2008 Escape sans Camo

[Harley Lover]

This one appears to be a base model: http://www.thecarconnection.com/Enthusiast...178.A11047.html

 

I wonder if Ford have decided to ditch the all chrome front grill treatment, or this doesn't have the chrome because it is a base model...

[jaydez]

I'm pretty sure that one is a Hybrid. It has the battery vent on the back driver's side window like the current Escape hybrids have.

 

But I like how it looks.

Edited November 2, 2006 by jaydez

[silvrsvt]

I'm pretty sure that one is a Hybrid. It has the battery vent on the back driver's side window like the current Escape hybrids have.

 

But I like how it looks.

 

 

From what I understand, Ford wanted to make the Hybrid different from the rest of the Escape lineup, and that one looks like a regular Escape, since other models have had more bling-bling front ends on them.

 

Looks really good otherwise...

[NickF1011]

I sure hope they decided to abandon the lower chrome section on the front end on all trim levels. It looks horrible on the Explorer. It looked horrible on the Escape spy photos.

[Harley Lover]

I sure hope they decided to abandon the lower chrome section on the front end on all trim levels. It looks horrible on the Explorer. It looked horrible on the Escape spy photos.

Agree 100%.

[waymondospiff]

I like it more than the Mariner's design. Looks more cohesive, the front end treatment isn't as "round" as the Mariner and integrates better with flat sides of the Escape.

 

Didn't the prototypes have a VW-like chrome "shield" grille up front? If that is a difference between the hybrid & standard Escapes, that is a significant change between the models. Makes sense, give the hybrid drivers a bit of differentiation, which they seem to like (Prius vs. Civic/Accord.)

 

I really want to see one of these "silver" interiors in gray, which inevitably looks better with silver trim than tan ever will.

 

Scott

[Drake]

That looks great! If they put the 3.5 and 6 speed auto in it would be perfect.

[RichardJensen]

I want to see this grille on Ford's trucks and SUVs. It's a nice bit of 'heritage'.

[DCK]

The parts they changed look good, and I like the interior(only wish they used nicely styled chrome ringed dials on the center console and the ones that the mariner uses which look fisher price cheap)

 

Just needs a new powertrain to compete with the rav4 and to boost its MPG, and of course I wish the greenhouse becaome more sleek and they shouldof invested in changing that.

 

But overall it looks nice and it is what was to be expected.

Edited November 2, 2006 by DCK

[NickF1011]

The parts they changed look good, and I like the interior(only wish they used nicely styled chrome ringed dials on the center console and the ones that the mariner uses which look fisher price cheap)

 

Just needs a new powertrain to compete with the rav4 and to boost its MPG, and of course I wish the greenhouse becaome more sleek and they shouldof invested in changing that.

 

But overall it looks nice and it is what was to be expected.

 

The Rav4 and Escape really aren't even in the same league size-wise anymore, so why the need to match them in power? I would agree with you on the fuel economy aspect however.

[sullynd]

The Rav4 and Escape really aren't even in the same league size-wise anymore, so why the need to match them in power? I would agree with you on the fuel economy aspect however.

 

2005 RAV4

L:166.6

W:68.3

H:65.7

WB:98

24/30

 

2007 Escape

L:174.9

W:70.1

H:67.6

WB:103.1

20/24

 

2006 RAV4

L:181.1

W:71.5

H:66.3

WB:104.7

22/29

 

The differential between the 2005 RAV4 and Escape was larger than that of the 2006 RAV and the Escape, yet they are the same class. Both are compact SUVs, and people in this target market shop as much by price as they do size. People definitely cross-shop the RAV with the Escape, it's not like we're talking about a 4Runner.

[Edgey]

The interior looks great, the exterior...not so much. I like everything about the new Mariner except for what they carried over. The Edge, I don't think I like anything except for the interior.

 

I noticed the display on the hybrid Escape appears larger than the one in the Mariner. In wonder if this is an illusion or needed for the hybrid.

Edited November 3, 2006 by Edgey

[2005GTP]

The interior looks great but Ford needs to stop only changing the head/tail lights and grill and calling it all new. It still looks old to me, if that makes any sense? I wish they would design the outside as good as they are doing on the interiors.

[Edgey]

The interior looks great but Ford needs to stop only changing the head/tail lights and grill and calling it all new. It still looks old to me, if that makes any sense? I wish they would design the outside as good as they are doing on the interiors.

 

Ford is fairly clever about updates that substantially freshen the look of a car without the expensive of completely redrawing the car. Ford can squeeze a good 8-10 years out of a body shell or greenhouse just by keeping the design very simple and updating the decorating around it. No other carmaker is doing this as effectively because they all believe they absolutely must change everything in order to make the car new. Focusing updates only to where it counts is how Ford can keep itself financially healthy while allowing for more regular product updates. The only time when a complete re skinning is necessary is when you introduce a new chassis that can't support the existing body.

Edited November 3, 2006 by Edgey

[waymondospiff]

Ford is fairly clever about updates that substantially freshen the look of a car without the expensive of completely redrawing the car.

I've never heard this referred to as "clever." Can you name one recent example where this actually worked?

 

"Freshened" Focus? Sales down.

"Freshened" Explorer? Sales down.

"Freshened" Ranger? Sales down.

"Freshened" Panther (take your pick)? Sales down.

 

The 3-year updates scheduled for the D3s & CD3s are a step in the right direction, but Ford needs to follow-up with significant updates every 5 years like the competition. Powertrain updates, NVH improvements, new sheetmetal, etc. Improve the cars frequently.

 

Simple updates to headlights, grille, and tail lights like the Panthers & Focus don't cut it after five long years. The 2005 Focus gave us the "Five Hundred" style grille & headlights but didn't update the complaints lodged against the Focus in the fall of 1999 - noisy, cheap interior pieces, uncomfortable seats. The 2008 Focus with new sheetmetal, new interior, and updated-but-same-design chassis is what Ford needs every five years. Followed by virtually "all-new" models every ten. Just like Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc.

 

Scott

[DCK]

Ford is fairly clever about updates that substantially freshen the look of a car without the expensive of completely redrawing the car. Ford can squeeze a good 8-10 years out of a body shell or greenhouse just by keeping the design very simple and updating the decorating around it. No other carmaker is doing this as effectively because they all believe they absolutely must change everything in order to make the car new. Focusing updates only to where it counts is how Ford can keep itself financially healthy while allowing for more regular product updates. The only time when a complete re skinning is necessary is when you introduce a new chassis that can't support the existing body.

I'm sorry but after reading that I swear my IQ lowered. I never expected a post like that from you, more like 630land but not from you....................just go back read what you typed and look at Ford's current situation.

 

Ford being cheap lazy and not competitive with their designs like how you mentioned has driven them nearly on the verge of bankruptcy. So I guess Toyota and Honda and Gm and Chrysler and Nissan should all pay attention to Ford's clever plan and not duplicate it or else they will lose billions of dollars with their market share sliding down the tubes.

 

Please don't ever defend Ford for decade long product cycles, I mean seriously? Don't you want them to succeed? With that mentality you clearly don't.

Edited November 3, 2006 by DCK

[RichardJensen]

The 2008 Focus with new sheetmetal, new interior, and updated-but-same-design chassis is what Ford needs every five years. Followed by virtually "all-new" models every ten. Just like Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc.

That's something of a misstatement.

 

Toyota introduced the current gen. Camry as a 1992. It was substantially updated in 1997, 2002, and for 2007. Every five years.

 

However, the basic Camry underbody and suspension has changed comparatively little. There is a reason why the Camry's steering and handling are not praised. The vehicle's underpinnings are ancient.

 

OTOH, Honda launched the previous generation Accord as a 1994. It was substantially updated in 1998, and was more or less replaced in 2003. The current Accord received minor tweaking last year, and I believe is getting a major overhaul either next year or in 2008. By comparison the Civic was given a serious overhaul in '97, and a minor overhaul in 2001, with another major overhaul coming in 2006.

 

Honda had historically followed a 4 & 8 schedule with a relatively minor refresh at the 4 year mark and a near total platform replacement at the 8 year mark.

 

However, with the 2003 Accord, I don't know that we'll se an all new platform in 2008. Honda may be adopting the Toyota 5 year minor upgrade cycle.

 

I don't have any idea what Nissan's regular schedule is, and part of me doubts that they have had one.

 

Ford appears to be aiming for a relatively mild 3 year refresh and a platform replacement at about the 6 year point. Don't know if that's wise or not, but it's seems to be what they're aiming at going forward.

 

Of course that too is not absolute. The F150 is being given a major update after 4 years on the market.

[DCK]

The interior looks great but Ford needs to stop only changing the head/tail lights and grill and calling it all new. It still looks old to me, if that makes any sense? I wish they would design the outside as good as they are doing on the interiors.

According to insiders Mark Fields was Thoroughly disgusted with the Explorer, Expedition and escape and after seeing them vowed that these lazy half ass redesigns won't happn anymore. Because I agree with you these simply won't fly and the consumer won't see them as new and the escape is going on 8 years old.

 

That's something of a misstatement.

 

Toyota introduced the current gen. Camry as a 1992. It was substantially updated in 1997, 2002, and for 2007. Every five years.

 

However, the basic Camry underbody and suspension has changed comparatively little. There is a reason why the Camry's steering and handling are not praised. The vehicle's underpinnings are ancient.

 

OTOH, Honda launched the previous generation Accord as a 1994. It was substantially updated in 1998, and was more or less replaced in 2003. The current Accord received minor tweaking last year, and I believe is getting a major overhaul either next year or in 2008. By comparison the Civic was given a serious overhaul in '97, and a minor overhaul in 2001, with another major overhaul coming in 2006.

 

Honda had historically followed a 4 & 8 schedule with a relatively minor refresh at the 4 year mark and a near total platform replacement at the 8 year mark.

 

However, with the 2003 Accord, I don't know that we'll se an all new platform in 2008. Honda may be adopting the Toyota 5 year minor upgrade cycle.

 

Minor is what you call Fords let's change the grill and call it all new. Toyota and Honda almost always totally reskin there vehicles like what Ford is doing with the focus after 8 years but toyota and honda do after 5. Toyota seems to be going at a 3 and five. With every 3 years it get a refresh and every 5 extensive changes, not "minor"

 

Of course that too is not absolute. The F150 is being given a major update after 4 years on the market.

 

And look at where it got the F-150, top seller and arguably the best Full size on the market, money well spent.....to bad ford never followed the idelogy with the F-150's success into all their vehicles or else they would be in an extremly better situation.

[Mark B. Morrow]

I hope the Hybrid is visually distinct from the gas version. Given the cost it should be readily identifyable. Ford made the mistake (IMHO) of making the SHO Taurus too similar to the standard model. The Hybrid should be the "Halo" Escape/Mariner in order to get some marketing benefit.

[RichardJensen]

Toyota seems to be going at a 3 and five. With every 3 years it get a refresh and every 5 extensive changes, not "minor"

 

And look at where it got the F-150, top seller and arguably the best Full size on the market, money well spent.....to bad ford never followed the idelogy with the F-150's success into all their vehicles or else they would be in an extremly better situation.

Here is a 2002 Camry:

Here is a 2006 Camry:

 

What "3" year update are you seeing, that I'm not?

 

Also, the extensive changes to the skin of the Camry are not reflected in the underpinnings of the car. Complaints about the numb steering and wallowy ride of the Camry (and Lexus ES 350) are not going away, they're getting louder.

 

--------------------------

 

Also, the F150 went from 1997 to 2003 with almost no changes. The major change coming in 2008 is a relative novelty in the industry. The GMT900s went 8 years, the Tundra will have gone 8 when it's replaced, the Ram went 8 years as well. Ford pushed the F150 out a year ahead of what had become the standard, and the next major update is coming only 4 years after that.

Edited November 3, 2006 by RichardJensen

[156n3rd]

Not bad, but the grille looks cheesy, not classy.

[waymondospiff]

What "3" year update are you seeing, that I'm not?

-revised grille treatment, -new headlight assemblies, -lower front fascia, -new wheel (cover) designs, -new tail lamps

 

Also, the extensive changes to the skin of the Camry are not reflected in the underpinnings of the car. Complaints about the numb steering and wallowy ride of the Camry (and Lexus ES 350) are not going away, they're getting louder.

Yes, but it is still competitive. Ask a Camry driver if they dislike their steering & ride. I doubt they'll say yes. The enthusiast press will decry it, but many, many Americans equate "soft" with "luxury." Can't fault Toyota for playing to that ideal.

 

More importantly, every 5 years the Camry looks new. Compare a 1996 Camry with a 1997 Camry. A 2001 Camry with a 2002 Camry. And a 2006 Camry with a 2007 Camry. Each changeover results in a "new" car without any shared exterior panels. Therefore the car is "new" to the consumers.

 

Honda has recently moved from their 2/4/8 schedule to 2-3/5/10 (facelift/redo/all-new.)

Example: 2003 All-new Accord

2006 "Facelift" Accord (revised grille, all-new tail-lamp treatment, powertrain tweaks, ESC added)

2008 "Redo" Accord (same chassis as 2003 with revisions, all-new exterior & interior panels)

 

Nissan has been a bit off with the restructuring that has gone on, but has largely been consistent.

Sentra: 1995 all-new, 1998 facelift, 2001 "redo", 2004 facelift, 2007 all-new

Altima: 1993 all-new, 1996 facelift, 1998 "redo", 2000 facelift, 2002 all-new, 2005 significant facelift, 2007 "redo"

Maxima: 2000 significant redo, 2002 significant facelift, 2004 all-new, 2007 facelift

 

Like I said, Ford is heading in that direction. But they've got to look at the competitors and keep up. The 3.5L was late to market. The 3.0L has been called noisy since it's launch in 1996 and it is still noisy, in 2007. The Escape's 201hp isn't going to cut it against 220hp Outlanders & 268hp Rav4s. Ford needs to look beyond headlights & grilles and do fundamental improvements to the vehicles at these mid-cycle updates. But it looks as though they're heading in that direction.

 

Scott

[RichardJensen]

-revised grille treatment, -new headlight assemblies, -lower front fascia, -new wheel (cover) designs, -new tail lamps

Not a square inch of sheetmetal was changed on that beast--Ford, for cryin' out loud, has done as much on the one year old MKZ. More, if you include powertrain upgrades. That's my point. In this market, those subtleties don't count for jack squat. They sure didn't count for much on the '05 Escape.

 

As to the Camry's ride being 'just fine', well, it's not getting better. I'm not predicting that next year Toyota is only going to sell 100k Camries because the thing rides like a pillow on top of a beach ball. But I am saying that there will be consequences in the market for Toyota unless they get their act together and stop taking their share of the segment for granted. They have a formula that they have not revisited for some time now, and W. Edwards Deming, who taught Toyota what they didn't learn from Ford, would not approve.

[DCK]

Not a square inch of sheetmetal was changed on that beast--Ford, for cryin' out loud, has done as much on the one year old MKZ. More, if you include powertrain upgrades. That's my point. In this market, those subtleties don't count for jack squat. They sure didn't count for much on the '05 Escape.

 

As to the Camry's ride being 'just fine', well, it's not getting better. I'm not predicting that next year Toyota is only going to sell 100k Camries because the thing rides like a pillow on top of a beach ball. But I am saying that there will be consequences in the market for Toyota unless they get their act together and stop taking their share of the segment for granted. They have a formula that they have not revisited for some time now, and W. Edwards Deming, who taught Toyota what they didn't learn from Ford, would not approve.

Toyota is simply giving their customers what they want, they want a soft ride and if they didn't they'd buy an accord.

 

Toyota gives almost all their vehicles extensive make overs and reskins every 5 years with a very rarely cases where it is delayed a couple months which push's it back a model year.

 

You can type all you want how toyota takes it for granted but it doesn't mean it will come true. Toyota learned from Fords and GM mistakes and they aren't aout to duplicate them unfortunately.

 

Here is a 2002 Camry:

Here is a 2006 Camry:

 

What "3" year update are you seeing, that I'm not?

 

It is funny how you don't post the rear and want anyone to ta,e your blatantly biased opinions and photos seriously.....................

 

Also, the extensive changes to the skin of the Camry are not reflected in the underpinnings of the car. Complaints about the numb steering and wallowy ride of the Camry (and Lexus ES 350) are not going away, they're getting louder.

They give the customer the soft wallowyu ride that their buying demographic likes, if they didn't they'd simply buy an accord.

 

Also, the F150 went from 1997 to 2003 with almost no changes. The major change coming in 2008 is a relative novelty in the industry. The GMT900s went 8 years, the Tundra will have gone 8 when it's replaced, the Ram went 8 years as well. Ford pushed the F150 out a year ahead of what had become the standard, and the next major update is coming only 4 years after that.

 

And your point? Did you see me not praise Ford for keeping the F-150 at the top of its class or did you miss that?

[Edstock]

"It is funny how you don't post the rear"

 

Well, this is a debate, please do not be intellectually lazy for the rest of us. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS. Is there a big difference? You imply that there is.

 

Maybe RJ doesn't know either, maybe because the Camry is so boring, who'd want to waste brain-cells remembering?

 

You imply that there is a difference as a point of argument, but you're too lazy to go to Google Image or wherever to provide proof to your statement. Help us out.

 

You say the photo's are biased. I AM NOT A CAMRY EXPERT.

Could you give details? How are they biased? Maybe you're right, but you're too lazy to tell the rest of us dumbasses just why it is so.

 

So, we have a brain-fart.

 

 

Thanks for playing.