Ford Escape Remains On Track For Discontinuation By 2026: Report

[Rick73]

19 minutes ago, akirby said:

Tweaking existing designs are all that is needed.  If there was a need for a new engine somewhere then something totally new like an I6 would be possible, but if the existing v6 and V8 engines are solid (and they are) then there is no reason to develop an entirely new engine.  Just like there is no reason to develop a new ICE platform.

 

Tweak the existing stuff like they did with MPC.

Didn't Ford claim 2.3L MPC EB is an all-new engine in their press release?  Not what I would consider a tweak — just happens to have same displacement.

 

For what it’s worth, I doubt existing V6s can be tweaked or modified enough to approach MPC geometry due to physical limitations.  But like you said, Ford may be fine with keeping 2.7, 3.0, and 3.5 around until all engines go extinct.  I doubt it, but that’s just a personal opinion.  In any case, not Escape related, so back to topic.

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Didn't Ford claim 2.3L MPC EB is an all-new engine in their press release?  Not what I would consider a tweak — just happens to have same displacement.

 

For what it’s worth, I doubt existing V6s can be tweaked or modified enough to approach MPC geometry due to physical limitations.  But like you said, Ford may be fine with keeping 2.7, 3.0, and 3.5 around until all engines go extinct.  I doubt it, but that’s just a personal opinion.  In any case, not Escape related, so back to topic.

 

 

The biggest difference between the old 2.3L and the MPC 2.3L is the addition of port injection, it also has archtechture differences of with bore decreased to 84 mm (3.31 in) and the stroke increased to 102 mm (4.02 in), which comes out to nearly the exact same displacement of 2.3 L (2,261 cc; 138 cu in). The compression ratio is increased to 10.634:1. Valve diameter and lift are increased, with intake and exhaust valve diameters of 34 mm (1.3 in) and 28.9 mm (1.14 in) respectively, and both valve types lifting up to 9 mm (0.35 in).

Port Injection already existed on the the Nano V6 (2.7 and 3.0L Ecoboost) and the Cyclone V6 3.5L Ecoboost. From what I understand, the port injection is help cut down on particulate emissions and cut down on sludge build up on DI engines. So the V6 where already more "advanced" then the I4

 

I'm SWAGing that it might be possible to make an inline 5 and 6 cylinder (maybe an I3 if they wanted to) from this engine also, since it is a "modular power cylinder" design, but given how the modular term has been used at Ford for the past 30 years, it might be just be that the same engine can be built on the same line like the modular V8/10 back in the day. 

Edited May 21 by Sherminator98

[bzcat]

Having just seen what Toyota is doing with the new 2026 RAV4, I see why Farley wanted to drag Escape to the shed and shoot it.

 

Ford is so far behind the segment leader it reminds me of 1989 4th gen Honda Accord that came out about the same time as the 2nd gen Tempo - I remember one of the car magazine asked how can two cars (Accord and Tempo) developed in the same spacetime continuum targeting the same buyers end up being so far apart in execution? 

[DeluxeStang]

18 minutes ago, bzcat said:

Having just seen what Toyota is doing with the new 2026 RAV4, I see why Farley wanted to drag Escape to the shed and shoot it.

 

Ford is so far behind the segment leader it reminds me of 1989 4th gen Honda Accord that came out about the same time as the 2nd gen Tempo - I remember one of the car magazine asked how can two cars (Accord and Tempo) developed in the same spacetime continuum targeting the same buyers end up being so far apart in execution? 

The new rav 4 is a prime example of how you can take a commodity boring product and redesign it to be more aspirational, kinda like what Toyota did with the latest Gen Prius as well. The rav 4 and Prius, 2 ugly and slow boring products. What did Toyota do?

 

Make them fun to drive and better looking. There's nothing stopping Ford from doing the same with the escape. 

[jpd80]

36 minutes ago, bzcat said:

Having just seen what Toyota is doing with the new 2026 RAV4, I see why Farley wanted to drag Escape to the shed and shoot it.

 

Ford is so far behind the segment leader it reminds me of 1989 4th gen Honda Accord that came out about the same time as the 2nd gen Tempo - I remember one of the car magazine asked how can two cars (Accord and Tempo) developed in the same spacetime continuum targeting the same buyers end up being so far apart in execution? 

And the answer is Ford Europe was looking at its own market and covering 

the assumption that Focus buyers would transition to this Escape design.

Escape was a key global product that Europe screwed up with a meh design.

 

The consequence of not effectively competing with RAV4 was that the Toyota’s sales last year were more than F Series, unseating it from that

40 odd year run as most popular vehicle crown.

 

Unfortunately, Fod is a slow learner tha must endure

the pain of loss before it reacts to the consequences 

of its poor decision making, it tolerated Escape’s under

Performing sales and suffered the consequences 

Edited May 21 by jpd80

[akirby]

35 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

The new rav 4 is a prime example of how you can take a commodity boring product and redesign it to be more aspirational, kinda like what Toyota did with the latest Gen Prius as well. The rav 4 and Prius, 2 ugly and slow boring products. What did Toyota do?

 

Make them fun to drive and better looking. There's nothing stopping Ford from doing the same with the escape. 

Except Ford did that first with Bronco Sport.  All it needs is a longer wheelbase and hybrid powertrains to compete directly with RAV4.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, bzcat said:

Ford is so far behind the segment leader it reminds me of 1989 4th gen Honda Accord that came out about the same time as the 2nd gen Tempo - I remember one of the car magazine asked how can two cars (Accord and Tempo) developed in the same spacetime continuum targeting the same buyers end up being so far apart in execution? 

And F series and Transit and Bronco and Mustang and Maverick are so far ahead of anything Toyota has in those segments.

Edited May 21 by akirby

[rmc523]

13 minutes ago, akirby said:

Except Ford did that first with Bronco Sport.  All it needs is a longer wheelbase and hybrid powertrains to compete directly with RAV4.

 

Except Ford leaves the low hanging fruit there and lets it rot instead of grabbing it.

[DeluxeStang]

22 minutes ago, akirby said:

Except Ford did that first with Bronco Sport.  All it needs is a longer wheelbase and hybrid powertrains to compete directly with RAV4.

So I should start by saying that when it comes to our vision for what we want out of Ford, you and I differ in certain areas. It seems like you want Ford to lean even harder into the boxy, rugged off-road look, which given the success of the bronco and bronco sport, I understand. 

 

But seeing as they already offer multiple boxy, rugged utilities, I'd like to see an escape/edge replacement go another way to avoid cross model cannibalisation and redundant product strategy. Sporty, coupe style utilities are another sort of popular lifestyle SUV that Ford is mostly ignoring, all they have there is the mach-e, which being an EV, has limited appeal.

 

I personally believe an escape replacement that was larger than the current escape, but slightly smaller than the edge paired with hybrid setups would be a captivating product. But where we differ is I'd like to see styling that was more crisp, and sporty. This is an evos sketch, but some of the styling fell flat on the finished product. 

 

Obviously things like the massive wheels are never gonna make it to production, but the more muscular sculpting might be able to. Basically version 2 of the evos making it even better looking and offering it in the states. 

 

I believe this would appeal to the crowd who likes the look of the mach-e, but doesn't want to go full ev yet. It would give buyers more choice as to what sort of styling they wanted as well. If they wanted a more boxy BS or bronco, it's there. If they want more sports car like styling, they can buy one of these or a mach-e. 

 

I just passionately believe that just like how choice of powertrains is important, having a wide array of styling to choose from is also important. I don't believe every utility ford makes should have the same boxy off-roader look it it. 

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, bzcat said:

Ford is so far behind the segment leader it reminds me of 1989 4th gen Honda Accord that came out about the same time as the 2nd gen Tempo - I remember one of the car magazine asked how can two cars (Accord and Tempo) developed in the same spacetime continuum targeting the same buyers end up being so far apart in execution? 

 

The Tempo was nothing more then an stretched out Escort from 1981. Not to mention that during that era, subcompacts and compact cars where nothing more then cheap compliance vehicles for the big 3.

 

Then add in the disjointed efforts Ford had since 1989 with products-the Taurus was selling well till 1996 and was slotted at the primary midsized vehicle for Ford and the Contour (Tempo replacement) died off when the Focus hit the market in 1999. Not to mention Ford making huge money off the Explorer, car development that matched what the Japanese did didn't happen till the Fusion launched. 

[bzcat]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

And F series and Transit and Bronco and Mustang and Maverick are so far ahead of anything Toyota has in those segments.

 

One should be able to chew gum and walk at the same time. Those are great segment leading vehicles no doubt. I was just pointing out why Farley wants to pull the plug in Escape. When you fall behind so much, there is no point to keep trying. 

Edited May 21 by bzcat

[akirby]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

So I should start by saying that when it comes to our vision for what we want out of Ford, you and I differ in certain areas. It seems like you want Ford to lean even harder into the boxy, rugged off-road look, which given the success of the bronco and bronco sport, I understand. 

 

But seeing as they already offer multiple boxy, rugged utilities, I'd like to see an escape/edge replacement go another way to avoid cross model cannibalisation and redundant product strategy. Sporty, coupe style utilities are another sort of popular lifestyle SUV that Ford is mostly ignoring, all they have there is the mach-e, which being an EV, has limited appeal.

 

I personally believe an escape replacement that was larger than the current escape, but slightly smaller than the edge paired with hybrid setups would be a captivating product. But where we differ is I'd like to see styling that was more crisp, and sporty. This is an evos sketch, but some of the styling fell flat on the finished product. 

 

Obviously things like the massive wheels are never gonna make it to production, but the more muscular sculpting might be able to. Basically version 2 of the evos making it even better looking and offering it in the states. 

 

I believe this would appeal to the crowd who likes the look of the mach-e, but doesn't want to go full ev yet. It would give buyers more choice as to what sort of styling they wanted as well. If they wanted a more boxy BS or bronco, it's there. If they want more sports car like styling, they can buy one of these or a mach-e. 

 

I just passionately believe that just like how choice of powertrains is important, having a wide array of styling to choose from is also important. I don't believe every utility ford makes should have the same boxy off-roader look it it. 

 

I’m not against that at all.  I think Explorer styling is more sleek and sporty than boxy and off road.  Just that Bronco Sport is a proven winner that’s being underutilized and it would be cheaper and better to fully flesh it out first before doing something completely different.  It really comes down to priorities.

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, akirby said:

I’m not against that at all.  I think Explorer styling is more sleek and sporty than boxy and off road.  Just that Bronco Sport is a proven winner that’s being underutilized and it would be cheaper and better to fully flesh it out first before doing something completely different.  It really comes down to priorities.

Gotta love Ford,

it goes to all the trouble of developing BS and Maverick for Nth America only 

and then cancels Escape everywhere else in ROW markets.

[Sherminator98]

6 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Gotta love Ford,

it goes to all the trouble of developing BS and Maverick for Nth America only 

and then cancels Escape everywhere else in ROW markets.

 

I'm guessing that the CE1 products will be a better fit for ROW markets with the demands for EVs being stronger in the EU for example. Or you could argue that the Explorer and Capri EV are "replacements" for the Kuga/Escape. 

 

[Rick73]

Escape sales success should be viewed in proper context, particularly when comparing to Bronco Sport.  A big deal is being made of its styling, or lack thereof, but as mentioned previously, Escape gets fairly good ratings in that area.  That’s not to say it could not look better, only that appearance is probably not what’s holding it back the most.

 

[rmc523]

18 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

 

 

 

That'd look good with SUV proportions (vs. the longer, lower profile Evos got).

 

55 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Escape sales success should be viewed in proper context, particularly when comparing to Bronco Sport.  A big deal is being made of its styling, or lack thereof, but as mentioned previously, Escape gets fairly good ratings in that area.  That’s not to say it could not look better, only that appearance is probably not what’s holding it back the most.

 

 

Combined, Ford is around 70k, 4th place.....the problem is Escape used to be at or near the top on its own.

Edited May 22 by rmc523

[akirby]

7 hours ago, rmc523 said:

..the problem is Escape used to be at or near the top on its own.

Only because of stripped models and fleet sales.

Edited May 22 by akirby

[Flying68]

4 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

 

That'd look good with SUV proportions (vs. the longer, lower profile Evos got).

 

 

Combined, Ford is around 70k, 4th place.....the problem is Escape used to be at or near the top on its own.

When you combine Hyundai/KIA together, Chevy and GMC, and add the 2 Subarus together, Ford is 6th.

 

Toyota       115402    16.29%
Honda        103325    14.58%
Hyundai/KIA   96274    13.59%
Chevy/GMC     86950    12.27%
Subaru        93477    13.19%
Ford          70720     9.98%
Nissan        62102     8.77%
Mazda         57712     8.15%
Volkswagen    15415     2.18%
Mitsubishi     3731     0.53%
Mini           3192     0.45%
Jeep            156     0.02%
 

[bzcat]

4 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

 

That'd look good with SUV proportions (vs. the longer, lower profile Evos got).

 

 

Combined, Ford is around 70k, 4th place.....the problem is Escape used to be at or near the top on its own.

 

Then you will need to combine RAV4 and Corolla Cross, CR-V and HR-V, CX-5 and CX-50 and CX-30, Equinox and Trailblazer etc. to make the same apples to apples comparison.

 

Everyone has multiple entries in the compact CUV segment. 

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

I'm guessing that the CE1 products will be a better fit for ROW markets with the demands for EVs being stronger in the EU for example. Or you could argue that the Explorer and Capri EV are "replacements" for the Kuga/Escape. 

You could argue all you like but the reality is that the current poor sales of

both the BEV Explorer and Capri are symptomatic of deeper issues within

Ford……those two are also only for Europe with no plans for ROW sales.

 

First CE1 is a pickup that Ford plans for calendar year 2027, it’s US only.

So unless Ford plans something drastic with BEVs between then and now,

the delivery pace of new BEVs is set to be modest.

[jpd80]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

Only because of stripped models and rental fleet sales.

sorry, not intending to jump all over your post here…

 

Unless you’re thinking pre-Mulally….
Ford USA’s highest sales year for Escape was 2014 with 300,000.

At that time, the stripped basic models were either gone or few sales.

Escapes sold to daily rentals were equivalent to retail rims because

thats what people renting were asking for.

Where Escape lost momentum?

From memory, that generation of Escape was allowed to age more than wise and then the replacement’s styling was seen

as underwhelming to buyers….

Edited May 22 by jpd80

[rmc523]

51 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

You could argue all you like but the reality is that the current poor sales of

both the BEV Explorer and Capri are symptomatic of deeper issues within

Ford……those two are also only for Europe with no plans for ROW sales.

 

First CE1 is a pickup that Ford plans for calendar year 2027, it’s US only.

So unless Ford plans something drastic with BEVs between then and now,

the delivery pace of new BEVs is set to be modest.

 

I think they were originally intended to be a more global tie up with ROW sales, but then Ford decided to go with their own products ROW and kept it to EU products.

 

Meanwhile, crickets on the product front.

 

40 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

sorry, not intending to jump all over your post here…

 

Unless you’re thinking pre-Mulally….
Ford USA’s highest sales year for Escape was 2014 with 300,000.

At that time, the stripped basic models were either gone or few sales.

Escapes sold to daily rentals were equivalent to retail rims because

thats what people renting were asking for.

Where Escape lost momentum?

From memory, that generation of Escape was allowed to age more than wise and then the replacement’s styling was seen

as underwhelming to buyers….

 

Aka, Ford's usual approach of having tepid refreshes, extending out lifecycles 1-3 years too long, and then wonder where the customers go.

[DeluxeStang]

16 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Aka, Ford's usual approach of having tepid refreshes, extending out lifecycles 1-3 years too long, and then wonder where the customers go.

These stretched product cycles are saving Ford money. They wouldn't bother me as much if Ford passed some of those savings onto consumers, or if the changes made to vehicles between generations were more substantial. 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

sorry, not intending to jump all over your post here…

 

Unless you’re thinking pre-Mulally….
Ford USA’s highest sales year for Escape was 2014 with 300,000.

At that time, the stripped basic models were either gone or few sales.

Escapes sold to daily rentals were equivalent to retail rims because

thats what people renting were asking for.

Where Escape lost momentum?

From memory, that generation of Escape was allowed to age more than wise and then the replacement’s styling was seen

as underwhelming to buyers….

We have a 2014 Escape Titanium that daughter still drives.  I almost never see other Escape Titanium’s of that generation.  Same for Fusions.  They’re almost all white SE models (ie the cheapest version).  So I should have said fleet sales in general not daily rentals.   So a lot of that 300k did come from fleet sales.

[Trader 10]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

Only because of stripped models and rental fleet sales.

Maybe…… do you have data to back this up? I believe Ford still sells Escapes to rental companies and there are lots of base models at dealerships. If I remember correctly, Escape sales fell sharply when the current generation was introduced. For whatever reason(s), buyers don’t like the current model nearly as much as the previous.