2008 Escape sans Camo

[RichardJensen]

Wow. Different taillights. Almost as exciting as the different headlights.

 

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

 

What a great way to give away sales. If you don't like it, buy an Accord.

 

Toyota is NOT perfect, and there are several things they have done with the Camry that are lazy, and which they can afford to do because of the Camry's reputation. As I said, W. Edwards Deming would not approve. Toyota's incentives, reported issues, and fleet volume on the Camry have all increased steadily. The same has not occurred with the Accord, IMO, a better car in every respect. Honda has hewed to Demings' methods better than Toyota, and it shows in the superior all around quality of every competing product. Hondas are almost always better engineered than Toyotas. Reliability is a toss-up between the two, but the edge, IMO, goes to Honda for maintaining stellar reliability without using wheezy and antiquated platforms.

 

Ford should not learn from the way Toyota engineers vehicles. They should learn from Honda. Toyota takes too many shortcuts that their position allows them to take. The market would simply not let them keep the Fusion on the same platform for 20 years.

Edited November 3, 2006 by RichardJensen

[Michael Reynolds]

Right, had Toyota learned from GM's and Ford's mistakes there wouldn't be a need to go back to the drawing board to re-tweak the new Corolla.

 

Oh and yes the rear-ends of the Camry from 03 to 06 were so much different that it warranted additonal boring ass pictures of a car sans a soul?

 

Using the Camry and Accord as proper examples of how to build a car, is a buch of baloney. We all know both of those vehicles sell because they are:

A: Recognized nameplates

B: Sporting Honda and Toyota emblems

 

If Ford produced the Camry I'd be willing to bet half the people around here, and the automotive press, would find issue after issue with the car.

 

Yes, I realize what Ford has done: screwed a well selling nameplate up so much it was discountinued last week, neglected V6 engines that at one point in time were class leaders out of re-works & refinement, and performed half ass updates (i.e. the Focus). That said until someone gets behind the wheel of the new 08 Escape and reports that it's the equivalent of a rolling tird, why even bother bitching about it?

[waymondospiff]

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 I said, Ford is getting there. But what sheetmetal changed on the MKZ? I know the grille & foglamps were tweaked, what else?

 

This further explains the point: the four-year old Escape got what the three-year old Camry got, new headlamps/tail lamps. The five-year old Camry got a full redo using a modified chassis and the seven-year old Escape gets another tweaking...some new sheetmetal, yes, but a lot of the same look including the same greenhouse. Same lackluster engines, too.

 

I just don't think this will cut it. Maybe I'm wrong. There's a good chance that I am. But history is not on the side of minimal changes.

 

As an aside I do agree with the Accord vs. Camry statement. I like and respect the Camry - it is great at what it does. But clearly the Accord is the more sophisticated ride. Of course neither are as near-and-dear to me as the Mazda6 which is still the best midsize in my opinion. The Fusion ranks below the Accord & Mazda6 in my book for its rather cheap interior. They should have just used Mazda's. But here I go into a Mazda direction again.

 

Scott

[RichardJensen]

As of mid MY 2006, Honda had sold about 10,000 more Accords, retail, than Toyota had sold Camries. Toyota had sold about 20,000 more Camries into fleet.

 

BTW, the Escape doesn't have the same greenhouse, the beltline was raised, and the roof was changed. So all the glass is different. It doesn't look too different, but then again, the glass on the '07 Camry doesn't look too different from the '06 either.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Gonna have to say that I'm not thrilled by the grill. The design of the grill itself isn't so offensive, but, its the way that it just doesn't blend in to the front clip well in my eyes. I think that they should have maybe tried to butch it up with a scalled down superduty front that was reproportioned for the vehicle, or gone a bit more modern with more of a three bar setup. What's there now just strikes me as old and wimpy.

[DCK]

Wow. Different taillights. Almost as exciting as the different headlights.

 

What is funny is this is what Ford would call "new"

 

Also they have had more extensive refreshes with the Sienna and Seqioa front ends, besides these are simple refreshes after three years. Of course since it isn't Fors you have a problem with it.

 

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

 

What a great way to give away sales. If you don't like it, buy an Accord.

You don't make since at all, while I don't prefer it, many many many of Camry buyers like the soft ride thats comes with it and same for the ES.

 

About your second sentence that doesn't make sense, because you can't have both and clearly a ton of custoemrs enjoy the camry. Why are you acting like a child and pretend not to comprehend things? I know your capable of it, is it because for once you can just give toyota just a tad bit of credit?

 

Toyota is NOT perfect, and there are several things they have done with the Camry that are lazy, and which they can afford to do because of the Camry's reputation.

I agree 100% with that, and have stating dozens of time here and at AW that they sell due to their reputation and not the sole merit of the vehicle, but unlike I give credit where it is due and that mean all automakers.

 

As I said, W. Edwards Deming would not approve. Toyota's incentives, reported issues, and fleet volume on the Camry have all increased steadily.

Exactly I never said otherwise, you just assume giving credit where it is due automatically makes someone who will defend Toyotas mishaps like you constantly do with Ford because I am open minded.

 

The same has not occurred with the Accord, IMO, a better car in every respect. Honda has hewed to Demings' methods better than Toyota, and it shows in the superior all around quality of every competing product. Hondas are almost always better engineered than Toyotas. Reliability is a toss-up between the two, but the edge, IMO, goes to Honda for maintaining stellar reliability without using wheezy and antiquated platforms.

 

Ford should not learn from the way Toyota engineers vehicles. They should learn from Honda. Toyota takes too many shortcuts that their position allows them to take. The market would simply not let them keep the Fusion on the same platform for 20 years.

 

I agree 100% and have statedd many times in the "Let's bash Honda" threads that constantly go on here that honda is arguably the best automanufacturer on the planet, not to mention they provide far more American jobs than toyota while only selling half the volume. Honda is simply a great company, its funny how so many here love to bash the best. Also I have stated in one of Ranges lets bash honda threads that I like honda nad wish the best for them and hope toyotas way of going about comes back and bites them in the ass, I want toyota to fail and I have said it, it is my opinion. But I will not be a blind fool and bash them senselessly and I give credit where it is due, you can't say the same.

 

 

 

As of mid MY 2006, Honda had sold about 10,000 more Accords, retail, than Toyota had sold Camries. Toyota had sold about 20,000 more Camries into fleet.

 

BTW, the Escape doesn't have the same greenhouse, the beltline was raised, and the roof was changed. So all the glass is different. It doesn't look too different, but then again, the glass on the '07 Camry doesn't look too different from the '06 either.

BS, then it only makes ford completely stupid, why change he greenhouse to have it look exactly alike so people won't see it as new. Clealry it is either complete BS or Ford is indeed extermly stupid for that.

Edited November 3, 2006 by DCK

[Michael Reynolds]

The Fusion ranks below the Accord & Mazda6 in my book for its rather cheap interior. They should have just used Mazda's. But here I go into a Mazda direction again.

 

Scott

 

Hmmm, really?!? The 6 didn't strike me as anything special over what the Fusion offers, but hey too each their own.

[waymondospiff]

Hmmm, really?!? The 6 didn't strike me as anything special over what the Fusion offers, but hey too each their own.

My experience comes from last fall's "Ford Racing Drive" event. I drove the Fusion and then extensively checked out the display model. And then walked out to my 6 in the parking lot. In my opinion:

 

-Fusion HVAC controls aren't great - I dislike Ford's automatic system with small button with lousy tactile feel and that's in all the models you find it. The Fusion's manual system suffers from small knobs with a rather "snickety" feel.

-Fusion's door panels have an odd proportion to them and suffer from a lack of textual breakup - it's all plastic all the time.

-The huge double DIN-sized swath of flat black plastic that is the Ford corporate stereo is exceedingly cheap looking.

-On sub-SEL models without the analog clock the "Fusion" nameplate looks cheap and like a decided afterthought.

-The dashtop storage bin is rather cheap feeling in operation.

-Lots of the black-plastic switchgear is made from a cheap plastic and doesn't have a positive engagement - this includes the steering wheel controls and the power window switches. Not to mention the lack of auto up/down windows. Or Ford's steering wheel controls that are difficult to make out and offer little in tactile differentiation whereas Mazda's design puts all of the controls in an easier to use location and with enough differentiation that you don't need to look at it to use it.

-Ford's absolute refusal to put an 8-way power seat in an affordable car. Why? Name a competitor with only 6-way? It's a rather noticeably cheapskate way of saving a couple of pennies per car.

-The leather quality wasn't that great...but that's true of many competitors (including the Mazda6)

-Lack of gated shifter (not to mention the lack of a V6/manual...but that's not an interior issue.)

 

It's still the best interior that Ford has made. But after playing around with the Fusion and then checking out the Mazda again, the Mazda is clearly superior. Most of my complaints about the Fusion are small details that could easily be changed. I left rather disappointed however that there were so many details Ford didn't fix.

 

The other ancedotal evidence I have is an Accord owner who loved the Mazda's interior sitting in the Fusion saying, "Oh, this isn't very good." But that's a non-car person who wasn't big on details.

 

As I said, a big step forward for Ford, now hopefully they'll step up their game on those niggling little details to make the Fusion truly a world-class sedan. If I were shopping midsize sedans I'd definetely include the Fusion & Milan on my list. But I doubt I'd choose one over a Mazda6 or Accord. But they are nice cars, no doubt.

 

To link this to the Escape - I see a lot of little niggling little problems with the design. But I've only seen pictures so I'll withhold further judgement until I can actually sit in one and touch everything.

 

Scott

[danglin]

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.

 

I really like the upgraded interior, but I agree completey about using some chrome on the dials, The solid black plastic needs a little more dressing.

 

I am still not convinced they did enough to the exterior. I will need to see it in person. I like the exterior of the Mariner better so far from what I have seen from the pictures.

[Mark B. Morrow]

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.

 

Excellent post RJ. With visual Facts to back up your points and everything.

[Michael Reynolds]

Granted my RX-8 is no 6 and vice-versa, both cars share quite a few interior components. That said I really don't get in my RX-8 and feel that the materials are oh so much better than that of my Fusion. The layout might be alot more pleasing to the eye, but the: plastics, leather, switch gear, etc differs no little if at all from what is found in the Ford.The doors, storage console, and dash trimming on a 6 is def. nothing to write home about. That textured strip of plastic that runs from the center console to the door on the passenger side of the dash is a great example of what I'm getting at. The window buttons are no different from what Ford uses on the Fusion, I mean come on it's not like the Mazda gets rubberized window pulls.

 

But hey like I said too each their own. If we were comparing say a Passat and a Fusion, then yes I'd ceed and agree 100 percent that the Fusion seems done on the cheap.

 

 

While the 6 may or may not deliver on a higher level of interior refinement, it does offer up a bit more in asthetic detail.

Edited November 4, 2006 by Michael Reynolds

[DCK]

Excellent post RJ. With visual Facts to back up your points and everything.

You have some brown on your nose...............seriously.............

[Michael Reynolds]

You have some brown on your nose...............seriously.............

 

Oh come on I know you wish it were yours. I'm sure it's not too late to get a lil lovin. :kissass:

[waymondospiff]

Looking at these two pictures the Ford looks better, but it brings back the memory of flash and not substance. Like I said, the Fusion is Ford's best interior, but it still has some way to go to be world class - in features (EIGHT-way power seat, gated shifter/automanual, auto up/down windows), materials (switchgear, door panels), and design (HVAC, stereo, steering wheel controls). I'd say the Mazda6 is further along in most of these areas.

 

As far as interior design I'd rate the Fusion kinda midpack, below Accord & Camry, above Galant, Sonata, and Malibu. About the same level as the Altima.

 

Some people may say I'm nit-picking at the Ford, but I say it's holding Ford to the same standard as Honda & Toyota on interior design. Sweat the details. No excuses.

 

Scott

[Michael Reynolds]

Again, I see your point. There are a lot of things, i.e. radio and message center that strike me as same ol' tired Ford. Yet, the plastics used don't strike me as being any cheaper than that of the competition, namely the Accord and the Camry. That greenish blue plastic crap found on the center stack of some Camrys has got to go, and the hollow plastic dash found on the Accord strikes me as cheap.

 

I suppose what I'm getting at is this. Each manufacturer seemed to accel in certain areas, but in doing so fell flat on their face in others. The only midsize car that has the feature content, interior design, and refinement is the Passat (which is why those buggers are so expensive in the first place).

[waymondospiff]

I suppose what I'm getting at is this. Each manufacturer seemed to accel in certain areas, but in doing so fell flat on their face in others. The only midsize car that has the feature content, interior design, and refinement is the Passat (which is why those buggers are so expensive in the first place).

I can whole-heartedly agree with that statement. About compromises, not the Passat (ugh.) For example, with Ford's slightly cheaper interior you get a class-leading suspension for an excellent ride & handling package. And the Ford's chunky-yet-bold exterior styling is definetely attractive vs. the blander styling of some rivals.

 

The Passat, well, it has a well-built feel to it. But VW botched the styling on the new model. And, can you really consider it a midsize? Sure, you can get a model for less than $25,000, but that kind of money will place you into a nearly fully loaded Fusion. Start adding options and the Passat rockets above $30,000 quickly and will race towards $40,000 if you get frisky with the options. Let's see, Acura/Lexus/Infiniti/BMW/Lincoln/Caddillac or a VW? Yeah. Tough choice.

 

The Subaru Legacy is another good example. Standard AWD, very slick interior, and a well-drawn exterior. But then look at the sticker. The base 4 cyl is about the cost of V6 rivals, you can add a turbo for the cost of competitor's flagship V6 models, or you can go to Subie's underwhelming 6 cyl for well over $30K. And you still get the Subaru's tiny rear seat.

 

It's all about choices. I just wish Ford would spring for the extra money to bring the Fusion's interior into class-leading, giving buyers even less reason to buy an Accord or Camry.

 

Scott

[Extreme4x4]

At this point, the Fusion could offer an interior that would make an Audi A8 blush.................... and it would still take years for the car to truly "catch on" or even be mentioned in the same breath as the Accord and Camry.

 

For Fords first honest attempt at reentering the midsize sedan market, they did a darn good job. Is the Fusion for everyone.............. no. There are too many beige people out there. However, for those of us who actually like to drive, want a little style, and get a kick out of getting a loaded V6 Fusion for the same money as a loaded 4cyl Camry or Accord................ the car is a hell of a deal. The option of AWD just makes it all the more interesting.

 

BTW, for those lamenting Fords recent refreshes............ lets take a good honest look at the new Altima. EVERYTHING is new. Yet, the car looks almost EXACTLY the same as last years car. Talk about a botched redo. Of course, they will get let off the hook here, by many................ why you ask............. well, because they are not Ford.

Edited November 4, 2006 by Extreme4x4

[danglin]

I agree with you Extreme4x4.

 

Though, I finally got an upclose an personal look at a Milan yesterday at my local dealer. I thought the interior was very nice except for that Corporate Radio. That needs a major upgrade Fast!!!

 

I also looked at a couple of fusions from the outside, one a SE with the manual HVAC controls. That is another area that needs a quick upgrade.

 

If they fix those two items, I feel that they will have just about perfect interiors.

Edited November 4, 2006 by danglin