Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=13847&make_id=trust
Honda:
http://hondanews.com/forms/corp/sales/02nov.html
At least Ford's media site is more high tech than Honda's. Can't the Japanese do any better than posting a scan of a paper document on their sales page?
NOVEMBER SALES A DOWNER FOR DETROIT
Detroit’s automakers continue to pay back for strong sales last year after Sept. 11, as each of the American carmakers saw sales slump in November. Ford led the way into negative territory with a 21-percent slide; GM posted an 18-percent retreat and Chrysler’s sales were off by 12 percent. However, some other big names — including Toyota by 5.2 percent, Hyundai and Volkswagen by 17 percent — were off too. Other highlights of the month’s results found Honda sales rising 4.6 percent; Infiniti had its best month ever while Nissan sales slumped 6.6 percent; Suzuki, Mitsubishi, Mercedes-Benz and Audi had their best Novembers ever, and Kia sales climbed 10.7 percent. Mazda was off 18.3 percent, while Porsche’s sales fell by 8 percent. Analysts are reasonably certain vehicle sales in November will check in about 15.8 million units on an annualized basis, an improvement over October’s thready-pulsed 15.4 million unit rate.
Detroit Needs Future Cars Now by Jerry Flint (11/25/2002)
baggs, I think you've effectively strengthened varmint's statement about Ford's environmental 'statement.'
http://www.pref.akita.jp/e/e130.htm
I suppose it could be a hoax (like the moon landing) but, I have a feeling it's authentic.
"I don't feel like looking up the numbers right now, but guess which one sold more in the U.S.." - Baggs
"baggs, I think you've effectively strengthened varmint's statement about Ford's environmental 'statement.'" - Diploid
I think what Baggs is saying is that unclean/inefficient vehicles are still making money, while green machines are not. I do agree with that. But I was talking about public perception when I wrote my original comments, not profits.
While I agree that Ford can make money on vehicles like the Excursion in today's market, it looks like that is changing. Tommorrow's market is almost here. The Jerry Flint quote posted by Hondaman sums up my position rather well, "Detroit Needs Future Cars Now" If Ford waits until they are financially stable, they will have waited too long.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=564&ncid=564&e=4&u=/nm/20021204/ts_nm/environment_cars_dc_1
Reed
Reed
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2002-12-04-green-autos_x.htm
It was front page news there too. How ironic.
"Looks like almost every manufacture is at least trying but Honda is clearly the leader!"
How are they "clearly" the leader? They are noted as being at the top, but it doesn't say by how much. They might be on the verge of dropping to number two for all we know. Also note that Honda's lead is said to have "slipped" this year.
""Detroit Needs Future Cars Now" If Ford waits until they are financially stable, they will have waited too long."
I don't agree. I really don't think the American public is ready for "future" vehicles. They might be ready for a few here and there (like the Civic and Escape hybrids), but the internal combustion engine isn't going any where for a long time.
We don't even know if these hybrid systems are reliable after a few years yet. Most of the current models have to have the battery replaced after 6 or 7 years (which is usually covered under 10 year warranty I believe). They have more moving parts and more complex electronics which equals more possibilities for things to go wrong. Plus they cost more, and how long are the manufacturers going to keep selling them at a loss to attract more buyers to the technology? How many current owners are going to be repeat buyers when they see that the next gens are being sold at their "real" MSRP's?
Lowering emissions and raising fuel mileage are one thing. "Future vehicles" are another. Ford, GM, and DM could probably implement the latter in no time if the government made them. All they have to do is go out and buy a CR-V to break down because it's the perfect vehicle right?
Don't worry, the big three will be right there with the little three when that time comes. They may even pull of a Bill Gates if the opportunity arises (he stole/copied the Mac OS to make Windows for those who don't know).
Steve, Host
We're supposed to believe everything that a person who goes by the name "hondaman" posts about Honda?
I don't think that all of them are lies or over-hyped. A few of them (and they are pretty big ones) are questionable if you ask me.
That's true! I forgot about the whole Xerox thing. Although, they were too stupid to market it on their own in the first place. I was only giving credit where credit was due.
I did not make these things up buddy they were written ALL for me and the world to see! It is too bad that they were not in Ford's favour but what can I say? You guys always seem to find everything "questionable" when it comes to Honda but never when there is a positive (however rare) comment about Ford! Wonder why that is???? HMMMM let me see.......must be because there are so many about Honda and so very few about Ford!
I used the little
How are they "clearly" the leader? They are noted as being at the top, but it doesn't say by how much. They might be on the verge of dropping to number two for all we know. Also note that Honda's lead is said to have "slipped" this year.
Honda's lead in the rankings slipped as new tailpipe standards forced competitors to catch up on reducing smog-forming emissions.
It does not matter by how much. It is clearly part of Honda's philosophy not something they have been mandated to do. Their lead has slipped due to the fact that others have been forced to step up and do what Honda already does best!
"Bill Ford has touted his green thumb, but until now only his speeches have merited a thumbs-up,"
The report criticizes Ford for making no progress to address global warming. Its vehicles emit 5% more carbon dioxide than GM's vehicles. And it says Ford needs to do more to improve the efficiency of vehicles other than SUVs.
Yes, EVERY manufacture is required to meet numerous federal standards and in reguard to fuel efficency and emissions. Honda is the leader not only based on their philosophy but, because they impliment the technology to accomplish this and have done so for a long time.
Don't shoot the messanger. Just echoing what the UCS Survey has already stated.
Reed
Couldn't have said it better myself.
"We don't even know if these hybrid systems are reliable after a few years yet."
Well, we DO know that the Escape isn't reliable. So if I'm going to gamble on reliability, I'd go with something unproven before I bought a vehicle proven to be problematic.
As for batteries and such, they may no longer be needed. Honda's first gen hybrid used a big honkin' oversized battery. It's true of the Insight. They already have their second gen hybrid on the road in the Civic. In this vehicle, the battery is much smaller. The third gen hybrid system has been shown in the DNX (DualNote) and uses an ultra capacitor, not a traditional battery. These are smaller and lighter and, as far as I can tell, they do not require replacement.
I did not include trucks/vans for either manufacturer.
==========
See your two (2) post 2660 and 2661 where you included Windstar and F-Series trucks.
You say:
If you think CR is "Honda's Bible" ..
and
If you still insist CR is trying to pull off a massive cover-up of Honda's errors while maintaining a Ford/Big 3 smear campaign, visit jdpower.com. Their studies of inital quality don't lie.
========
A. I never claimed, stated or implied that CR was a Honda Bible, those are your words.
Also, I was pointing out the FACT that what you posted on behalf of CR (post 2660) did not include the Honda/Acura recalls that are clearly on the NSTHA site.. So was CR wrong? NSTHA wrong, or you wrong?
I'm just responding to what I believe is mis-information being posted.
Hondaman, first off you gloat that all Honda vehicles get this huge amount of MPG better than Ford vehicles.. WRONG.. Granted, Honda averages 2mpg better across the board when comparing a Pilot to a V6 Explorer, or a Taurus SES to an Accord V6, or a Focus to a Civic. Windstar to an Odyssey. What is up with the S2000??? 20/26 vs a v8 Mustang GT that gets 18/26??? Not this huge gap of MPG advantage you wish to think.
Japan and the environment. Nice pics of the Forest, Pictures. I was in Japan about 2 years ago and the air smelled terrible. The Japanese are not known for their environmental endevours.
Sure is funny how Ford is this Big bad, unreliable, garbage producing, polluting monster yet they still sell thousands of vehicles and have not gone out of business..
Drives between Manhattan and Long Island every day.
No problems.
If everyone had a skeptical, negative attitude towards progress... there would be no progress.
Japan's environment got the way it is before they got concerned about the environment. The pollution you are describing is the result of what Japan did 30-50 years ago. Japan has seen the effects of pollution. That's why they are trying to do something about it now.
If you want evidence of how the US has screwed up the environment, look at LA.
You are the one that told us that sticker numbers don't really reflect reality and you are using them now!
In the first place, I was talking more about how clean Honda cars are compared to Ford not really MPG's but yes they are better!
Good example Varmint with L.A.
That's not entirely fair to LA - local topography and weather patterns have a lot to do with air stagnation. The density of cars in the NYC/Long Island area is at least as high as in LA and the air is not nearly as bad.
tidester, host
You can't blame it all on the vehicles.
"Well, we DO know that the Escape isn't reliable. So if I'm going to gamble on reliability, I'd go with something unproven before I bought a vehicle proven to be problematic."
Quoting from the Bible again? The copy I have isn't unreliable. It starts every day and gets me from A to B too. Every Ford I've ever driven and/or owned was the same way.
As a matter of fact, it got my wife and I to work this morning through 5 inches (and counting) of snow without any problems. The auto 4WD is nice, but turning the 4X4 on is way better.
I'm going to try and stay away from the emissions discussions from now on. I obviously don't know anything about it, nor do I care to know. There are too many older cars, both foreign and domestic, out there that spew black, engine fire smelling smoke out their tail pipes for me to worry about what is coming out of my new vehicles pipe. And this is in an area which requires yearly emission tests for each and every vehicle! I can tell you exactly what is coming out of both our vehicle's pipes because they give you the test results when they're done. The Escape had a lot of very low numbers as I recall.
Maybe their archiving system is inaccurate but, I highly doubt they intentionally leave facts out to screw Ford. I think Ford sells alot of garbage but, I didn't knowingly leave off Honda recalls to make Ford look bad.
How about we forget CR and go to jdpower.com (as I said before) their initial quality reports don't lie. You could also check out intellichoice.com for their vehicle assessments. OR stay right here, click on new vehicle, choose a CR-V, click on "True Cost To Own" and compare the Escape to the CR-V.
If people in America believe Ford to have a product equal to that of Honda, why doesn't the Escape's resale value hold a candle to that of the CR-V?? (Or any other vehicle for that matter?)
Honda also cares more about your children's safety and protecting the environment than any other car company in the world.
Why is it taking Honda so long to stop world hunger, develop a cure for cancer, and bring peace to the middle east?
You're catching on!!!
#2 "Honda also cares more about your children's safety and protecting the environment than any other car company in the world."
Actually, I can't speak for them. I can only make a judgement based upon their actions. I can however, speak for me. And I care more about my child's safety and protecting the enviornment, so I drive a Honda. Reason? See #1
Maybe cause they devote all of their time to #1 in the post above.
The point is that a problem exists. It doesn't matter why. The places where that problem exists seem to be the places where people/companies/governments are doing something about it. When Scape2 writes things like, "these place are dirty, the manufacturers are not clean", it's pure stinky stuff.
Honda, Toyota, and other clean car makers have learned their lesson. They are doing something about it. They are ahead of the game and pushing the envelope. Even though it doesn't make them any money, right now. Ford, DCX, and GM are only doing whatever is necessary to meet the mandates handed down to them.
Absolutely. Recreation vehicles like dirt bikes, jet skis, snowmobiles... pretty much anything with a 2-stroke engine... will pollute far more than a car. Factories, refineries, powerplants, and other industrial sites are also far more "dirty". This is why I'd be perfectly happy with an LEV engine like the one in the Escape. But progress is still progress. I support the companies that make progress (in addition to making a profit).
This thread has drifted way off topic, so I agree we should put this subject away and get back to CR-Vs and Escapes. It's been a good discussion, though.
Baggs - You can call CR the bible if you like. To me, it's simply the only source we have that ranks specific vehicles. You can point out theoretical problems with the calcuations or little discrepancies, but their bottom line has been consistent with what other resources report in quality studies, brand-based studies, and public opinion.
You can theorize that hybrids may be less reliable than cars with ICEs, but so far the owners are not reporting any more problems than people with non-hybrid cars. Accusations on the subject are pretty much unfounded with no data to back them up at all.
I'll take CR's proven record over that any day.
FYI, Honda is working on those things as we speak. The task of finding a cure for AIDS and ending racism has, however, been relegated to GM.
So are CR's reliability ratings. How can they give one year old vehicles poor reliability ratings based on unequal sample sizes? I guess it all depends on how you define "reliable".
That's why I have an easier time believing J.D.'s long term awards, even if they don't seem to poll a large enough sample.
We'll have to wait and see how the hybrids hold up.
"Honda also cares more about your children's safety and protecting the environment than any other car company in the world."
Ever hear of Volvo? They know a thing or two about safety too. Their new SUV is pretty much indestructible.
Blame it on the tires if you wish but, Volvo would have NEVER let the roll-over/Explorer/Firestone debacle happen.
How long will it take Ford to ruin them? I like the Jag/Aston/Taurus though.
The majority of the public does not subscribe to their magazine, therefore the public's opinion of CR is pretty low too. Also, public opinion is what their reviews influence, so it's not surprising that the two coincide.
Their bottom line is only consistent with some other resources. Ford had more vehicles listed on J.D.'s long term quality survey than Honda did (I'm not counting their other brands either). CR doesn't report it that way. Several publications, Edmunds included, have given higher overall ratings to the Escape when compared to the CR-V and vice versa. Yet CR basically calls one junk and the other is the vehicle that God himself would drive. Having only one "authority" to form an opinion from is not the way it is normally done.
Anyone interested in starting a competitor to CR? We can call it "Automobile Reports". Then we can spin a TV show off of it! I can hear it now: "Live from New York, it's 'Automobile Reports' with your hosts Steve and Tidester..."
The point is that a problem exists. It doesn't matter why.
That wasn't the point - the original post was using LA to demonstrate what a mess the US made of the environment. I am saying there are mitigating circumstances as the Spaniards most likely didn't anticipate the internal combustion engine.
tidester, host
"The other vehicles in this group scored close together, landing between the Forester and Honda CR-V. The Ford Escape outscored the Santa Fe by the slimmest of margins. The Escape is a more well-rounded package than the Tribute, with a more compliant ride. Both offer spirited acceleration, excellent brakes, and generous interior space that stretches the definition of "small SUV." But both suffer from too much road and wind noise and high fuel consumption. Reliability is unknown."
2003 review of the Escape -
"The car-based Escape is a mechanical twin of the Mazda Tribute, unibody vehicles with a fully independent suspension. The roomy interior includes a spacious rear bench. We recommend the more supportive power driver's seat, which is optional on the base XLS model and standard on the uplevel XLT. The Escape's ride is less stiff and more comfortable than the Tribute's. Handling is relatively nimble, and the brakes are strong. An available 3.0-liter, 201-hp V6 serves up lively acceleration and the available AWD system works well. There's too much road and wind noise, however, and fuel economy is disappointing. Offset-crash-test results were also subpar."
So, was that the first time you actually read one of their reports?
Honda makes a more reliable vehicle. The CR-V is more eco-friendly, has a better build, and offers all the power I need. That is why I chose it, that is why I recommend it.
The Fords that were listed on the JD Power's survey are mostly in segments where Honda did not compete. The rest of the things you noted are overall rankings, not reliability predictions.
As for using one source, I wouldn't. I use all the related sources. Lemme try this one more time...
You can point out theoretical problems with the calcuations or little discrepancies, but their bottom line has been consistent with what other resources report in quality studies, brand-based studies, and public opinion.
Your comments about overall rankings do not refute that argument.
You see, the CR-V didn't have the power that I wanted. I probably could have gotten by with what it has, but I didn't want to. Build quality was a wash when I compared them. Whether one or both improved since January, I don't know. I never gave emissions or fuel economy a single thought until I started getting involved in these boards and I certainly didn't consider either when shopping around. That's why I chose the Escape.
But I don't recommend it to anyone. When people ask me what to buy, and believe it or not a lot do, I always give them a short list and point them to the dealer for some test drives. I also give them a quick rundown of each vehicle's strengths and weaknesses based on what I've read about them. If they ask "How do you like the Escape?" I always tell them how much I like it, but that they should still shop around some. Last August, my brother-in-law happened to choose a 2001 CR-V SE over the Escape after shopping around.
Yes, some Honda is always on my list. I do think they are good automobiles and I do currently own one. However, they do not belong in the upper echelon that a lot of people try to put them in. I learned that from my own experience, and that of several others. Some things look better on paper.
So who does?
Here's what I have to say about the first sentence above: "You can point out theoretical problems with the calcuations or little discrepancies,..."
As for the second sentence: "How can they give one year old vehicles poor reliability ratings based on unequal sample sizes?"
How long are we going to keep playing this game?
By the way, Ford sells about 3 vehicles for every 1 that Honda sells. If they look poor because they're not the majority, how does that make Honda look?
Here are circulation numbers for other popular publications:
Sports Illustrated - 3,212,595
Playboy - 3,252,661
Gentlemen's Quarterly - 707,776
Newsweek - 3,144,695
AutoWeek - 315,000
Field & Stream - 1,774,266
Car and Driver - 1,365,577
Motor Trend - 1,278,568
Popular Mechanics - 1,271,042
Road & Track - 758,299
Mustang Monthly - 58,122
5.0 Mustang - 80,042
Mustang Illustrated - 22,283
Family Circle - 5,002,042
Good Housekeeping - 4,558,524
Woman's Day - 4,244,383
Rolling Stone - 1,252,497
Time - 4,056,150
Not bad for a rag no one reads. (or respects)
No one. Each one has it's own qualities (Honda: efficient reliable small engines, Ford: powerful reliable V8 engines) that stand out. It's all up to the consumer to determine which one is the best.
Not too bad I'd say. I wouldn't write off the publication as biased based on this report.
I pointed out that the environment around LA has suffered as a result of man-made pollution. I used LA as an example of a place where pollution has made an impact on the environment. In the context on my overall argument, I used it as an example of a place where a poor environment has effected people's attitudes (and politics) regarding pollution.
You seem to be making the assumption that I am laying blame for the condition of LA. Like there is something we should have done to prevent it. You said things like, "that isn't fair". Fairness isn't an issue. That wasn't my point. My point is simply that it is a reality. We have no one else to blame, but ourselves.
Unless, of course, it was Bin Laden.