I'm sorry, was this a reply to my post? CVT doesn't mean squat- we know little to nothing about the TX-as with fuel economy :P . People ARE uing the power. Sure, in 8.5 seconds the FS will go as fast as other competitors will be going, but for safety manuvers, it's nicer to have the peppy extra 270 hp. Only because of what people THINK they need. I didn't say anything about what people need, I said what theFS needed. But people don't need cars. Every car is an uneeded luxury. So why won't you walk to work?
Yeah- but it'll take you 17 seconds to do 100 mph in the FS, whereas you could probably have your little road rage in the TX in 13. And it's called the passing lane. I use it too. Your not supposed to used it constantly.
CX-9's 12 less hp. All this and it still managed better gas mileage, despite it's lower rating, on MT's test loop. Huh? Acadia rated better than CX9 in gas mileage.
Good point. You shouldn't be driving behind a semi, by any means. But racing for a spot isn't good either. But when passing a semi,or any car, you need to get passed as quickly as safely possible.
There is no shortage of go in the FS, bury the pedal to the floor and it flat goes, I suspect people aren't pressing the gas pedal all the way to the floor to use what the FS has hence the bad rap. Yeah- they bury their feet into the pedal- that's the only way to get it all out. But it's still taking 8 and a half seconds to get to 60. But then I suspect most critic's around here haven't ever driven one so we'll just leave it at that...and to those that have I just plain do not agree. Well- you probably haven't driven the competition yourself. Otherwise, you would feel the difference in acceleration.
Bottom line is that the Freestyle has plenty of power if you know how to press the pedal to the floor if you really have to. Just ask Freestyle owners versus car reviewers. After driving it that long with out driving other competing vehicles it probably would feel that way. But ask those who have driven them verses the competition.
In general, the problem is this: given that you have enough acceleration to get past the semi, you do it, and THEN you immediately find yourself boxed in by all the backed up traffic in front of the semi . . the traffic that was causing the semi to be doing only 40mph in the first place. Acually- the semi doing 40-55 mph is probably doing it being it's a heavy truck carrying 30 tons worth of stuff-that's 75 ft long. That can make it difficult to do more than 55mph. SO you probably won't be boxed in. I do agree, though, that having ample power is a useful tool. But then so is knowing exactly what power you do have, and then using it when you can . . but not in an aggressive or unsafe manner. Many times, accelerating around a problem isn't really helping the traffic flow . . . in fact, it probably hinders it by causing unsafe situations that cause others behind you to brake. Exactly!
I tend to agree. If you floor the Freestyle, it'll kick into high rpm's very quickly, and you'll soon find yourself running into the cars ahead of you. You have to press long and hard to get acceleration in the FS. It does not come quickly. Period.
I'm sorry, I don't recall asking for a snapshot of your personal life, or why you think the way you do. I'm comparing CUV's. So let's stay ON TOPIC. There are design solutions that can better serve this and other vehicles, diesel power, hybrid, light weight materials, etc.. Why doesn't the lambda's embrace any of that, that would make it actually "most significant" instead they took the easy path to satisfy the target market... YOU mistr... YOU and those like you. The lambdas already get better MPG than the Edge and other smaller CUVs- with the new figures. And why doesn't ford drop the FS/TX and continue building minivans? You Freealfas, and those like you who need a minivan but don't want to be seen/ don't like driving one. That goes for all other 3 row CUVs. Did you once think that with the new EPA testing regs that all across the board are going to post lower numbers than current. Wouldn't it be nice to see the number at the very least stay level with the new models embracing better solutions to address the revised testing as opposed to just taking it on the chin. Yupr point? The old numbers were wrong, that doesn't mean theyre still improving! That's not a healthy marketplace to be shopping in. The good gas saving vehicles are still there, but YOU get to choose what you want. That's a VERY healthy market. So stop griping on other's decisions. Be happy with what YOU have. And plus, the numbers are all improving. But now EPA shows what wev've always been getting.
I'm the one secure enough to be driving and owning a FS, you're the one seemingly looking to compensate for something... Mmmm... don't think so. I'm having a conversation. You're saying your vehicle is better than everyone elses.
Plus, the vast majority of people (driving mostly machines with plenty of power in reserve) are godawful drivers.
Gosh, with about 230,000,000 registered vehicles in the U.S. and some 6,500,000 accidents each year it would appear that the vast majority of drivers are fairly competent.
Imagine how much better mileage it would be getting if it weighed 500lbs less and how much faster it would be... that would make us both happy and I'd concede GM did it's homework and made a difference in the CUV market instead of taking the easy way out.
What easy way? Gm designed a good vehicle. WHy did Ford take the easy way out and call a station wagon (FS) a CUV instead of designing a real one?
The deletion of the CVT and the increased HP are missing the point for me, the best money spent on the FS model freshening for '08 would have been to spend it all on the interior and the quality of the materials. Have you sat in a vw, our '98 passat has a nicer interior materials and was cheaper to buy even adjusted for the model year difference. Ford can and needs to do better with that.
CVT may end up not being a benefit on the FS we will see when the TX comes out. and Consumer Reports doesn't approve any VW's, but it decently likes the FS. So maybe ford has done something right.
The other thing people fail to recognize it was to market 2 years before all the latecomers that are spoken of as the darlings around here. But it was desgned 3 years before. An old non attractive style. Another reason it sold slow.
Just because they are catering to the lowest common denominator means its the right answer, they didn't do it with the original Taurus/Sable and I don't think they should now. It's time for a "hail mary" as the conservative route has not served them well.
Check this- Ford needs to sell cars- that people want to buy. That's the bottom line.
And the Acadia still get's better MPG than all most competition. GM did fine.
Plus, the vast majority of people (driving mostly machines with plenty of power in reserve) are godawful drivers. A bit more discipline and skill on everyone's part would go a long way. And help as well when people make their buying decisions.
I've been reading this thread and all I can say is WOW. What's the point of it all. Mine's bigger than yours. I traded an 05 SE and now own a 2007 SEL. I like it because of the interior space and smoothness of the CVT. I feel secure with the safety features and like the overall styling inside and out. It's not a fancy vehicle, but it also not bad looking. I've driven in inner city local, and freeway traffic in Minneapolis, New York/Jersey, Seattle, Washington DC and St Louis. I've driven through the Rockies, Cascades and Black Hills and have never been disappointed with the power or acceleration when I needed it in all those circumstances. I consistently get 19-20 mpg in mixed city/freeway driving and averaged 28 to 32 mpg freeway on my cross country trips. I think that's pretty good for a vehicle this size. I checked out the Rav 4 and Forrester and decided that the Freestyle best fit my needs and desires. Everyone involved in this "discussion" should focus on what's good about the vehicles they drive and stop putting down the ones they don't. A tone of negativity has infected this Freestyle forum. Thank goodness all vehicles are different, and if you paid over $35000 for your vehicle it probably is nicer than a Freestyle, so be it. I like driving my Freestyle, talking about my Freestyle, washing my Freestyle and showing off my Freestyle. I have no regrets of buying a Freestyle and I'm going to enjoy many years of driving mine.
Still no word on the 2008 Pilot. I'm anxious to see it. I wonder how they've done to stomp the competition. Hopefully they've go a real winner here. But it could be a well rounded vehicle, and possibly the most ideal one for replacing the minivan and SUV. It's sibling, the MDX already tows 5000lbs, and the overall frame I've heard is more carlike. So if Honda stretches the CUV 5-6 inches, and can add 3-4 inches 3rd row leg room and 3-4 inches second row leg room (I know that doesn't add up, but Honda designers are smart-they could figure it out) plus increase cargo room to just over 100 cuft, and and gas mileage a couple digits, they would have a real winner. If they could somehow miraculously increase cargo space to 120 cuft, then they would really be replacing the minivan-with a midsize SUV. The impossible! Just dreaming big.
"Everyone involved in this "discussion" should focus on what's good about the vehicles they drive and stop putting down the ones they don't. A tone of negativity has infected this Freestyle forum."
How's this then they're all great because they are getting bigger, weighing more, have more power, get less mileage and best of all cost more, oh yeah, and they are getting more pretty. I really think the market is moving in a positive direction in light of all those reasons one might have to review in the purchase of a CUV. The manufacturer's should all be commended as it really is a challenge to make a vehicle with all of those attributes and then expect the public to pay more for it. It's a win/win, FOR THEM, they aren't challenged by the consumer and we get to pay more for the privilege of having such advanced thinking come to fruition in the marketplace.
Steve;Tidester: Come on guys step in and do something about this Freestyle crew that has highjacked this once upon a time informative forum. I am sick of it!!! All topics wind up being about Freestyle somehow. There is very little constructive information being shared here(including info about FS... talk about beating a dead horse) just nasty zings back and forth all related to FS. When is enough,enough?
I don't think so. I've seen lots of awful drivers drive for years without an accident. Example: my ex-mother-in-law forced another driver off the road in a construction zone (I was riding with her and cringing). She never even noticed what she did. She is an absolutely awful driver, but has never had an accident on her record.
Barnstormer, I agree with baloo 100%. Why do you feel the need to slam or respond to his post? Do you feel he is speaking directly to you? This forum has become nasty and myopic. I am shopping for a CUV and seeking feedback about all cuv's not just Ford's Freestyle. Do you have any idea how many people view these forums my guess would be thousands daily and the vast majority do not feel the need add anything just get relevent information. A wise man once said when you are talking you are not hearing/learning anything. I've seen this appeal for civility with regard to you FS posters many times in the past month and it does seem to be falling on deaf ears. Grow up and learn to play nice!
Slow down there balooo. This discussion made its way TO the Freestyle forum because of the format change. It now seeks key words and Freestyle is one of them. The original Freestyle forum was populated by Freestyle owners who are enthusiastic about their cars. When this thread topic slipped in we had to start defending our choices. I've noticed that folks who were posting two years ago when I joined in the discussion no longer participate. With the current tone, do you blame them! You know what, I agree. Take this comparison thread out of the Freestyle forum.
The fact is, Freestyle owners (myself included) are very happy with what we think is a great vehicle but we get tired of the abuse. I am not going to say that it is better than any of the others in this discussion because I do not have enough experience with the other vehicles to compare most of the important factors. I would bet this is true for 99% of those posting. Unless you own more than one of these and drive them regularly or are a professional car reviewer (and even they are sometimes suspect), you fall into the same category as I do. I know the Freestyle pretty well because I have been driving one for 2.5 years. With that in mind, I will evaluate the Freestyle and keep the comparison to opinion or referenced facts. I am looking at four areas that come up frequently in these discussions.
Power: The Freestyle has plenty for my real needs. The CVT is able to get everything it needs our of the 3.0L Duratec. I have no issues accelerating and passing when I need to. I love the feel of the CVT but I think that it makes the Freestyle feel a lot more sluggish than it really is. My Wrangler feels a lot faster. I would not mind having the slick new 3.5 (I like power), but I would not give up the CVT for it given the choice. The facts (from Car and Driver's review of each) is that the Freestyle is only 0.1 seconds slower to 60 than the Acadia (8.2 vs 8.1), it is only 0.2 seconds slower from 30-50 (4.3 vs 4.1) and it is 0.1 faster from 50-70 (5.9 vs 6.0). These are not significantly different. I would speculate that the Freestyle might be a little more affected by increased load, but not enough to warrant the criticism it receives for power. These times are all adequate for my driving needs.
Styling: Since this is subjective, this in only my opinion. The Freestyle is bland. Not quite ugly, but a long way from stylish. This is in line with my opinion of the Pilot and Highlander, although they look more SUV like to me vs. the Freestyles wagon look. The Acadia, CX-9, and VC look nice, as does the Pacifica although it has gotten old. I am also not sold yet on the changes made for the Taurus X, but I will hold off until I see more of them.
Space: It is amazing what the Freestyle does with space and how versatile it is. 7 will fit in mine (middle bench), but not with a carseat. The back seat is fine for 2 large adults for short trips. The front seats are very comfortable for long trips. Leg room is good in the first 2 rows and again adequate for short trips in the third. Moving the seats is easy and provides a lot of space for hauling. Without loading various items in the others, I cannot really compare, but it has met most of my needs. The Acadia is the only one of the others that I have spent any significant time in. It also has great space and seems larger than the FS, but I have a hard time believing three will fit comfortably in the back (two of me would barely fit). The sliding second row should make access to the back (particularly with a carseat) easier than the Freestyle.
Fuel Economy: The Freestyle is great most of the time for what it is. I am pretty heavy footed, but I have gotten over 29 in 65 mph highway driving in my AWD on a trip with 3 adults, baby and stuff. I have also gotten around 18 in a tank that was purely my solo 4 mile trip back and forth to work. While the Freestlye is rated 19-24 and the Acadia is rated 17-24, C&D in their same review had both the Freestyle and the Acadia getting 17. While this may vary for some, these are both (along with most of the others in this forum) excellent for the size of the vehicles and, more importantly, a huge improvement over their SUV counterparts.
All in all, most of these are good vehicles with their minor differences. I hope this helps someone make a decision, or at least leads them to look at all the options more closely.
As a side note, us Freestyle owners welcome those who like all of the others to post in this forum as much as we do and apologize for our over-zealous appreciation of our vehicle.
Comparison topics do tend to be a bit more, er, excitable.
Since we welcome all points of view automotive, even the model specific discussions aren't always a love fest towards a particular model.
If we were all walking around an auto show together, the visual cues that don't make it to text would make the zings seem more friendly. But you lose some of that good natured flavor in text unfortunately. Meanwhile enjoy a virtual beer or Kripsy Kreme on us.
"Just because they are catering to the lowest common denominator means its the right answer, they didn't do it with the original Taurus/Sable and I don't think they should now."
I stand by my statement.
Any business makes a profit by providing what the customer wants. Ford got into it's present predicament because they failed to allow for the customer's changing preferences away from light trucks and SUVs. In other words, they didn't provide what the customer wanted. Then to top it off, when they had alternatives (Focus, 500, Freestyle) they didn't change their corporate philosophy - it was still geared around SUVs / trucks. Thus their advertising and public relations didn't emphasize their strengths in the emerging market. For example, which vehicle did they hybridize? A small sedan? Nope, the Escape SUV.
To make a profit (or even survive), the customer must drive the production pattern, not vice versa. You might try asking (former) Edsel owners how they liked being "pushed" into a design.
Changing people's perceptions of how they should drive / that they should be more "XXXX" (pick your societal cause) is a matter for someone other than a manufacturer. Use of the word "right" (implying "wrong to do otherwise) indicates one is speaking of morality, not car manufacturing.
"All in all, most of these are good vehicles with their minor differences. I hope this helps someone make a decision, or at least leads them to look at all the options more closely."
I concur. Mine is a 2006 SEL FWD.
CAVEAT: This is discussing the Freestyle, but I am not opposed to the Lamda platform, Hyundai, DC, or other products for those who prefer that style of vehicle. Now, back to the regularly scheduled post. :P
I think that many people are turned off by the Freestyle design, which mimics the Ford Explorer. But further, the design was built from the inside out, to maximize space for the platform. Thus the high roof that goes a couple of inches higher over the 3rd row (cleverly hidden by the sloping roof rails).
My own opinion is that the FS is a rare combination of space and value.
- The 3.0 is fine for use with the CVT (it would be underpowered with a conventional transmission). But it must be acknowledged that many people these days prefer a much stronger engine, and certainly all the car magazines are programmed to emphasize power in their reviews. The CVT is being dropped because Ford has the new 6 speed transmission developed, and the German steel for the CVT chain was too expensive. Also, the current CVT could not handle the added torque of the 3.5l without modifications. I actually expect similar MPG on the road with the "Taurus X" (3.5L / 6 speed).
- The car has a good grip on the road. There is no stability feature offered or (in my opinion) needed. Handling is such that the road makes it's presence known, as opposed to being isolated from the road. Some people like this, other prefer a different ride. The vehicle is quiet at highway speeds.
- I have the bench 2nd row, which I didn't want, but no one here in So Cal carried the captain's chairs. I now prefer it, because I occasionally carry three in the 2nd row and can still have the entire rear for cargo.
- The view from the driver's seat is very SUV-like; it sits high up and visibility is very good, with lots of glass all around. The rear seats are stadium style, slightly higher than the front seats.
- On the technical side, many people don't know that the Freestyle uses a data bus to run all of the electronics. This is a new feature for cars (although I would expect the Lamdas to also have this technology). Older cars just had wires going to the computer; this one is built like the inside of a personal computer (but thankfully not running Microsoft software)! :surprise:
Some notes and cautions:
- If you get one, make sure it has the additional rear air conditioning. The vehicle has a lot of glass, and needs the additional cooling.
- I recommend the Limited for several reasons, but the one I will list is that it has white gauges with black numbers; the other models have black gauges with white numbers, which are hard to read when going under tunnels, etc. OK, I'll list another; the Limited has the Audiophile stereo, which is much better than the basic model I have.
- The windshield slopes such that there is a lot of glare from the dashboard. It shows up on both the beige and the grey interior, but is worse on beige. I generally wear polarized sunglasses anyway, and didn't really notice until I read about it on Edmunds.
- There are only two cup holders for the 2nd row, mounted very low to the floor on the rear of the console. There are two door holders, but they are really designed for bottles, not cups. I would have preferred better cup holders back there. The third row has a cup holder only on the right side (the left has the optional rear A/C motors, I think).
- For some unknown reason, the Ford designers did not allow for one to simply fold the 3rd seats forward to carry cargo. They expect one to fully fold the seats into the floor (which is easy to do). If you merely fold those 3rd row seats and then place cargo, the backs of the 3rd row seats will have a nice checkerbox pattern from the load. There is a notice on the seats and (I think) in the owner's manual, but to me this is a dumb design - one should be able to just fold those seats over for a quick cargo change. I keep stuff in the cargo "well" (the deep place behind the 3rd row into which the seats fold), and to carry cargo I have to remove this and then fold the seats.
Overall: A good, solid ride, with loads of functionality. I like it a lot, but some people may not like the style or be able to get used to the different "feel" of the CVT.
Good luck to all in their search for the "perfect" CUV... :shades:
"In other words, they didn't provide what the customer wanted. Then to top it off, when they had alternatives (Focus, 500, Freestyle) they didn't change their corporate philosophy - it was still geared around SUVs / trucks. Thus their advertising and public relations didn't emphasize their strengths in the emerging market. For example, which vehicle did they hybridize? A small sedan? Nope, the Escape SUV."
I've never argued with this point and agree Ford has completely missed the boat with management and marketing as of late.
"To make a profit (or even survive), the customer must drive the production pattern, not vice versa. You might try asking (former) Edsel owners how they liked being "pushed" into a design."
I don't think the makers of the itunes/ipod would agree. Good design defines the market segment and draws the customer hence producing profitability as opposed to relying on the customer to define it. As for citing the edsel, not everyone gets it right all of the time, why didn't you pull the original Mustang out of the Ford resume as a positive example, more recently the Taurus/Sable and even the Focus to an extent as it was recognized quite favorably for its performance and handling. But for the Mustang no one expected it, everyone who saw one didn't know previously they wanted one because design drove the brief and it defined the market segment. Ford has the design ability to do that, whether they have the marketing staff and management to foster that happening again presently, I'm not so sure.
"Changing people's perceptions of how they should drive / that they should be more "XXXX" (pick your societal cause) is a matter for someone other than a manufacturer. Use of the word "right" (implying "wrong to do otherwise) indicates one is speaking of morality, not car manufacturing."
That leaves the government to define what's "right" for us and to protect us from ourselves if we don't show or drive(insert wit) some reasonableness into the minds of the manufacturer's we are relying on to give us vehicles that meet our needs. We already know how well that works...stops rant here...
"I stand by my statement."
As do I, it is no challenge to build a lambda/CX/T-rex/ or otherwise that is shinier, heavier, more powerful and less economical and bring it to market as new and improved. How does that get viewed across the board as progress and acceptable. Why are we so vehement about more is better, tell me how a 500lb less lambda/cx/t-rex/whatever would not be a better, more economical solution to the CUV even leaving the engine displacement on the table but recognizing that further gains could be realized if that was reduced as well with no compromise in "performance" because apparantly around here and listening to other's "arguments" that's why we buy CUV's.
Bottom line, It's a CUV not a sports car, if you want 300+hp, buy a sports car and track it, if you need a CUV to carry people and stuff why not make it a reasonable compromise of power, economy and space. This generation of CUV's I contend are going in the wrong direction and being sold as progress. They are not, they haven't introduced a hybrid or diesel model improving mileage and they are significantly heavier requiring larger more powerful engines just to get them to get out of their own way. In fact GM is hybridizing it's line of pick-ups and full size SUV's without talk of doing the same to the Lambda's thereby closing the gap even further between the CUV/SUV. Why wouldn't it be the other way around.
The current path will lead simply to a CUV comparable to a traditional SUV differing only in the fact they will be unibody as opposed to body on frame. Their weights are becoming more comparable, as are their amenities, power and economy or lack there of. I stand by my question at that point what have you produced other than a SUV sized vehicle that you now call a CUV that handles marginally better but is no more responsible or forward thinking.
Steve, This forum has become a lovefest for one vehical and I believe that is part of balooo's point. At least they brought a concern many are expressing directly to the host. This forum has become lopsided with people "defending"their Freestyle to the point nothing constructive or comparative is really being shared here either from lack of interest or fear of being gang raped by FS "defenders". Everyone has his or her own management style head on,look into it or simply look the other way... I've seen "lets get back on track" editorial comments or redirection to a more suitable forum by host all the time in other forums. I now the difference between humor and nasty and too many of these posts in my opinion are just plain rude.
I enter this site via interest in the CX-9,Acadia and Outlook forums. Not via an interest in Freestyle. Why don't you just rename this forum DEFENDING MY FREESTYLE. I'm sick of it also.
I just want to know what are the options for hauling around 7 (including carseats) people that get great gas mileage? Are there any hybrid minivans? No. Hybrid CUVs? No. Hybrid anything? No, not with seating for 7.
Since I have neither the time, money nor expertise to build my own car, I am left with what IS out there. What is out there is a minivan, big SUV and big CUV. I don't have anything to tow so I throw out the big SUV. What am I left with? Minivans and big CUVs. Both get about the same mileage (within 10%). Mid to high teens in town and mid to low 20s on highway. What the flip else am I supposed to buy? I put off buying a car in the hopes of ANYBODY offering a hybrid minivan, but it did not happen.
I don't want to hear about the FS because IT DID NOT HOLD ENOUGH PEOPLE. Seating capacity does matter to some people and while it is a fine car IT DOES NOT HOLD ENOUGH PEOPLE for my needs.
Another thing that should be considered. The CX-9, Acadia, and Outlook are all brand new and don't have the large group of owners that the Freestyle has. For whatever reasons anyone wants to use, they may catch up soon, but for now there are a lot more Freestyle owners here reading this forum and wanting to chime in on how much they like their vehicle. I would not say that most are ugly, but there are always going to be some that seem that way, no matter how well intentioned they may be. Maybe a forum called "Finally Getting in the Large CUV Game" would be more appropriate and it would not need to be linked to the Freestyle forums. OK. Sorry, just had to. Anyway, I look forward to hearing more people jumping to the defence of their vehicles like us Freestyle owners do as their sales grow.
"This forum has become lopsided with people "defending"their Freestyle to the point nothing constructive or comparative is really being shared here either from lack of interest or fear of being gang raped by FS "defenders"."
So far as I know, there is nothing stopping other vehicle owners from expressing their views. I have encouraged it myself, since I am interested in all the models, even though I am not currently buying, and even though I own a "you-know-what" (Ford model that starts with an "F".)
I can't really see blaming a certain vehicle owner class for not having information posted from other vehicle owners. If there is a lack of information, blame the people who are not posting their vehicles.
There are a couple of over-enthusiastic posters here, but to be fair it all started when other people kept putting down this "you-know-what" vehicle. It sort of snowballed from there. It my opinion it may have started there, but it needs to stop. For my part, I don't feel any need to "defend" anything.
Have you tried? I DID AND IT DID NOT FIT MULTIPLE CARSEATS AND FIT 7! NO WAY. NO HOW. GET OFF OF IT.
I know you did that just to agitate me, but whatever gets you off. You know what, most in this comparison will not. I wandered into many dealerships with multiple carseats and tried to get them to fit in a manner convienent to use, and most did not. Try and fit five 350 pound people in the back of you FS ans see how it goes. That is about the footprint of most carseats.
"Have you tried? I DID AND IT DID NOT FIT MULTIPLE CARSEATS AND FIT 7! NO WAY. NO HOW. GET OFF OF IT. "
You may not know it, but CAPS is considered shouting. Did you mean to shout?
I do not write to the forum to cause anyone problems, or to "get at" or "agitate". I wrote my post to ask how many carseats you needed, which is basically what my post said. I didn't get an answer from your reponse.
Your original post said nothing about having tried it at multiple dealerships. Sorry about the confusion.
My family is past the carseat stage right now, but those seats ARE rather bulky. We used a booster seat in our vehicle for the first few months.
Where in the post that you replied to am I defending the FS or telling YOU to buy one. If you read the post again I am critical of the direction CUV's are going, Ford included. Read other posts of mine and you will find I have even been critical of the FS I own and make payments on. Apparantly no one is willing to discuss the bigger points being raised in a CUV comparison forum thread.
Someone posts up "Most significant new vehicle, Lambda's" I say farcical and make my points politely as to why I think that not to be the case. People who don't like my opinion don't defend their position as much as now whine to the Host about being hijacked and "raped" by the FS crowd. It's a comparison forum, not a thread meant to show free love to all that enter. Make your point contrary to those I have made and compell me to think otherwise about what I am saying. Whining to the host is not debating the points at hand.
I don't care what you buy I just want better options in the market available, don't care who makes them, and that won't seem to be happening anytime soon with what the buying public is telling the manufacturer's to make. Why do you think there are no hybrid mini-vans, because gas has been cheap until the recent past and the driving public didn't demand that it be addressed. Maybe if the buying habits of the driver's here in the US indicated a value in economy as opposed to more, more, more, you might have seen your hybrid mini come to market.
No one wants to address those questions which has been my point with my posts for awhile now.
BTW, 5 adults, 2 carseats(1 each in 2nd/3rd rows wasn't most convenient but it worked) & 31mpg/highway on a trip back from Michigan in my FS, not that I'm telling you what to buy or anything but I'd say that's great mileage.
There are plenty of Lambda platform owners out there... I recently purchased an 07 Outlook XR (That I love)personally I choose to share my comparative opinions in a more constructive and safe forum. Hopefully this forum will heal itself soon and non FS owners will feel it worthwhile to post.
My Freestyle will hold seven if they are the right size, but I wouldn't want to do it for any long trips or if I needed to hold seven all the time. One carseat might still allow this but I don't think that 2 will at all (unless you maybe put one in the back) I think the only possible CUV choice might be the Acadia, but I haven't seen one with a second row bench to tell. Your best bet if you have to haul 7 often and want them to be at all comfortable would probably be a minivan.
Comments
CVT doesn't mean squat- we know little to nothing about the TX-as with fuel economy :P .
People ARE uing the power. Sure, in 8.5 seconds the FS will go as fast as other competitors will be going, but for safety manuvers, it's nicer to have the peppy extra 270 hp.
Only because of what people THINK they need.
I didn't say anything about what people need, I said what theFS needed. But people don't need cars. Every car is an uneeded luxury. So why won't you walk to work?
Huh? Acadia rated better than CX9 in gas mileage.
But when passing a semi,or any car, you need to get passed as quickly as safely possible.
Yeah- they bury their feet into the pedal- that's the only way to get it all out. But it's still taking 8 and a half seconds to get to 60.
But then I suspect most critic's around here haven't ever driven one so we'll just leave it at that...and to those that have I just plain do not agree.
Well- you probably haven't driven the competition yourself. Otherwise, you would feel the difference in acceleration.
After driving it that long with out driving other competing vehicles it probably would feel that way. But ask those who have driven them verses the competition.
Acually- the semi doing 40-55 mph is probably doing it being it's a heavy truck carrying 30 tons worth of stuff-that's 75 ft long. That can make it difficult to do more than 55mph. SO you probably won't be boxed in.
I do agree, though, that having ample power is a useful tool. But then so is knowing exactly what power you do have, and then using it when you can . . but not in an aggressive or unsafe manner. Many times, accelerating around a problem isn't really helping the traffic flow . . . in fact, it probably hinders it by causing unsafe situations that cause others behind you to brake.
Exactly!
You have to press long and hard to get acceleration in the FS. It does not come quickly. Period.
There are design solutions that can better serve this and other vehicles, diesel power, hybrid, light weight materials, etc.. Why doesn't the lambda's embrace any of that, that would make it actually "most significant" instead they took the easy path to satisfy the target market... YOU mistr... YOU and those like you.
The lambdas already get better MPG than the Edge and other smaller CUVs- with the new figures. And why doesn't ford drop the FS/TX and continue building minivans? You Freealfas, and those like you who need a minivan but don't want to be seen/ don't like driving one. That goes for all other 3 row CUVs.
Did you once think that with the new EPA testing regs that all across the board are going to post lower numbers than current. Wouldn't it be nice to see the number at the very least stay level with the new models embracing better solutions to address the revised testing as opposed to just taking it on the chin.
Yupr point? The old numbers were wrong, that doesn't mean theyre still improving!
That's not a healthy marketplace to be shopping in.
The good gas saving vehicles are still there, but YOU get to choose what you want. That's a VERY healthy market. So stop griping on other's decisions. Be happy with what YOU have. And plus, the numbers are all improving. But now EPA shows what wev've always been getting.
Mmmm... don't think so. I'm having a conversation. You're saying your vehicle is better than everyone elses.
Good point. Do we see our vehicle for what it is?
Gosh, with about 230,000,000 registered vehicles in the U.S. and some 6,500,000 accidents each year it would appear that the vast majority of drivers are fairly competent.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
What easy way? Gm designed a good vehicle. WHy did Ford take the easy way out and call a station wagon (FS) a CUV instead of designing a real one?
The deletion of the CVT and the increased HP are missing the point for me, the best money spent on the FS model freshening for '08 would have been to spend it all on the interior and the quality of the materials. Have you sat in a vw, our '98 passat has a nicer interior materials and was cheaper to buy even adjusted for the model year difference. Ford can and needs to do better with that.
CVT may end up not being a benefit on the FS we will see when the TX comes out. and Consumer Reports doesn't approve any VW's, but it decently likes the FS. So maybe ford has done something right.
Ha Ha Ha
I'm not laughing at you-exactly. :P
But it was desgned 3 years before. An old non attractive style. Another reason it sold slow.
OMG YES!
Check this- Ford needs to sell cars- that people want to buy. That's the bottom line.
And the Acadia still get's better MPG than all most competition. GM did fine.
Don't know about you, but I'm a good driver.
from another review: Fuel Economy
2WD XE, AWD XR, Class Average
4, 4, 3.9
Test 2WD XE averaged 16.0 mpg in mostly city driving. Test AWD XR averaged 17.5 mpg with more highway use. Outlook uses regular-grade fuel.
Why not 350? 400? 450?
So why won't you walk to work?
43 miles is a long way (each way)
I guess you haven't driven mine the way I drive it.
because bigger is always better...
"Everyone involved in this "discussion" should focus on what's good about the vehicles they drive and stop putting down the ones they don't. A tone of negativity has infected this Freestyle forum."
How's this then they're all great because they are getting bigger, weighing more, have more power, get less mileage and best of all cost more, oh yeah, and they are getting more pretty. I really think the market is moving in a positive direction in light of all those reasons one might have to review in the purchase of a CUV. The manufacturer's should all be commended as it really is a challenge to make a vehicle with all of those attributes and then expect the public to pay more for it. It's a win/win, FOR THEM, they aren't challenged by the consumer and we get to pay more for the privilege of having such advanced thinking come to fruition in the marketplace.
why can't we all just get along...
Come on guys step in and do something about this Freestyle crew that has highjacked this once upon a time informative forum.
I am sick of it!!!
All topics wind up being about Freestyle somehow.
There is very little constructive information being shared here(including info about FS... talk about beating a dead horse) just nasty zings back and forth all related to FS.
When is enough,enough?
I agree with baloo 100%.
Why do you feel the need to slam or respond to his post? Do you feel he is speaking directly to you?
This forum has become nasty and myopic.
I am shopping for a CUV and seeking feedback about all cuv's not just Ford's Freestyle.
Do you have any idea how many people view these forums my guess would be thousands daily and the vast majority do not feel the need add anything just get relevent information.
A wise man once said when you are talking you are not hearing/learning anything.
I've seen this appeal for civility with regard to you FS posters many times in the past month and it does seem to be falling on deaf ears.
Grow up and learn to play nice!
Power: The Freestyle has plenty for my real needs. The CVT is able to get everything it needs our of the 3.0L Duratec. I have no issues accelerating and passing when I need to. I love the feel of the CVT but I think that it makes the Freestyle feel a lot more sluggish than it really is. My Wrangler feels a lot faster. I would not mind having the slick new 3.5 (I like power), but I would not give up the CVT for it given the choice. The facts (from Car and Driver's review of each) is that the Freestyle is only 0.1 seconds slower to 60 than the Acadia (8.2 vs 8.1), it is only 0.2 seconds slower from 30-50 (4.3 vs 4.1) and it is 0.1 faster from 50-70 (5.9 vs 6.0). These are not significantly different. I would speculate that the Freestyle might be a little more affected by increased load, but not enough to warrant the criticism it receives for power. These times are all adequate for my driving needs.
Styling: Since this is subjective, this in only my opinion. The Freestyle is bland. Not quite ugly, but a long way from stylish. This is in line with my opinion of the Pilot and Highlander, although they look more SUV like to me vs. the Freestyles wagon look. The Acadia, CX-9, and VC look nice, as does the Pacifica although it has gotten old. I am also not sold yet on the changes made for the Taurus X, but I will hold off until I see more of them.
Space: It is amazing what the Freestyle does with space and how versatile it is. 7 will fit in mine (middle bench), but not with a carseat. The back seat is fine for 2 large adults for short trips. The front seats are very comfortable for long trips. Leg room is good in the first 2 rows and again adequate for short trips in the third. Moving the seats is easy and provides a lot of space for hauling. Without loading various items in the others, I cannot really compare, but it has met most of my needs. The Acadia is the only one of the others that I have spent any significant time in. It also has great space and seems larger than the FS, but I have a hard time believing three will fit comfortably in the back (two of me would barely fit). The sliding second row should make access to the back (particularly with a carseat) easier than the Freestyle.
Fuel Economy: The Freestyle is great most of the time for what it is. I am pretty heavy footed, but I have gotten over 29 in 65 mph highway driving in my AWD on a trip with 3 adults, baby and stuff. I have also gotten around 18 in a tank that was purely my solo 4 mile trip back and forth to work. While the Freestlye is rated 19-24 and the Acadia is rated 17-24, C&D in their same review had both the Freestyle and the Acadia getting 17. While this may vary for some, these are both (along with most of the others in this forum) excellent for the size of the vehicles and, more importantly, a huge improvement over their SUV counterparts.
All in all, most of these are good vehicles with their minor differences. I hope this helps someone make a decision, or at least leads them to look at all the options more closely.
As a side note, us Freestyle owners welcome those who like all of the others to post in this forum as much as we do and apologize for our over-zealous appreciation of our vehicle.
Since we welcome all points of view automotive, even the model specific discussions aren't always a love fest towards a particular model.
If we were all walking around an auto show together, the visual cues that don't make it to text would make the zings seem more friendly. But you lose some of that good natured flavor in text unfortunately. Meanwhile enjoy a virtual beer or Kripsy Kreme on us.
I stand by my statement.
Any business makes a profit by providing what the customer wants. Ford got into it's present predicament because they failed to allow for the customer's changing preferences away from light trucks and SUVs. In other words, they didn't provide what the customer wanted. Then to top it off, when they had alternatives (Focus, 500, Freestyle) they didn't change their corporate philosophy - it was still geared around SUVs / trucks. Thus their advertising and public relations didn't emphasize their strengths in the emerging market. For example, which vehicle did they hybridize? A small sedan? Nope, the Escape SUV.
To make a profit (or even survive), the customer must drive the production pattern, not vice versa. You might try asking (former) Edsel owners how they liked being "pushed" into a design.
Changing people's perceptions of how they should drive / that they should be more "XXXX" (pick your societal cause) is a matter for someone other than a manufacturer. Use of the word "right" (implying "wrong to do otherwise) indicates one is speaking of morality, not car manufacturing.
I concur. Mine is a 2006 SEL FWD.
CAVEAT: This is discussing the Freestyle, but I am not opposed to the Lamda platform, Hyundai, DC, or other products for those who prefer that style of vehicle. Now, back to the regularly scheduled post. :P
I think that many people are turned off by the Freestyle design, which mimics the Ford Explorer. But further, the design was built from the inside out, to maximize space for the platform. Thus the high roof that goes a couple of inches higher over the 3rd row (cleverly hidden by the sloping roof rails).
My own opinion is that the FS is a rare combination of space and value.
- The 3.0 is fine for use with the CVT (it would be underpowered with a conventional transmission). But it must be acknowledged that many people these days prefer a much stronger engine, and certainly all the car magazines are programmed to emphasize power in their reviews. The CVT is being dropped because Ford has the new 6 speed transmission developed, and the German steel for the CVT chain was too expensive. Also, the current CVT could not handle the added torque of the 3.5l without modifications. I actually expect similar MPG on the road with the "Taurus X" (3.5L / 6 speed).
- The car has a good grip on the road. There is no stability feature offered or (in my opinion) needed. Handling is such that the road makes it's presence known, as opposed to being isolated from the road. Some people like this, other prefer a different ride. The vehicle is quiet at highway speeds.
- I have the bench 2nd row, which I didn't want, but no one here in So Cal carried the captain's chairs. I now prefer it, because I occasionally carry three in the 2nd row and can still have the entire rear for cargo.
- The view from the driver's seat is very SUV-like; it sits high up and visibility is very good, with lots of glass all around. The rear seats are stadium style, slightly higher than the front seats.
- On the technical side, many people don't know that the Freestyle uses a data bus to run all of the electronics. This is a new feature for cars (although I would expect the Lamdas to also have this technology). Older cars just had wires going to the computer; this one is built like the inside of a personal computer (but thankfully not running Microsoft software)! :surprise:
Some notes and cautions:
- If you get one, make sure it has the additional rear air conditioning. The vehicle has a lot of glass, and needs the additional cooling.
- I recommend the Limited for several reasons, but the one I will list is that it has white gauges with black numbers; the other models have black gauges with white numbers, which are hard to read when going under tunnels, etc. OK, I'll list another; the Limited has the Audiophile stereo, which is much better than the basic model I have.
- The windshield slopes such that there is a lot of glare from the dashboard. It shows up on both the beige and the grey interior, but is worse on beige. I generally wear polarized sunglasses anyway, and didn't really notice until I read about it on Edmunds.
- There are only two cup holders for the 2nd row, mounted very low to the floor on the rear of the console. There are two door holders, but they are really designed for bottles, not cups. I would have preferred better cup holders back there. The third row has a cup holder only on the right side (the left has the optional rear A/C motors, I think).
- For some unknown reason, the Ford designers did not allow for one to simply fold the 3rd seats forward to carry cargo. They expect one to fully fold the seats into the floor (which is easy to do). If you merely fold those 3rd row seats and then place cargo, the backs of the 3rd row seats will have a nice checkerbox pattern from the load. There is a notice on the seats and (I think) in the owner's manual, but to me this is a dumb design - one should be able to just fold those seats over for a quick cargo change. I keep stuff in the cargo "well" (the deep place behind the 3rd row into which the seats fold), and to carry cargo I have to remove this and then fold the seats.
Overall: A good, solid ride, with loads of functionality. I like it a lot, but some people may not like the style or be able to get used to the different "feel" of the CVT.
Good luck to all in their search for the "perfect" CUV... :shades:
I've never argued with this point and agree Ford has completely missed the boat with management and marketing as of late.
"To make a profit (or even survive), the customer must drive the production pattern, not vice versa. You might try asking (former) Edsel owners how they liked being "pushed" into a design."
I don't think the makers of the itunes/ipod would agree. Good design defines the market segment and draws the customer hence producing profitability as opposed to relying on the customer to define it. As for citing the edsel, not everyone gets it right all of the time, why didn't you pull the original Mustang out of the Ford resume as a positive example, more recently the Taurus/Sable and even the Focus to an extent as it was recognized quite favorably for its performance and handling. But for the Mustang no one expected it, everyone who saw one didn't know previously they wanted one because design drove the brief and it defined the market segment. Ford has the design ability to do that, whether they have the marketing staff and management to foster that happening again presently, I'm not so sure.
"Changing people's perceptions of how they should drive / that they should be more "XXXX" (pick your societal cause) is a matter for someone other than a manufacturer. Use of the word "right" (implying "wrong to do otherwise) indicates one is speaking of morality, not car manufacturing."
That leaves the government to define what's "right" for us and to protect us from ourselves if we don't show or drive(insert wit) some reasonableness into the minds of the manufacturer's we are relying on to give us vehicles that meet our needs. We already know how well that works...stops rant here...
"I stand by my statement."
As do I, it is no challenge to build a lambda/CX/T-rex/ or otherwise that is shinier, heavier, more powerful and less economical and bring it to market as new and improved. How does that get viewed across the board as progress and acceptable. Why are we so vehement about more is better, tell me how a 500lb less lambda/cx/t-rex/whatever would not be a better, more economical solution to the CUV even leaving the engine displacement on the table but recognizing that further gains could be realized if that was reduced as well with no compromise in "performance" because apparantly around here and listening to other's "arguments" that's why we buy CUV's.
Bottom line, It's a CUV not a sports car, if you want 300+hp, buy a sports car and track it, if you need a CUV to carry people and stuff why not make it a reasonable compromise of power, economy and space. This generation of CUV's I contend are going in the wrong direction and being sold as progress. They are not, they haven't introduced a hybrid or diesel model improving mileage and they are significantly heavier requiring larger more powerful engines just to get them to get out of their own way. In fact GM is hybridizing it's line of pick-ups and full size SUV's without talk of doing the same to the Lambda's thereby closing the gap even further between the CUV/SUV. Why wouldn't it be the other way around.
The current path will lead simply to a CUV comparable to a traditional SUV differing only in the fact they will be unibody as opposed to body on frame. Their weights are becoming more comparable, as are their amenities, power and economy or lack there of. I stand by my question at that point what have you produced other than a SUV sized vehicle that you now call a CUV that handles marginally better but is no more responsible or forward thinking.
This forum has become a lovefest for one vehical and I believe that is part of balooo's point.
At least they brought a concern many are expressing directly to the host.
This forum has become lopsided with people "defending"their Freestyle to the point nothing constructive or comparative is really being shared here either from lack of interest or fear of being gang raped by FS "defenders".
Everyone has his or her own management style head on,look into it or simply look the other way...
I've seen "lets get back on track" editorial comments or redirection to a more suitable forum by host all the time in other forums.
I now the difference between humor and nasty and too many of these posts in my opinion are just plain rude.
I enter this site via interest in the CX-9,Acadia and Outlook forums. Not via an interest in Freestyle.
Why don't you just rename this forum DEFENDING MY FREESTYLE.
I'm sick of it also.
Perhaps people could show a little restraint and focus on comparisons without feeling compelled to defend one's purchase.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Since I have neither the time, money nor expertise to build my own car, I am left with what IS out there. What is out there is a minivan, big SUV and big CUV. I don't have anything to tow so I throw out the big SUV. What am I left with? Minivans and big CUVs. Both get about the same mileage (within 10%). Mid to high teens in town and mid to low 20s on highway. What the flip else am I supposed to buy? I put off buying a car in the hopes of ANYBODY offering a hybrid minivan, but it did not happen.
I don't want to hear about the FS because IT DID NOT HOLD ENOUGH PEOPLE. Seating capacity does matter to some people and while it is a fine car IT DOES NOT HOLD ENOUGH PEOPLE for my needs.
How many carseats? Many of the vehicles in this comparison will seat 7, including (just had to get this in) the Freestyle...
So far as I know, there is nothing stopping other vehicle owners from expressing their views. I have encouraged it myself, since I am interested in all the models, even though I am not currently buying, and even though I own a "you-know-what" (Ford model that starts with an "F".)
I can't really see blaming a certain vehicle owner class for not having information posted from other vehicle owners. If there is a lack of information, blame the people who are not posting their vehicles.
There are a couple of over-enthusiastic posters here, but to be fair it all started when other people kept putting down this "you-know-what" vehicle. It sort of snowballed from there. It my opinion it may have started there, but it needs to stop. For my part, I don't feel any need to "defend" anything.
Any Acadia owners out there?
I know you did that just to agitate me, but whatever gets you off. You know what, most in this comparison will not. I wandered into many dealerships with multiple carseats and tried to get them to fit in a manner convienent to use, and most did not. Try and fit five 350 pound people in the back of you FS ans see how it goes. That is about the footprint of most carseats.
You may not know it, but CAPS is considered shouting. Did you mean to shout?
I do not write to the forum to cause anyone problems, or to "get at" or "agitate". I wrote my post to ask how many carseats you needed, which is basically what my post said. I didn't get an answer from your reponse.
Your original post said nothing about having tried it at multiple dealerships. Sorry about the confusion.
My family is past the carseat stage right now, but those seats ARE rather bulky. We used a booster seat in our vehicle for the first few months.
Where in the post that you replied to am I defending the FS or telling YOU to buy one. If you read the post again I am critical of the direction CUV's are going, Ford included. Read other posts of mine and you will find I have even been critical of the FS I own and make payments on. Apparantly no one is willing to discuss the bigger points being raised in a CUV comparison forum thread.
Someone posts up "Most significant new vehicle, Lambda's" I say farcical and make my points politely as to why I think that not to be the case. People who don't like my opinion don't defend their position as much as now whine to the Host about being hijacked and "raped" by the FS crowd. It's a comparison forum, not a thread meant to show free love to all that enter. Make your point contrary to those I have made and compell me to think otherwise about what I am saying. Whining to the host is not debating the points at hand.
I don't care what you buy I just want better options in the market available, don't care who makes them, and that won't seem to be happening anytime soon with what the buying public is telling the manufacturer's to make. Why do you think there are no hybrid mini-vans, because gas has been cheap until the recent past and the driving public didn't demand that it be addressed. Maybe if the buying habits of the driver's here in the US indicated a value in economy as opposed to more, more, more, you might have seen your hybrid mini come to market.
No one wants to address those questions which has been my point with my posts for awhile now.
BTW, 5 adults, 2 carseats(1 each in 2nd/3rd rows wasn't most convenient but it worked) & 31mpg/highway on a trip back from Michigan in my FS, not that I'm telling you what to buy or anything but I'd say that's great mileage.
I recently purchased an 07 Outlook XR (That I love)personally I choose to share my comparative opinions in a more constructive and safe forum.
Hopefully this forum will heal itself soon and non FS owners will feel it worthwhile to post.