Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
Some people have opinion that TX is best it's included you.. So i don't tell it them.
My opinion is not that the TX is the best. I was proving to you that the TX is cheaper than the Lambdas. My favorite is the CX-9 but I will cross shop it with the Acadia, Outlook, TX, and whatever else is out there when the time comes. I am admittedly biased towards Ford but my wife is not and this is her vehicle. Therefore I have to look at all of them with an open mind as I don't know what she'll like that month. It's mostly about looks with her when it comes to vehicles so I'm sure it will be pretty whatever it is we end up leasing.
The price I can agree, but performance very good (0.4 sec difference).
Their performance is fine and more than adequate. But it is by no means class leading or anything special like I said. That .4 seconds you keep quoting is .4 seconds slower than a competitor which really means it's nothing special. That and all other objective comparisons between the Lambdas and the competition are close enough to be a wash across the board. I'm saying the looks of the Lambdas are what sell them. They are handsome and very likeable IMO. The CX-9 by comparison, while handsome to me, is a bit more daring and not as appealing to the masses IMO. For example, my wife thinks it "looks like a frog". Go figure! :confuse:
it's true. Me and wife thought about TX, but we have VW wagon. my wife said why do I want buy car that looks same as VW wagon? She said there're no reasons spent a lot money for same looking vehicle. So people buying more Acadia, then TX because an apperence of TX as wagon, even it seats higher of the ground than VW. So I have tried a CX-9, but price and no discount. I told them good luck to sell cars with such approach. I crossed a street to GM and got a deal. I have read some posts that people had same experience with the Mazda, even GM and Mazda under same "roof". So go figure.
that was a revealing little post vad, so you are saying that you could have very well been this amarous and opinionated about a CX-9 and the ONLY reason you didn't is because your "advances" were thwarted at the dealer and you got kicked to the curb and had to go across the street to find another suitor that would cut a "deal" for you...
imagine if the mazda folks played ball with you you'd be a rabid fan of the CX-9 around here and then have to figure out how poorer sales of it relative to the lambdas still make it the much better vehicle. Boy you really dodged a bullet there.
LOL... drive safely and enjoy your ride for whatever reason you bought it at this point as I just can't keep up anymore...
BTW - my driveway is a black passat variant and a black LTD FS, my wife and I are more than OK with that...
n apperence of TX as wagon, even it seats higher of the ground than VW.
If appearance and a couple of extra inches of seat height were your deciding factors (and the deal), then that tells me all I need to know...enjoy your car
A lot of folks tend to stick with one manufacturer, so another possible reason for low TX sales is because the Escape and Explorer are so good that people are keeping them and not interested in the TX, while with GM, maybe people are unsatisfied with the GM SUVs and are trading them in for lambdas. Just a possibility.
Escape is a decent seller, but Explorer's sales are at rock bottom lows. There's nothing hiding the TX- well except for Ford marketing.
At least I looked them up! If we were going by what you say all the time we'd all think the Pilot comes with reverses sensors, a rear view camera, two power seats, a popcorn maker, driver's side toilet system, 46" plasma HD-DVD entertainment system (which doesn't block the rear view mind you), and much, much more!
From what you've said- the TX doesn't have a passenger power seat. Pilot does come with reverse sensors. I proved that to you. You have no idea what you are saying.
Second, no Pilot trim comes standard with backup sensors and they are a $696, before installation costs, dealer installed accessory. Completely idiotic on Honda's part given the size of the Pilot IMO.
Ofcourse- given that the Pilot is a foot shorter in length than the TX.
Then there's still the fact that all the controls are on the Ford unit whereas the Honda unit has only the essentials. That IS a function Ford has that Honda does not have and is not my opinion. It's a fact.
Yet Honda has the rest on the remote.That isn't a function, as the Honda DVD player may do all that the Fords can do.
Oh, I'm not trying to tell you that, I AM telling you that. IMO having the wires up and out of the way of little feet is much safer and convenient than having them on the floor where there is no light and the wires are usually black. Also, I'm not sure how the Pilot seats lock to the floor but the Ford seats lock with a mechanism similar to that on a trunk or a hatch. Kind of a claw and a Pin. If a wire somehow makes its way to one of those when you bring the seat down, bye bye wire.
Yes- in your oppinion- and that's all that is. in my oppinion wires on the floor is safer, and you can move them out of the way. Also, "little feet" can kick them out of the inputs during ingress/egress.
Now a headphone jack near the floor would be nice (it's up high on the Ford) and tripping on that probably wouldn't be as much of an issue as the headphones are light and the wire usually pulls out very easily. A/V wires are much tighter and don't give as easily.
Honda doesn't have that problem. It's called wireless headphones. Really easy to use, and much more convinient than wired ones. Honda gets one for ergonomics there.
Again, all of this is my opinion of course and you've stated yours. Please stop telling us that Honda wins this and Honda wins that because if a Honda were the best for us I'd be driving one. Obviously I'm not and for good reason.
I'll stop saying Honda wins when you stop saying Ford wins. You're bringing most of the oppinion to this discussion. And if Ford were the best then maybe I'd be driving one. Maybe they'd be selling more than 22000 Freestyles in a year. Obviously I don't- and that's for good reason- better than just oppinion.
From what you've said- the TX doesn't have a passenger power seat. Pilot does come with reverse sensors. I proved that to you. You have no idea what you are saying.
Hopefull this is it for this. You showed that I was wrong about the Pilot EX-L not coming with fog lamps. It does and I was wrong. Next, I said the TX didn't have a power passenger seat. The Limited does and again, I was wrong.
Either way, reverse sensors are still a dealer accessory on the Pilot and you have proved nothing other than that you are not following along and you are unwilling to look any of this up for yourself.
Honda doesn't have that problem. It's called wireless headphones. Really easy to use, and much more convinient than wired ones. Honda gets one for ergonomics there
Again, you're not following along or looking this stuff up before saying it. Both Ford and Honda offer a headphone jack and both give you two sets of wireless headphones. I don't know exaclty why they give you an extra headphone jack and the wireless sets, but they do and I think Honda's is in a better place.
I'll stop saying Honda wins when you stop saying Ford wins.
I have not been playing the "who wins" game and have simply been stating what I see on the mfr sites and what my experience is after researching these units. You keep telling me Honda wins this and Honda wins that. Millions of people DO NOT buy Hondas each year so the other mfrs are doing something right I would suppose. Wouldn't you?
I don't think most buyers are looking at the numbers like we do. I've been inside of most of these CUVs at car shows and they all look the same to me size wise. I still say it's the looks inside and out all other things being pretty much equal.
Most best sellers are apealing to the masses- not that there's anyhting wrong with going against the grain.
No, nothing wrong with that at all. I like vehicles that are a bit more daring to an extent and try to shy away from the dull mass appealing appliances if I can.
Interesting article and considering that the Outlook and Acadia are virtually identical, then this comparison hold true for the Acadia. Pretty much says what I've been saying all along. Don't forget the TX has a different engine/tranny to the FS being tested in this article.
"The Freestyle is three to four inches narrower inside than the other two, and it feels it. Want the vehicle to feel compact and manageable? Then you want the Ford. Want a feeling of space? Then you want the Outlook
This plus large windows gives the Freestyle the best all-around visibility of the three.
The Ford's interior looks much more downscale than the other two. Ford for a few years was stuck in a highly functional interior aesthetic. That said, it feels more solid than the other two despite having the plainest styling.
The front seats of the Saturn Outlook are among its weakest aspects In the second row, the Outlook fares even worse. Legroom is easily sufficient, but the split bench seat is devoid of contour and mounted way too low to the floor to provide adults with anything resembling thigh support.
Best of all, the Freestyle's second-row seats are mounted high off the floor, providing both very good under-thigh support and an open view forward. in terms of second-row legroom and comfort for two adults the Ford is the clear winner.
In the Ford's favor, it's third row actually stows beneath the floor, as in a minivan, so it has a lower load floor than the other two and especially than the relatively high floor in the Saturn.
The Saturn Outlook's steering has reassuring weightiness to it that builds properly as the wheel is turned, but doesn't provide much road feel. Here the Ford wins, with a much tighter, more precise feel to the steering than you'll find in the other two. Combined with the higher driving position and narrower width, the Ford easily feels the most agile.
The Outlook's interior feels much larger owing to its greater shoulder room, it looks more upscale, and it can seat an additional person. It also has much more road presence and a stronger, more refined, engine. In the Ford's favor, it has more agile handling, more precise steering, a more compact feel, a more comfortable second row, and a lower load floor. My head says the Ford is the better buy from a functional and cost standpoint, but I suspect most people's hearts will lead them to hunt down the extra dinero for the Outlook."
"The height is just about perfect, too . . . higher seating than a car, but lower than a SUV, and a tad lower than a minivan."
Do you know reason why a lot people buying SUV and minivans? The high seating position, that helps, more safely ride for your family, so you can see 2-4 cars ahead of you. It's very helpful in traffic, as well on highway, so you have more time to react and make right decision. I think style of TX just about 4-5 years behind all other world. Even new Flex looks like upgraded and re-sized version of TX.
Either way, reverse sensors are still a dealer accessory on the Pilot and you have proved nothing other than that you are not following along and you are unwilling to look any of this up for yourself.
As I said before, you can get the Pilot with reverse sensors. I was the one who found that on Honda's sight, unlike you, who twisted some statements and made something up.
Again, you're not following along or looking this stuff up before saying it. Both Ford and Honda offer a headphone jack and both give you two sets of wireless headphones. I don't know exaclty why they give you an extra headphone jack and the wireless sets, but they do and I think Honda's is in a better place.
I was thinking Ford offered wireless headphones (and they're proabably standard with the DVD system). It would be idiotic for them not to.
I have not been playing the "who wins" game and have simply been stating what I see on the mfr sites and what my experience is after researching these units. You keep telling me Honda wins this and Honda wins that. Millions of people DO NOT buy Hondas each year so the other mfrs are doing something right I would suppose. Wouldn't you?
I simply respond to you when you say Ford wins this, or that, because you keep using your oppinion as fact, so I use apply some of my own logic to the argument. That's basically where this is going. The point of this isn't that Honda is doing something right, or that others aren't- though Honda is profitable, while some other mfrs aren't.
Thinking about it, it does seem as though the TX is really just a freshened FS (I guess we already knew that), but the Flex is like a gen II FS. But too me, except for the front and the ugly body cladding, the TX looks better. Ford seems to do well everywhere but in styling. And they don't know how to use a good thing when they've got it. Why not use Edge styling for this Flex. It would probably apeal so much more to the masses than this Flex styling.
I don't think most buyers are looking at the numbers like we do. I've been inside of most of these CUVs at car shows and they all look the same to me size wise. I still say it's the looks inside and out all other things being pretty much equal.
Buyers definitely look at aspects like "best in class interior space" or "More cargo space than a MB GLclass". Or else these things wouldn't be advertised.
No, nothing wrong with that at all. I like vehicles that are a bit more daring to an extent and try to shy away from the dull mass appealing appliances if I can.
It's nice, but sometimes vehicles are so different that they appeal to too few of a market. I think this applies to the Tribeca.
Front end looks better on TX, but Flex looks longer than TX. It's going fun to clean a roof after snow.
I think the Flex front end looks better, and the Flex is longer by an inch. It probably looks like more because the Flex is so low and wagon like. If you're refereing to the sky view windows on top, why? just close the shades.
It's nice to hear what others feeel after comparing these vehicles. That's what this is- someone's oppinion after comparing these three cehicles. Nice details to.
The TX & Flex are the exact same height, so they're between SUV and car height, so you get the added visibility without a too high step-in height. The Flex is 4" wider and 2" longer then the TX, but otherwise pretty much the same layout of the TX. I'm sure it will cost more too. The Flex will become Ford's minivan and the TX Fords 7 passenger CUV, with the Edge as Ford's 5 passenger CUV.
Flex will not popular, as minivan. A lot people are buying minivans because they have auto- sliding doors, also for same reason people choose minivan over CUV. So I think it will replace TX eventually.
As I said before, you can get the Pilot with reverse sensors. I was the one who found that on Honda's sight, unlike you, who twisted some statements and made something up.
It was fog lights you pointed out albook. You don't even know what you posted. You keep arguing with me but you're not even following along! :sick:
If you still think it was reverse sensors then either find the post where you made that statement or find them on this page which is the official Honda Pilot specs page on the Honda web site. Go ahead and build a top of the line Pilot while you're there too. You'll see the same thing I do which is that reverse sensors are a dealer installed option and do not come from the factory standard or not. THE END!
I simply respond to you when you say Ford wins this, or that, because you keep using your oppinion as fact, so I use apply some of my own logic to the argument.
Well since I wasn't saying one wins or the other loses I don't know where you are coming from. I have stated my opinions as well as stated that those same opinions are just opinions. Several times you took those opinions of mine, compared them to what Honda offers, and boasted that Honda wins.
I also never state my opinion as fact and use "IMO" heavily which I'm sure annoys other members to no end. If you still think otherwise, please provide me with some examples so I know what you are talking about. I do make a valid effort to not present opinion as fact and if I'm doing it wrong please show me why. :shades:
The big plus in Ford Flex 2009 is that it will come with new Eco-Boost system which according to Ford will improve MPG by 20%. So with same 3.5l engine and 6 speed trany official EPA numbers should look like 19 city/28 hw MPG. That will be a huge plus comparing to any other CUV's especially acadia-outlook because interior space difference will be gone as well.
* EcoBoost is Ford Motor Company’s new high-volume, affordable engine technology slated for a range of global vehicles – from small cars to large trucks. * EcoBoost uses gasoline turbocharged direct-injection technology for up to 20 percent better fuel economy, 15 percent fewer CO2 emissions and superior driving performance versus larger displacement engines. * The new technology will be available in half a million Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles annually in North America during the next five years – beginning with the new Lincoln MKS sedan in 2009. * Ford Explorer America concept at the North American International Auto Show showcases EcoBoost combined with other sustainability actions; together, they deliver a 20-30 percent increase in fuel economy, depending on engine selection, versus today’s mid-size utilities.
DETROIT, Jan. 6, 2008 – Ford Motor Company is introducing a new engine technology called EcoBoost that will deliver up to 20 percent better fuel economy on half a million Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles annually in North America during the next five years.
The EcoBoost family of 4-cylinder and 6-cylinder engines features turbocharging and direct injection technology. Compared with more expensive hybrids and diesel engines, EcoBoost builds upon today’s affordable gasoline engine and improves it, providing more customers with a way to improve fuel economy and emissions without compromising driving performance.
“EcoBoost is meaningful because it can be applied across a wide variety of engine types in a range of vehicles, from small cars to large trucks – and it’s affordable,” said Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of Global Product Development.
“Compared with the current cost of diesel and hybrid technologies, customers in North America can expect to recoup their initial investment in a 4-cylinder EcoBoost engine through fuel savings in approximately 30 months. A diesel in North America will take an average of seven and one-half years, while the cost of a hybrid will take nearly 12 years to recoup – given equivalent miles driven per year and fuel costs,” he said.
Ford will introduce EcoBoost on the new Lincoln MKS flagship in 2009, followed by the Ford Flex and other vehicles. By 2013, Ford will have more than half a million EcoBoost-powered vehicles on the road annually in North America.
From article "Pearce disputes allegations the Flex will cannibalize sales from the Ford Freestyle CUV, which, like the Flex, seats seven."
I think it will take sales from TX. It has more room and price as mention in article will be at level with the main competitors Acadia and Pilot. So, the price will at same level as TX , just may be 2-3K more. It's another failure by Ford.
Flex will not popular, as minivan. A lot people are buying minivans because they have auto- sliding doors, also for same reason people choose minivan over CUV.
Actually, just the opposite is true...minivan sales are down and CUV sales are up.
Regardless of what the article says, the fact is that Ford, like GM, no longer sells minivans, but they do sell large CUV, or Ford will once the Flex is available to the public. So Ford/GM stops selling minivans and replace them with large CUVs, so I call them minivan replacement.
The price of the Flex will be about the same as the Acadia, so it will cost a few thousand more than the TX, of course depending on options/incentives.
Will the Flex take sales away from TX? Maybe, but then I'm sure the Pilot takes sales away from the Odyssey and vice versa. The new Rav4 7 seater takes sales away from the Highlander. And on and on. It's the nature of the auto business to have overlap. The key to a company is to keep the buyers trying to choose between one or two of the manufacturers products.
In that it's smart for Ford to have both the Flex and TX, since there will be some people thinking about the TX but finding it too small, but the Flex might keep them buying a Ford product versus a lambda. On the other hand without the TX, someone may look at the Flex and find it too big for their needs and may decide to buy the smaller and less expensive TX rather than buying another company's CUV. So it's good to have some overlap.
Just catching up on my reading... I like your nice, concise, well worded summary in this reply. You hit the nail on the head!! I always like your comments because you manage to use very logical reasoning and be diplomatic at the same time. Jim
LOL, Flex is not going to take sales away from TX ( they are to small anyway, Ford is not promoting TX at all) but with improved MPG, SYNC and interior size it will take sales away from Enclave-Outlook-Acadia for sure.
Of course Ford is going to say that, again it goes back to the whole image thing.
If you're a Ford loyalist and you go in to a dealer to trade in that Windstar or Freestar, the first thing you'll look at is a Flex.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. It goes back to my earlier theory that they're selling to the same customers at a higher price point, which is good for Ford.
EcoBoost sounds good to me. Smaller engines can use boost only when needed. My 2 concerns are:
* will the boosted engines required premium fuel? * will there be any lag?
Heavy vehicles with auto transmissions that are boosted tend to lag noticeably. Let's see how Ford addresses this.
Also, if it drinks premium fuel, then a 20% gain in fuel economy is cut in half when you factor in that the fuel cost 10% to begin with.
Any how, I look forward to reading about and sampling what Ford's solution will be.
It's interesting to see the pics together like that. The one thing that stands out to me is the greater width of the Flex.
Thanks for the pics and the specs on size. Same height, eh? It looks shorter in that photo only because the other dimensions are bigger, but in person it actually seemed tall and very long. Those wide doors open up nicely to the interior, too.
I do think it will cannibalize the Taurus X a bit, for people that want the extra space and can afford the slightly higher price. That's OK, however, I bet overall sales are higher for Ford.
"In that it's smart for Ford to have both the Flex and TX, since there will be some people thinking about the TX but finding it too small, but the Flex might keep them buying a Ford product versus a lambda."
In term financially I don't see nothing smart in tis step. It's huge financial over head the spending money for unknown future, called the word "May be". Ford should compete with Toyota or Honda
Let's wait until we will see interior on real vehicle. I hope it's better quality, that TX.
"I do think it will cannibalize the Taurus X a bit, for people that want the extra space and can afford the slightly higher price. That's OK, however, I bet overall sales are higher for Ford."
I would like to see domestic automaker come back to life. It will be good for economy. But anyway in two-three years, if Flex will succeed in sale, the TX will be discontinued.
May be GM, but not a Chrysler. If you have seen there last vehicle, they are opposite to any other automaker, may be the close one will be Toyota. A lot different kinds SUV/CUV (jeep, dodge) and just new updated minivan from Dodge and Chrysler. So I think Chrysler still on the path to compete with Toyota and Honda.
You asked: EcoBoost sounds good to me. Smaller engines can use boost only when needed. My 2 concerns are:
* will the boosted engines required premium fuel? * will there be any lag?
There was a bit of discussion on these issues of the EcoBoost over in the Blue Oval Forums. See also the YouTube video by Ford.
Bottom Line: * The direct injection of the fuel into the cylinder cools the gas, allowing high compression ratios without knocking using standard fuel (premium not needed) * Ford has developed a twin Turbo that increases compression uniformly at all RPMs. Thus no significant Turbo lag. * The small remaining power lag is compensated by direct injection into the cylinder (not the air stream). For instance, the gas can be turned on and off independently, affecting power output immediately, independent of the turbo's rate of air injection.
Ford says direct fuel injection into the cylinder (used commonly in diesels) and their new Turbos are a excellent combination that solves a lot of typical turbo issues.
The 20% fuel savings will work across the board for all engines in all applications: City, Highway, Cars, Trucks, Hybrids, etc.. They all see a >20% improvement. This is a very big thing! The US could dramatically lower foreign oil dependence to the extent this is applied to all cars, which Ford is trying to do rapidly. The only issue, as mentioned in the above video, is that cars are only a part of our total oil usage. For instance, a lot of natural gas goes into heating.
In my case, I'd love to see the TX rise from 19 MPG to 24 MPG on average combined City/Highway by using EcoBoost. I'm almost tempted to wait a few months to pick up next year's model of the TX, if the TX isn't dropped next year. In the above video, Ford says they'll put the EcoBoost in the "Taurus and Flex", very soon after the Lincoln MKX. But they don't explicitly say "Taurus X" (as it may be inferred?). However, if they don't drop the Taurus car, which is unlikely, I suspect they'll also keep the TX since it's produced at the same plant that would otherwise be under utilized. And the TX fits a niche between Flex and Edge for people like me. Personally, I find the Edge too small for my large family, and the Flex too big for nice car-like behavior. I might as well get an Outlook as the Flex.
The CX-9 has won the 2008 North American Truck of the Year, beating out the Buick Enclave and Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid for the award. I guess it was expected considering the number of praises its been getting.
In term financially I don't see nothing smart in tis step. It's huge financial over head the spending money for unknown future, called the word "May be".
What are you talking about?? The lambdas are big CUVs as is the Flex. How is this an "unknown future" for Ford when large CUVs are today's reality. But then you did say that people are buying more minivans......
Ford should compete with Toyota or Honda And who do you think Ford is competing with?
The CX-9 has won the 2008 North American Truck of the Year, beating out the Buick Enclave and Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid for the award.
Which indicates that bigger isn't always better. It's the total package. BTW, the TX has almost the same interior/exterior dimensions as the CX-9, and both the CX-9 and TX are much more car-like. The CX-9 is much more sporty looking and feeling, the TX more practical and plain.
The CX-9 is much more sporty looking and feeling, the TX more practical and plain.
I can agree with the CX-9 is more sporty looking and riding, and TX is plain but TX practical no way. Acadia is more practical from both this vehicles. It has more room in side, better ride, quietly ride, more safety options.
It's sad story, another "made in japan" won award in US, the country of inventor affordable automobile for mass.
Acadia is more practical from both this vehicles. It has more room in side, better ride, quietly ride, more safety options.
I was only comparing the CX-9 to the TX in my post. I agree that the Acadia has more room inside, but bigger isn't always better, and I agree that the Acadia is also quieter inside. But I'm not sure how you define "better ride" because to me the TX and CX-9 are the winners, and as far as "more safety options" you'll have to specify what additional safety options are found on the Acadia an not on the TX/CX-9.
It's sad story, another "made in japan" won award in US, the country of inventor affordable automobile for mass.
So you're saying that the CX-9 has been winning awards just because it's made by a manufacturer in Japan? I suppose the Accord, Camry, and Odyssey are also just winning awards because of that too
doesn't this get old. the ONLY reason you are not a cx fanboy here is because they would not do a deal that you wanted to be part of. so you went across the street and found someone who would. As I said if that didn't happen you have been here trying to figure out how to rationalize cx sales not supporting the idea that its your favorite, how less space than a lambda wouldn't matter, etc., etc.. now you are the pied piper of all things lambda. they have more space period, that's their big benefit.
all of the larger cuv's are capable of carrying 7 in safety and some more comfortable than others, to say otherwise is just plain incorrect and pointless. to keep harping on the fact that the FS/TreX is in some way less than the rest is just juvenile. we know you don't like it, heck it might have been your first choice but they would do the deal you wanted either and then you had to go to mazda, and then gm before you got the deal you want, who knows the real story.
we know you like your lambda and all the things you think it has over the rest, at the end of the day it's no different in capability than the others FS/TreX included as much as you think otherwise. It works for you for whatever reason, we more than know that... now you'll just have to hang your head in shame that you can't lord the big award over everyone's head around here now, it's tough enough as it is already.
It's sad story, another "made in japan" won award in US, the country of inventor affordable automobile for mass.
Oh please, you're making me shed tears. US carmakers put themselves in this situation by being mediocre since the 80s, and not really improving on their products. The only reason they did as well as they did was for the very high profit margins on their SUVs, which were also bordering on mediocre which is why Honda and Toyota ate up so much market share.
It's a good thing they are starting to wake up. I'm sure that the Acadia will have a sporty version soon (Denali), and others will follow. These will be winners, imo, since car mags and journalists tend to prefer sporty over family.
The most of you have problem with playing on one word or part of the sentence. I have never seen in any other forum how people make assumption base one the part of sentence. For your information I have tried deal CX-9 and Acadia almost at same time. I need a car and I was not sure if GM will give me good deal, so CX-9 was one of the choices and I didn't see something wrong in that. But Acadia always have been my first choice.
Hey Free, at some point I think we need to move on to other posters/topics otherwise you'll have a lump on your forehead from banging it on a wall too many times
i am looking to buy a 7 seater crossover, the CX9 looks the sportiest but im really looking for the best pickup and the sturdiest ride.
I had until now a Honda Odyssey, loved it but i am now looking for 4WD.
The Acadia is sure a bigger car then the CX9 but i have not ridden eather. I tried the ford EDGE which was great just a shame they do not come with a 3rd row seat.
"The Acadia is sure a bigger car then the CX9 but i have not ridden either."
The Acadia is not that much bigger than the CX-9. The Mazda does a better job of hiding it's size. Below are the length , height, and width dimensions for both vehicles.
Comments
My opinion is not that the TX is the best. I was proving to you that the TX is cheaper than the Lambdas. My favorite is the CX-9 but I will cross shop it with the Acadia, Outlook, TX, and whatever else is out there when the time comes. I am admittedly biased towards Ford but my wife is not and this is her vehicle. Therefore I have to look at all of them with an open mind as I don't know what she'll like that month. It's mostly about looks with her when it comes to vehicles so I'm sure it will be pretty whatever it is we end up leasing.
The price I can agree, but performance very good (0.4 sec difference).
Their performance is fine and more than adequate. But it is by no means class leading or anything special like I said. That .4 seconds you keep quoting is .4 seconds slower than a competitor which really means it's nothing special. That and all other objective comparisons between the Lambdas and the competition are close enough to be a wash across the board. I'm saying the looks of the Lambdas are what sell them. They are handsome and very likeable IMO. The CX-9 by comparison, while handsome to me, is a bit more daring and not as appealing to the masses IMO. For example, my wife thinks it "looks like a frog". Go figure! :confuse:
So I have tried a CX-9, but price and no discount. I told them good luck to sell cars with such approach. I crossed a street to GM and got a deal. I have read some posts that people had same experience with the Mazda, even GM and Mazda under same "roof". So go figure.
imagine if the mazda folks played ball with you you'd be a rabid fan of the CX-9 around here and then have to figure out how poorer sales of it relative to the lambdas still make it the much better vehicle. Boy you really dodged a bullet there.
LOL... drive safely and enjoy your ride for whatever reason you bought it at this point as I just can't keep up anymore...
BTW - my driveway is a black passat variant and a black LTD FS, my wife and I are more than OK with that...
If appearance and a couple of extra inches of seat height were your deciding factors (and the deal), then that tells me all I need to know...enjoy your car
That- and the best in class interior space.
The CX-9 by comparison, while handsome to me, is a bit more daring and not as appealing to the masses IMO.
Most best sellers are apealing to the masses- not that there's anyhting wrong with going against the grain.
And maybe Ford could raise the price.
Escape is a decent seller, but Explorer's sales are at rock bottom lows. There's nothing hiding the TX- well except for Ford marketing.
From what you've said- the TX doesn't have a passenger power seat. Pilot does come with reverse sensors. I proved that to you. You have no idea what you are saying.
Second, no Pilot trim comes standard with backup sensors and they are a $696, before installation costs, dealer installed accessory. Completely idiotic on Honda's part given the size of the Pilot IMO.
Ofcourse- given that the Pilot is a foot shorter in length than the TX.
Then there's still the fact that all the controls are on the Ford unit whereas the Honda unit has only the essentials. That IS a function Ford has that Honda does not have and is not my opinion. It's a fact.
Yet Honda has the rest on the remote.That isn't a function, as the Honda DVD player may do all that the Fords can do.
Oh, I'm not trying to tell you that, I AM telling you that. IMO having the wires up and out of the way of little feet is much safer and convenient than having them on the floor where there is no light and the wires are usually black. Also, I'm not sure how the Pilot seats lock to the floor but the Ford seats lock with a mechanism similar to that on a trunk or a hatch. Kind of a claw and a Pin. If a wire somehow makes its way to one of those when you bring the seat down, bye bye wire.
Yes- in your oppinion- and that's all that is. in my oppinion wires on the floor is safer, and you can move them out of the way. Also, "little feet" can kick them out of the inputs during ingress/egress.
Now a headphone jack near the floor would be nice (it's up high on the Ford) and tripping on that probably wouldn't be as much of an issue as the headphones are light and the wire usually pulls out very easily. A/V wires are much tighter and don't give as easily.
Honda doesn't have that problem. It's called wireless headphones. Really easy to use, and much more convinient than wired ones. Honda gets one for ergonomics there.
Again, all of this is my opinion of course and you've stated yours. Please stop telling us that Honda wins this and Honda wins that because if a Honda were the best for us I'd be driving one. Obviously I'm not and for good reason.
I'll stop saying Honda wins when you stop saying Ford wins. You're bringing most of the oppinion to this discussion. And if Ford were the best then maybe I'd be driving one. Maybe they'd be selling more than 22000 Freestyles in a year. Obviously I don't- and that's for good reason- better than just oppinion.
Hopefull this is it for this. You showed that I was wrong about the Pilot EX-L not coming with fog lamps. It does and I was wrong. Next, I said the TX didn't have a power passenger seat. The Limited does and again, I was wrong.
Either way, reverse sensors are still a dealer accessory on the Pilot and you have proved nothing other than that you are not following along and you are unwilling to look any of this up for yourself.
Honda doesn't have that problem. It's called wireless headphones. Really easy to use, and much more convinient than wired ones. Honda gets one for ergonomics there
Again, you're not following along or looking this stuff up before saying it. Both Ford and Honda offer a headphone jack and both give you two sets of wireless headphones. I don't know exaclty why they give you an extra headphone jack and the wireless sets, but they do and I think Honda's is in a better place.
I'll stop saying Honda wins when you stop saying Ford wins.
I have not been playing the "who wins" game and have simply been stating what I see on the mfr sites and what my experience is after researching these units. You keep telling me Honda wins this and Honda wins that. Millions of people DO NOT buy Hondas each year so the other mfrs are doing something right I would suppose. Wouldn't you?
I don't think most buyers are looking at the numbers like we do. I've been inside of most of these CUVs at car shows and they all look the same to me size wise. I still say it's the looks inside and out all other things being pretty much equal.
Most best sellers are apealing to the masses- not that there's anyhting wrong with going against the grain.
No, nothing wrong with that at all. I like vehicles that are a bit more daring to an extent and try to shy away from the dull mass appealing appliances if I can.
http://www.epinions.com/content_286658760324 From the article:
"The Freestyle is three to four inches narrower inside than the other two, and it feels it. Want the vehicle to feel compact and manageable? Then you want the Ford. Want a feeling of space? Then you want the Outlook
This plus large windows gives the Freestyle the best all-around visibility of the three.
The Ford's interior looks much more downscale than the other two. Ford for a few years was stuck in a highly functional interior aesthetic. That said, it feels more solid than the other two despite having the plainest styling.
The front seats of the Saturn Outlook are among its weakest aspects
In the second row, the Outlook fares even worse. Legroom is easily sufficient, but the split bench seat is devoid of contour and mounted way too low to the floor to provide adults with anything resembling thigh support.
Best of all, the Freestyle's second-row seats are mounted high off the floor, providing both very good under-thigh support and an open view forward. in terms of second-row legroom and comfort for two adults the Ford is the clear winner.
In the Ford's favor, it's third row actually stows beneath the floor, as in a minivan, so it has a lower load floor than the other two and especially than the relatively high floor in the Saturn.
The Saturn Outlook's steering has reassuring weightiness to it that builds properly as the wheel is turned, but doesn't provide much road feel. Here the Ford wins, with a much tighter, more precise feel to the steering than you'll find in the other two. Combined with the higher driving position and narrower width, the Ford easily feels the most agile.
The Outlook's interior feels much larger owing to its greater shoulder room, it looks more upscale, and it can seat an additional person. It also has much more road presence and a stronger, more refined, engine. In the Ford's favor, it has more agile handling, more precise steering, a more compact feel, a more comfortable second row, and a lower load floor. My head says the Ford is the better buy from a functional and cost standpoint, but I suspect most people's hearts will lead them to hunt down the extra dinero for the Outlook."
I don't need to tow.
The "styling" is subdued . . just what I wanted.
The size is just about perfect.
The height is just about perfect, too . . . higher seating than a car, but lower than a SUV, and a tad lower than a minivan.
Do you know reason why a lot people buying SUV and minivans? The high seating position, that helps, more safely ride for your family, so you can see 2-4 cars ahead of you. It's very helpful in traffic, as well on highway, so you have more time to react and make right decision.
I think style of TX just about 4-5 years behind all other world.
Even new Flex looks like upgraded and re-sized version of TX.
As I said before, you can get the Pilot with reverse sensors. I was the one who found that on Honda's sight, unlike you, who twisted some statements and made something up.
Again, you're not following along or looking this stuff up before saying it. Both Ford and Honda offer a headphone jack and both give you two sets of wireless headphones. I don't know exaclty why they give you an extra headphone jack and the wireless sets, but they do and I think Honda's is in a better place.
I was thinking Ford offered wireless headphones (and they're proabably standard with the DVD system). It would be idiotic for them not to.
I have not been playing the "who wins" game and have simply been stating what I see on the mfr sites and what my experience is after researching these units. You keep telling me Honda wins this and Honda wins that. Millions of people DO NOT buy Hondas each year so the other mfrs are doing something right I would suppose. Wouldn't you?
I simply respond to you when you say Ford wins this, or that, because you keep using your oppinion as fact, so I use apply some of my own logic to the argument. That's basically where this is going. The point of this isn't that Honda is doing something right, or that others aren't- though Honda is profitable, while some other mfrs aren't.
Buyers definitely look at aspects like "best in class interior space" or "More cargo space than a MB GLclass". Or else these things wouldn't be advertised.
No, nothing wrong with that at all. I like vehicles that are a bit more daring to an extent and try to shy away from the dull mass appealing appliances if I can.
It's nice, but sometimes vehicles are so different that they appeal to too few of a market. I think this applies to the Tribeca.
I think the Flex front end looks better, and the Flex is longer by an inch. It probably looks like more because the Flex is so low and wagon like. If you're refereing to the sky view windows on top, why? just close the shades.
It was fog lights you pointed out albook. You don't even know what you posted. You keep arguing with me but you're not even following along! :sick:
If you still think it was reverse sensors then either find the post where you made that statement or find them on this page which is the official Honda Pilot specs page on the Honda web site. Go ahead and build a top of the line Pilot while you're there too. You'll see the same thing I do which is that reverse sensors are a dealer installed option and do not come from the factory standard or not. THE END!
I simply respond to you when you say Ford wins this, or that, because you keep using your oppinion as fact, so I use apply some of my own logic to the argument.
Well since I wasn't saying one wins or the other loses I don't know where you are coming from. I have stated my opinions as well as stated that those same opinions are just opinions. Several times you took those opinions of mine, compared them to what Honda offers, and boasted that Honda wins.
I also never state my opinion as fact and use "IMO" heavily which I'm sure annoys other members to no end. If you still think otherwise, please provide me with some examples so I know what you are talking about. I do make a valid effort to not present opinion as fact and if I'm doing it wrong please show me why. :shades:
* EcoBoost is Ford Motor Company’s new high-volume, affordable engine technology slated for a range of global vehicles – from small cars to large trucks.
* EcoBoost uses gasoline turbocharged direct-injection technology for up to 20 percent better fuel economy, 15 percent fewer CO2 emissions and superior driving performance versus larger displacement engines.
* The new technology will be available in half a million Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles annually in North America during the next five years – beginning with the new Lincoln MKS sedan in 2009.
* Ford Explorer America concept at the North American International Auto Show showcases EcoBoost combined with other sustainability actions; together, they deliver a 20-30 percent increase in fuel economy, depending on engine selection, versus today’s mid-size utilities.
DETROIT, Jan. 6, 2008 – Ford Motor Company is introducing a new engine technology called EcoBoost that will deliver up to 20 percent better fuel economy on half a million Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles annually in North America during the next five years.
The EcoBoost family of 4-cylinder and 6-cylinder engines features turbocharging and direct injection technology. Compared with more expensive hybrids and diesel engines, EcoBoost builds upon today’s affordable gasoline engine and improves it, providing more customers with a way to improve fuel economy and emissions without compromising driving performance.
“EcoBoost is meaningful because it can be applied across a wide variety of engine types in a range of vehicles, from small cars to large trucks – and it’s affordable,” said Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of Global Product Development.
“Compared with the current cost of diesel and hybrid technologies, customers in North America can expect to recoup their initial investment in a 4-cylinder EcoBoost engine through fuel savings in approximately 30 months. A diesel in North America will take an average of seven and one-half years, while the cost of a hybrid will take nearly 12 years to recoup – given equivalent miles driven per year and fuel costs,” he said.
Ford will introduce EcoBoost on the new Lincoln MKS flagship in 2009, followed by the Ford Flex and other vehicles. By 2013, Ford will have more than half a million EcoBoost-powered vehicles on the road annually in North America.
I think it will take sales from TX. It has more room and price as mention in article will be at level with the main competitors Acadia and Pilot. So, the price will at same level as TX , just may be 2-3K more. It's another failure by Ford.
Actually, just the opposite is true...minivan sales are down and CUV sales are up.
The price of the Flex will be about the same as the Acadia, so it will cost a few thousand more than the TX, of course depending on options/incentives.
Will the Flex take sales away from TX? Maybe, but then I'm sure the Pilot takes sales away from the Odyssey and vice versa. The new Rav4 7 seater takes sales away from the Highlander. And on and on. It's the nature of the auto business to have overlap. The key to a company is to keep the buyers trying to choose between one or two of the manufacturers products.
In that it's smart for Ford to have both the Flex and TX, since there will be some people thinking about the TX but finding it too small, but the Flex might keep them buying a Ford product versus a lambda. On the other hand without the TX, someone may look at the Flex and find it too big for their needs and may decide to buy the smaller and less expensive TX rather than buying another company's CUV. So it's good to have some overlap.
I like your nice, concise, well worded summary in this reply. You hit the nail on the head!! I always like your comments because you manage to use very logical reasoning and be diplomatic at the same time.
Jim
May be, but Ford TX is actually exception of this rule.
If you're a Ford loyalist and you go in to a dealer to trade in that Windstar or Freestar, the first thing you'll look at is a Flex.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. It goes back to my earlier theory that they're selling to the same customers at a higher price point, which is good for Ford.
EcoBoost sounds good to me. Smaller engines can use boost only when needed. My 2 concerns are:
* will the boosted engines required premium fuel?
* will there be any lag?
Heavy vehicles with auto transmissions that are boosted tend to lag noticeably. Let's see how Ford addresses this.
Also, if it drinks premium fuel, then a 20% gain in fuel economy is cut in half when you factor in that the fuel cost 10% to begin with.
Any how, I look forward to reading about and sampling what Ford's solution will be.
PS Jim: thanks. :shades:
Thanks for the pics and the specs on size. Same height, eh? It looks shorter in that photo only because the other dimensions are bigger, but in person it actually seemed tall and very long. Those wide doors open up nicely to the interior, too.
I do think it will cannibalize the Taurus X a bit, for people that want the extra space and can afford the slightly higher price. That's OK, however, I bet overall sales are higher for Ford.
In term financially I don't see nothing smart in tis step. It's huge financial over head the spending money for unknown future, called the word "May be".
Ford should compete with Toyota or Honda
Let's wait until we will see interior on real vehicle. I hope it's better quality, that TX.
Ford primarily competes with GM and Chrysler.
Import buyers are import buyers, and it would be hard to convert them.
I would like to see domestic automaker come back to life. It will be good for economy.
But anyway in two-three years, if Flex will succeed in sale, the TX will be discontinued.
May be GM, but not a Chrysler. If you have seen there last vehicle, they are opposite to any other automaker, may be the close one will be Toyota. A lot different kinds SUV/CUV (jeep, dodge) and just new updated minivan from Dodge and Chrysler. So I think Chrysler still on the path to compete with Toyota and Honda.
EcoBoost sounds good to me. Smaller engines can use boost only when needed. My 2 concerns are:
* will the boosted engines required premium fuel?
* will there be any lag?
There was a bit of discussion on these issues of the EcoBoost over in the Blue Oval Forums.
See also the YouTube video by Ford.
Bottom Line:
* The direct injection of the fuel into the cylinder cools the gas, allowing high compression ratios without knocking using standard fuel (premium not needed)
* Ford has developed a twin Turbo that increases compression uniformly at all RPMs. Thus no significant Turbo lag.
* The small remaining power lag is compensated by direct injection into the cylinder (not the air stream). For instance, the gas can be turned on and off independently, affecting power output immediately, independent of the turbo's rate of air injection.
Ford says direct fuel injection into the cylinder (used commonly in diesels) and their new Turbos are a excellent combination that solves a lot of typical turbo issues.
The 20% fuel savings will work across the board for all engines in all applications: City, Highway, Cars, Trucks, Hybrids, etc.. They all see a >20% improvement. This is a very big thing! The US could dramatically lower foreign oil dependence to the extent this is applied to all cars, which Ford is trying to do rapidly. The only issue, as mentioned in the above video, is that cars are only a part of our total oil usage. For instance, a lot of natural gas goes into heating.
In my case, I'd love to see the TX rise from 19 MPG to 24 MPG on average combined City/Highway by using EcoBoost. I'm almost tempted to wait a few months to pick up next year's model of the TX, if the TX isn't dropped next year. In the above video, Ford says they'll put the EcoBoost in the "Taurus and Flex", very soon after the Lincoln MKX. But they don't explicitly say "Taurus X" (as it may be inferred?). However, if they don't drop the Taurus car, which is unlikely, I suspect they'll also keep the TX since it's produced at the same plant that would otherwise be under utilized. And the TX fits a niche between Flex and Edge for people like me. Personally, I find the Edge too small for my large family, and the Flex too big for nice car-like behavior. I might as well get an Outlook as the Flex.
AP News Link
What are you talking about?? The lambdas are big CUVs as is the Flex. How is this an "unknown future" for Ford when large CUVs are today's reality. But then you did say that people are buying more minivans......
Ford should compete with Toyota or Honda
And who do you think Ford is competing with?
Why? Many manufacturers have different vehicles that can hold 7 people but of different sizes. The Flex is large and the TX medium.
Which indicates that bigger isn't always better. It's the total package. BTW, the TX has almost the same interior/exterior dimensions as the CX-9, and both the CX-9 and TX are much more car-like. The CX-9 is much more sporty looking and feeling, the TX more practical and plain.
I can agree with the CX-9 is more sporty looking and riding, and TX is plain but TX practical no way. Acadia is more practical from both this vehicles. It has more room in side, better ride, quietly ride, more safety options.
It's sad story, another "made in japan" won award in US, the country of inventor affordable automobile for mass.
I was only comparing the CX-9 to the TX in my post. I agree that the Acadia has more room inside, but bigger isn't always better, and I agree that the Acadia is also quieter inside. But I'm not sure how you define "better ride" because to me the TX and CX-9 are the winners, and as far as "more safety options" you'll have to specify what additional safety options are found on the Acadia an not on the TX/CX-9.
It's sad story, another "made in japan" won award in US, the country of inventor affordable automobile for mass.
So you're saying that the CX-9 has been winning awards just because it's made by a manufacturer in Japan? I suppose the Accord, Camry, and Odyssey are also just winning awards because of that too
doesn't this get old. the ONLY reason you are not a cx fanboy here is because they would not do a deal that you wanted to be part of. so you went across the street and found someone who would. As I said if that didn't happen you have been here trying to figure out how to rationalize cx sales not supporting the idea that its your favorite, how less space than a lambda wouldn't matter, etc., etc..
now you are the pied piper of all things lambda. they have more space period, that's their big benefit.
all of the larger cuv's are capable of carrying 7 in safety and some more comfortable than others, to say otherwise is just plain incorrect and pointless.
to keep harping on the fact that the FS/TreX is in some way less than the rest is just juvenile. we know you don't like it, heck it might have been your first choice but they would do the deal you wanted either and then you had to go to mazda, and then gm before you got the deal you want, who knows the real story.
we know you like your lambda and all the things you think it has over the rest, at the end of the day it's no different in capability than the others FS/TreX included as much as you think otherwise. It works for you for whatever reason, we more than know that... now you'll just have to hang your head in shame that you can't lord the big award over everyone's head around here now, it's tough enough as it is already.
Oh please, you're making me shed tears. US carmakers put themselves in this situation by being mediocre since the 80s, and not really improving on their products. The only reason they did as well as they did was for the very high profit margins on their SUVs, which were also bordering on mediocre which is why Honda and Toyota ate up so much market share.
It's a good thing they are starting to wake up. I'm sure that the Acadia will have a sporty version soon (Denali), and others will follow. These will be winners, imo, since car mags and journalists tend to prefer sporty over family.
I have never seen in any other forum how people make assumption base one the part of sentence.
For your information I have tried deal CX-9 and Acadia almost at same time. I need a car and I was not sure if GM will give me good deal, so CX-9 was one of the choices
and I didn't see something wrong in that. But Acadia always have been my first choice.
i am looking to buy a 7 seater crossover, the CX9 looks the sportiest but im really looking for the best pickup and the sturdiest ride.
I had until now a Honda Odyssey, loved it but i am now looking for 4WD.
The Acadia is sure a bigger car then the CX9 but i have not ridden eather. I tried the ford EDGE which was great just a shame they do not come with a 3rd row seat.
thanks all
The Acadia is not that much bigger than the CX-9. The Mazda does a better job of hiding it's size. Below are the length , height, and width dimensions for both vehicles.
Acadia 200.7 69.9 78.2
Mazda 199.8 68.0 76.2
diff 0.9 1.9 2.0