Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
http://www.evworld.com/databases/shownews.cfm?pageid=news040103-0- 1
...along with an electric motor is what will probably be powering the Hybrid Escape later this year.
Like I said, we can come up with these situations all day long. With that one, you would have to remove the rear seat by unscrewing it from it's base.
On a trip up north with my wife and two camping buddies, I was able to fit four backpacks and two bags of spare clothes in the back (no biggie). But because I removed the picnic table and used the space under the rug, I was able to position the backpacks in the center of the vehicle low enough to see over them. This greatly reduced the amount of my rearview that was blocked.
Wanna try another one?
Decreased rearward visibility wouldn't have prevented you from hauling those backpacks and clothes though. That folded seat would have prevented me from bringing those boxes home. Unless I had a tool box handy I guess.
How much do those backpacks each weigh? I probably could have thrown a couple more than the CR-V could in a soft, water proof roof carrier and had room in the back for a couple of extra coolers of beer.
The fancy aluminum tubed rack on the Sport model is the one you really want if you're the outdoor type. It has some sort of ladder that comes down the back of the truck, and it holds quite a bit more weight.
That's not to mention the nifty little trailers and platforms available for attaching to the Escape's hitch. The little platform one is pretty cool, and I think it holds up to 800 lbs if I remember correctly.
I just figured out that hing is hinge. So I get that part, a silly who cares blurb about hinge versus strut reliability. Name a hatch that doesn't use a hinge. Anyway, I already said I'd rather have the hatch so what's your point?
So which is it? Does the Escape have to be revved just like the CR-V to win a 0-60 battle or not? (I really do not care.) Bottom line, if you're worried about straight-line acceleration you're not going to worry about RPM. The CR-V's auto tranny is matched so well to it's engine that the auto actually gets better mileage than the manual tranny. (I can't think of many vehicles that can say that.) I don't know how you'd suggest anything be changed.
I bought the CR-V as a family hauler, not an extension of my manhood.
I said that I could put more backpacks on the roof of the Escape than one could put on the roof of a CR-V.
If you can put two on the roof of a CR-V, I could put nearly four of them up there.
I figured you could get hitch accessories for the CR-V, but tow packages don't seem to be popular equipment on them. I don't think I've ever seen a hitch on a new CR-V, have you?
Pretty much all Escape's have them even though they aren't standard. So you'd most likely have to pay to get a hitch installed if you own a CR-V on top of paying for the accessory.
Getting a hitch installed for a bike rack is probably a good investment because that seems like something which will be used a lot. Having one installed for some of the other accessories would probably be a waste of money because they aren't things which would be used daily. If you do use them daily, you should have bought a pickup.
For example, here's the picnic table you can get for the Escape:
http://www.fordaccessories.com/dept.asp?dept%5Fid=157&dept=19
At $190 it's not a bad deal if you maybe want to use it for tailgating a few times a year. Add the cost of mounting a hitch to that $190 and the table starts to look more like a luxury item than a convenience.
http://www.autoweek.com/specials/2003_newyork/escape/index.htm
YYYYUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCK!!!!
There are going to be thousands of people who's introduction to hybrid technology will be the Escape. (People that don't even consider Honda and Toyota an option.) If Ford doesn't build this vehicle well, it may spell doom for future domestic hybrid applications.
Odie
...I type fast.. an admit.. grammer is not my forte..
Wasn't it you who said a hinge would last longer??.
I bought my Escape to tow my two watercraft and haul my gear. Get me to the skii slopes along with my favorite fishing spots AND a family hauler...:-)
I like the interior colors for the HEV. They are totally impractical, but the look is striking.
I'll second that. They were obviously there for show only though. There's no way they'll use those colors in something as mainstream as the Escape.
Historically, white leather is usually reserved for Jaguars and other like makes. Vehicles that a child will never see the inside of.
"I really do think it's awesome Ford is really going to produce the Escape Hybrid."
When it will be available still seems to be up in the air. The latest I've read is that it will go on sale to fleets later this year and then be available to the general public at the beginning of next year. No official word from Ford yet though.
It wasn't me that said a hinge would last longer. Doesn't your computer allow you to scroll up and check before you post?
I'm glad you like your Escape, cause you'd take a big hit if you tried to sell it.
Subjective. But I bet we hear similar comments from the press.
35 to 40 mpg city sounds pretty good eh?
Steve, Host
Kelly Blue Book says a 2001 Escape XLT with 25,000 miles on the odo and in "Good" condition is worth $13,075 at trade in right now (my zip). A 2001 CR-V EX with the same options (I was as fair as I could be), 25,000 miles on the odo, and in "Good" condition is worth $13,625 at trade in.
The Escape did not have leather, moonroof, premium sound (the CR-V did have prem sound), and power seats as options because they weren't available for the CR-V. Again, I was trying to be as fair as possible. Without those options on the Escape I'd have to believe that both were very close in MSRP too.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's not much of a hit.
BTW, the 2001 EX did not have a premium sound system. It had a basic single CD player and the same speaker set-up as the LX. The upgraded (6 disk) sound system was reserved for the SE model along with leather and a few other upgrades.
I'm not 100% sure about that. I know that my Brother-in-law's SE was about $1000 more than a comparable XLT in 2001. He got a great deal on the SE whereas he couldn't get anything off of the XLT due to it being so new.
The Escape that was $2000 more than the CR-V would most likely have had leather, a moonroof, power seat, 6-disc CD changer (or MACH system), tow package, and several other little things that the CR-V didn't have.
"Try the 2002 models for a more reasonable comparison."
See post #3721 on page 187 of this thread for that one.
I tried the CR-V again with leather, tow package, power seat, and roof rack to get a trade in value of $17,335. I don't know how they got that because some of those options aren't available on the U.S. version. Without those four options I got $16,445. The Escape came in at $16,875 without those options.
http://www.autonews.com/files/ny2003/mercury/mariner/1.htm
Here's the story:
http://www.autonews.com/news.cms?newsId=5081
Looks like the 2.3L I4 (the Hybrid's gas engine) will be offered along with the 3.0L V6. I would guess the same goes for the Escape which means there's some hope for a more reasonable base version. The 2.0L was never a good idea.
That same engine is currently available in the Focus if you live in CA, MA, NY, and one other state. Those Focus' (Focii, whatever) are classified as PZEV vehicles and will be available to the rest of the country next year. MPG ratings are in the upper 20's to low 30's for the city and upper 30's to low 40's for the highway. Plus it puts out about 150HP and 150 lb/ft. It is a newer engine that was co-designed with Mazda for use in several future FMC (all brands) vehicles. I believe the Mazda 6i is using the VVT version right now.
Someone at Ford must be listening to you icvci.
It'd be nice to have the added HP and fuel economy.
I can't even imagine how anemic the 2.0 must be in the Escape, it's just a little more than adequate in the P5 with the 5 speed.
http://www.autonews.com/news.cms?newsId=5086
(baggs, I'm figuring you've already read this.)
The average will still improve. Just not by 25 percent.
Ford to Phase Out Taurus
By DANNY HAKIM
After 18 years and nearly eight million Tauruses and Mercury Sables sold, Ford's flagship sedan has evolved from daring to dull in the eyes of most reviewers and customers. More important, Ford stopped making any significant profit on the Taurus years ago and now sells more than half of the cars on the cheap to rental or corporate fleets, or to its own employees.
Let's see, last year sales figures for the Taurus and Sable were 332,690 and 98,998 respectively. (According to ford.com sales numbers) Half of that is 215,844. Anyone care to argue the effect of fleet sales and employee sales on overall sales figures? And mind you, those figures don't include sales to people with supplier discounts!
Odie
I paid 21,800 for a V6, XLT 4WD Escape. It has a 6CD changer, step bars, roof rack, privacy glass, 4whl ABS, power seats, center console, pretty well loaded except no leather or sunroof. This state of mind that Honda's are actually investments is a joke. Right along with the shortage of CRV's. Plenty out my way...
Now for some news Honda fans hate to hear. All the doom and gloom about Fords financial issues and the beating of the drum of Ford is going to die..
In todays paper the big bad Evil Ford. With its unreliable vehicles and terrible quality posted a 896 million.. YES 896MILLION dollar first quarter profit. Stock shares jumped 10 percent. Fords first quarter revenue grew to 41 BILLION, yes BILLION from 39.5BILLION.. And who would want to buy Fords.. Gosh, I guess noone.. yet sales increased 3percent and the U.S. market share grew from 20.7percent to 21.2 percent.
Nuff said..
Pretty impressive - I thought we wrote Ford off a few months ago :-). They need to keep selling those trucks though.
Steve, Host
That's for the Taurus/Sable though. It's probably one of the most, if not the most, popular vehicles to rent at this time because it can be had for a reasonable price. SUV rentals are just plain expensive. The Explorer is about $75 per day at Hertz. Add tax, gas, and insurance (if needed) to that and you're approaching $1000 to rent one for a week. A Taurus would be less than $500 for the same period of time. Which one would you rent?
Ford, GM, and DM are always going to "sell" a lot of vehicles to fleets. Period. They all own one or more of the rental companies so it's just common sense that they would offer their own vehicles there. They also build their vehicles with specific "Fleet" trims because the demand is there for them. If the imports had the capacity to do the same thing, they would because it's easy money.
I'm a little sad to see the Taurus go because the first car I ever drove (legally) was my Dad's 87 Taurus. I loved that car. On the other hand, it's replacement (Futura) looks like it might be pretty nice if they can pull off what they are saying about it.
I've never said I don't believe you. Different markets have different offers. The Protege5 I just bought here in Detroit is $500 less in California AND, they get $750 MORE in customer cash. It's a market thing and most markets sell CR-V's at or a little below MSRP.
Every vehicle is an "investment". You invest time and money into it, that makes it an investment. The argument here is which is a worse investment (neither being a money making investment). The market says Honda is a less bad investment. Argue all you want, a fact is a fact, residual value on Honda vehicles is higher.
Just sold my 2000 Honda Civic DX hatchback (bought 10/99 for $13,400 put $2000 down) with 50,000 miles on it for $7800, I owed $4000. That's not too bad considering the used car market is poop right now. Edmunds says I made the right choice. A similarly equipped Focus has a TMV of $5,118, and it was within $400 of my purchase price. (Actually, Edmunds says TMV for my hatch is $8600 but, I wanted to get rid of it.)
BTW, what age group am I? Dude.
This makes sense to me. After the recall fiasco with the original Escape, keeping a lid on a product that will seem experimental to many buyers is a good idea.
However, this also makes me wonder about a few other considerations. Such as...
How long will this HEV model be on the market? The same goes for the Mariner. Before long, the Escape will be due for a complete redesign. It's approaching it's fourth year. Are these coming to market only two years before the basic design is scheduled to get replaced? Or is it possible that the Escape will go essentially unchanged until 2007?
BTW, I'm not trying to be negative about it, I'm just curious about what direction the product is taking. According to another article, Ford believes they can decrease the time taken to get models to market. Currently, it takes them a year longer than other companies (which might explain the rush with the Escape). But that fact next to the concerns about new versions of the old design and one begins to wonder...
For the Taurus? I'm not surprised, but I would not have guessed it. I think your theory is more true for the big three's car lines. I wouldn't say the same for their trucks.
Ford at least seems to see this and is trying to re-vamp thier car line. They realize the imports are killing them in that category and it's time to do something about it. GM seems to be making things worse for themselves in all areas. In my opinion they're still stuck in the eighties. If DM could build a vehicle that lasts for more than three years/36,000 miles they would have a fighting chance too. Some of their cars are very appealing in looks, price, and package. They're just not good.
"Are these coming to market only two years before the basic design is scheduled to get replaced? Or is it possible that the Escape will go essentially unchanged until 2007?"
I wondered the same thing when I read those articles. However, everything still points to an Escape re-design for MY 2005 or 2006.
Keep in mind, the current Mountaineer was introduced about a year before the Explorer. They might be pulling the opposite with the Escape/Tribute/Mariner triplets with the Escape/Tribute coming out a year before the Mariner. I have to think the HEV would still be offered because the hybrid system it relies on for motivation is supposedly very easy to transfer from vehicle to vehicle. Adding it as another engine option for the next Escape shouldn't be a biggie if that is the case.
Although, the Freestyle may just be the deciding factor when it comes to the future of the Escape/Tribute/Mariner. If cross-overs take off like they're supposed to, most of these small SUV's will probably go the way of the Dodo.
Why all this bashing of the Taurus?? My father in law has owned 2 over the last 15 years or so and just bought their third about 2 weeks ago. This is what he tells me.. He went in and purchased a Taurus SES for $18,775. Now, go to Edmunds and see whe Edmunds posts this price of this vehicle at. This car is absolutely loaded, leather, sunroof, 6CD changer. power everything. There is no way in he.. you could even touch an Accord V6, leather, optioned the same for less than 23K.. Honda owners love to talk about resale value, yet they don't tell you you pay more upfront..
Todays paper.. Honda CRV EX's are going for $22,888! want the Dealership? phone# and vin#'s?
My only reason for bringing the Taurus here was to show that fleet and employee sales often account for a high percentage of vehicle sales. If I could get the numbers for other Ford cars and trucks I'm sure you'd be suprised by the numbers. While I doubt they are as high as the Taurus, I bet they account for significant sales.
The Taurus is a decent car. However, the only reason it's mentioned in the same breath as the Accord and Camary is because they are about the same size. Otherwise, they kick it's Taur-as.
I don't know why you're posting $22,888 as a great number when MSRP including destination is $22,860. How can they sell for $28 over MSRP when you say they are sitting on lots everywhere in your area? Dumb dealers?
See who's at the top of this safety ranking, and who's at the bottom. Surprise? Nope.
Hey, it's amazing what you can learn watching the Discovery channel.
90% of the time our V is on the road is with the wife and kids. Nice to know it's at the TOP of that list as well!!!
Reed
Did you read the part in the Escape test where data was lost and the left foot area was actually rated as good?? not poor? for the Escape?
Also, the Escape stops anywhere from 9ft up to 13ft better than the CRV depending on what brake test you read. Thus allowing you a better chance to avoid an accident all together. The Escape also handles better than the CRV. The other thing is the rear portion of the CRV is an accident waiting to happen. The rear collision causes the glass to explode because of the rear mounted tire and lots of $$$ to fix..The other large item is the vehicle tested was a 2001 Escape with no side air bags. Side air bags were not available until 2002 in the Escapes. Time for a new test I would say..
Granted, the Escape doesn't do as well as the CRV but to paint it as being an unsafe vehicle is going a bit too far..
If you read Autoweek, the CR-V stops 4 ft shorter than the Escape. While I agree that the Escape generally halts better than the CR-V, the difference is not as great as you would like us t believe.
In any situation where the CR-V is hit from behind with enough force for the rear glass to "explode", the shards will scatter away from the vehicle.
http://edmunds.nytimes.com/reviews/consumersmostwanted/2003/index- .html
Proof again that what people want versus what incentives allow them to afford are worthy debates.
And the editors, who all have actually driven and seen the vehicles, chose the Escape. Are we accepting people's opinions as "data" or "proof" now?
"If you read Autoweek, the CR-V stops 4 ft shorter than the Escape."
Didn't we come up with an average of all publications before. It was something like 6 or 8 feet I think.
"In any situation where the CR-V is hit from behind with enough force for the rear glass to "explode", the shards will scatter away from the vehicle."
But now you have an open area for potentially deadly, high speed projectiles to fly through. Especially if you are hit by another vehicle. If the window were still there it would server as a protective barrier to a certain degree.
On the other hand, I would imagine there is a point at which the rear glass will fail on all vehicles. Even the Escape.
When hit right, the CR-V's point of "explosion" is < 5 mph. Will the glass on another vehicle "explode" at it's point of failure, or will it just shatter in place? That could be a better question.
The CR-V will cost more to fix if hit from behind at a low speed, but do any other vehicles protect its occupants from projectiles any better? If it's just going to blow out anyway why can't we have those old power rear windows that you used to see in the station wagons of old?
You've argued that I should take yours over CR and JD Power. Of course as any conspiracy theorist will tell you, CR and JD are flawed and biased.
That's how I feel. Granted, the rear glass has been noted as a problem. But look at all of the other factors. Look particularly at intrusion into the passenger compartment. Which is worse - flying glass that may or may not end up inside the vehicle, or another vehicle's bumper ending up where your foot was?
Not to mention the unforgiveable lack of a shoulder belt in the center rear seating position. As far as I'm concerned, that makes the Escape a 4-seater, since neither I nor anyone I care about is going to ride with only a lap belt.
A bumper would not hit your foot in a crash identical to the IIHS test. The intrusion they speak of is from the footwell and/or lower dash panel being slightly deformed. If those areas push in towards the passenger too much the seatbelt may or may not prevent the occupant from touching them because it does give a little bit. If you touch them there is a potential for, not guarantee of, injury.
I'm not just talking about flying glass coming through the back here either. The CR-V's glass will fall away from the vehicle as varmint said. I've seen it happen so that's not really a big deal. Small and sharp pieces of plastic, metal, and other glass fly off of vehicles at a high speed when they crash. If you have no rear window, one could lodge in the back of your head.
Laugh all you want, but I'll bet more people are killed by projectiles than are from being involved in a crash identical to the IIHS's. And you would have to be in an identical crash to yield their results as no two crashes are alike. If you really look at it, you basically have to hit a Yugo that is butted up against a solid concrete wall to experience what the IIHS is doing. It doesn't happen like that in the real world very much if at all. They don't take a lot of factors into account. Like how both vehicles in their crash would likely be turning away from each other instead of heading straight for each other. Both vehicles would likely be braking instead of coasting/accelerating.
If they wanted this to be more like the real world the Escape would have hit the barrier more towards its left front and at a lower speed because it handles better (for getting out of the way) and brakes better than the CR-V.
I'm not trying to downplay the IIHS's results. They did their little test and it has some merit. The Escape showed a weakness. But if anyone thinks they are safer in a CR-V because of a one in a million crash scenario, they're crazy. You can get hurt in many other ways so here's hoping all your crashes are identical to the IIHS's.
Seriously though, I truly hope no one finds out what one or more of the zillions of other crashes can be like. Nor the one the IIHS replicates for that matter.
"Not to mention the unforgiveable lack of a shoulder belt in the center rear seating position."
I'll take the LATCH system in the Escape over that any day. It's next to impossible to screw up car seat installations with the LATCH. Good luck with your seat belt. Are you sure it's tight enough?