Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
"Looks aren't everything scooter. After all.. she married you, didn't she? "
But unlike the Freestyle, my looks are well, uh, umm, distinctive.
The Freestyle is free-of-style.
Accord and Camry are inoffensive but contemporary. They can get away with that because of their sheer excellence, The Ford simply;y does not have that cred.
The Freestyle would have looked fresh and contemporary 10-15 years ago.
I am agreeing with you, it's a promising car but Ford played it like a sports team who goes in uptight because they HAVE to win and are Praying not to lose. That never works. Look what Ford had done to this poor vehicle. First they saddled it with invisible non-styling, no marketing at all then fed the rumors of it's cancellation and a Mercury replacement. Then they said never mind and wisely are going to restyle it (actually style it for the first time) as soon as they possibly can.
No argument on the marketing efforts. The CIA itself couldn't have done a better job at keeping the Freestyle a secret.
But on your styling concerns..
It's difficult (if not impossible) to make a tall wagon look like a Maserati and still maintain it's usefulness and practicality. Case in point would be today's Pacifica. Looks great yes, but... in contrast to the Freestyle, it's cramped inside, it doesn't have a useable third-row, has zero storage behind that third-row, and is generally considered to be overweight and consequently a bit of a gas hog.
I think the Freestyle has rugged good looks. I mean, look at how many plainer Explorers Ford has sold; now there's a vehicle with bland proportions. Very utilitarian, the Explorer is. The Freestyle has cool fender flares and a nice stance, looking a little like the popular Jeep Grand Cherokee or Toyota Highlander. So I'm not blaming Freestyle's looks on its slow sales. Its the way Ford has abused customers over the years many times that has spoiled the reputation.
When I went to the Los Angeles auto show in January I talked to one of the Freestyle designers at the Ford display and he told me that this was the first car they ever designed from the inside out rather than the outside in. In other words they started with a list of design priorities based on fit, function and safety and they made the outer aesthetics work around this. This is in contrast to the usual paradigm of creating a model of the body and overall outer aesthetics and attempting to get everything to work within that. The end result is a car that we all appreciate for all the right reasons, but perhaps it's overall visual impact could be more compelling. The Pacifica on the other hand was clearly designed from the outside in and it's flaws are obvious. I can only speak for myself regarding the subjective looks of the Freestyle and all I can say is I love everything about the car so much, I have grown to actually like the way it looks.
On a side bar note, there was also a Freestyle on display at the show that was modified a little. I was so busy talking to the designer that I didn't take too close of a look, but I did notice that they put on bigger tires (255/55/18) and made it look a lot sportier. Reading all the comments about tire size I respectfully recognize that drivers who live in extreme winter conditions ( I live in sunny southern California) would not like these bigger tires, but this sportier Freestyle looked GREAT! I asked the designer about the possibility of a "Sport" version and he said his V. P. came to the exhibit and saw the car. We both agreed that with a few modifications the Freestyle could look WAY better.
I think most of us bought our Freestyles because we recognize function and value as primary criteria in our decision making. Unfortunately, many other car buyers don't consider these priorities as important as self image based on outer aesthetics. Don't get me wrong. I would not buy an ugly car, but as a first step I think the Freestyle is on the right track and has it's priorities in order.
Now I understand. The CR reviews are submitted by subscribers to the magazine. These subscribers rate the stuff they buy. Then I suppose to be totally objective they wait until they have owned their Freestyles say, 8 months to a year. Then they base their opinions on how well it did on that cross country trip with the family, all the gear they brought along and how easy it was to fit it all. Then they consider the gas mileage on the open road and in the mountains, comparing it to their everyday driving and how well it performs under different circumstances and weather conditions. They comment on the seats being a little hard, but overlook that because of the lack of back and shoulder fatigue. Of course all along their thinking about the smooth ride and all the safety features built in to the vehicle to keep their family safe. Then consideration is given when they had to bring home 10 foot 2X4's from the lumber yard and how they fit inside the car with the front seat folded flat. Or the time four golf bags and four adult males fit comfortably on that trip to the out of town course. They certainly asked their wife about how easy it is to load the kids and secure the baby because of the roomy second row. Of course they don't forget how comfortable everyone was and how easy it was for their elderly mother to get in and out of the car when they went to dinner and a show. Then they remember how well it's performed overall and that there hasn't been any mechanical failures since they brought it home. Then one day they notice how good it looks parked next to a Buick Rendezvous on one side and a Pontiac Aztec on the other. I don't know, based on its own merits, it seems the CR score should be pretty high for the Freestyle. Now, as Forrest Gump once said..."that's all I've got to say about that".
"It's difficult (if not impossible) to make a tall wagon look like a Maserati and still maintain it's usefulness and practicality. Case in point would be today's Pacifica. Looks great yes, but... in contrast to the Freestyle, it's cramped inside, it doesn't have a useable third-row, has zero storage behind that third-row, and is generally considered to be overweight and consequently a bit of a gas hog. But if looks are all that matters..."
That explains why clearly inferior products from Chrysler and Buick,that look better, are selling better.
The Free-of-style has plain slab sides, tires that are too small, 1986 Taurus headlights, an oddly shaped grille that doesn't seem to fit the opening and completely bland taillights. Fine, it's a functional box, it doesn't not need to be so anonymously sterile that it looks 10 years old at introduction.
That's why in the span of one year, Ford was going to kill it, hand if off to Mercury and now are revising is at fast as they can.
You either play to win, or you play scared and guarantee your own defeat.
"That explains why clearly inferior products from Chrysler and Buick,that look better, are selling better. "
Actually no, they're not. So far in 2006, the Freestyle is handily outselling both the Pacifica and the Rendezvous. (And Buick is practically giving away the Rendezvous.)
"1986 Taurus headlights"
Ouch... that really hurt. I think you exaggerate a bit though.
Here is a post that was made to a new discussion (I suggested that he post it in "problems and solutions):
"Car was running parked for about 15-20 min in summer with air on, went into reverse and it died. I restarted engine and prceeded to drive off. When I went to get on high way I had no acceleration and the dash read "Engine in failsafe mode" I stopped shut it off and restarted and it was fine."
The only "failsafe mode" I've ever heard of is in the Ford Ranger, which will shut down 3 cylinders if the water pump fails, and use the other three cylinders to propel the truck. That was the German 4.0l engine. I wasn't aware that the Duratec 3.0 had this feature, and the owners manual makes no mention of it. Interesting.
I like the Freestyle styling. It is basically a new model Ford Explorer on a less tall platform. I was in an office building last week and looked down to see a Freestyle in the gold color. I asked my daughter if she liked the gold or the dark gray we had. She liked the gold.
When we got back downstairs, I realized that the gold vehicle was a late model Explorer.
As an owner of a 1986 Taurus, I personally like those headlights. I was also able to view them next to the Freestyle's. The lensing is different, the shape is different, and the turn signal/flasher lamps are different too. The Freestyle's look more European to my eyes.
Styling is a personal thing. I am glad that the Freestyle has some elegance, and doesn't look like a "Hot Wheels" truck like some new SUV/CUV's do. Others need that "contemporary" design. If you don't like the styling of the Freestyle, and that is your main criteria, don't buy it. No one made people buy the Pontiac Aztek.
Personally, the best way to deal with the Freestyle styling (if it bugs you) is to photograph your Freebie, launch Photoshop, and modify it to your liking - then post the images here, maybe even send them to Ford. :shades:
"Personally, the best way to deal with the Freestyle styling (if it bugs you) is to photograph your Freebie, launch Photoshop, and modify it to your liking - then post the images here, maybe even send them to Ford. "
The way I personally dealt with it, is by not buying one.
As the sales figures and the free-of-style's sales figures and near-death experience indicate, many people did the same.
I don't need to show my pictures to Ford, they already know the FS is in need of a urgent makeover and is working on it as fast as they can.
A "great personality" combined with "big bones" will only take you so far...
What do you think the reason is that "ugly" hasn't stopped the Scion Xb? Not only that, but it is a dated "ugly" design that is boat slow even when compared to the "sporty" Freestyle.
I passed a car today and did a doubletake. It was very elegant looking, and I was shocked to see it was a FS. Silver Birch with the tan cladding made it look very different from ours at first glance. Our blue Limited is very nice looking, but has a more sporty look. I hate tan/gold cars, but we nearly ended up with the tan FS because it looked so nice. Firey red would've been nice, but the burgundy color made it look a little fuddyduddy. The FS actually looks good in more of the offered colors than a lot of cars.
Before we needed a new car, I saw a silvery blue Pacifica the first year they were out. It was loaded, and took my breath away. I saw a white Pacifica last month and thought it was some sort of deformed minivan at first.
I saw Honda Elements around for awhile and thought they were bizarrely ugly. Then I saw a lime green one and it just wowed me. What a fun look!
It's just funny how color can change your own perception of a car's looks. White makes some cars look stunning, while on others it makes you start thinking about making s'mores. Black can become utterly generic or glitzy.
Everyone around here was buying the tan Lexus RX300's like crazy. They looked glitzy a few years ago, now they are seeming akin to the old faux wood paneled wagons of my childhood.
Well, anyhow, I don't generally ride alongside the FS, I ride inside it It's the inside that counts to me. All the little cubbies and drink holders keep the car utterly organized, something I never achieved in any other car. The passenger legroom keeps people happy. The handling is terrific, and with the recent heavy rains in California the brakes have made me feel like the roads were completely dry. I could go on for pages, but you all know the plusses this car has
Knowing how safe I am in this CUV that has a 5 star rating without side airbags makes me feel extremely at ease after having been in an accident last year that I am still recovering from physically.
Ugly or not, I don't care at all what anyone thinks, I love it. It's a beautiful car to live in
For the past 1/2 hour I have been reading some very entertaining articles on the FreeStyle. I recently purchased my blue and grey colored SE 3 weeks ago. I have noticed that either my good looks have increased, or other drivers are just admiring my new FreeStyle! What ye think of those apples scooterrash? Happily cruising! Marshall2 :shades:
The Free-from-style is not ugly. It is unattractive. That word means there is an absence of attractiveness. As in bland, plain or completely invisible to to its anonymous design. If it was introduced 10-15 years ago it would have fit right in. It's design reminds me of one of those "anonymobiles" from an insurance company commercial.
Ford played this (and the 500) like a really "tight" team plays a game. They didn't play to win, they played hoping and praying not to lose. That team usually loses to the relaxed team that is playing to have fun. And Ford admit they did this and shot themselves in the foot.
My posts are in response to a request for theories as to why a vehicle this good has been a marketplace failure.- What is your theory?
We all know Ford builds vehicles unchanged way too long and milks every bit of life out of them before revising them.
I'm not debating that it is a vehicle with a "great personality"
I am answering the question that was asked. Can you?
How do you explain in only one year, Freestyle was introduced, cancelled, handed-off to Mercury, taken back from Mercury and is now being redesigned as fast as Ford can pull it off?
tim156 (and others) have it right. tim156: "Then one day they notice how good it looks parked next to a Buick Rendezvous on one side and a Pontiac Aztec on the other."
Oh, the Aztek is truly ugly, in any dictionary. Our Freestyle looks like Cindy Crawford next an Aztek.
Anyway, I think the Freestyle is sharp looking. Its in the eye of the beholder.
If you don't own one, and it seems never intend to, why are you using up so much energy trashing it. There are so many other vehicles and owners out there to criticize, why not move on to them.
Since it never happened I know you can't point out one instance where I criticized any owners as you claim nor did I "trash" the car.
As each of my posts mentioned, I think it's a very promising vehicle.
How Ford has handled it summarized why their company and the American auto industry is in such a mess.
They rushed it to market with a weak, unrefined engine to accomodate their odd transmission choice, a body devoid of styling and then did their best to hide it from the public so they could focus on selling 14 mpg Explorers.
I'd be interested in buying one if it had a non-industrial powerplant, a transmission that will not soon be remembered as an orphaned oddity and "styling" that does not look 15 years old.
I was hopeful when it was going to be given to Mercury but am glad Ford is now licking it's wounds.
Rather than surrender, they are going to give it another try, and after only one year, they plan to address everyone of my concerns.
Style, engine and transmission. I guess I wasn't alone in my opinions.
Ordered our SEL in late JAN...told this week that the build date is now sked for the end of March. Dealer says it will take 3 days to build and less than a week to get to us in South Texas. Any ideas behind the holdup at ford and did anyone experience the same delays. Many thanks for this great website that helped us with our purchase.
Good for you ordering one to your specifications- too many people are in need of immediate gratification and settle for a car someone else picked out.
Part of Ford's cost cutting is a reduction in overtime. They are going to cut back on 2nd and 3rd shifts and limit vehicle production to one plant- even if it causes production delays or limits production volume of popular vehicles. 8 weeks for a production slot isn't too bad.
I have had people ask about my Freestyle - "What is that, and who makes it?" They don't always believe it is a Ford. Seeing the increase in the number of Freestyles on the road in my part of town, and sales growth numbers that seem to match, I will no longer have such an exclusive vehicle - but it does show that more people are doing their homework and finding a gem.
If I could use a metaphor, movie critics may pick apart a movie based on some academic criteria or personal agenda, but their views don't reflect that of the marketplace which pays to see the movie. Marketing failure is not the same as marketplace failure. Further, it is easy to forget that vehicle design needs to appeal to both male and female tastes. Women are a major vehicle purchase influence.
So, all of this discussion made me think of other CUVs and how their looks compared. If the Freestyle is not your cup of tea, don't buy it. Here is a list of purported CUVs. Is there a beauty in the bunch? Is beauty only skin deep? Do they seem designed by one person, or three different people with different visions. Engineering or image? You be the judge. I would say the Freestyle borrows many styling cues from the Lexus RX330 - the good ones that is. :shades: ************************** CUV Model(s) Acura MDX and Honda Pilot BMW X3 BMW X5 Buick Rendezvous/Pontiac Aztek Cadillac SRX Chevrolet Equinox/Pontiac Torrent Chrysler Pacifica Dodge Caliber Ford Edge Ford Freestyle Ford Territory Honda CR-V and Honda Element Hyundai Tucson/Kia Sportage Hyundai Santa Fe Infiniti FX Lexus RX330 Mitsubishi Endeavor? Mitsubishi Outlander Nissan Murano Porsche Cayenne Subaru Forester Toyota RAV4 Volkswagen Tuoareg Volvo XC90
Details make a difference, and the changes for the 2008 models on sale about one year from now will probably be in details - the grille, headlights, tail lights, and various feature and option upgrades. It does not need to be zoomy or an extreme fashion victim (e.g. the Magnum) to be both significantly more attractive and still unoffensive to mainstream buyers. The new engine and transmission will also end any talk about lack of power and noisy operation. Plus, Ford will also have the Edge sitting on the same dealer lots by then. What will people then have to say about Ford's offerings?
It's useless to argue about personal preferences in style or anything else. As the French say: A chacun son gout, or even A chacun son sale gout. To each his taste or to each his nasty taste.
My Freestyle was made in late 2004, and it took 12 weeks. All Freestyle CUVs and Ford 500 sedans are made at the same flexible plant in Chicago. Since both have growing sales, part of the delay is just finishing enough 500s to switch over to the Freestyle again. 8 weeks is not unusual, but certainly, the anticipation is hard to take - I know. :shades:
The CVT is a gem IMHO as well. As mentioned earlier, the new Dodge Caliber will offer a CVT as their only automatic transmission choice. 6 - 8% improvement in mileage over the standard automatic. :shades:
You had me right up until "I would say the Freestyle borrows many styling cues from the Lexus RX330 - the good ones that is"
"Marketing failure is not the same as marketplace failure."
Sadly, Ford had both here. They failed to sell it and as a result of that and it's blandness it's running at about one-half of it's projected volume.
Next year Ford will have Edge, Escape, new and improved Freestyle, Explorer and the Expedition in regular and XL. I think they might have the segment saturated.
Thanks. My statement stands: "the Freestyle borrows many styling cues from the Lexus RX330 - the good ones that is..." The Lexus RX300, and later the 330 defined the CUV segment.
Most of us at this Forum ARE the "marketplace". Whether you view us as failures is a personal thing. I have not heard anything that those of us doing our Freestyle research prior to purchase were not aware of. If you can offer us ideas on how to get the most out of our Freestyles, your words will be the most use to this "marketplace". Time to move on :shades:
When one sends an e-mail (or a forum post in this case) the words and language can be interpreted in many ways by different people. Since you don't own one, your criticism of the Freestyle is your opinion and only that. Because I chose to buy one, I interpret your criticism as being directed toward me for making a bad choice. I'm satisfied with the performance, as is most of the posters to this forum. After driving and riding in vehicles with conventional transmissions, I hope the CVT is offered in nearly all vehicles when I purchase a new car in 8 years or so. Ford's inept marketing department has nothing to do with the quality of this vehicle. Ford wants to sell the vehicles that make them the most money. I don't see as many Explorer commercials since gas prices have risen and sales have fallen. I researched before I purchased mine. When I finally went to the dealer there were more Freestyles in the front row of the lot than Explorers, and on the showroom floor there was a beautiful black SEL with no Explorers in sight. Despite what the marketing department was doing, my dealer had the Freestyle front and center. Hasn't the 3.5 Duratec been in Ford vehicles since the early to mid 90's. Seems to me, if it's such a dog, Ford would have already dumped it. The styling of the vehicle is what it is. If you don't like the way it looks, move on. I still want to see an Edge on the road before I give it my styling stamp of approval. It looks a lot like a smaller Freestyle with a glass roof and level roof line. I hope the Freestyle is still around in 2013 when I expect to purchase a new car.
It is important to note that the 3.0 liter Duratec in the Freestyle has been revised and improved since the original. :shades: This info is from media.ford.com
******************************** The 3.0-liter Duratec engine has seen a host of improvements, so much so that it has earned a new name, the Duratec 30, starting with this vehicle program.
For example, the engine uses new 5W20 oil - which is an upgrade from ILSAC GF-3 to GF-4. The new GF-4 oil provides fuel economy as well as emissions and durability benefits. It has 20 percent less phosphorous and lower sulfur, which reduces contamination of catalyst and emission system components. It flows better at low temperatures, maintains its integrity under high load and temperature and helps keep piston rings clean.
The International Lubricants Standardization and Approval Committee began rating oils with GF-1 in 1993.
Among other improvements are:
* Electronic throttle body, heated for cold-weather performance * Self-adjusting accessory drive belt rated for 150,000 miles * Improved heat treatment on cylinder heads and improved head gaskets * Upgraded sealing systems and gaskets rated for up to 15 years of service * Re-designed pistons * Improved cooling around the intake and exhaust valves * Double heat-treated valve springs for durability * New oil pan design with front sump for reduced oil aeration * Integrated intake air fuel module for ease of assembly, with tuned intake runners for low noise
I suggest you consult my post/question, and don't dodge what I asked. I never commented on your Freestyle critique. I asked you about the Xb and how it differs from the ugly Aztek. Please reread and don't patronize when you can't understand someone's post.
I actually tend to agree that the Freestyle is too plain. I think redoing the front and back would do wonders for it. I was interested in why you thought the Aztek could not find its niche when the Xb has the same ugly rep with most of the car buyers. It has found a market.
I think the Camry and Freestyle actually are very similar, but the car buying public just seems to either ignore the Camry's nondescript look or actually like it. I think if Toyota put its badge on the Freestyle it would catch much less flack and probably would outsell the Highlander. I think the Xb would have been a major bust if it had come out under any of the Big 3 banners. Considered ugly by most and slow by all, I don't think it would have ever made it to a 2nd year of production. I actually think it is so boxy and strange that I kind of like it. Although when I point it out to any of my family and friends as a good utility econobox, they can only laugh at it, and ask me to please not buy one.
I think the Freestyle is a refresh away from much bigger sales. Also, I first thought the 500 was plain, but now I rather like its look, but maybe I am just getting old.
That is correct. The Duratec 30 is a version of the dual overhead cam, four valve per cylinder engine revised for the Freestyle/500 and available for the 2005 Taurus, not the overhead valve 3.0 L Vulcan engine.
The improvements mentioned in post #5874 were done ~2004 to the Duratec 30 engine best of my knowledge.
One more bit of trivia about the Duratec 30: "While Ford has reaped the Duratec's benefit, it was not an original design. The primary input for the design of this engine was Porsche, which was already developing the configuration for other purposes. Porsche sold the engineering to Ford and Cosworth, the dominant force behind the cylinder head design. There is actually a 6.0L V-12 Duratec configuration used in the Aston Martin, which is custom built for each vehicle by Cosworth in England." :shades:
The concern about the 3.5L (in the Edge and later Freestyles) is that it has too many things new about it to be bug-free at first. The current Duratec 3.0L, a descendant of the Ford Contour's 2.5L, has years of refinements and gets great gas mileage as well. I get 25 mpg in 70% highway driving, which is very good in a vehicle this size, although the CVT gets some of the credit.
barnstomer64 previously mentioned variable valve timing. Wish we had Mazda's MZI Duratec version, which adds variable valve timing, as does Jaguar's AJ30. They are both versions of our Freestyle's Duratec. This is truly a "world" engine. Porsche and the U.K.'s Cosworth engineered most of it, with Ford picking up some work. Then Aston Martin makes a V-12 out of the design, and Yamaha makes a V-8 (Taurus SHO) out of it. This Duratec V6 gets around!!
hopefully a lot of people will read your very educational post. the 'dura is under appreciated. maybe the flexibility of the design compromised some other aspects.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
WOW, what an excellent link. I'm glad they didn't produce the Freestyle FX. So much more than just information on the Duratec. Everyone should take a look. Give yourself some time, it's extensive.
"Because I chose to buy one, I interpret your criticism as being directed toward me for making a bad choice"
"Whether you view us as failures is a personal thing."
That is sad in many ways. We're talking station wagons, no one said a single word about you.
But this put a smile on my face: "the Freestyle borrows many styling cues from the Lexus RX330 - the good ones that is..."
I'm sorry if the truth hurts and you take it personally.
The Free-of-style is a marketplace failure.
It's selling at about one-half it's projected volume, and had a date with the executioner months after it's introduction.
Luckily, Ford is not so thin-skinned. Instead, they are actually going to style it this time and will address the weak engine.
The question asked was "why aren't they selling?" It's simple, Poor marketing and a product too bland and invisible to sell itself; Ford knows it and will address both.
Comments
But unlike the Freestyle, my looks are well, uh, umm, distinctive.
The Freestyle is free-of-style.
Accord and Camry are inoffensive but contemporary. They can get away with that because of their sheer excellence, The Ford simply;y does not have that cred.
The Freestyle would have looked fresh and contemporary 10-15 years ago.
I am agreeing with you, it's a promising car but Ford played it like a sports team who goes in uptight because they HAVE to win and are Praying not to lose. That never works.
Look what Ford had done to this poor vehicle. First they saddled it with invisible non-styling, no marketing at all then fed the rumors of it's cancellation and a Mercury replacement. Then they said never mind and wisely are going to restyle it (actually style it for the first time) as soon as they possibly can.
It deserves to sell despite their best efforts.
But on your styling concerns..
It's difficult (if not impossible) to make a tall wagon look like a Maserati and still maintain it's usefulness and practicality. Case in point would be today's Pacifica. Looks great yes, but... in contrast to the Freestyle, it's cramped inside, it doesn't have a useable third-row, has zero storage behind that third-row, and is generally considered to be overweight and consequently a bit of a gas hog.
But if looks are all that matters...
On a side bar note, there was also a Freestyle on display at the show that was modified a little. I was so busy talking to the designer that I didn't take too close of a look, but I did notice that they put on bigger tires (255/55/18) and made it look a lot sportier. Reading all the comments about tire size I respectfully recognize that drivers who live in extreme winter conditions ( I live in sunny southern California) would not like these bigger tires, but this sportier Freestyle looked GREAT! I asked the designer about the possibility of a "Sport" version and he said his V. P. came to the exhibit and saw the car. We both agreed that with a few modifications the Freestyle could look WAY better.
I think most of us bought our Freestyles because we recognize function and value as primary criteria in our decision making. Unfortunately, many other car buyers don't consider these priorities as important as self image based on outer aesthetics. Don't get me wrong. I would not buy an ugly car, but as a first step I think the Freestyle is on the right track and has it's priorities in order.
But if looks are all that matters..."
That explains why clearly inferior products from Chrysler and Buick,that look better, are selling better.
The Free-of-style has plain slab sides, tires that are too small, 1986 Taurus headlights, an oddly shaped grille that doesn't seem to fit the opening and completely bland taillights.
Fine, it's a functional box, it doesn't not need to be so anonymously sterile that it looks 10 years old at introduction.
That's why in the span of one year, Ford was going to kill it, hand if off to Mercury and now are revising is at fast as they can.
You either play to win, or you play scared and guarantee your own defeat.
Yes, that's true. I wouldn't believe the data collected by CR on them either.
Actually no, they're not. So far in 2006, the Freestyle is handily outselling both the Pacifica and the Rendezvous. (And Buick is practically giving away the Rendezvous.)
"1986 Taurus headlights"
Ouch... that really hurt. I think you exaggerate a bit though.
Tell me about her.
"Well, she, uh...has a good personality."
And?
"She's really hard working"
Ok...
"And she had a lot of good traits."
Is there something you're not telling me?
"Well, she is kind of slow but is should be very faithful."
Anything else?
"Her good qualities are not apparant on first glance."
So in other words, I won't want to be seen in public with her.
"Yes, but she sounds just like your Freestyle."
"Car was running parked for about 15-20 min in summer with air on, went into reverse and it died. I restarted engine and prceeded to drive off. When I went to get on high way I had no acceleration and the dash read "Engine in failsafe mode" I stopped shut it off and restarted and it was fine."
The only "failsafe mode" I've ever heard of is in the Ford Ranger, which will shut down 3 cylinders if the water pump fails, and use the other three cylinders to propel the truck. That was the German 4.0l engine. I wasn't aware that the Duratec 3.0 had this feature, and the owners manual makes no mention of it. Interesting.
When we got back downstairs, I realized that the gold vehicle was a late model Explorer.
Styling is a personal thing. I am glad that the Freestyle has some elegance, and doesn't look like a "Hot Wheels" truck like some new SUV/CUV's do. Others need that "contemporary" design. If you don't like the styling of the Freestyle, and that is your main criteria, don't buy it. No one made people buy the Pontiac Aztek.
Personally, the best way to deal with the Freestyle styling (if it bugs you) is to photograph your Freebie, launch Photoshop, and modify it to your liking - then post the images here, maybe even send them to Ford. :shades:
The way I personally dealt with it, is by not buying one.
As the sales figures and the free-of-style's sales figures and near-death experience indicate, many people did the same.
I don't need to show my pictures to Ford, they already know the FS is in need of a urgent makeover and is working on it as fast as they can.
A "great personality" combined with "big bones" will only take you so far...
Before we needed a new car, I saw a silvery blue Pacifica the first year they were out. It was loaded, and took my breath away. I saw a white Pacifica last month and thought it was some sort of deformed minivan at first.
I saw Honda Elements around for awhile and thought they were bizarrely ugly. Then I saw a lime green one and it just wowed me. What a fun look!
It's just funny how color can change your own perception of a car's looks. White makes some cars look stunning, while on others it makes you start thinking about making s'mores. Black can become utterly generic or glitzy.
Everyone around here was buying the tan Lexus RX300's like crazy. They looked glitzy a few years ago, now they are seeming akin to the old faux wood paneled wagons of my childhood.
Well, anyhow, I don't generally ride alongside the FS, I ride inside it
Knowing how safe I am in this CUV that has a 5 star rating without side airbags makes me feel extremely at ease after having been in an accident last year that I am still recovering from physically.
Ugly or not, I don't care at all what anyone thinks, I love it. It's a beautiful car to live in
The Free-from-style is not ugly.
It is unattractive.
That word means there is an absence of attractiveness. As in bland, plain or completely invisible to to its anonymous design. If it was introduced 10-15 years ago it would have fit right in. It's design reminds me of one of those "anonymobiles" from an insurance company commercial.
Ford played this (and the 500) like a really "tight" team plays a game.
They didn't play to win, they played hoping and praying not to lose. That team usually loses to the relaxed team that is playing to have fun.
And Ford admit they did this and shot themselves in the foot.
My posts are in response to a request for theories as to why a vehicle this good has been a marketplace failure.-
What is your theory?
We all know Ford builds vehicles unchanged way too long and milks every bit of life out of them before revising them.
I'm not debating that it is a vehicle with a "great personality"
I am answering the question that was asked. Can you?
How do you explain in only one year, Freestyle was introduced, cancelled, handed-off to Mercury, taken back from Mercury and is now being redesigned as fast as Ford can pull it off?
Oh, the Aztek is truly ugly, in any dictionary. Our Freestyle looks like Cindy Crawford next an Aztek.
Anyway, I think the Freestyle is sharp looking. Its in the eye of the beholder.
Since it never happened I know you can't point out one instance where I criticized any owners as you claim nor did I "trash" the car.
As each of my posts mentioned, I think it's a very promising vehicle.
How Ford has handled it summarized why their company and the American auto industry is in such a mess.
They rushed it to market with a weak, unrefined engine to accomodate their odd transmission choice, a body devoid of styling and then did their best to hide it from the public so they could focus on selling 14 mpg Explorers.
I'd be interested in buying one if it had a non-industrial powerplant, a transmission that will not soon be remembered as an orphaned oddity and "styling" that does not look 15 years old.
I was hopeful when it was going to be given to Mercury but am glad Ford is now licking it's wounds.
Rather than surrender, they are going to give it another try, and after only one year, they plan to address everyone of my concerns.
Style, engine and transmission.
I guess I wasn't alone in my opinions.
Many thanks for this great website that helped us with our purchase.
Part of Ford's cost cutting is a reduction in overtime. They are going to cut back on 2nd and 3rd shifts and limit vehicle production to one plant- even if it causes production delays or limits production volume of popular vehicles.
8 weeks for a production slot isn't too bad.
You know, there's actually an ADVANTAGE to this. As in reduction of thefts.
Also, just compare the Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX330. Surely we'd all agree that the Lexus is more stylish, less bland, etc, right?
Yet the Toyota is much more functional because of all the extra room its "blandess" allows.
Frankly, I think that most people who would want a Freestyle aren't the sort who would care too much about "style" in a vehicle.
One of the best things about the Freestyle is the CVT, IMO.
If I could use a metaphor, movie critics may pick apart a movie based on some academic criteria or personal agenda, but their views don't reflect that of the marketplace which pays to see the movie. Marketing failure is not the same as marketplace failure. Further, it is easy to forget that vehicle design needs to appeal to both male and female tastes. Women are a major vehicle purchase influence.
So, all of this discussion made me think of other CUVs and how their looks compared. If the Freestyle is not your cup of tea, don't buy it. Here is a list of purported CUVs. Is there a beauty in the bunch? Is beauty only skin deep? Do they seem designed by one person, or three different people with different visions. Engineering or image? You be the judge. I would say the Freestyle borrows many styling cues from the Lexus RX330 - the good ones that is. :shades:
**************************
CUV Model(s)
Acura MDX and Honda Pilot
BMW X3
BMW X5
Buick Rendezvous/Pontiac Aztek
Cadillac SRX
Chevrolet Equinox/Pontiac Torrent
Chrysler Pacifica
Dodge Caliber
Ford Edge
Ford Freestyle
Ford Territory
Honda CR-V and Honda Element
Hyundai Tucson/Kia Sportage
Hyundai Santa Fe
Infiniti FX
Lexus RX330
Mitsubishi Endeavor?
Mitsubishi Outlander
Nissan Murano
Porsche Cayenne
Subaru Forester
Toyota RAV4
Volkswagen Tuoareg
Volvo XC90
"Marketing failure is not the same as marketplace failure."
Sadly, Ford had both here. They failed to sell it and as a result of that and it's blandness it's running at about one-half of it's projected volume.
Next year Ford will have Edge, Escape, new and improved Freestyle, Explorer and the Expedition in regular and XL.
I think they might have the segment saturated.
The Lexus RX300, and later the 330 defined the CUV segment.
Most of us at this Forum ARE the "marketplace". Whether you view us as failures is a personal thing. I have not heard anything that those of us doing our Freestyle research prior to purchase were not aware of. If you can offer us ideas on how to get the most out of our Freestyles, your words will be the most use to this "marketplace". Time to move on :shades:
I assume you mean the 3.0 Duratec, not the 3.5
http://www.autofieldguide.com/driven/0605dri18.html
:shades:
********************************
The 3.0-liter Duratec engine has seen a host of improvements, so much so that it has earned a new name, the Duratec 30, starting with this vehicle program.
For example, the engine uses new 5W20 oil - which is an upgrade from ILSAC GF-3 to GF-4. The new GF-4 oil provides fuel economy as well as emissions and durability benefits. It has 20 percent less phosphorous and lower sulfur, which reduces contamination of catalyst and emission system components. It flows better at low temperatures, maintains its integrity under high load and temperature and helps keep piston rings clean.
The International Lubricants Standardization and Approval Committee began rating oils with GF-1 in 1993.
Among other improvements are:
* Electronic throttle body, heated for cold-weather performance
* Self-adjusting accessory drive belt rated for 150,000 miles
* Improved heat treatment on cylinder heads and improved head gaskets
* Upgraded sealing systems and gaskets rated for up to 15 years of service
* Re-designed pistons
* Improved cooling around the intake and exhaust valves
* Double heat-treated valve springs for durability
* New oil pan design with front sump for reduced oil aeration
* Integrated intake air fuel module for ease of assembly, with tuned intake runners for low noise
It'd have been nice if that'd made it variable-valve-timing for the Freestyle/500, though.
I actually tend to agree that the Freestyle is too plain. I think redoing the front and back would do wonders for it. I was interested in why you thought the Aztek could not find its niche when the Xb has the same ugly rep with most of the car buyers. It has found a market.
I think the Camry and Freestyle actually are very similar, but the car buying public just seems to either ignore the Camry's nondescript look or actually like it. I think if Toyota put its badge on the Freestyle it would catch much less flack and probably would outsell the Highlander. I think the Xb would have been a major bust if it had come out under any of the Big 3 banners. Considered ugly by most and slow by all, I don't think it would have ever made it to a 2nd year of production. I actually think it is so boxy and strange that I kind of like it. Although when I point it out to any of my family and friends as a good utility econobox, they can only laugh at it, and ask me to please not buy one.
I think the Freestyle is a refresh away from much bigger sales. Also, I first thought the 500 was plain, but now I rather like its look, but maybe I am just getting old.
The improvements mentioned in post #5874 were done ~2004 to the Duratec 30 engine best of my knowledge.
One more bit of trivia about the Duratec 30: "While Ford has reaped the Duratec's benefit, it was not an original design. The primary input for the design of this engine was Porsche, which was already developing the configuration for other purposes. Porsche sold the engineering to Ford and Cosworth, the dominant force behind the cylinder head design. There is actually a 6.0L V-12 Duratec configuration used in the Aston Martin, which is custom built for each vehicle by Cosworth in England."
:shades:
Yes, I've never understood the people who DON'T think the CVT is the greatest thing. No shifting is a good thing.
The concern about the 3.5L (in the Edge and later Freestyles) is that it has too many things new about it to be bug-free at first. The current Duratec 3.0L, a descendant of the Ford Contour's 2.5L, has years of refinements and gets great gas mileage as well. I get 25 mpg in 70% highway driving, which is very good in a vehicle this size, although the CVT gets some of the credit.
Wish we had Mazda's MZI Duratec version, which adds variable valve timing, as does Jaguar's AJ30. They are both versions of our Freestyle's Duratec. This is truly a "world" engine. Porsche and the U.K.'s Cosworth engineered most of it, with Ford picking up some work. Then Aston Martin makes a V-12 out of the design, and Yamaha makes a V-8 (Taurus SHO) out of it. This Duratec V6 gets around!!
"Whether you view us as failures is a personal thing."
That is sad in many ways.
We're talking station wagons, no one said a single word about you.
But this put a smile on my face:
"the Freestyle borrows many styling cues from the Lexus RX330 - the good ones that is..."
I'm sorry if the truth hurts and you take it personally.
The Free-of-style is a marketplace failure.
It's selling at about one-half it's projected volume, and had a date with the executioner months after it's introduction.
Luckily, Ford is not so thin-skinned. Instead, they are actually going to style it this time and will address the weak engine.
The question asked was "why aren't they selling?"
It's simple, Poor marketing and a product too bland and invisible to sell itself;
Ford knows it and will address both.
What's your answer?