LarryQW Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I would guess that a T-X is also a much more comfortable ride than the Windstar/Freestar. I've driven four of the D3s and feel like I could drive or ride for hours in one of those. If you don't mind me asking, how big is your family? I have a family of 5 - me, wife & three daughters. All of us are tall (I'm 6' and the teen daughters are 5'10" or so). The oldest daughter is 21 and doesn't go on family trips any more, so it's usually the four of us and gear. Sometimes on local trips, my oldest daughter and her boyfriend joins us, and we have six in the car. The four of us in the T-X leaves lots of room for camping gear including two tents, bikes, sleeping bags, clothes, and stoves,etc.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I have a family of 5 - me, wife & three daughters. All of us are tall (I'm 6' and the teen daughters are 5'10" or so). The oldest daughter is 21 and doesn't go on family trips any more, so it's usually the four of us and gear. Sometimes on local trips, my oldest daughter and her boyfriend joins us, and we have six in the car. The four of us in the T-X leaves lots of room for camping gear including two tents, bikes, sleeping bags, clothes, and stoves,etc.. Gotcha. I ask 'cause we're planning on having 4 kids, which means that on road trips, all three rows would have to be used. From what I've observed with three-row crossovers, there's not a lot of space for many suitcases behind that third row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 unless things have changed since I made my database, the Galaxy has the same wheelbase as the S-Max and is just barely over 2 inches longer with it's extra room coming from being more squarish. A new grille for the Flex, yeah, that's not expensive; new fascia and bumpers, OK even an updated interior, which would cost, could be worthwhile imho but imho sheetmetal modifications won't get sufficient ROI imho...it'd still look similar enough only carnuts would be sure which was which. We'll see. Still makes the Galaxy larger :P And yes, forgot to mention the definitely necessary interior update for the Flex - while it still looks great, given the interior advancements of Ford's other vehicles, it definitely needs an update to just be even with them at this point, IMO. Sheetmetal updates - except for maybe an updated hood design to go better with the new grille/front end look, no, I would agree that no sheetmetal changes really need to be made at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 On the other hand, if you have a bigger family and regularly take long trips, you'll need the luggage space. Why do people always forget about luggage racks when making this argument? They would be inconvenient to use every day, but for the once or twice annual family vacation, it sure beats having to buy far more vehicle than you need for the other 50 weeks of the year for a lot of people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Why do people always forget about luggage racks when making this argument? They would be inconvenient to use every day, but for the once or twice annual family vacation, it sure beats having to buy far more vehicle than you need for the other 50 weeks of the year for a lot of people. They add to the wind noise for those other 50 weeks of the year you don't use it LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 They add to the wind noise for those other 50 weeks of the year you don't use it LOL So get one that mounts to the tow hitch then. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 So get one that mounts to the tow hitch then. :P I've used one of these on many a road trip: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Why do people always forget about luggage racks when making this argument? They would be inconvenient to use every day, but for the once or twice annual family vacation, it sure beats having to buy far more vehicle than you need for the other 50 weeks of the year for a lot of people. and you and I always seem to be the same two that bring that up...along with the rack mounted Thule storage bins..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Why do people always forget about luggage racks when making this argument? They would be inconvenient to use every day, but for the once or twice annual family vacation, it sure beats having to buy far more vehicle than you need for the other 50 weeks of the year for a lot of people. I'm guessing most folks like having their stuff inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captainp4 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I always think of my uncle driving into the low ceiling parking lot under the hotel we were staying at on one of our family vacations and smashing the whole luggage rack off of the top of his cuv at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryQW Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Gotcha. I ask 'cause we're planning on having 4 kids, which means that on road trips, all three rows would have to be used. From what I've observed with three-row crossovers, there's not a lot of space for many suitcases behind that third row. There's only about 17 cubic feet behind the third row. But that's true of about any crossover or minivan. I get 47 cubic feet behind the second row. which allows full amount of camping gear and things. The extra 16 cubic feet in the cargo box on top allows me to see out the rear windows. When I take six big mountain bikers, there's plenty of room behind the third row for everyone's pack, helmet, and other personal gear. But it's probably too small for most travel with six people. Unless maybe you pack light and stay in a hotel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryQW Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Why do people always forget about luggage racks when making this argument? They would be inconvenient to use every day, but for the once or twice annual family vacation, it sure beats having to buy far more vehicle than you need for the other 50 weeks of the year for a lot of people. That was exactly my thinking when I went for a Crossover versus an SUV. Why buy an Excursion for just two weeks of need per year, but suffer the poor truck handling and miserable mileage (14 versus 22 MPG) the other 50 weeks. For a fraction of the huge price difference, I got a cargo box to make up the capacity difference for those two weeks. My Yakima Skybox16 is aerodynamic and doesn't affect mileage much - either way I get 24-26 MPG on a level highway at 65 MPH. The crossbars don't make any wind noise, but they can be removed from the Landing Pads in 30 seconds, so I take them off when not needed, just for appearance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm guessing most folks like having their stuff inside. Or they simply don't thoroughly consider their other options at the time of purchase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Or they simply don't thoroughly consider their other options at the time of purchase. Options considered or not, everyone still has their preferences. Personally, I prefer keeping everything inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm guessing most folks like having their stuff inside. are they the same people that complain about ever esculating prices, size of vehicles, curb weight and mileage? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 are they the same people that complain about ever esculating prices, size of vehicles, curb weight and mileage? Nah... those folks are often the ones who aren't in the market anyway and complain just to complain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) Ford already builds the equivelent of minivans (MPVs) in Europe... A little smaller than the current minivan size, but that could change. 5-passenger C-Max: 172in Long and 72in Wide 7-passenger Grand C-Max: 178in Long and 72in Wide 5-passenger S-Max: 188in Long and 74in Wide 5-passenger Galaxy: 190in Long and 74in Wide The C-Max and Grand C-Max are based on the Focus and the S-Max and Galaxy are based on the Mondeo. Only the Grand C-Max has traditional sliding rear doors... While the difference between the S-Max and Galaxy is that the Galaxy is more of a tradional boxy van while the S-Max is "low and sporty". From this we could get a NA sized minivan to compete with Crysler, Toyota, and Honda. Depending on the future the following could be a single family. New Fusion/Mondeo: 190in Long and 74in Wide New S-Max: 188in Long and 74in Wide New Edge: 188in Long and 76in Wide New Taurus: 198in Long and 76in Wide New Galaxy: 196in Long and 76in Wide New Explorer: 196in Long and 78in Wide Edited February 26, 2011 by Kris Kolman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 Ford already builds the equivelent of minivans (MPVs) in Europe... A little smaller than the current minivan size, but that could change. 5-passenger C-Max: 172in Long and 72in Wide 7-passenger Grand C-Max: 178in Long and 72in Wide 5-passenger S-Max: 188in Long and 74in Wide 5-passenger Galaxy: 190in Long and 74in Wide The C-Max and Grand C-Max are based on the Focus and the S-Max and Galaxy are based on the Mondeo. Only the Grand C-Max has traditional sliding rear doors... While the difference between the S-Max and Galaxy is that the Galaxy is more of a tradional boxy van while the S-Max is "low and sporty". From this we could get a NA sized minivan to compete with Crysler, Toyota, and Honda. Depending on the future the following could be a single family. New Fusion/Mondeo: 190in Long and 74in Wide New S-Max: 188in Long and 74in Wide New Edge: 188in Long and 76in Wide New Taurus: 198in Long and 76in Wide New Galaxy: 196in Long and 76in Wide New Explorer: 196in Long and 78in Wide ford's EUCD triplets wer compromised more than the focus c-maxes were. There is very few differences between the S-max and galaxy, other than the Roof line and longer rear over hang. If it had to be done again I could see a galaxy with sliders and an S-max with only one A pillar with it's own windshield. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 Ya... Was thinking next generation platform... Should have been clearer. It seems to me the Galaxy was a late addition to the Mondeo platform. It was until 2006 a badge engineering job from a VW platform (Sharon). It doesn't seem Ford needs to have two vehicles occupying the same size. There is little separating the two and I would say one vehicle, S-Max, could service that market alone. But I'm thinking the next Galaxy could come from the next generation Taurus... Which itself is rumored to be a length and width stretch from the same next generation Mondeo platform. Lincoln would still need a platform mate for the MKT and if the C-Max gets Ford back into the minivan segment than a Galaxy as opposed to a new Flex seems like a good candidate. It would of course be NA sized and be equipped with sliding doors (MKT would retain regular doors), but because of the common Mondeo heritage it doesn't seem unreasonable for export/assembly worldwide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryQW Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 A compact minivan is an oxymoron in the US. People in the US want minivans for extra size and utility. Compact minivans may work in Europe due to their small vehicle culture, well founded by their small roads, limited parking, tight alleys, and very high priced gas. We don't have that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John E Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 What I really want is for Ford to offer Focus and Fusion wagons in the U.S. My tough-to-beat benchmark vehicle is the 2001 VW Passat wagon my wife and I bought new exactly 10 years ago -- perfect size, decent fuel economy, good road manners, safety, and handling. I always bought American cars until Ford, GM, and Chrysler abandoned the sport sedan based wagon market, and that led us to VW/Audi. I want a low roofline and a low center of gravity, not an SUV or a minivan. By the way, our first car was a 1976 Ford Pinto Squire wagon, which provided us with cheap and mostly reliable transportation for 16 years, until it got stolen(!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 We'll see... Interesting point is that the Grand C-Max is amazing close, little bigger, than the original Chrysler minivan size (178 in vs. 176 in). We'll see if the lower price point, better fuel economy, and more practical demensions appeal to young families. For some bigger isn't always better, and considering how little Ford needs to spend to manufacture the C-Max next to the Focus it makes sense at ~50,000 units per year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 We'll see... Interesting point is that the Grand C-Max is amazing close, little bigger, than the original Chrysler minivan size (178 in vs. 176 in). It might be interesting, but if you look at the market since the the Mid-1980's...ALL cars have gotten quite a bit larger. I was checking out an old Civic from the early 1990's and a new Fit was next to it, and the Fit towered over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 We'll see... Interesting point is that the Grand C-Max is amazing close, little bigger, than the original Chrysler minivan size (178 in vs. 176 in). We'll see if the lower price point, better fuel economy, and more practical demensions appeal to young families. For some bigger isn't always better, and considering how little Ford needs to spend to manufacture the C-Max next to the Focus it makes sense at ~50,000 units per year. this may be off-base but imho it makes a difference that the GCM is the extended C-Max where the 175.9" ovl Mopar minivan was the short wheelbase version (the long wlb was over 190"ovl) 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.