

I also heard Farley mention this at a presentation. But he's a marketing guy, not the Chief Program Engineer who has to deliver it. Personally, I think it's mandatory to get over 30. Explorer has to fight to get back into the game and fuel economy is certainly one good way to get the message across.

 

Ford is pursuing a lot of weight reduction ops to get to this kind of fuel economy. For instance, a single piece magnesium liftgate is in the works IIRC. That will have a lot of knock-on benefits to the customer in lighter effort, structural support for hinges and struts, and lighter motor for lifting. And it sweeps up quite a number of parts that would have to be welded together separately. We'll see if it makes it into production.

[battyr]

According to Igor a few months ago, Ford is shooting for 30 mpg in the Explorer 2.0 EB

 

You do the math, that is only 20% improvement. A I4 EB plus some other technology should be able to do this easily.

[fordmantpw]

4. Medium --> Large family with all babies/ toddlers.... this is the one area where a used Sienna makes more sense than a new Flex/ Transit/ F-150.... so Ford may well just sacrifice these sales for a while. Those that want a little bit of everything would fit into this category too.

 

We do pretty well with our Flex hauling 3 small children. We had one in a booster and 2 in car seats, now we have two in boosters. We got the bucket seats in the second row so the oldest could walk through to the back (she can buckle herself). Works great, and the wife is happy that she doesn't have to drive a minivan. Plus, with a minivan, we would not have been able to open the hatch when parked inside the garage due to the extra height and lenght over the Flex.

 

Now, if we had 3 in car seats, it may be a different story, but that just doesn't happen that often. Besides, a car to haul them in would probably be the least of my worries if I had 3 that small!

 

BTW, my 3.0L 05' Sienna has never gotten better than 21mpg avg.

 

Our AWD Flex averages 21-22 in everyday driving, as high as 24 on extended trips.

[Blue II]

What does everyone think of an EB Galaxy? Would you prefer it over S-Max?

[jpd80]

Jim Farley said 30% better fuel economy (than a 4.0 liter V6 - 14/20 mpg).

 

"This is the Explorer America Concept with room for six clever interior features and a lot more.

It uses a unibody construction for weight savings. It employs a six-speed select shift transmission

and it's mated to a 2.0 liter Ecoboost engine with comparable torque to a 4.0 liter V6 for off roading

and towing it ha 30% better fuel economy. Global technologies for all of us."

 

 

 

[itguy09]

poor Packaging, more wieght, poor fuel economy.

 

Let's see here, I get almost 25-27 highway in my 04 G35 6MT. That's RWD with a 3.5 V6. Mustangs get decent fuel economy, so does the 300c, charger, challenger.

 

I think the weight is comparable as well.

 

There's nothing inherent about RWD that makes it have poor fuel economy. Packaging can be overcome - my G has a decent trunk.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

That's highway mpg on a rounded off brick. 20% is not a trivial improvement by any stretch of the imagination.

[RichardJensen]

I bet the buyers want all of that but don't want to part with green...

No. They'll pay--and, regardless, the options need to be there.

 

If you are just carrying people and want some class, it would work.

Sigh. Minivans do not -just- carry people. Go look at the options, configurations, and complexity of top of the line Chryslers, Dodges, Toyotas and Hondas.

 

Furthermore, if CD3 could have been stretched to minivan dimensions (i.e. the Flex), don't you think that IT would have underpinned the Flex instead of D3?

 

Ford is, IMO, wise to be out of the minivan market right now. I have doubts that they could reenter it successfully, and I don't think that any half-baked solution (i.e. Flex with sliders, Galaxy from Europe) would be worth its cost.

Edited June 25, 2009 by RichardJensen

[old_fairmont_wagon]

IF (and that's a big if) the Galaxy could be produced domestically on a line that was already outfitted for that particular platform along some other volume vehicle, and it could share a significant enough amount of parts with that vehicle, it might be able to sell enough to warrant its existence. But there's a lot of variables there and success is far from certain. I suspect with more and more of Ford's vehicles migrating to one or two platforms (I see a future when one compact platform and one stretchable mid/full size platform underpins everything in Ford, globally, that's not a truck or produced on someone else's platform). With that being where I think that they are headed, and with the increased ability for Ford's plants to flexibly manufacture a variety of vehicles at (for our purposes) the same time, they will be better able to cater to these somewhat smaller markets.

 

As for the minivan market in general, you have Toyota and Honda dominating the upper end of that market. Loaded Doyssey EX-Ls and Sienna Limiteds go for quite a bit and move in decent volume and Chrysler/Dodge competing in the mid and lower end of that market (though they offer high end models, they don't move the proportional number of them that Honda and Toyota do, this I get from a friend of a friend that's a sales manager for a local conglomerate of dealerships that has at least one or two of each brand). Where is Ford going to fight that battle? It takes an established product and name in that segment to get volume on the high end. And, with chryco having shoveled cash on their vans for well on a decade now (a practice which I don't see stopping once they get to making them again) they'll still command the mid and low end. You have the peripheral players (The nissan quest which is designed to survive on lower volume, the Kia Sedona which is arguably a decent product in the segment, but saddled with the wrong brand name, and the VW Routan, which is a thinly disguised Cryco and has pathetic sales), all trying to scrape off a few sales on either end of that stranglehold and not succeeding very well. Where would Ford meet with success.

 

Unless Chrysler completely implodes and has to cease all operations, there is no hole in the market for Ford. If Chrysler does grind to a permanent halt, then Ford would be advised to have at least done the design work on something that they can get rolled out in a hurry.

[RichardJensen]

Re: Galaxy based minivan

 

Might as well base the next F150 off the global Ranger, IMO.

[rmc523]

Re: Galaxy based minivan

 

Might as well base the next F150 off the global Ranger, IMO.

 

Hmmm....what a coincidence! They are basing the next F-150 on the global Ranger.

[RichardJensen]

Except they aren't.

[silvrsvt]

As for the minivan market in general, you have Toyota and Honda dominating the upper end of that market.

 

I dunno about that, when my company rents minivans, we get nothing BUT Toyota or Honda Minivans. I hate the Sienna with a passion, its like driving a Panther, except that you sit up higher. The Oddissy is a much better "drivers" minivan.

[battyr]

You do the math, that is only 20% improvement. A I4 EB plus some other technology should be able to do this easily.

 

My 20% improvement was calculated compared to todays Flex. Compared to a todays Explorer, it would be a 50% improvement. Not bad, doable and cheap.

[LoveTaurus]

Plus, with a minivan, we would not have been able to open the hatch when parked inside the garage due to the extra height and lenght over the Flex.

Thanks for your comments!

 

Still, Minivans like Odyssey and Sienna are the same length and height as the Flex, within 1" or 2" in range; and 2" +/- wider than the Flex.

 

The reasons why Flex got less interior are mainly, 1. the minivans have their windshield and dash moved much forward, and 2. the Flex/TaurusX seats actually just functioning as "FOLDING" turn into a platform, taking up major volume. Whereas the minivans truly folding its 3rd seats under the floor and the 2rd row are removable.

Edited June 25, 2009 by LoveTaurus

[RichardJensen]

minivans also have a much simpler rear suspension and a totally unique floorpan.

[LoveTaurus]

minivans also have a much simpler rear suspension and a totally unique floorpan.

Yes, that's too! Thanks!

[NLPRacing]

What does everyone think of an EB Galaxy? Would you prefer it over S-Max?

 

Sounds interesting, is that coming over? If so, when?

[joihan777]

I dunno about that, when my company rents minivans, we get nothing BUT Toyota or Honda Minivans. I hate the Sienna with a passion, its like driving a Panther, except that you sit up higher. The Oddissy is a much better "drivers" minivan.

 

That's true.

 

I spent the day driving the Sienna on the twisties of Hwy1 from Muir Woods to Stinston Beach.... it was a grotesque exercise to say the least.

 

The Odyssey is more a driver's car, but it is harsher.

 

The Sienna is tuned for quiet, like a panther. It's great for sleeping babies or sleeping old folks....

[Harley Lover]

The Odyssey is more a driver's car

Isn't that an oxymoron?

[silvrsvt]

The Odyssey is more a driver's car, but it is harsher.

 

Well I do drive a Mustang GT...LOL

[old_fairmont_wagon]

With respect to Blue II's question about an EB Galaxy, I'd kind of like it. I'm currently looking at eventually replacing the SWB Dodge Caravan that I use on a daily basis with a Mazda5. I't would get the job done, but be a touch anemic and small for what I'd use it for. HAving looked at the Galaxy specs, it appears that the it is a bit bigger than the 5. If it came with an I4 EB, I think it would be almost perfect. Now, as long as it doesn't cost an arm and a leg, I'd consider it.

 

Sounds interesting, is that coming over? If so, when?

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Having test driven both the Odyssey and Sienna, they are different takes on the same issue. ride and handling balance. Back in 2002 when we bought our first minivan, I had my wife test drive most of the vans on the market. We liked everything about the MPV except for one thing, its ride. My wife thought it rode very stiffly and was unsettling to drive around here because of that. Today, the odyssey isn't as bad, but, is markedly stiffer than the Sienna. My wife also REALLY didn't like the driver's position dash layout on the Odyssey. She couldn't put it into words, but it didn't feel right. She liked the layout of the Sienna much more and liked the more compliant suspension of the Sienna. For her style of driving, which is to ease around corners, then floor it down the street, the sienna is almost perfect. Since ours is an 07, the first year with the 3.5L V6 and 5AT combo, it doesn't have traction control standard. She had to learn that she can't floor it like she could in the old caravan. The term "rediculous wheel spin" definitely applies there.

 

The Sienna is, however, very comfortable in what we like to use it for, though. It will gobble up highway miles without wearing you out. The seats are big and comfy. The suspension is soft and complaint without being floaty. IT also gets very good highway mpg, even when loaded with the whole family. I find it hard to believe that there's a lot that can be done to the basic setup of a minivan that would go much beyond it, save for having a second row that folds completely flat into the floor like the Cryco Sto-and-Go setup. You can't do that in a Sienna, though, because the spare is under the second row passenger side seat. That was the tradeoff for the gargantuan cargo area behind the third row. Since we are a family of 6, that doesn't matter that much to us. My van, with all the seats out, is more than capable of hauling anything like that anyway.

[Biker16]

I just want to add a couple of things.

 

1) RJ does not know everything

 

2) the transit connect is waay too small to be considered, come on its the same footprint as a focus.

 

3) the next gen galaxy could work, but rememeber sliding doors weigh more, the galaxy's floorpan is more CUV than minivan. volumes for US/EU van would be adquate, but ~150k but would require a delicate touch on meeting EU and US needs. The S-max would benifit from being a less minivan-like CUV and the galaxy on being a less CUV like minivan.

 

4) lets not foget about the FULL-SIZE Transit, its scalable design could be a boon to a ignored segment of the midsized van market. the hauler, available in FWD 8 and 9 passenger versions, a trully durable van as an option for those looking for more meat and less fluff, and a RWD model for more meat like towing and payloads.

 

transit tourneo

L/W/H 191/77.7/81.5 4238lbs

 

honda oddesey

202/77.1/68.8 4400-4700lbs

 

ford connect

179/70.7/78

 

as to why the flex cannot replace a minivan.

 

odessey 147cu/ft max cargo volume

 

flex 82.2

Edited June 29, 2009 by Biker16