Agreed the monster headlight styling trend is played out, time for something new.
I think putting the Explorer on a car platform is a supreme mistake. They've already got two car platform based SUVs, why not leave one based on a truck platform for those people who want a sturdier undercarriage and plan to really use the U part of their SUV?!
I absolutely don't understand the idea to have 2 Ford branded 3 row CUV's on the same D platform? Why not keep Explorer BoF for the towing, "man truck" crowd? No additional investment in the archeticture would be needed.
Prawo Jazdy and The Velocity Trumpets promoted this comment
RLJ676-LS3 Commuter Car - for the environment was starred
RLJ676-LS3 Commuter Car - for the environment was unstarred
@RLJ676-LS3 Commuter Car - for the environment: I heard whatshisname from WWJ the other day talking about BoF staying for the people who really need it with just one version per manufacturer. So maybe Ford has a Bronco in the works..
The Explorer went so far up market that it became to close to the Expedition. People who wanted towing capability up sized and the Explorer was in the nether regions. Neither light or nimble, and getting the same relative mileage.
The answer was to take the Explorer to softroader status and send the Taurus X to an early grave.
There was a real smaller truck version that would be shared with the aging Ranger, but I believe that group has closed up shop. When asking about their futures I just get blank stares.
So, you can't tow a boat with it. You can't use it off-road (i know, most don't anyways), but it's still too big for what it needs to be. What's the point? The flex already does what this does.
Build a new explorer. Build it as a truck, with a truck frame and a proper diesel or v8 with a 6 or 7 speed transmission. Build only a limited number per year. That way you aren't producing 1 billion more SUVs, but people who can actually need one can still buy one. I still guarantee you'd build more than necessary. People who really need one can fuckin' pay for it. And if you don't need one, which you don't, you can find a Flex on the lot instead.
That car-based thing is such blasphemy. Keep it the damn Taurus X and build a real Explorer. I want to explore more than just the suburbs, malls, and maybe the neighbor's flowerbed when I accidentally off-road through it.
Why can't we have small, capable off-road vehicles anymore? The only decent 4x4s are all full size, and even the Wrangler has gotten bigger than necessary.
@LamerX - No cheeky slogan necessary...: Part of the reason we can't have them is there is virtually no market for them. If I had to guess, I'd say less than one percent of the motoring population does more than ten miles of offroading in a year. Of those people who do venture into the backwoods, their needs are served well enough by the larger full-on 4x4s that any cry for a more capable, smaller machine is going to be ignored in favor of the higher profit margins of the larger vehicles. The people who really do need or seriously desire to go offroading will simply suck it up and take what offers, there being no smaller, more elemental vehicle to purchase. Unless you count ATVs and compact utility vehicles.
Someone's missing the point. It's either me or the product planners.
Seems like they took home the message that we need to make SUVs more fuel efficient and car-like.
...when what we need is good cars. Ford's going to spend all this time developing too-tall-too-heavy CUVs that maybe buyers will migrate to for briefly, but the overall trend is to cars: coupes, sedans, wagons, ya know?
I am sure this must have been said before, but if Ford already has the Flex, Edge, and Taurus X (which I guess will die soon) what is the point of a an Explorer CUV.
@ranwhenparked: Yeah, but I though the Taurus X was dying off because of the Flex. What is Ford going to do with the Flex, and the Edge, and the Explorer, if they are all crossovers?
@wookie1901: Personally, I'm hoping they retire either Taurus X or Explorer, put the winner on this new platform, shoot the Edge, and keep the Flex as-is - it'd be nice if they'd call it Fairlane, too.
10/13/09
How will people distinguish between all their offerings that are so similar?
IMO they should have kept it truck based BoF or killed it, and not cannibalized their own sales.
10/13/09
I think putting the Explorer on a car platform is a supreme mistake. They've already got two car platform based SUVs, why not leave one based on a truck platform for those people who want a sturdier undercarriage and plan to really use the U part of their SUV?!
10/13/09
10/13/09
"so we think we should revive a model that made ford great in this turnaround we're having"
"great idea, but which model?"
"something that was respected and fun to drive, but something the kids will like."
"what do the kids like nowadays?"
"hey, I got it, the Thunderbird!"
"I think we need a car the public will view as responsible, now we've really got to think here. What else can we make?
"An SUV!!!"
...just great.
10/13/09
10/13/09
/dream
10/13/09
A new FS Bronco would be awesome. A new Bronco II would be depressing.
10/13/09
11/03/08
11/03/08
...they want to sit on top of everyone else, that's why.
11/03/08
What say you, Ford fans?
11/03/08
11/03/08
The answer was to take the Explorer to softroader status and send the Taurus X to an early grave.
There was a real smaller truck version that would be shared with the aging Ranger, but I believe that group has closed up shop. When asking about their futures I just get blank stares.
11/03/08
11/03/08
11/03/08
Build a new explorer. Build it as a truck, with a truck frame and a proper diesel or v8 with a 6 or 7 speed transmission. Build only a limited number per year. That way you aren't producing 1 billion more SUVs, but people who can actually need one can still buy one. I still guarantee you'd build more than necessary. People who really need one can fuckin' pay for it. And if you don't need one, which you don't, you can find a Flex on the lot instead.
11/03/08
11/03/08
11/03/08
That car-based thing is such blasphemy. Keep it the damn Taurus X and build a real Explorer. I want to explore more than just the suburbs, malls, and maybe the neighbor's flowerbed when I accidentally off-road through it.
Why can't we have small, capable off-road vehicles anymore? The only decent 4x4s are all full size, and even the Wrangler has gotten bigger than necessary.
11/03/08
11/03/08
Seems like they took home the message that we need to make SUVs more fuel efficient and car-like.
...when what we need is good cars. Ford's going to spend all this time developing too-tall-too-heavy CUVs that maybe buyers will migrate to for briefly, but the overall trend is to cars: coupes, sedans, wagons, ya know?
11/03/08
Explorer - Far away, uncharted land.
Expedition - Closer, but still on the maps.
Excursion - Let's go have a picnic in the burbs.
So far, their crossovers seem to be named on relative stiffness, decreasing with size:
Edge - Rigid, sharp.
Flex - A little bit bendy.
2011 Explorer? - Will probably be renamed the Ford Flop. This might happen a year or two into the production cycle of course...
11/03/08
11/03/08
11/03/08
To replace the Taurus X.
11/03/08
11/03/08