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
It is better, it has a was to go. It doesn't suprise me that they lowered their numbers so fast. They did a half wit job engineering and fixed the problems on the run. i.e. Focus and Escape.
They also didn't have any new high volume vehicles launched last year so, we'll see where they land with the next "all-new" whatever it will be. Honda on the other hand completely rebuilt the CR-V and Accord then they introduced the Pilot...and they're still in the top 3.
I have never seen a CR drone on this board. I have seen people that use every tool available to them to make an educated decision. But, I never heard anyone say they only buy something based upon CR.
FUN TO DRIVESubaru Impreza WRX
FAMILY SEDANHonda Accord (4cyl.)/Volkswagen Passat (V6)
SMALL SEDANHonda Civic EX
DRIVING GREENHonda Civic Hybrid
AFFORDABLE VERSATILITYPontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix
SMALL SUVToyota RAV4
MIDSIZED SUVHonda Pilot
PICKUP TRUCKChevrolet Avalanche
MINIVANHonda Odyssey
I'd say Honda influenced Ford to stop building rolling dung. Without Honda, Q1 would still be the slop Ford would be slinging.
I believe Will Rogers said,
"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there."
Second, the issue on hand was reliability. What you are talking about is a complete assessment of the vehicle including personal preferences like styling, performance, price, etc. I never made any reference to those characteristics and neither does the article I linked to. My post was about reliability and reliability alone. You're getting chocolate in my peanut butter.
Getting back to the peanut butter... If you state that X brand is good enough. That is your standard. That brand is then shown to be the very bottom of the heap. How can we conclude anything other than the fact that your standard is low?
What you've done is attach the source, which is fine. But the problem here is that CR is very consistent with other publications doing the same kind of research. The JD Powers research on long term reliability (by brand) comes to the same conclusions. They use different methodology, but the overall rankings are pretty much the same.
Aside from calling people "drones", you haven't got a leg to stand on.
HOW MANY times should I repeat that the Focus is a nicely engineered car and gets the highest (HIGHER than Honda and Toyota) TUV backed quality ratings in Europe.
Don't confuse ENGINEERING with the Fords terrible launch mistakes made in the N.A. market.
FoMoCo's angered its suppliers with the draconian cost cuts requirements and got the appropriate payback in the form of greatly reduced parts quality.
Studies have shown that Toyota and Honda are generally "liked" by their suppliers. Meanwhile the constant cost-cutting, spec changes, and bullish attitude of the domestics have diminished their image in the eyes of the suppliers. Last minute changes alone have caused quality problems with domestic parts.
Okay then. They did a half wit job manufacturing and fixed the problems on the run. i.e. Focus and Escape.
Better now?
What exactly did that solve?
I'd say there were engineers somewhere in Ford that said the parts they were getting would work fine. But, that's speculation.
Yes it was.
And the people who were largely responsible for that disaster are gone.
The Focus leaving the factory floor today is a completely different animal.
Honda fans... Watch out for the next gen Focus/Mazda3.
And if the Mazda6 launch is of any indication, FoMoCo's suffered enough to learn not to repeat the early Focus and Escape (to the lesser extent) launching mistakes.
Those were re-skinnings at best. They were not new from the ground up like the Escape and Focus. We don't know what the CR-V was like in it's first year because it wasn't sold here. Is there an echo in here?
"It was a piece of trash here in it's first year or so."
So was the current Civic. The Focus isn't unreliable, it just had a lot of recalls. Again, so did the Civic.
"INITAL quality."
No. Reliability ratings. Read it (varmints link is what I'm talking about) again.
"When I wrote "you", I was not directing that specifically at Bess. Sorry, I could have been clearer."
Pretty much everything I typed was based on that. I thought you were implying that you had higher standards than bess because you bought a Honda. After having said yourself that people have different standards it didn't make a whole lot of sense.
You can pretty much disregard everything I typed in that post.
"How can we conclude anything other than the fact that your standard is low?"
So when someone marries the ugly girl with the great personality he is considered to have low standards? I don't think so. His standards are just different. Reliability is not the only quality of a vehicle that we have to look at.
You could say that an Escape owner's reliability standards are low according to CR. But since CR is only offering us a guesstimate for the Escape(which did improve this year if I'm not mistaken) you'd be doing the same.
"But the problem here is that CR is very consistent with other publications doing the same kind of research. The JD Powers research on long term reliability (by brand) comes to the same conclusions. They use different methodology, but the overall rankings are pretty much the same."
Not really.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-03-11-cr-picks_x.htm
Hyundai does differ.
I've taken out quite a few manufacturers from the lower ranks just to shorten up the list...and cause it's taken from CR without their consent.
The new CR 3 year LONG TERM RELIABLITY chart is below
How automakers stack up for 2000
The average three-year-old car had 55 problems per 100 vehicles. Some makes did better, others worse.
MAKE PROBLEMS per 100 vehicles
Better than average
Acura 21
Toyota 25
Honda 32
Lincoln 47
Hyundai 53
AVERAGE MODEL 55
Ford 56
Mercury 57
Volkswagen 74
Cadillac 82
Worse than average
Source: Consumer Reports
The Civic is listed as one of the vehicles with the FEWEST compliants per 100 vehicles in the 3 year span from 2000 to 2002. So, maybe the problems weren't quite as far-reaching as you thought? The Focus is listed as one of the worst.
CR's RELIABILITY RANKINGS
For 2002 models, the average was 18 problems per 100 vehicles, vs. 21 in 2001.
Brand Problems per
100 vehicles
Toyota 10
Honda 11
Hyundai 11
Subaru 13
Nissan 15
BMW 20
Chrysler 20
Mazda 20
Volkswagen 20
General Motors 21
Mercedes-Benz 22
Ford Motor 23
Source: Consumer Reports
Hyundai raised it's reliability for one year, not in long term (3 or 5 year) reliability.
"So when someone marries the ugly girl with the great personality he is considered to have low standards? I don't think so. His standards are just different. Reliability is not the only quality of a vehicle that we have to look at."
Right. And if I were talking about the total package, I would agree. But I wasn't talking about the total package. I was talking about reliability only. That time, I was clear.
Let me borrow your example and perhaps things will get clearer.
A man states that "personality" is him prime requisite for a love interest. He then proposes marriage to a mannequin, claiming that the plastic clothes hanger is the girl of his dreams. Can we consider this man an authority on personality? Does he have high standards for social interaction?
FWIW, I am reading great things about the next Focus platform.
BTW, the guy who was responsible for that mishap is gone too.
All signs are FoMoCo is very serious about its launching strategies and is not willing to tolerate any launching mismanagement.
It depends on how you define a problem. I have never seen a CR survey myself so I don't know how they define it.
In the case of the Focus vs. the Civic, maybe the Honda owners aren't reporting the recalls as problems but Ford owners are. All the bad press the Focus has been getting doesn't help the owners to like them either. I always bring the BMW X5 up in these discussions because it is easily one of the worst vehicles ever made when it comes to recalls and problems, but you never hear about it. That's why I don't think the whole Focus thing is that bad and I don't think that the Civic is problematic either. Recalls aren't problems in my book because they are expected. Think about it. When you go in for a fix to a recall you get a brand new re-engineered part that is better than before. What's bad about that? If your transmission goes they only give you another one of the same quality. Too many does look bad and can be seen as a quality control issue (as in the case of the Focus) but it doesn't always mean the vehicle is a total loss. Just ask C&D.
Charlie Hughes didn't have anything to do with the mix of vehicles Mazda chose to produce. Anyway, how would you have had them advertise? You don't launch a new vehicle with ads of the lowest model scooting around a bend! It was an upper, upper management (way higher than Hughes) call, and it was way off.
The 6i4 can compete with the likes of the Accord and the Camary but, it's going to take more than an ad to get 4 cylinder buyers away from their beloved Honda and Toyota products...it's going to take a test drive and word of mouth.
So, after saying that, I would say Ford/Mazda have screwed up the launch. They wouldn't have base model 6i4's sitting on their lots if the sport package was a dealer installed option. There's no reason a dealer can't install side sills, 17 inch wheels and a front and rear spoiler. That's on top of producing the wrong mix of vehicles in the first place.
How can all these reliability stats mean anything when you have a car company (Honda) hiding TSB and complaint information??? Not giving the public the whole story.. and to some its ok...
Why are CRV sales down so much?? I would be willing to bet the new 02 sales spike was from people trading in their old CRV's for new model year. I went by my friends Honda dealership and he has 7, yes folks 7 used CRV's sitting on his lot...Hmmm... where is all this so called demand for these?? I am going to go over this weekend and check out a Mega dealership and see how many used CRV's are on this lot..
By the way.. a CRV EX goes for almost 24K in my area. A Limited Escape with leather, heated seats, AND sunroof goes for 24.3K!! Want the Ad? or dealership again??.....
For all intents and purposes, yes. The launches of the new CR-V and Civic were compared to those of the Escape and Focus in a previous post. Apples and oranges I say. The CR-V and Civic were both re-designs for existing platforms whereas the latter from above were all new from the ground up (albeit poorly done, but like vadp says, those folks are gone now). The next Escape and Focus launches will be handled much differently I'm sure.
So technically, they weren't just re-skins. I know what you are getting at. I think the Pilot was in that post too. None of those three Honda's were engineered from completely new platforms like the Escape (very heavily modified 626) and Focus (heavily modified Euro Focus) were.
"I was talking about reliability only. That time, I was clear."
But bringing the term "standards" in to the mix opens up a whole new book.
So you are claiming that someone has low standards for reliability because they choose to ignore what CR, JD, IC, etc. say about it? Big deal. That same person may think he has high standards for reliability based upon his and/or other people's experiences. You have to care about and/or read what those publications say to apply to that set of standards. Not everyone does.
Think about what I posted above: "But since CR is only offering us a guesstimate for the Escape(which did improve this year if I'm not mistaken) you'd be doing the same.". CR is guessing what the reliability most vehicles will be. If you believe it, then you are guessing too.
They were wrong about the Escape last year. It did improve for this year and probably will again next year. If it keeps improving everyone who bought one is going to look like a genius.
Used CRV have one of the best resale value any car made. I havn't check the Escape/Tribute's but saw one 2000 1/2 Tribute EX advertised for $12000 last year,that's what 4 year old CRV with 100k miles are selling for.
4 year old CRV's with 100k miles are going for 9k to 11k max.. (and this is from CarMax, which means those vehicles were traded in at considerably less by the owners).
01 Escapes (there is no such thing as an 2000 1/2 Escape as the first model year was the 01) with 40k miles going for 17k.
01 CRV's with 40k miles go for 16k to 18k depending on trim.
Basically, resale is about the same.. I would encourage everyone to verify resale values for themselves rather that trust what some salesman says.
You use of the term 'standard' is not well defined and vague. However for the sake of this discussion, I'll assume you are talking about 'quality' or 'reliablity' because this is the only attribute about the CRV that some publications give the advantage to the CRV.
So, as I've said, my standards for quality are just as high as yours. Where we differ is whos measurements for these standards do you trust?
Are you basing the measurment of CRV or Honda quality on your previous experience with the brand, or are you basing the measurment solely on what some magazine publishes.
At times you claim you base it on your experience, in which I also have experiences with Fords that indicate they have very high quality and long term reliability.
So then, the only difference in the CRV or the Escape is what CR says.. I'll look at their data, but that doesn't mean I have to draw the same conclusion.
I base my measurments of how Ford is doing on quality on my (and friends/family) previous experiences with the brand.
I also take into account other aspects of the vehilce when making a purchasing decision such as looks, performance, and overall value. In this aspect, my standards are also very high.
Why do Honda owners insist on thinking they are better 'people' than someone else because of the brand of vehicle they chose to buy?
This attitude of looking down on others because they don't agree with you is what I don't understand.
Attitudes like: 'because I drive a Honda, I have higher standards than you'. or 'Folks who buy Fords are willing to settle for less' or 'only people who are employees of Ford will buy the vehicle', or "Those who are passionate about Honda base their opinions on ownership, and have often driven other vehicles out of choice, not circumstance"
to me just look like attempts to either bash Ford or owners of Ford for reason's I'll refrain from speculating on for now.
I've already explained that my post was not directed at you personally.
"You use of the term 'standard' is not well defined and vague."
Yet you managed to post in moral outrage against it. You've got almost a dozen paragraphs describing something you don't understand? I don't think so. Clearly you understood it well enough.
"So, as I've said, my standards for quality are just as high as yours. Where we differ is whos measurements for these standards do you trust?"
Okay. This I can understand. But as I've written since that original posting, I use plenty of other data aside from CR. JD Powers is linked above, if you'd like a second opinion.
"I base my measurments of how Ford is doing on quality on my (and friends/family) previous experiences with the brand."
Which adds up to what? Maybe 40-50 vehicles? CR and JD Powers gathers data from thousands of vehicle owners in their surveys.
How can you ignore the only real data available on the subject and claim to have an educated opinion on the subject. Your argument boils down to, "In my own little world, where we ignore things like statistics, Fords are good." Fat lot of good that does for the people here on Earth.
Um, we're talking about the platform (structure) not the drivetrain.
"CR and JD Powers gathers data from thousands of vehicle owners in their surveys."
Not necessarily for each vehicle though. Remember the Grand Am example? CR didn't even get 100 back last year. We still don't have those sample sizes.
Demand for ALL used cars is down. Current incentives and lease returns have killed the used car market. The Honda dealer by my house has 6-7 used CR-V's in front of it too. So what?
By the way.. a CRV EX goes for almost 24K in my area. A Limited Escape with leather, heated seats, AND sunroof goes for 24.3K!! Want the Ad? or dealership again??.....
So what you're saying is incentives pull this fully loaded Escape down to the cost of a CR-V EX? Uhhhh thanks...good work proving my point.
The Focus was not all-new from the ground up. It had existed in Europe.
The Escape wasn't new from the ground up, it uses old engine technology and an old tranny.
I guess the only new car for either of them was the Thunderchicken? I don't know much about it, is it just old parts with a new skin? So the Mazda6 is new but when the Taurus is redesigned on that platform, it won't be? The Mazda3 will be new but the subsequint Focus and V40 built on it's platform won't be? Will Ford ever have a "new" car again? Will anyone ever have a new car again?
Personally, I think a complete over-haul with a completely new body style, new interior, new engine (to that vehicle) and new tranny (to that vehicle) make the vehicle new. I guess not though.
Is the new Accord new? Is the Element new? The Pilot isn't new? Where was it produced before? It's not like they just put new sheet metal on it, the entire interior and drivetrain are new.
I do think many followers of the big3 were content with the way quality was until they found out it could be better.
But in this case, we're talking about brand ratings, not individual cars. You've got that rebuttle memorized, but you're not using in the correct place.
According to Scape, the Escape's V6 is superior because it can climb hills, full loaded, without any difference in passing power. In a CR-V, you can feel the load when attempting the same task. By Scape's standards, the CR-V does not have enough power.
According to me, the amount of effort required to do this in a fully loaded CR-V is perfectly acceptable. Yes, you can feel the weight, but it's not what I would characterize as a struggle. This meets my standard for a car in this class.
One way to summarize that argument is to say that Scape has a higher standard than I on this particular issue. He expects more from the car. I do not take this personally, nor should he.
Now we can take that information debate whether or not my standard is too low, or if his is unreasonably high. We'd do that determining a standard for this class of vehicles and seeing how each measures up.
Now, do the same for reliability.
The Escape auto came out of Mazda 626, had lots of trouble in those years. Not known for lengevity when used on a little 4 cylinder. Ford bolted it on the 200hp V6, you think it will last?
The structure did not exist before. Leave the engine and tranny out of it. All manufacturers use engines and trannies over and over again.
The Thunderbird is built on the same platform as the Lincoln LS and Jaguar S-Type. It was not all new. The Pilot does the same with the MDX and Odyssey.
Do you get it now? The Escape shares it's platform with nothing else, meaning it is all new from the ground up. Same with the Focus (the U.S. version is supposedly pretty different from the Euro version). I'm not talking about new sheet metal, engines, and/or trannies.
"Is the new Accord new? Is the Element new? The Pilot isn't new?"
No. No. Yes.
"It's not like they just put new sheet metal on it, the entire interior and drivetrain are new."
It's almost exactly like that actually. Everything on/in the Pilot, MDX, and Odyssey is bolted to the same structure in almost the exact same places. That's the way the whole platform sharing process works, otherwise they'd be spending a lot more money developing each model. Guess who would be paying for it.
Since it keeps getting brought up, their engines are all pretty much the same too.
"But in this case, we're talking about brand ratings, not individual cars. You've got that rebuttle memorized, but you're not using in the correct place."
I was pointing out how the playing field may not be as level as it should be.
Honda Motor should know the answer to that question. Why don't you give them a call. What were all the models again? You know, the one's with the failing trannies that now have extended warranties on them so the owner won't have to pay for a replacement when their's goes. I remember the Accord and Odyssey but I can't remember the rest.
The fact is when a new vehicle is put together, when things are being used in ways they haven't been used exactly as before, there is room for error. The Pilot is a new vehicle by every definition of the word. (It was new back when you arguing that was the reason it was on Yahoo's top picks list.) The interior is new. The exterior is new. The 4 wheel drive system is new. The doors the windows go in, are new, the dash board is new...etc. The same holds true for the Civic, the Accord, the Element, and the CR-V.
It's not just new sheet metal! That's like saying every human being is the same because we all have the same skeleton! It's just wrong. The internal parts are different. That changes everything.
vadp will argue the Focus is almost exactly the same car straight from Europe...at least he used to. We'll see if that gets changed for this argument.
On the other hand a completely new platform launch (as with the Escape/Tribute, Focus and Mazda6) is an event of a different magnitude.
Those platforms have never existed. Every structure in their bodys needed to be designed and tested from the ground up.
The Accord, CR-V/Element in their current redesigns have received updates to the existing tried-and-true foundations/platforms.
The Civic IMO is somewhere in between. There were made some extensive changes to its platform in the form of the completely new rear floor panels (Flat floor) and significant changes to the front end in the form of the changed suspension geometry (struts).
But still, it's not the same as to design a completely new platform.
And in that respect Baggs is right: the new Pilot is as new as the Odyssey.
PS The American and Euro Focuses are the same.
The only difference is the supplier base and quality (building some pretty crucial parts like a manual tranny to lower tolerances from the lower quality materials as was the case with the cars assembled during the '00-01 model years).
No. I said it was an all new model. The platform was not mentioned. The LS was an all new model too but it shared a platform. Maybe nameplate would be a better term to use.
If you look at the recalls for the Escape you'll note that more than one was issued to repair some part that had the potential to fall off of the vehicle. These are things that can happen with a new platform because sometimes they just aren't bolted on right the first time. It could be that robots weren't programmed correctly or maybe the assemblers weren't trained properly. The Escape was rushed to the dinner table before it was fully cooked.
You're still bringing up the rest of the vehicle. That doesn't count here because all the rest of that stuff can have problems at any time during the model run, due to constant changes/updates, and not have any bearing on the launch. We were discussing launches. More specifically the launches of a proven platform vs one that hadn't seen the light of day yet.
I know it's hard for all you Honda people to believe, but they're not any different from any other manufacturer when it comes down to designing new models. They all use existing platforms and parts for several models. It's one way to save a lot of cash. Your CR-V is pretty much a Civic with a high roof and sitting on small stilts. The Element seems to differ somewhat more but it's still a Civic at heart. It's easier to count how many Acura's are not based on the Accord than it is to count how many are. You already know about the rest of the line. Odyssey, Odyssey, Odyssey.
They're not as unique as one would like to think, and I'm sure varmint is going to dispute all of this with some technical jargon at some point. Go ahead and hide behind it if you want.
"It's not just new sheet metal! That's like saying every human being is the same because we all have the same skeleton! It's just wrong. The internal parts are different. That changes everything."
Parts change from year to year. Does that mean there's a new model every year? When a manufacturer switches to a stronger valve, which slightly increases power, halfway through a model's run does that make it an all new vehicle. Internal parts changed, so it must be new.
*edit*
OK. I was wrong about the Focus and I'll leave it out from now on. I thought the U.S. version was a lot different from the Euro version. Maybe it was the Contour I was thinking of.
The kind of things Honda generally doesn't have problems with.
A Honda tranny recall? Could be worse.
http://www.flamingfords.com/nytimes/nyt042696.html
Old news for sure but, lets not forget the largest recalls in Ameircan automobile history. (The one they tried to cover up...scape...one that could potential kill you.) TSB's gimme a break.
Bringing up recalls is such a bad thing for a person defending Ford to do.
http://www.safetyalerts.com/rcls/category/auto.htm
Compare pages. Notice the Civic only had one recall from 1997 to 2000, 4 years and one recall for one of the best selling cars in America. Not bad. Maybe that's how you get an above average mark with CR?
I predict scape will say that Honda covers up all of their recalls.
SUVs seem to be made up of "systems" just like cars and trucks. Sometimes a system gets upgraded, like the addition of ABS to the brakes or different struts or shocks to the suspension. The whole of these systems makes the car ride and perform like it ultimately does, but is there really all that much under any of this sheetmetal that's not piggybacking on earlier incremental advances?
Steve, Host
I agree Steve. I find it hard to understand why, with that kind of system, some manufacturers can't get things worked out. Look at all of the Taurus recalls. There are a TON of them. It'd seem like they'd have a year in there where there wasn't a recall.
Ya know, looking through alot of these recalls, many of these things aren't the reason I choose Honda.
I chose my Hondas because of the article I posted before, the one that says Honda's are built to last 20 years and Fords 15. Recalls are generally things that get taken care of. It's the small stuff that breaks that I really hate. I know baggs has said that his Accord has things falling off but I've gotta tell you my 4 Hondas have never had anything fall off. (I probably treat my vehicles alot better than most people. You can seriously eat off the engine on any car I've owned, even after 168,000 miles.) There was a rust problem in the 90's but, I think that's pretty true of quite a few vehicles in that era.
I wonder when Ford and Honda figure things start breaking? They can't plan everything will have a life of 15 or 20 years...can they? They must figure some things will break sooner.
Actually Baggs, the only thing worth correcting you on is your use of the word "platform". 20 years ago, platform sharing meant that the car/truck was built on the same frame as another car. For example, the original Explorer shared it's platform with the Ranger.
That is no longer the case. At least, not with unit body vehicles. Platform sharing now refers to the space taken up on an assembly line and the types of hardware used to manufacture the vehicles (both supplies and tools). For example, here is a picture of the Pilot's frame. The Ody chassis has no such rail system under the skin. Nor does the Accord which is the basis for the Ody.
The characteristics of a modern platform are typically related to the vehicle's size, drivetrain configuration, and suspension. For example, the Civic, Element, and CR-V share the same platform because they each use a front engine, FWD bias design. They all use struts up front and multi-link 2-bones in the back. And each fits on roughly the same type of assembly line, meaning that they could use the same or similar machines to manufacture each.
They do not share unitized frames (obviously). Although they use the same type of suspension, they do not necessarily share suspension components. The CR-V and Element do share a few key components, but almost none with the Civic, RSX, or Stream (which share the same platform, as well).
Hmmm.. I would say that a "platform" consistes of suspension, driveline configuraton and most importantly a single most expensive component - the pan stamping also called floorpan and firewall.
And if the Pilot does ride on a frame, then of course it has nothing to do with the Odyssey.
As for the Civic and CR-V, these technical drawings are the best I could find for you.
http://h.wieck.com//pv/2002/02/06/HON2002020653799_pv.jpg
http://h.wieck.com//pv/2002/08/19/HON2002081940631_pv.jpg
Our 96 had at least two though, and that was the year of transition from one design to the next.
"Honda Has Recalled the 2003 Acura CL , TL , MDX , ACCORD , ODYSSEY , PILOT because a timing belt tensioner pulley is misaligned."
That's a good one for this current discussion. How can one think these vehicles are all that different when they've all just been recalled for the same thing.
"Actually Baggs, the only thing worth correcting you on is your use of the word "platform"."
I was trying to keep it simple. Thanks for taking the time to type all that out though. I just assumed everyone knew what I was talking about.
Underpinnings is probably a better word to use than platform, but it is even harder to explain.
Also, and this isn't directly aimed at you varmint, I want to add that I was never meant to imply that the Pilot and Odyssey are exactly the same underneath the sheet metal. Obviously they have to bend and stretch the frame members to make things fit differently for each design. It all starts out in the same place though.
What varmint typed above also shows why you'll never see a Taurus, or even Escape for that matter, built on Ford's DEW97 platform (LS, S-Type, T-Bird). It is a RWD platform and will not allow for the entire drivetrain to reside in the front of the vehicle. They are using a shortened version of that platform for the next Mustang though.
Like the current CR-V, the Escape won't be all new the next time around either. It is rumored that it will be built on the Mazda 6 platform. Hopefully all the bugs are worked out by then so we don't have to talk about this again.
I would imagine that a suitable buyer (should it happen) would take on the warranties already in force, but who knows who will be the new owners or will Ford cease to exist and what about resale value. Should buyers be cautious about buying now.
I mean would you book a vacation with a tour company that's facing bankruptcy. Or are all such potential worries absurd and people shouldn't be concerned. I wonder...
http://www.forbes.com/2003/03/10/cz_jf_0310flint.html?partner=yah- - oo&referrer=
Here's what those crazy Brits wrote:
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml;$sessionid$J4G4ZTY- - YDDRBPQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/money/2003/03/07/cnford07.xml&- - sSheet=/portal/2003/03/07/ixportal.html&_requestid=232812
Sounds like a bad thing for those who like to "hide" info...
I'm not 100% sure what these tables mean, but the Escape seems to be better than the CR-V.
Can't argue with that.
You seem to be trying to turn those numbers into a quality measure. They're not about that. Besides, having to import the parts from outside the U.S. is sometimes the reason for the extra cost too.
It almost sounds like you think that's a good thing. If you crash, and your insurance premium increase offsets what you've been saving in gas every year over a competitor, what's the point in buying a frugal Honda?