Why, why, why? Why do they take a top of the line Edge with every available option and compare it to a base model from a different mfr? Is it asking too much to do an apples to apples price comparison?
I gave up on the Edmunds editors years ago when Wardlaw told me that changing the stroke on an engine wouldn't change the displacement.
I understand why they tested a loaded Edge, but if they want to compare prices why not look at vehicles with comparable equipment levels? base vs. base, loaded vs. loaded, AWD vs AWD, etc.? Is that asking too much?
Seeing as how this reporter chose to laser-focus in on the price tag, it was a huge mistake to provide him with only a fully optioned-out vehicle to test. At the same time it was unfair for the edmund's reviewer to imply that all Edge's will cost 36k. The base model comes in pretty well equipped for under 26.
Here is a perfect example. The article says you can get a comparable Toyota Highlander Limited AWD for the same price as a loaded AWD Edge. But if you add the same options to the Highlander and it's well over $40K. That really tells an entirely different story, now doesn't it?
How can you not focus on the price? $36k for that thing? No way. I drove this Edge and was not impressed nor excessively displeased but the whole time I was thinking it was about a $26,000 car - maybe $30k with the nav and AWD. $36,000 - yes, a Santa Fe Limited is a better car.
There was a reference to the Cadillac SRX as being 'comparable' to the Edge. The Edge and SRX are targeted at different buyers although you 'could' compare them as they are both CUV's. The Cadillac is considered a luxury CUV and the price noted ($37,665) is for the base car. If you add AWD and large sunroof option, which the Edge has, the SRX price ballons to $41,365. If you add navigation and heated seats that were also on the Edge, the price climbs even higher. Not sure why the reviewer lumped in the SRX but it is a much more expensive vehicle when optioned accordingly and MPG is lower w/AWD.
When the Edge starts appearing at dealerships in sufficient numbers, then potential buyers will let it be known whether they like the vehicle and are willing to pay what Ford is asking. Styling certainly helps to sell a vehicle, but quality and value are important components as well.
Too much is being made of the prices of the alternatives I gave. I'm not trying to pull the wool over anybody's eyes here. The contrary would be truer. This story is not a formal comparison test wherein we score a vehicle on the options available/installed/or not available. I'm fairly certain we'll have one of those in the future.
The point of naming each of those vehicles was simply to illustrate the following hypothetical, "If you had $36,000 to spend on one vehicle -- besides this particular Edge -- you could also get (fill-in the blank) for about the same or less money." Some of those alternatives are available with three rows of seating, some with all-wheel drive, some with navigation, some with all of the above, and some with none of the above. My point is this: I don't know about you, but to me, $36K is a bunch of money. Before I were to spend that, I'd be sure to research what else is out there and to determine if those similarly priced alternatives were better suited or not to my needs. Would I need more or less seating, interior volume, towing capacity, or fun in the one vehicle on which I'm about to spend a huge chunk of change?
That's what I meant when I wrote, "Bottom Line: The price might be hard to foist on sophisticated buyers who know what else is out there, but the Edge offers a new and reasonably useful package." I'm sorry I couldn't write an absolutely sparkling review for this vehicle (which we all know is very important to the future health of FoMoCo), but every time I found something to like, I also found something to question.
I really do appreciate you all taking the time to read and comment. While I'm not insecure in my vehicle assessments, I usually check to see what the public is saying about the vehicle in general (e.g. It's ugly; it's now on my shopping list; MT got a better 0-60; whatever). I'm as into cars as you are. That's why I do this for a living.
Respectfully, Chris Walton, Chief Road Test Editor
let me say that i, for one, appreciate your posting in this thread. edmunds is about dialog. too many reviews are one sided. it is posted and then others, not the author, debate it. i'll go back read your review again. i'll probably have something to post after that.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
karl is pretty accessible, but he had his own thread about his impressions. he has since moved onto blogs.
chris, jmo, it would have been better to point out it was a pre-production test vehicle. the brakes are a concern. how many miles were on your tester? maybe you let some other things slide because of that? highlander 3rd seat and caddy srx comparisons were a bit of a stretch. i didn't really like the 'foist' terminology. load up a sienna xle awd. then compare the weight, price, and performance for the extra row of seats and more cargo capacity. :surprise: given all the 'betters' of others, that's what i came up with for a comparison.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Thanks for responding! I would be more sympathetic if you had also mentioned that a base Edge could be had for $26K if you don't need all of those bells and whistles. So a better comparison would be a base Edge vs. a base SRX V6. The base Edge would be $10K cheaper. Wouldn't that be a better deal than either the $36K Edge or a $37K base SRX V6?
And please tell me you understand how lengthening the stroke of an engine increases the displacement.
Lucky you to be able to be an automotive journalist and drive/review cars for a living. The article was certainly well written and contained specifics about the Edge that many potential buyers might overlook. I had no intention of besmirching your review by stating the Cadillac SRX was not a far comparison to the Edge. As you know, that vehicle is in another class regardless of it's price point. Most that are shopping an SRX may not even consider a Ford product. I agree that 36K is a lot for a vehicle of any type and I, for one, think is a bit steep for a Ford. I bought a 2005 Freestyle in April 2005 which had a MSRP of nearly 34K - which I refused to pay. Needless to say I got it for 3K less and have been very pleased with it.
Keep up the good work - that's why people such as myself continue to reference Edmunds for it's information from reviewers and forum posters.
Thanks for replying but, sorry, I'm not buying it.
The price comparisons weren't just mentioned in passing. They were THE lead and a central point to your review. You got there by the end of the first paragraph:
"So what's the problem?
"Our loaded Edge carried a $36,360 as-tested price. Granted our tester was packing the top-tier SEL Plus AWD trim level, but even staffers enamored by the Edge took one look at that number and spontaneously blurted out something like, 'Well that changes everything.'"
What changed???
In my opinion, the price category in which you viewed the vehicle. It was now seen as being at a higher price point than the Pilot/Highlander - more SRX-like in price. Note the very next paragraph:
"The fact is you get a comparable Honda Pilot EX-L AWD or Toyota Highlander Limited AWD (both with a third-row) for less than that. Even a Cadillac SRX V6 comes in at $37,665."
All the above price comparisons are wrong. The Edge is priced at or below the Pilot and the Highlander when comparably equipped. The SRX is at least $6K more. I agree that the Edge is probably not the class leader, but I think your flawed price comparisons and resulting wrong expectations drove an excessively negative tone to the review.
You didn't do your homework, and I don't think you can offer an acceptable excuse for that.
give cwalton1 a break, he's only been a member since sept 1. if you want to see a comparison of some overweight oinkers, check out the minivan story on the main page. :sick: '02 comparison test: explorer 0-60 8.3, 15.7 mpg. damn slow, gas sucking suv. :P
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
It seems the majority of you "get it." Look. I know how these strings work: usually somebody who is a (manufacturer) fan becomes offended that his favorite (manufacturer) wasn't held in the highest esteem by somebody like me. Sometimes, other readers call him on it (thanks) and the discussion goes on for about three pages until somebody else starts name calling. I'm not into that at all. Whether anybody "buys" my side of the story interests me very little. I'm not going to produce some spreadsheet with all the options and prices for every comparable vehicle. (Actually Edmunds.com does a very good job of that with Compare Vehicles and that's what I used to form some of my opinions).
I'm happy for the opportunity to have a dialogue with our readers (unlike some "buff" books who take a month to dream up a witty insult and hide behind the name "Ed." in the Backfires column.)
Instead, I merely wanted to raise some doubt in your minds as to what Ford was thinking with the Edge - Is it really the cure-all it's promoted to be? Is it the least bit sporty to drive? Is it a good deal? Does it have a fuel economy advantage over the SUVs it is supposed to replace? Do you realize it weighs as much as regular-cab F-150 V8 with 4wd? Don't you think the price is a little steep?
I'm not trying to kick Ford when they're down. I'm just trying to help you folks realize there are alternatives. That's all. I have no agenda other than to help you inform yourselves.
And for the record, I did write, "The base price for an Edge SEL Plus AWD like ours is $31,395. A base model SE with FWD starts at $25,995." That was in a photo caption, but it was there. Also, I understand that increasing the stroke also increases the overall cylinder displacement -- as well as torque output (if all else remains the same -- which it usually does not).
Okay, I'm signing off for now. I hope you all realize we're here for the information and the fun of it all. Let's not get carried away.
"...Do you realize it weighs as much as regular-cab F-150 V8 with 4wd?..." A little overstated, but your point is good. Correction: An '06 F150 2WD reg-cab XL is listed in Edmunds.com at 4,615 lbs, and a 4WD version weighs more, listed at 5,004 lbs. The Edge comes in at about 4,400 lbs by comparison. The Edge's weight is an issue (makes braking, handling, MPG, acceleration worse), but looking at some of the other CUVs out there (Acadia at 4,722 lbs, etc.), it makes my Freestyle (3,900 lbs) look svelte, and the Edge has a lot of company in the 4500 lb area.
Not counting the vista roof (which nobody else offers) it's only a couple of hundred pounds more than comparable vehicles. That's only one passenger. And there's no reason that braking performance has to suffer because of added weight. I don't think the two are related.
Some automotive reviewers just have to find something to gripe about with Ford.
i think 150+ feet from 60 to 0 is way too long, based on most other vehicles. i don't think the extra 200 or so pounds is the reason for the extra 15-20 foot distance. i would like to know what is causing it. i wish the edge had a rear hatch window that opened seperate from the liftgate. lack of that says minivan to me.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
About braking distance, its true if the brakes were larger and the tires were wider, you could get the distances down. Its about time Ford engineered a vehicle that beats the competition instead of just lagging behind.
you could be right, but i doubt it is that simple. for example, i just bought some new tires for my wife's escape. they are the same size as the original tires, but a noticeably larger. i replaced the tires on my explorer. the new ones are quiet and smooth riding, but they are below average in bad weather. the old tires were noisy, rough riding, but great in bad weather.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
If you added weight after designing the brakes - yes. But my point was they could engineer the brakes to stop the thing whether it weighs 4000 or 4600 lbs. Something is wrong here - either a pre-production issue or something changed at the last minute. No way they engineered it to stop like that.
F=M*A said that Isaac Newton fellow, if you believe him.
Yes, but Newton also says the braking force (i.e. friction) is proportional to the weight so the masses "cancel out." You are probably thinking of that James Joule fellow who tells us the brakes heat up in proportion to the weight of the vehicle, i.e. Akirby's point.
Those were all done prior to job 1. The job 1 delays are just working out the kinks in the assembly line and supplier products. They're holding the vehicles until they can go 5 straight days with 0 defects. They're almost there.
The Edge's brakes already apply enough torque short of wheel lock. Therefore, wider tires would stop it quicker, not more braking torque. Its not the brakes, its the tires. That being said, you begin to see why high weight makes things difficult. Wider tires would make it fun on ice/snow and cut MPG, and few want that.
I test drove an Edge, S-model, base model. the handling was decent, but what can you expect from a 4000lb vehicle? It soaked up the bumps well, the steering I do wish was a bit tighter. This car was more of a cruiser, instead of a curve-taker. I think for 80% of the population out there, this will be a comfortable vehicle to own. I have heard Ford will be making a "sport" version available and that they're working on it. That should account for the other 20% of the market.
To me it felt like the Murano in ride quality.
The driving position was very comfortable. I agree with others in that the front seats have to be the most comfortable Ford has had in A LONG TIME! Very supportive and the right amount of cushion! I didn't want to get out!
Fit and finish was equal to Toyota and Honda. If not a bit more solid. Some of Toyota's latest models, are a bit thin in the doors. These doors had a nice "thud" when closing. I like that.
Engine was responsive and no throttle lag like Toyota has on some of their vehicles. Also, I commend Ford on this engine, I can see why it was in Ward's ten best engines for 2006. Very smooth, refined. Ford definitely has been doing their homework (about time)!
Transmission - 6 speed was smooth, but i felt that the shift points needed to be a bit more pronounced. I like to know when the car is shifting, it helps me know what gear I'm in.
I only wish Ford would get rid of that UGLY green illumination and go with something less "1980's" and get a nice blue or white. Other than that, I think Ford, if they keep on this type of engineering or better, should be good for the future.
Chris, I get it and I wish you did as well. These statement you write are your opinion and with opinions comes biases. It is clear you have many. I own a Toyota and a Saab, I wish the American auto industry the best, but I buy what's in my own best interest. I wish you could see your biased opinion for what it is. An inflated Ford Fusion..lacking any cutting edge style.. sorry I think it looks pretty good. Criticizing the RSC system because it limits the ability to push the vehicle to its limit is stupid.
Comparing the price points of a loaded EDGE to another's base vehicle is shortsighted.
The US car industry was bad for many years. It's ashame that writers are still to biased and fearfullnow to write an objective, even handed review.
This review speaks volumes about Ford in general. My 2005 Ford Freestyle is exactly as described here. Almost, but no cigar! I don't think Ford is recovering. It's the culture inside the company. And that's hard to change. Goodbye Ford.
I have had my edge for a week now and in my opinion it is as good or better than anything in its class.The new v-6 and trans are as smooth as silk,effortless acceleration up to 90, what else do you want.Fit and finish are as good as can be.Brakes are more than adequate as is the overall handling. Mileage so far on 400 miles is 21.1 combined.TO all you toyota lovers you better give this vehicle a look cause its as good as it gets.
The Edge doesn't have Toyota's throttle lag because Ford has adopted a variable displacement ATF oil pump so as to provide high volume ATF pressure/flow with the engine at idle but no excessive flow at higher engine RPMs.
With a FIXED volume "gear" type oil pump such as Toyota uses the capacity/volume MUST be minimized in order not to overheat the ATF at higher engine RPMs. Minimized volume results in the inability at idle to provide sufficient pressure/flow for two sequential gear changes.
The new (~98??) Toyota shift pattern/schedule might require an upshift with any lift-throttle event, especially a FULL lift-throttle event in order to prevent engine compression braking from interfering with ABS or even resulting in loss of directional control if the roadbed is slippery enough.
So if you happen to re-apply throttle just after this upshift sequence begins then with the engine now at idle there may not be enough ATF pressure/flow to complete the required downshift quickly.
Toyota's solution was to adopt DBW, e-throttle, to delay the onset of engine torque 1-2 seconds, "to protect the drive train", until the downshift can be completed.
Hello! I'm new to this website and these boards. I'm very casually looking at new SUV type vehicles with no intention of rushing into anything, as I have a perfectly good paid off car in my posession, though it's getting a little "long in the tooth." I have not been to a Ford dealership and actually looked at one of these yet. They look interesting at a glance, but like many people, I am very leery about Ford's reputation. So this is an all new engine? Or has it been used in other Ford cars? I'm a little confused on that point. I would like to hear from folks who have test driven/ and especially bought one. Many thanks!
The 3.5L is all new but it's just an evolution of the Duratec line which has been very reliable for many years in a lot of different vehicles. The transmission, OTOH, is also brand new and was jointly developed with GM so it's more of an unknown. But you do get a 5 yr/60K mile powertrain warranty on the Edge and 6 yr/70K on the MKX.
Mark and akirby -- thanks for the info on the engine. That helps clear it up. I did take a brief look at the forum on the Fusion and I do not see hardly anyone complaining about the engine, so that's a good sign. I'll keep checking back here and some time when it warms up (I'm in the Northeast) I will go test drive one and see what I think. (and post my thoughts.) Thanks again. Karen
I have about 800 miles on my edge and I have to say this new engine and drivetrain are as smooth as silk with power to spare. I do believe its the sweetest engine ford has had in the last 30 years ,including the yahama built SHO engines.Put this motor in a 3500lb. vehicle and it would really scoot.
The "new" engine supports DFI (assuming you mean Direct Injection) and there are running prototypes using it now with Twin Turbos. How many production engines have it today?
The problem with DFI is that it reduces low end torque. Americans LOVE low end torque. Mazda turbos their 2.3L DFI to add back that torque. (See the MazdaSpeed6 with 270+ hp from 2.3L)
Ford will turbo the 3.5L also, take a look at the Lincoln MKR concept. (CLICK HERE) for an article about this cars engine.
Yeah, well except the Fusion uses a different engine and transmission than the Edge. Fusion 3.0L, Edge 3.5L though the bigger engine is based on the design of the smaller one.
From personal experience, the 3.0L Duratec is pretty bulletproof. I have one in my Lincoln LS. 80K and runs like new with $0 maintenance except oil changes.
Comments
Maybe that's what Ford had around to test? At the bottom of the first page of the article is this little blurb:
The manufacturer provided Edmunds this vehicle for the purposes of evaluation.
They did compare the Edge to at least six competing SUVs but I guess you are saying the loaded Edge isn't comparable to a base Santa Fe?
Maybe one of the editors will read this thread and shed some light on your question.
I understand why they tested a loaded Edge, but if they want to compare prices why not look at vehicles with comparable equipment levels? base vs. base, loaded vs. loaded, AWD vs AWD, etc.? Is that asking too much?
There was a reference to the Cadillac SRX as being 'comparable' to the Edge. The Edge and SRX are targeted at different buyers although you 'could' compare them as they are both CUV's. The Cadillac is considered a luxury CUV and the price noted ($37,665) is for the base car. If you add AWD and large sunroof option, which the Edge has, the SRX price ballons to $41,365. If you add navigation and heated seats that were also on the Edge, the price climbs even higher. Not sure why the reviewer lumped in the SRX but it is a much more expensive vehicle when optioned accordingly and MPG is lower w/AWD.
When the Edge starts appearing at dealerships in sufficient numbers, then potential buyers will let it be known whether they like the vehicle and are willing to pay what Ford is asking. Styling certainly helps to sell a vehicle, but quality and value are important components as well.
Regards -
M. J. McCloskey
The point of naming each of those vehicles was simply to illustrate the following hypothetical, "If you had $36,000 to spend on one vehicle -- besides this particular Edge -- you could also get (fill-in the blank) for about the same or less money." Some of those alternatives are available with three rows of seating, some with all-wheel drive, some with navigation, some with all of the above, and some with none of the above. My point is this: I don't know about you, but to me, $36K is a bunch of money. Before I were to spend that, I'd be sure to research what else is out there and to determine if those similarly priced alternatives were better suited or not to my needs. Would I need more or less seating, interior volume, towing capacity, or fun in the one vehicle on which I'm about to spend a huge chunk of change?
That's what I meant when I wrote, "Bottom Line: The price might be hard to foist on sophisticated buyers who know what else is out there, but the Edge offers a new and reasonably useful package." I'm sorry I couldn't write an absolutely sparkling review for this vehicle (which we all know is very important to the future health of FoMoCo), but every time I found something to like, I also found something to question.
I really do appreciate you all taking the time to read and comment. While I'm not insecure in my vehicle assessments, I usually check to see what the public is saying about the vehicle in general (e.g. It's ugly; it's now on my shopping list; MT got a better 0-60; whatever). I'm as into cars as you are. That's why I do this for a living.
Respectfully,
Chris Walton, Chief Road Test Editor
i'll go back read your review again. i'll probably have something to post after that.
chris,
jmo, it would have been better to point out it was a pre-production test vehicle. the brakes are a concern. how many miles were on your tester? maybe you let some other things slide because of that? highlander 3rd seat and caddy srx comparisons were a bit of a stretch. i didn't really like the 'foist' terminology.
load up a sienna xle awd. then compare the weight, price, and performance for the extra row of seats and more cargo capacity. :surprise:
given all the 'betters' of others, that's what i came up with for a comparison.
And please tell me you understand how lengthening the stroke of an engine increases the displacement.
Lucky you to be able to be an automotive journalist and drive/review cars for a living. The article was certainly well written and contained specifics about the Edge that many potential buyers might overlook. I had no intention of besmirching your review by stating the Cadillac SRX was not a far comparison to the Edge. As you know, that vehicle is in another class regardless of it's price point. Most that are shopping an SRX may not even consider a Ford product. I agree that 36K is a lot for a vehicle of any type and I, for one, think is a bit steep for a Ford. I bought a 2005 Freestyle in April 2005 which had a MSRP of nearly 34K - which I refused to pay. Needless to say I got it for 3K less and have been very pleased with it.
Keep up the good work - that's why people such as myself continue to reference Edmunds for it's information from reviewers and forum posters.
Regards -
M. J. McCloskey
The price comparisons weren't just mentioned in passing. They were THE lead and a central point to your review. You got there by the end of the first paragraph:
"So what's the problem?
"Our loaded Edge carried a $36,360 as-tested price. Granted our tester was packing the top-tier SEL Plus AWD trim level, but even staffers enamored by the Edge took one look at that number and spontaneously blurted out something like, 'Well that changes everything.'"
What changed???
In my opinion, the price category in which you viewed the vehicle. It was now seen as being at a higher price point than the Pilot/Highlander - more SRX-like in price. Note the very next paragraph:
"The fact is you get a comparable Honda Pilot EX-L AWD or Toyota Highlander Limited AWD (both with a third-row) for less than that. Even a Cadillac SRX V6 comes in at $37,665."
All the above price comparisons are wrong. The Edge is priced at or below the Pilot and the Highlander when comparably equipped. The SRX is at least $6K more. I agree that the Edge is probably not the class leader, but I think your flawed price comparisons and resulting wrong expectations drove an excessively negative tone to the review.
You didn't do your homework, and I don't think you can offer an acceptable excuse for that.
if you want to see a comparison of some overweight oinkers, check out the minivan story on the main page. :sick:
'02 comparison test: explorer 0-60 8.3, 15.7 mpg. damn slow, gas sucking suv. :P
I'm happy for the opportunity to have a dialogue with our readers (unlike some "buff" books who take a month to dream up a witty insult and hide behind the name "Ed." in the Backfires column.)
Instead, I merely wanted to raise some doubt in your minds as to what Ford was thinking with the Edge - Is it really the cure-all it's promoted to be? Is it the least bit sporty to drive? Is it a good deal? Does it have a fuel economy advantage over the SUVs it is supposed to replace? Do you realize it weighs as much as regular-cab F-150 V8 with 4wd? Don't you think the price is a little steep?
I'm not trying to kick Ford when they're down. I'm just trying to help you folks realize there are alternatives. That's all. I have no agenda other than to help you inform yourselves.
And for the record, I did write, "The base price for an Edge SEL Plus AWD like ours is $31,395. A base model SE with FWD starts at $25,995." That was in a photo caption, but it was there. Also, I understand that increasing the stroke also increases the overall cylinder displacement -- as well as torque output (if all else remains the same -- which it usually does not).
Okay, I'm signing off for now. I hope you all realize we're here for the information and the fun of it all. Let's not get carried away.
Chris Walton, Inside Line.
Some automotive reviewers just have to find something to gripe about with Ford.
i wish the edge had a rear hatch window that opened seperate from the liftgate. lack of that says minivan to me.
for example, i just bought some new tires for my wife's escape. they are the same size as the original tires, but a noticeably larger.
i replaced the tires on my explorer. the new ones are quiet and smooth riding, but they are below average in bad weather. the old tires were noisy, rough riding, but great in bad weather.
Yes, but Newton also says the braking force (i.e. friction) is proportional to the weight so the masses "cancel out." You are probably thinking of that James Joule fellow who tells us the brakes heat up in proportion to the weight of the vehicle, i.e. Akirby's point.
tidester, host
The brakes are probably str8 off of the Fusion which is why the prototypes had unvented rear roters...I hope they change that for production.
Mark.
How Much Will Ford Fix the Edge? (The Driving Woman)
So, cosmetics and ""two functional changes." One rear brake each would be "two functional changes" eh?
To me it felt like the Murano in ride quality.
The driving position was very comfortable. I agree with others in that the front seats have to be the most comfortable Ford has had in A LONG TIME! Very supportive and the right amount of cushion! I didn't want to get out!
Fit and finish was equal to Toyota and Honda. If not a bit more solid. Some of Toyota's latest models, are a bit thin in the doors. These doors had a nice "thud" when closing. I like that.
Engine was responsive and no throttle lag like Toyota has on some of their vehicles. Also, I commend Ford on this engine, I can see why it was in Ward's ten best engines for 2006. Very smooth, refined. Ford definitely has been doing their homework (about time)!
Transmission - 6 speed was smooth, but i felt that the shift points needed to be a bit more pronounced. I like to know when the car is shifting, it helps me know what gear I'm in.
I only wish Ford would get rid of that UGLY green illumination and go with something less "1980's" and get a nice blue or white. Other than that, I think Ford, if they keep on this type of engineering or better, should be good for the future.
Bet you can't wait!
Mark.
Hope they also are working on upgraded brakes as well. Would like them to be a little more sporty
Criticizing the RSC system because it limits the ability to push the vehicle to its limit is stupid.
Comparing the price points of a loaded EDGE to another's base vehicle is shortsighted.
The US car industry was bad for many years. It's ashame that writers are still to biased and fearfullnow to write an objective, even handed review.
Cheers,
I don't think Ford is recovering. It's the culture inside the company. And that's hard to change. Goodbye Ford.
With a FIXED volume "gear" type oil pump such as Toyota uses the capacity/volume MUST be minimized in order not to overheat the ATF at higher engine RPMs. Minimized volume results in the inability at idle to provide sufficient pressure/flow for two sequential gear changes.
The new (~98??) Toyota shift pattern/schedule might require an upshift with any lift-throttle event, especially a FULL lift-throttle event in order to prevent engine compression braking from interfering with ABS or even resulting in loss of directional control if the roadbed is slippery enough.
So if you happen to re-apply throttle just after this upshift sequence begins then with the engine now at idle there may not be enough ATF pressure/flow to complete the required downshift quickly.
Toyota's solution was to adopt DBW, e-throttle, to delay the onset of engine torque 1-2 seconds, "to protect the drive train", until the downshift can be completed.
If it helps, go take a look at the Ford Fusion problems/solutions board...OH WAIT THERE ISN'T ONE!
Mark.
Ford will turbo the 3.5L also, take a look at the Lincoln MKR concept. (CLICK HERE) for an article about this cars engine.
This engine is producing 118hp/L.
Mark.
Sorry.
From personal experience, the 3.0L Duratec is pretty bulletproof. I have one in my Lincoln LS. 80K and runs like new with $0 maintenance except oil changes.