By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Dealer prep would be a better term than "tuned". I see no reason why a dealer would go to the expense/headache of having tires of new vehicles balanced unless a customer specifically said there was an issue. I do not believe dealers do that as a matter of course on every new vehicle that hits the lot.
fluids and pressures I can see being done as prep for delivery.
the systems activated comment would set my BS meter off unless they had a much better clarification of what that might mean.
short of air pressures variance one to the other there is no reason that the 2 test drives should have been that substantially different all else the same. So either your seat of the pants-o-meter needs recalibration or one had some production defect that affected it to the point you are describing fairly vaguely.
I was on the interstate, and only saw the mileage figures- 15/22. Ouch!
yeah yeah..I also know 2008 Epa tests are more strict..but I think everyone will agree that an AWD should have gotten about 18-24..at worst 17-23. With those numbers why not buy an Explorer..or a cuv from another manufacturer who knows how to make effiecient yet powerful engine in light vehicles..and that is my soap box for Ford...save your company Ford, stop being boneheads!! This is unacceptable
Mark.
Well, the FWD does get 16 / 24. RE: Acceleration. The Edge is a bit heavier than the FS ... er, I mean Taurus X.
But I don't get it. The Acadia uses the same engine and transmission (or started with the co-developed pair), weighs around 700 lbs more, and still gets better EPA. It doesn't make sense. The Acadia is rated at 18 /26 for FWD and 17 / 24 for AWD.
It will be interesting to see how the two compare in terms of acceleration and real world MPG.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectEngine.jsp?year=2005&make=Ford&mo- - del=Freestyle%20AWD
In the case of the AWD 2005 Freebie, the state 19/24 city/highway becomes 17/22 (2008 EST). That being said, I still get 26 to 27 MPG on the highway on long journeys. As the EPA says on the new web site, "your mileage will still vary". It sounds like the new Taurus X is not quite as thrifty with gas as my 2005. :shades:
It will be interesting to see how the two compare in terms of acceleration and real world MPG.
But aren't the mags and owners of Acadia's reporting more like 16 on average? I own two Ford's and both are spot on with EPA estimates for 2008 and at least one of them does better than their 2008 estimate on the highway as I recently found out. I don't see why the Taurus X would stray either then.
there's nothing the same about the engines, tranny's yes they were co-developed but there is no relationship whatsoever between the ford and gm motors.
Oops, yup, sorry. Same transmission.
Worse and worse. The GM uses a 3.6L and the Ford uses a 3.5L. So the smaller engine gets worse MPG!
However I note that the GM uses variable valve timing. Maybe the Ford engine is less sophisticated.
why won't they embrace this, why...
The transmission came from a common source between GM and Ford, so it isn't that different - probably software.
In my opinion as a FS owner the car didn't need the extra HP, and the CVT / 3.0L is a really good combination for power and efficiency.
why won't they embrace this, why..."
Because they don't have a diesel engine that will meet CARB specs. Currently only vehicles with GVW of 6K lbs or greater can have a diesel. This is basically the F250 pickup and above. The Expedition is not heavy enough. The Excursion (dropped in 2005) had a diesel option. The problem was that to power a vehicle over 6000 lbs, one had to use a very large diesel, over 6L. So the economy, while good for a 6L engine, was not so good in terms of the MPG itself.
VW and Honda have technology in the works to put CARB qualified diesels in their vehicles for 2009 models (anticipated, that is - not confirmed). Honda has said it will license the technology, but their current diesels are 2.2L, which is OK for an Accord or CR-V, but too small for the Ford CUVs (or the Honda Ridgeline, Odyssey, and Pilot, for that matter).
Now THAT'S something the Acadia can't match... I think that the T-Rex wins the "war of the words"
c'mon ford we're really trying here...
I think that's the way it works. Anyone know different?
18" wheels have no bearing on body roll, springs, shocks and sway bars determine body roll.
18" wheels will most likely be harsher over bumps/potholes due to lower sidewall profile and increased weight not helping unsprung weight to the detriment of ride quality.
18" wheels only help stability(i.e. grip) if better tires are used as there are just as many tires that will have better grip as opposed to tires that will offer less.
so that blanket statement really can't be made with any accurracy.
All of my noted points reference different parts of ride quality that ARE affected by going to a taller rim.
You referenced 18" wheels which implies a taller wheel from the original 17", you didn't say wider wheels in your original post. You can get 17" wheels with a wider rim and improve handling as well without having the negative impact on ride quality 18"s can.
18" does not necessarily mean wider in all cases. what it does mean with a vehicle though is when going +1" or +2 on a wheel package is reduced sidewall, touring tire or sport tire regardless, and it can have a negative impact on potholes and ride quality due to the reasons I already mentioned.
A wider tire now that you mention it will help with grip, no argument there, but it will have no affect on body roll as that is controlled by the suspension.
All of my noted points reference different parts of ride quality that ARE affected by going to a taller rim.
You referenced 18" wheels which implies a taller wheel from the original 17", you didn't say wider wheels in your original post. You can get 17" wheels with a wider rim and improve handling as well without having the negative impact on ride quality 18"s can.
18" does not necessarily mean wider in all cases. what it does mean with a vehicle though is when going +1" or +2 on a wheel package is reduced sidewall, touring tire or sport tire regardless, and it can have a negative impact on potholes and ride quality due to the reasons I already mentioned.
A wider tire now that you mention it will help with grip, no argument there, but it will have no affect on body roll as that is controlled by the suspension.
Please post.
A friend of a friend had his Freestyle in for the rear brake work and talked the dealer into an Edge for a loaner. He said he was very sensitive to seat design/comfort/support due to a back injury. He was very glad to return to his Freestyle's seats, he said. He didn't feel the Edge seats had the same level of support or comfort for his back. :shades:
yeah yeah..I also know 2008 Epa tests are more strict..but I think everyone will agree that an AWD should have gotten about 18-24..at worst 17-23. With those numbers why not buy an Explorer..or a cuv from another manufacturer who knows how to make effiecient yet powerful engine in light vehicles.
Well, you should check EPA web site then.
08 T-reX AWD, 15/22, convert to old std, 17/23
08 Acadia/Outlook AWD, 16/22, old std, 17/24
Not much difference there. And at 17/23, T-reX met your low-end expectation.
I think the "problem" is with gearing and final drive ratio. Fusion and Taurus(X) are suppose to use the same JV 6spd trans. but they have different gear ratios for all 6 gears. And final drives are different, too. I don't know much about GM CUVs, can somebody post their gearing details?
Mark
If I recall correctly, in some comparision in C & D, it showed that the GM CUVs had the same transmission gearing as the Taurus.
Close, but it's 13/19 for the V6 4X4 (it was 15/20 on the sticker). I get 13 in the city which is where we mostly drive. However I got just under 22 on the highway during our last long trip. '06 Explorer V6 4X4.
V6 2WD is 14/19 according to the new standards if that's what you were referring to.
Worse case buy a take off set on ebay and then ebay the ones you have if it's that big af a deal for you.
Has anyone been able to test drive this car?
Thanks
Please comment if you have strong feelings one way or the other.
Ford reimbursed my son 100% for his brake job. Only took a week.