Jump to content
  • Custom Search


ANTAUS

'19 Year End Sale Totals

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, grbeck said:

When publications as disparate as Car and Driver and Consumer Reports pan the noise level and overall refinement of the three-cylinder Escape (particularly in view of the asking price), I'd say that there is more going on here than people not wanting to accept something new and/or different.

 

Huh?
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a29077713/2020-ford-escape-drive/




The Escape's base powerplant, a turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-three-cylinder, produces 181 horsepower and 190 lb-ft of torque, which comes on quickly and relatively smoothly and is fully adequate for getting this compact ute up to a moderate pace. Which is a good thing, considering it is the only mill to be had on S and SE trim levels. The run from zero to 60 mph in our all-wheel-drive SE test car takes 7.7 seconds, and the quarter-mile is dispatched in 15.9 seconds at 87 mph—leagues ahead of the 9.2- and 16.9-second measurements we recorded for a previous-generation front-drive Escape with the now-defunct turbo 1.5-liter inline-four. There's a throaty warble to the triple's engine note under load that could only come from an inline-three. Our one complaint is some faint boominess inside the cabin when the cylinder-deactivation system occasionally kicks in and idles one of the cylinders.

 

Sounds like it just describing how a I3 operates vs a I4...not that its terrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the 3 cyl isn’t its power. It wasn’t fast but it was adequate for most drivers. The problem was the sound and vibration. I don’t care how nice the vehicle looks on the inside, people will get the impression that it’s a cheap vehicle from the sound alone. If ford put some more sound deadening material in it or used the active noise cancellation, or even pumped in some fake engine noise, it would go a long way in making the escape feel like it matches its price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading multiple reviews it sounds like the NVH issues are being exaggerated a bit.  Half the reviews don't even mention it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of Americans still resist the thought of a three cylinder anything regardless of how good it may seem, it just adds to the feeling of cost cutting especially when they look around the cabin, consider the price and package relative to RAV4 and Equinox that are selling the house down month after month. It may not be one thing in isolation but a string of doubts in a buyers mental checklist, things that shouldn’t matter suddenly become an issue and the buyer walks because they see what they want over there.

 

 I’ve seen this happen where the slightest thing sets off a cascade of “nope let’s get out of here” and you really wonder WTF just happen- salespeople call it the splash but to me it’s like psycho irrational pull out. It’s like everything has to be perfect and quite the opposite of dumb bunnies going OK to everything the salesperson says.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good technical explanation about NVH in 3-cylinder engines. https://www.carthrottle.com/post/heres-the-problem-with-three-cylinder-engines/

 

Quote

"An inline three-cylinder engine is essentially a straight six engine lopped in half. Normally in a straight six, the two outer cylinders reach top dead centre (TDC) in unison, with the other four cylinders reaching specific angles of rotation to balance the primary forces, secondary forces and rotational torque of the engine nicely.

 

In a three-pot, piston one (the front piston) reaches TDC while the other two are 120 degrees away from either TDC or bottom dead centre (BDC). This means that the primary and secondary forces are balanced vertically, but the torque over the reciprocating pistons is not matched in unison like in an I6. Instead, the engine is trying to naturally rotate and flip over on itself. So to avert this, a balancing shaft is needed to counteract the twisting force.

 

The torque inbalance (shared with inline-five engines) makes for a rattling powertrain as the engine tries to rock from end-to-end, even when balanced as much as physically possible. This is due to the weight of the balancing shaft that the crankshaft has to work against, making these engines less free-revving than their more-balanced counterparts. Counterweights can also be machined into the crankshaft itself but they also add weight, decreasing its ability to rotate freely.

Also, due to the fact that ignition occurs every 240 degrees, the crankshaft journals are spaced 120 degrees apart. This means that there will be a significant proportion of crankshaft rotation (60 degrees) when no power stroke is occurring. That reciprocatory feature leads to the lack of smoothness in power delivery and large amounts of vibration that three-cylinder engines are notorious for. The rough-running engine behaviour will be emphasised at lower engine speeds especially, due to the lack of power strokes occurring."

 

4ddca0e3cd28ed34b269106c81472ee0.gif

Edited by rperez817

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NVH is a minor issue IMO.  The bigger issue is that the Rav4 has a larger (2.5L NA) engine with better NVH but also MORE power and BETTER fuel economy.  What's the point of using a smaller 3 cylinder turbo if it can't beat a 2.5L NA on power or fuel economy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, akirby said:

NVH is a minor issue IMO.  The bigger issue is that the Rav4 has a larger (2.5L NA) engine with better NVH but also MORE power and BETTER fuel economy.  What's the point of using a smaller 3 cylinder turbo if it can't beat a 2.5L NA on power or fuel economy?

 

Exactly!  Since I'm now 1 for 2 in having an EB fail on me, I can't imagine that I'll be eager to purchase another one.

 

HRG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Exactly!  Since I'm now 1 for 2 in having an EB fail on me, I can't imagine that I'll be eager to purchase another one.

 

HRG

 

Ford did not repair under warranty, and give you a loaner until the vehicle was repaired?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Exactly!  Since I'm now 1 for 2 in having an EB fail on me, I can't imagine that I'll be eager to purchase another one.

 

That's not usually the case though with other ecoboosts.   E.g. in F150 the 2.7LEB produces the same power as the 5.0L but gets 3 mpg better while the 3.5LEB gets the same fuel economy but FAR more power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, akirby said:

NVH is a minor issue IMO.  The bigger issue is that the Rav4 has a larger (2.5L NA) engine with better NVH but also MORE power and BETTER fuel economy.  What's the point of using a smaller 3 cylinder turbo if it can't beat a 2.5L NA on power or fuel economy?

 

Seems like just a couple of years back the Ford Escape was an extremely popular vehicle in the Denver Metro area.  I have yet to see any 2020's on the road, not even a rental (that might be a good thing).  In the meantime the RAV4, CR-V, and the lookalike Koreans are all over the place!  I didn't think the 2020 was styled that bad, it takes a different style direction from the Asians but their over-creased edgy bodies are not my thing.  On a positive anecdotal note - the new Explorer is seen a lot and really presents itself as a clean, modern design.  Lincoln also, seems to be much more prevalent in the So-Cal Wannabe Denver Burbs. 

Edited by Kev-Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

Ford did not repair under warranty, and give you a loaner until the vehicle was repaired?

 

Yes they repaired under warranty, and yes they provided a loaner. But, I was still without MY vehicle for almost 6 weeks, in what seems not be a random failure, according to my dealer.

 

Did Ford take care of the problem, yes. But I'm not sure that I won't dump this vehicle before the powertrain warranty expires. In 40 years of buying new vehicles, this is the first one that's needed this kind of repair. Coincidentally, my first turbo-charged one.

 

HRG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2020 at 8:18 AM, silvrsvt said:

 

I'm wondering if the low PIU sales are due to late roll out of them in summertime combined with the fucked up launch of the Explorer? Should be interesting how sales play out early this year. 

 

I haven't seen any local agencies with the new PIU in their fleet and my local PD just got some Chargers after using Explorers. 

 A lot of departments around me have switched away from Ford all together including the State Patrol.  

 

Once county has had nine of their Explorer PIs on order destroyed by Ford because they could not be fixed.  One agency has gone with the Tahoe exclusively.  

 

I think a lot of agencies were surprised at the price increase of the Explorer PI.

Edited by sho94_2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picked up my explorer the other day from getting repaired for its transmission cooler leak. The service guy said they had 3 or 4 more with the same problem being repaired (not to mention the several people here who have mentioned they had the same issue). I wonder if we will see a recall on the explorer for this issue. It’s had a bunch of bad press already that could be affecting its sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Exactly!  Since I'm now 1 for 2 in having an EB fail on me, I can't imagine that I'll be eager to purchase another one.

 

HRG

 

16 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Yes they repaired under warranty, and yes they provided a loaner. But, I was still without MY vehicle for almost 6 weeks, in what seems not be a random failure, according to my dealer.

 

Did Ford take care of the problem, yes. But I'm not sure that I won't dump this vehicle before the powertrain warranty expires. In 40 years of buying new vehicles, this is the first one that's needed this kind of repair. Coincidentally, my first turbo-charged one.

 

HRG

 

So you had a non-turbocharged Ecoboost?? :headscratch:

Edited by twintornados

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

 

So you had a non-turbocharged Ecoboost?? :headscratch:

 

No, this is the first vehicle I've ever had that had a turbo-charged engine, in this case a 1.5L 4-cyl EB.  Everything prior had been NA.

 

HRG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

No, this is the first vehicle I've ever had that had a turbo-charged engine, in this case a 1.5L 4-cyl EB.  Everything prior had been NA.

 

HRG

 

1 hour ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Exactly!  Since I'm now 1 for 2 in having an EB fail on me, I can't imagine that I'll be eager to purchase another one.

 

HRG

 

Your "I'm now 1 for 2 in having an EB fail on me" comment is not accurate then? It would lead one to presume that you have had two EB powered vehicles and one needed warranty repairs. 

Edited by twintornados

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

 

Your "I'm now 1 for 2 in having an EB fail on me" comment is not accurate then? It would lead one to presume that you have had two EB powered vehicles and one needed warranty repairs. 

 

I also now have a 2019 Edge in the garage, with the 2.0 4-cyl EB. Bought before the '18 puked.

 

HRG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

I also now have a 2019 Edge in the garage, with the 2.0 4-cyl EB. Bought before the '18 puked.

 

HRG

 

 

So, the comment below is inaccurate....thank you for the clarification. I get it now...the '18 was your first turbocharged vehicle purchased.

 

16 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

No, this is the first vehicle I've ever had that had a turbo-charged engine, in this case a 1.5L 4-cyl EB.  Everything prior had been NA.

 

HRG

 

Edited by twintornados

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Huh?
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a29077713/2020-ford-escape-drive/

 

 

 

Sounds like it just describing how a I3 operates vs a I4...not that its terrible. 

 

I believe that this is the preview of the new Escape.


The actual road test is in a later issue. I have to look it up when I get home tonight (I still buy the actual copies of the magazine), but it was much less positive regarding the new Escape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

So, the comment below is inaccurate....thank you for the clarification.

 

 

 

Read it again. Everything PRIOR to the 2018 Escape had been NA.  The 2019 Edge was bought after the Escape, but before the 1.5 EB failed.

 

Spin this any way you want, what happened to me is a FACT. I'd be more than happy to post the 3 page list of parts that were replaced.

 

HRG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Read it again. Everything PRIOR to the 2018 Escape had been NA.  The 2019 Edge was bought after the Escape, but before the 1.5 EB failed.

 

Spin this any way you want, what happened to me is a FACT. I'd be more than happy to post the 3 page list of parts that were replaced.

 

HRG

 

Go back as see my correction to my comment...and, I would love to see the list. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, akirby said:

NVH is a minor issue IMO.  The bigger issue is that the Rav4 has a larger (2.5L NA) engine with better NVH but also MORE power and BETTER fuel economy.  What's the point of using a smaller 3 cylinder turbo if it can't beat a 2.5L NA on power or fuel economy?

In a nutshell, yes.

RAV4 and Equinox are just so popular because buyers see a package that looks nice and works for most of them. 

If Ford is taking Escape upmarket, the  base engine has to reflect that and exceed the competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is AWD for comparision.  Personally I want AWD, so that's all that matters to me.  Anyway, the "BETTER fuel economy" statement isn't exactly right.  Only Honda is better combined FE.

 

fuel.thumb.png.357b1c5e93a397de09b2fd95b2ec13a6.png

Edited by 92merc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add, with AWD and Toyota, it's a 2.5 only.  And Honda is a 1.5 turbo only.  Only in Chevy and Ford do you get a choice.

 

And with the Chevy 2.0 turbo, it's 24 combined, 22 city, 28 highway.

 

Ford is 26/23/31.  So considerably better than Chevy.  And for me, it's 2.0 EB or go home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×