Hugh Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) Autoblog 2 Surprises: The classic Dark Blue Pearl Metallic is still a wonderful colour IMHO. Second, this version did not have EPAS which is surprising. I used it enough in the Fusion, Focus and Fiesta and found it to be just great. I think it was available in the Taurus, Flex and Edge I drove but I could be wrong. Edited December 28, 2011 by Hugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 The sport utility vehicle became an endangered species not long after fuel prices began to skyrocket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss444 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) The sport utility vehicle became an endangered species not long after fuel prices began to skyrocket. LOL...The SUV is like the "super size" fries from McDonalds. McDonalds, under pressure from the health nazis, got rid of their super size fries...except that they didn't. They just relabeled them "large". Same thing with the SUV. It never went away. Traverse, Tahoe, Suburban, Expedition, Explorer, Edge, Escape, etc. They are all SUVs. But in an effort to pander to the enviro nazis, the auto makers renamed them "crossovers" or "utilities". On the Edge Eb though...I think it's a great combination...but it's stupid that the V6 Edge can't tow more. Such short sightedness. Edited December 28, 2011 by Boss444 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) I call my Edge and MKX "SUVs", rarely "Crossovers". To me, the Edge/MKX are akin to the Jeep Grand Cherokee and even the original Explorer, 5-seater midsize SUVs. If Ford dropped the Edge/MKX or botched it someway, the Jeep Grand Cherokee is a likely replacement in my garage. Edited December 28, 2011 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) LOL...The SUV is like the "super size" fries from McDonalds. McDonalds, under pressure from the health nazis, got rid of their super size fries...except that they didn't. They just relabeled them "large". Same thing with the SUV. It never went away. Traverse, Tahoe, Suburban, Expedition, Explorer, Edge, Escape, etc. They are all SUVs. But in an effort to pander to the enviro nazis, the auto makers renamed them "crossovers" or "utilities". There is a difference between an SUV, a CUV and a 4WD but they are all Utilities and as such for the purpose of CAFE, they all come under Trucks. And if you knew anything about the history and evolution of SUVs, you would know that nearly all of the changes have been customer driven. Continuous improvement in fuel economy and more refined, car like driving experience is something buyers have zeroed in on... On the Edge Eb though...I think it's a great combination...but it's stupid that the V6 Edge can't tow more. Such short sightedness. The mazda based CD3S Edge is on a dead end platform, that's why Ford didn't spend any money on EPASS and increasing the Vehicle's tow rating. As basically a five seater hatchback on stilts, I doubt very few people would want to tow much more than a small box trailer.. Edited December 28, 2011 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mlhm5 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Is the Ecoboost worth the $1K upgrade price. Well if you plan to keep the car for 50K miles, you will break even, not counting difference in trade in vs the 3.5L Edge. "We averaged a surprising 25.1 miles per gallon during our week of driving. For comparison's sake, we averaged 21.9 mpg in the 3.5-liter-equipped Edge, itself a reasonable number. Assuming our 3.2 mpg difference is representative of real-world fuel economy, is the EcoBoost's efficiency increase worth $995? If we assume 12,000 miles per year and 87 octane gas sits at $3.50/gallon, the EcoBoost owner can expect to pay $1,673 for fuel each year. The equivalent 3.5-liter V6 owner faces a $1,917 tab – $245 more than the EcoBoost model. That means the $995 price tag of the EcoBoost model should pay for itself in about four years or about 50,000 miles. " Who would have thought in 2002 that in 2012 25mpg would be something to brag about. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Is the Ecoboost worth the $1K upgrade price. Well if you plan to keep the car for 50K miles, you will break even, not counting difference in trade in vs the 3.5L Edge. "We averaged a surprising 25.1 miles per gallon during our week of driving. For comparison's sake, we averaged 21.9 mpg in the 3.5-liter-equipped Edge, itself a reasonable number. Assuming our 3.2 mpg difference is representative of real-world fuel economy, is the EcoBoost's efficiency increase worth $995? If we assume 12,000 miles per year and 87 octane gas sits at $3.50/gallon, the EcoBoost owner can expect to pay $1,673 for fuel each year. The equivalent 3.5-liter V6 owner faces a $1,917 tab – $245 more than the EcoBoost model. That means the $995 price tag of the EcoBoost model should pay for itself in about four years or about 50,000 miles. " Who would have thought in 2002 that in 2012 25mpg would be something to brag about. interesting coming from a self confessed diesel proponent.....regardless, I think MPGS is a mindset and poeople overlook the cost of the upgrade, which at $1000 is pretty reasonable....and I alos think the break even would be a tad earlier due to the fact that a majority of driving is not at a constant speed, the smaller displacement will have more of an advantage in around town climates... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 I'd rather have AWD than MPGs....the FE benefits of the 2.0L EB don't make sense on the Edge since they are not significant. If you need an FE SUV, the Escape is your car. But it's an interesting option nonetheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mlhm5 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) interesting coming from a self confessed diesel proponent.....regardless, I think MPGS is a mindset and poeople overlook the cost of the upgrade, which at $1000 is pretty reasonable....and I alos think the break even would be a tad earlier due to the fact that a majority of driving is not at a constant speed, the smaller displacement will have more of an advantage in around town climates... I admit to being a diesel guy, however I'm not buying a 4,000lb diesel until I see 40mpg. I have read that the the $39,995 Volt is too expensive, and weighs too much at 3,800 pounds, and only gets 100+ mpg according to actual owner's OnStar statistics and according to Romney, a car whose time has not yet come. The same folks won't even question the success of a $38,910 Edge (as tested in the article I quoted) that weighs 4,000 pounds, and gets 25 mpg? Could be because Ford already established successful sales with the same price range, and even heavier weight and lower MPG with their outgoing V6 version of the same vehicle. It's a very odd, odd world we live in. One set of standards for "green" cars, and a completely different standard for every other car on the market. Just saying. Edited December 28, 2011 by mlhm5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 I admit to being a diesel guy, however I'm not buying a 4,000lb diesel until I see 40mpg. I have read that the the $39,995 Volt is too expensive, and weighs too much at 3,800 pounds, and only gets 100+ mpg according to actual owner's OnStar statistics and according to Romney, a car whose time has not yet come. The same folks won't even question the success of a $38,910 Edge (as tested in the article I quoted) that weighs 4,000 pounds, and gets 25 mpg? Could be because Ford already established successful sales with the same price range, and even heavier weight and lower MPG with their outgoing V6 version of the same vehicle. It's a very odd, odd world we live in. One set of standards for "green" cars, and a completely different standard for every other car on the market. Just saying. The Edge also gives you 5 seats (the Volt has 4) and more than 55 additional cubic feet of cargo room (68.0 vs 10.6 for the Volt). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 The Edge also gives you 5 seats (the Volt has 4) and more than 55 additional cubic feet of cargo room (68.0 vs 10.6 for the Volt). Don't try to debate the troll. He'll just hang around longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 I admit to being a diesel guy, however I'm not buying a 4,000lb diesel until I see 40mpg. I have read that the the $39,995 Volt is too expensive, and weighs too much at 3,800 pounds, and only gets 100+ mpg according to actual owner's OnStar statistics and according to Romney, a car whose time has not yet come. The same folks won't even question the success of a $38,910 Edge (as tested in the article I quoted) that weighs 4,000 pounds, and gets 25 mpg? Could be because Ford already established successful sales with the same price range, and even heavier weight and lower MPG with their outgoing V6 version of the same vehicle. It's a very odd, odd world we live in. One set of standards for "green" cars, and a completely different standard for every other car on the market. Just saying. hear you, but COMPARATIVELY speaking those are pretty good numbers in the Edges size class, and it seems to be THE size people are embracing. AND the car drives great, comfortable, quiet, peppy and feature laden ( no barbs about MFT please ) as for the volt, ive yet to see something that actually adds in the cost of the electricity to charge the beast then calculates how much gas that equals....dont know about anyone else here, but Electricity isnt free by any means....my home bill is $250 plus a month, the gas bill for my bike @ 38mpgs is $100. PPS, I guess weight reduction is being adressed by Ford in a big way in the next few....course, by that time the crash standards will be incresed 10 fold countering any weight savings and the use of exotic materials will explain the base price of $25k for the 2015 Ford Fiesta.....lol.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 I'd rather have AWD than MPGs....the FE benefits of the 2.0L EB don't make sense on the Edge since they are not significant. If you need an FE SUV, the Escape is your car. But it's an interesting option nonetheless. What do you need AWD for? They've got plows in the suburbs right? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Don't try to debate the troll. He'll just hang around longer. Sorry, it was a weak moment. bububu let's compare a compact sedan to a midsize utility bububu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 (edited) What do you need AWD for? They've got plows in the suburbs right? Sure, when they get around to it. But in the interim (or while it's snowing), AWD is a nice luxury. And besides, AWD offers other performance benefits. Edited December 29, 2011 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Sorry, it was a weak moment. bububu let's compare a compact sedan to a midsize utility bububu Watch this and follow my lead...... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 I admit to being a diesel guy, however I'm not buying a 4,000lb diesel until I see 40mpg. I have read that the the $39,995 Volt is too expensive, and weighs too much at 3,800 pounds, and only gets 100+ mpg according to actual owner's OnStar statistics and according to Romney, a car whose time has not yet come. The same folks won't even question the success of a $38,910 Edge (as tested in the article I quoted) that weighs 4,000 pounds, and gets 25 mpg? Could be because Ford already established successful sales with the same price range, and even heavier weight and lower MPG with their outgoing V6 version of the same vehicle. It's a very odd, odd world we live in. One set of standards for "green" cars, and a completely different standard for every other car on the market. Just saying. OK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 (edited) What do you need AWD for? They've got plows in the suburbs right? Even on plowed roads that are snow packed and slippery AWD really helps when taking off and reduces the chance of wheel spin while driving. Where I live I would never even consider a two wheel drive vehicle. Edited December 29, 2011 by 2005Explorer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Even on plowed roads that are snow packed and slippery AWD really helps when taking off and reduces the chance of wheel spin while driving. Where I live I would never even consider a two wheel drive vehicle. That's the key...where you live and the terrain. When I owned my 4WD Bronco ll, I also had a vacation home up in Northern MI town that averaged about 150 inches of snow/season and was hilly terrain. So the Bronco ll with traction lock on both axles came in pretty handy. Only got stuck once, and after digging with shovel for 30 minutes got out fine. But in Metro Detroit it was a waste of money that averages about 30 inches of snow/season and terrain is flat. We are called "Flatlanders" by Northern MI folk. My FWD Taurus is fine in the snow, even when we get the occssional 12 inch storm every three three years or so. And no problem driving on snow covered road with it. And the other 11 months and 15 days the roads are pretty much clear of snow I get much better fuel mileage than any AWD vehicle of same size and weight. So if you live in the snow belt and hilly terrain, an AWD/4WD really comes in handy, and if you don't or live in warm year around area, big waste of money IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 That's the key...where you live and the terrain. When I owned my 4WD Bronco ll, I also had a vacation home up in Northern MI town that averaged about 150 inches of snow/season and was hilly terrain. So the Bronco ll with traction lock on both axles came in pretty handy. Only got stuck once, and after digging with shovel for 30 minutes got out fine. But in Metro Detroit it was a waste of money that averages about 30 inches of snow/season and terrain is flat. We are called "Flatlanders" by Northern MI folk. My FWD Taurus is fine in the snow, even when we get the occssional 12 inch storm every three three years or so. And no problem driving on snow covered road with it. And the other 11 months and 15 days the roads are pretty much clear of snow I get much better fuel mileage than any AWD vehicle of same size and weight. So if you live in the snow belt and hilly terrain, an AWD/4WD really comes in handy, and if you don't or live in warm year around area, big waste of money IMO. You don't live in Rochester HILLS, I live at the top of one of them 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss444 Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 (edited) There is a difference between an SUV, a CUV and a 4WD but they are all Utilities and as such for the purpose of CAFE, they all come under Trucks. And if you knew anything about the history and evolution of SUVs, you would know that nearly all of the changes have been customer driven. Continuous improvement in fuel economy and more refined, car like driving experience is something buyers have zeroed in on... Other than marketing speak...I really don't see the difference. Engines (or lack of), drive systems, and structure do not make a vehicle. Jeep has shown us that. The mazda based CD3S Edge is on a dead end platform, that's why Ford didn't spend any money on EPASS and increasing the Vehicle's tow rating.As basically a five seater hatchback on stilts, I doubt very few people would want to tow much more than a small box trailer.. I would love to replace my Expedition with a V6 Edge that could tow my boat and gear. I also have a family member that's in the same boat (pun completely intended). Is it really that wild of a concept that a mid-sized SUV can tow more than 3500 pounds. Is there really only a market for 7 passenger vehicles that can tow 5K pounds? Edited December 29, 2011 by Boss444 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 You don't live in Rochester HILLS, I live at the top of one of them Believe me those aren't hills. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 The answer as to why the Edge cannot tow more has already been addressed. That you have chosed to ignore said explanation, is par for the course. When/if the Edge moves to a different platform, then there will be more options available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 What do you need AWD for? They've got plows in the suburbs right? "needs are only strongly felt wants." Dr. Micheal Spicer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Even on plowed roads that are snow packed and slippery AWD really helps when taking off and reduces the chance of wheel spin while driving. Where I live I would never even consider a two wheel drive vehicle. I've been to Lead, and I've been to central Michigan (Detroit suburbs, Lansing, Saginaw, etc.) Big difference. I've never felt a need for AWD--of course, I live in a core area that is plowed non-stop during snow storms...... 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.