both of the sel's you drove were brand new T-reX's I'm assuming then and both were awd not one being awd and one being fwd.
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.
Are the Freestyles and Taurus X's geared more towards families that would have purchased a Ford mini van? I happen to like the style of the Freestyle/Taurus X however would it appeal more towards women to drive?
See that you can build a x on website now. Have not drove one yet..but I'm not too excited now. Gas mileage is a disaster. How can GM build the outlook/enclave/arcadia which are all bigger, heavier vehicles that have similiar horsepower (more actually) yet still get better gas mileage. I love ford..but its no wonder their in such much trouble. With that mileage..this thing better hit 0-60 in sub 7.7 seconds..which I doubt. According to C&D the 3.5 did not help the Lincoln MKZ to 60...and feels sluggish in the Edge. Why does Ford have such an over wieght under powered issue? It makes you wonder if they post real horsepower numbers..or if they are all inflated. 200 hp in a Ford engine feels about equivalent to 140 in a GM. I know I know..this ain't no race car..but with those truck like gas mileage numbers..it better damn well feel like one..or be able to tow 8000 1bs. At least the price looked good compared to new higlander, GM Lambadas, and other similiar cuvs.
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
To my knowledge the x is only a Ford divison product....but as someone on here proved...mercury at least thought about producing a twin...and that would make sense considering mercury makes the twin to the new taurus...the sable...just like in the days of ole...but that is all speculation. For now...its just the x unless someone else knows more...
"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."
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.
I looked up my 2005 AWD Freestyle SEL on the EPA web site. They have tables of "original" EPA estimates and the "new" 2008 estimate corrections for your vehicle.
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:
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.
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.
"The Acadia uses the same engine and transmission "
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.
I'm glad I have the Freestyle. My real-world MPG is between 20-30 depending on the driving conditions, with it being able to reach 30mpg cruising at 65mph, and just above 20mpg with mostly non-highway driving. Considering that the Freestyle and Taurus X are practically identical inside, it seems a waste to me to reduce MPG just to give it more power that it really doesn't need. My drive in the Rockies proved to me that the FS has plenty of power.
"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.
Nothing in the spec on the website say vvt. Turbodiesel, I want a turbodiesel for the Flex and even the T-reX. That would make a big difference in mpg and drivetrain longevity...
according to C&D, they got a little over 17 mpg with the Acadia in a comparison with the Mazda CX-9....and you know they were not babying it for good mileage....I don't know...It seems that the one thing the x ought to be able to do is be more car like than its competition...but if they can be more suv like and return better mileage...you know people will shop the competition. People seem to want an suv that looks the part..but drives like a car and returns good mileage...it seems this car may look more like a wagon..(thats a turnoff for many people) and return mileage like an suv..it makes no sense...at least the new taurus looks a lot better in person than in photos..so hopefully the x will too! sorry to sound so negative
Yes...the engine & tranny are different, but the interior, dimensions, etc...everything a driver and passenger will see, are the same. The only difference is that the new engine uses more gas.
"Yes...the engine & tranny are different, but the interior, dimensions, etc...everything a driver and passenger will see, are the same. The only difference is that the new engine uses more gas."
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.
"Nothing in the spec on the website say vvt. Turbodiesel, I want a turbodiesel for the Flex and even the T-reX. That would make a big difference in mpg and drivetrain longevity...
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).
I have an 05 SEL FWD and just got back from a 2000 mile trip to Kentucky and surrounding states. Overall MPG was 26.6!!!! No problems passing or accelorating with a full load and grandkids on board. Ford is running scared with the engines, trannies etc.
Sure. Just make sure the diameter of the new wheel and tire together are the same as the diameter of the 17" wheel and it's tire from the factory. That way you won't have to adjust the speedometer.
I think that's the way it works. Anyone know different?
Does anyone know about the "brake feel" of the new x? I know the most common complaint with the ford edge is braking...I didn't think the two shared the same system..but I'm not sure. Thanks!
The brake feel of the Freestyle has always been excellent. Much better than newer vehicles like the Edge. The brake problem has been premature wear of the rear pads on some vehicles.
"Putting the 18 inch wheel on helps with stability , body roll and bumps."
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.
Disagree strongly with your idea that 18 inch wheels make no difference in ride. They absolutely help with stability and body road and give a better ride.I am definitely not alone in that as I have seen a number of people in other area and boards post that adding wider tires helps the ride quality. They add a bit more then 1/2 inch -I am not talking sport perreli tires here with lower profile done for looks- I am talking a touring tire not low profile. I hate low profiles they definitely do pick up every bump in the road and make for a rough ride. and of course any tire needs to have the correct air pressure or you will get the results you are talking about also.
I never said they make no difference in ride quality.
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.
I never said they make no difference in ride quality.
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.
My 2005 SEL AWD is getting ready for its 1400 mile August journey hauling college stuff. This will be the sixth such journey in the Freebie and it is a great, comfortable long haul crossover.
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:
jrl said, 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?
The 17" tires ride better than the 18". I have driven Freestyles with both many times. The 18" offer some benefits, but ride is not one of them. Also, the 18" Pirellis are quite noisy.
Just a quick clarification: Fusion and Taurus do not use the same transmission. The Taurus uses the joint venture 6 speed but the Fusion still uses the Aisin. Fords with the 3.0 use the Aisin while the 3.5 gets the joint venture transmission, except for the Lincoln MKZ which mates the 3.5 with the Aisin. A bit confusing!
If I recall correctly, in some comparision in C & D, it showed that the GM CUVs had the same transmission gearing as the Taurus.
Based on the drop other models have felt from the new 2008 test, the Explorer V6 will probably go from 16/20 to 14/18.
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.
Could you explain what benefits the 18 inch tires offer? You said you didn't find any in the ride. I thought the Pirelli's were noisy and felt rougher going over bumps in that we felt more of the bumps. Also wondered if any one knows how co operative dealers are in switching tires on a new taurus x - should we expect to be carged?-It seems all the ones that come with 18 inch wheels around here have perellis and the SEL version with 17 inch wheels only have continentals. Thanks
They aren't going to be switching wheel packages as they are listed on the build sheet, that's what I found when I purchased my FS LTD when I asked. I'm sure they will be happy to charge you for another set though.
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.
Yes it was test driven and if you patiently read and looked to follow the discussion you would have seen that prompted the wheel discussion. There are people that tires make a difference to- especially people that have injuries or illnesses and have a much more sensitive body that feels the bumps and body roll because of the injuries. You don't have to take part in this discussion but please don't get annoyed because other people have legitimate questions that matter to them. -Just read read what you are interested in.
We have a new name for the Freestyle - so the options are to rename the existing discussions to Ford Freestyle - Taurus X like this one (that originally started out being the Ford CrossTrainer!), or just start over with new Taurus X discussions. That would make the discussion sizes a bit more manageable and readable too (for a while anyway).
Please comment if you have strong feelings one way or the other.
The steering feel with the Pirellis is a little more precise , after all it is a little wider and lower profile. But as most have observed,it comes at the price of ride and noise.
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.