RichardJensen Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 IMO there is only one decent car rag: Road and Track, and only one nationally published journalist that does a decent job covering Ford: Amy Wilson. I wouldn't give you two cents for the rest of them boxed up and FOB. --- As to Detroit 'deciding' what you want... Happens all the time, and not just with Detroit. Toyota DECIDES you don't want a manual with your V6--or V8 (I don't think you can get a manual transmission with any Toyota V6, except maybe the IS and the pickups), BMW decides that you're getting iDrive, and so on and so forth. Manumatics are hardly the norm in any segment anyway, (outside the luxury GT). You can't get a manumatic on the Lexus ES, and nobody bellyaches, you can't get a manumatic on the Mercedes C, and nobody bellyaches. And once again, you want a manumatic? Buy a Dodge Stratus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05fordgt Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 (edited) Want sporty? The Edge doesn't have a manumatic, has a nice UNSPORTY interior, and doesn't look nearly as sporty as the competitors like the Murano, BMW X3, etc. About the BMW X3, and price comparsion (since price has been discussed here). Have you seen how much that little SUV costs? I went to my local BMW store, and was shocked to see a loaeded model, was over $43,000!!! Thats alot of money for this vehicle. Another thing in regards to comparisons with the Murano, and weight? Does anyone realize that the main reason why the Edge is heavier than the Murano? The Edge is over a foot wider (at 87.1") than the Nissan (at 74.0). And the weight difference between the two (comparing the Nissan SE AWD, VS the SEL+ AWD) is only 286 lbs. Thats reallly not a whole lot different considering that the Edge is so much wider. By the way people are talking on here, it sounds like they are saying the Nissan is the Lotus Elise of the CUV world. The good thing with with the width, wider means more room inside. So if the Edge was the same width, weighed the same as the Murano, but didn't have the passenger space it does, everyone would be bitching about it not being roomy enough. JMHO guys. We saw the thread on the MKS and the lack of a V8 option. So sad. The Detroit mentality seems to sort us into two categories: vanilla golf-carts and Corvettes. It is obvious from Detroit's performance that that's not covering the bases. (Of course, the 800 lb. gorilla in the closet here is that maybe Detroit simply can no longer afford to cover the bases. That's deeper doodoo.) But if they can afford it, they better start giving us something to get us excited. More options, less excuses. If that's a manumatic in an SUV, then so be it. Retro, I guess you didn't hear that Ford reconsidered that thought, and is now going to have a V8 for the MKS when it comes out. Just wanted to let you know that. If you don't believe me, you can read it below from Autoblog. Ford retracts previous report of no V8 for Lincoln. Edited November 8, 2006 by 05fordgt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtisH Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Regarding the manumatic, my wife's CX-7 has it. Seems like a waste to me. She will never use it. I've used it once and decided it was not worth the effort. My mustang GT does not have it. Now, that's a vehicle that should have it. If the next Murano has a manumatic, then people will wonder why the Edge doesn't and so on. Currently, the Murano only comes with the CVT, so I doubt that it will get a manumatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bec5150 Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Regarding the manumatic, my wife's CX-7 has it. Seems like a waste to me. She will never use it. I've used it once and decided it was not worth the effort. My mustang GT does not have it. Now, that's a vehicle that should have it. Currently, the Murano only comes with the CVT, so I doubt that it will get a manumatic. On the SE (highest trim level) the CVT has a "six speed manumatic" mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Ok guys, I'm officially declaring this horse dead. Quit beating the poor bastard. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pictor Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 On the SE (highest trim level) the CVT has a "six speed manumatic" mode. I have an Audi A4 Conv. and it has an CVT with a six speed manuamtic mode. I use it most of the time, then again I would have got a 6 speed if it was available Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I drove a friends G35 coupe and tried out the Manumatic on it, and it very poor replacement for a true stick shift. No thank you. Not to mention the fully auto mode shifted quicker then I ever could Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Both my vehicles have manumatics, I use them all the time. BUT, had they not had them in the first place, I doubt I would miss it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 :blah: :blah: :blah: Here we go with this Dearborn isn't offering up enough, and settling for second best crap. All over what, a manumatic transmission that in most circumstances is too f'n slow to respond to input. Yeah, sign me up for that. Yeah, I sure feel cheated that my Fusion didn't come with something as useless as that, and I'm sure potential Edge owners will shy away from what seems a perfectly fine vehicle becuase it doesn't have this feature. If everyone is going to piss and moan about it, how about the lack of a manual transmission for starters.......because manumatics do not give you the euphoric control that a standard tranny will. It's funny how people find things to bitch about. Ford doesn't offer this, but Honda does. Well the company sucks it up and offers the feature, yet people still find some sort of way to complain and get all bent out of shape. Give me a break already. I will say this much, features such as: bluetooth, keyless go, aux jacks, and the like should've been offered a long time ago. The lack of technological innovation absolutely is unexcused, and Ford really needs to get in the game from that perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 BTW. Know what else doesn't have manumatics? Toyota and Honda branded vehicles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bec5150 Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 (edited) I think when we start comparing the "sporty" CUV's and SUV's, at least with Honda, you have to compare to the MDX and RDX from Acura. The RDX has "Paddle Shifters" and the MDX has "Sequential Sportshift." Honda doesn't really have a direct competitor to the Edge. The CR-V is smaller, less money, 4cyl, five seat. The Pilot is bigger, three row, etc; and I wouldn't consider either one truly "sporty." Edited November 9, 2006 by bec5150 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think when we start comparing the "sporty" CUV's and SUV's, at least with Honda, you have to compare to the MDX and RDX from Acura. The RDX has "Paddle Shifters" and the MDX has "Sequential Sportshift." Honda doesn't really have a direct competitor to the Edge. The CR-V is smaller, less money, 4cyl, five seat. The Pilot is bigger, three row, etc; and I wouldn't consider either one truly "sporty." I wouldn't really say the Edge seems to be very sporty either. CX-7 yes, Edge no. It's all in the appearance more than the packaging and options to me. Some vehicles just scream "drive the hell out of me"...others don't. The Edge looks more like a handsome appliance to me than something I would find "fun" to drive. Just the way it is I guess. :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bec5150 Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I wouldn't really say the Edge seems to be very sporty either. CX-7 yes, Edge no. It's all in the appearance more than the packaging and options to me. Some vehicles just scream "drive the hell out of me"...others don't. The Edge looks more like a handsome appliance to me than something I would find "fun" to drive. Just the way it is I guess. :shrug: Thus the problem with the Edge? Who's gonna buy it? It's not three seat, it's not sporty, it's not economical, and it's not particularly luxurious. I have 30-35K and I am buying a CUV. What wouild make me want to buy the Edge over the competition? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Thus the problem with the Edge? Who's gonna buy it? It's not three seat, it's not sporty, it's not economical, and it's not particularly luxurious. I have 30-35K and I am buying a CUV. What wouild make me want to buy the Edge over the competition? It's cool. That's why. This is a vehicle for status conscious people looking to make an impression. Practicality does not need to be a strong suit here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Thus the problem with the Edge? Who's gonna buy it? It's not three seat, it's not sporty, it's not economical, and it's not particularly luxurious. I have 30-35K and I am buying a CUV. What wouild make me want to buy the Edge over the competition? The exact same reason why people bought tons of Explorers in the mid to late 90s. It wasn't sporty, it wasn't economical, it wasn't anything luxurious. That said people still snatched them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 The exact same reason why people bought tons of Explorers in the mid to late 90s. It wasn't sporty, it wasn't economical, it wasn't anything luxurious. That said people still snatched them up. Yup. I would possibly consider one if I was in the market for such a vehicle. Just because it's not sporty doesn't mean it's not appealing to the discerning eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swenson88 Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Thus the problem with the Edge? Who's gonna buy it? It's not three seat, it's not sporty, it's not economical, and it's not particularly luxurious. I have 30-35K and I am buying a CUV. What wouild make me want to buy the Edge over the competition? Looks. That's all most vehicles really need. Most people don't drive on the AutoBahn, don't race stoplight to stoplight, and don't stroke their vehicle's dashboard on a daily basis. But what they do want is to look good in the vehicle they drive, similar to a clothing outfit. If the Edge is what they feel looks best, they will buy it in spite of the drawbacks. That's what makes a "must-have" vehicle a must-have: it's looks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 "That's what makes a "must-have" vehicle a must-have: it's looks." Then there's the Armada and the Pathfinder. Brutal. Saw a new Pathfinder today, driving ahead of a 2K6 Explorer. The Explorer has a lot more balance and finesse of expression, especially from a 3/4 back view, where the Nissan doors look really clumsy when you have an Explorer next to it, for comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 I just went to the New England Auto Show and an Edge was on the turntable. I know someone commented that they thought the Edge wasn't sporty. It's no sports car, but it's (in my opinion) the best looking SUV/CUV/thingamajig/whatever I have ever looked at. I would never buy an SUV. I would never think about getting an Explorer, but I would think about an Edge, and if I had to get one this would be it. The Edge is more attractive than most cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bec5150 Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 I hesitate to comment on the looks because I am almost embarrassed to say this...I like the looks of the 500 and Focus "family" look than the chrome "razor blade" grille of the Edge and Fusion. I must be warped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAC_Sparky Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) I hesitate to comment on the looks because I am almost embarrassed to say this...I like the looks of the 500 and Focus "family" look than the chrome "razor blade" grille of the Edge and Fusion. I must be warped. If one company made a car that everybody wanted, it would have 100% of the market, no? The Edge doesn't have to apeal to every person, just a lot of people. Edited November 10, 2006 by OAC_Sparky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 If one company made a car that everybody wanted, it would have 100% of the market, no? The Edge doesn't have to apeal to every person, just a lot of people. And for the others there's always the Escape and Explorer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 All SUV's and CUV's must diiieeee!!!!!! lol No seriously, I'm one of those "other" categories I guess because I'm so damn tired of SUV's of any type no matter what you want to call them. They are all boring, ugly, overpriced and suck gas in my opinion. And this from a man that drove a Rodeo Sport for a couple years. By the way the V6 motor in the Rodeo drinks gas like there's no tomorrow. But anyway, like I was saying, I'm just tired of seeing the damn things. I can't excited about it when they release another one. It's kind of like saying "Hey!!! They opened another Mega Mart!!!!" :boring: :boring: Rolling boxes, whoopie. From a versatility point of view, they offer good versatility if you need to haul around a shitload and I do mean a shitload of stuff everywhere you go. But the vast majority of people don't haul around a shitload of stuff everywhere they go the vast majority of the time so it's just wasted space, and gas. They could get by just as well with just about any sedan or station wagon. Don't waste your time throwing the different strokes for different folks posts at me. I know already. By the way I don't hate the Edge, I just think it's a waste of time given everything else Ford already has in it's line up. It is of course overpriced as I said it would be. I think they should have put the money into the panther car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MGallun Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 you guys are funny.. bashing a vehicle not out for sale yet, and the one tested was a preproduction one... things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm.... plus this was a fully loaded awd too, which generaly get worse mileage.. wait to the freaking thing is on sale and the real reviews, ones from people who own them come out.. then say its a failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
156n3rd Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 I didn't read every posting under this heading. But, Motor Trend tears Ford a new butt slot with it's review of the Edge. They say if Ford keeps this up, it will surely go bye-bye. 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.