Archives

Time to take the gloves off and call a spade a spade… or was that a pig? (http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=123877)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/2009_Ford_Flex.jpgWayne Gerdes - CleanMPG (www.cleanmpg.com) - July 16, 2008

2009 Ford Flex -- Half to a Billion $’s in development down the drain :(

DEARBORN - Can the 2009 Ford Flex's boxy crossover design deliver the superb aerodynamics needed for maximum fuel economy? In the case of the Flex, the answer is an unqualified “Not a chance”!

Thinking outside the box and into the grave

Ford designers and engineers spent countless hours to deliver aerodynamics while staying true to the looks of the Ford Fairlane concept that inspired the Flex. What is missing from the story is the somewhat poor reception the Fairlane concept received from journalists in attendance at the 2005 NAIAS in Detroit. Even with the tepid reaction to the concept, Ford’s management team decided the Flex was headed for production anyway :confused:

Aerodynamic details

At 55 mph, the Flex needs only 8.90 horsepower while the nearest competitors in the full-size crossover segment - the GMC Acadia and Toyota Highlander - require more than 9.30 horsepower. As equipped, the Flex needs a Gas-Guzzling, 265 HP 3.5L engine why again?

Moreover, the Flex's coefficient of drag is significantly better than all of its Asian competitors. Flex tests at 0.355 coefficient of drag while the competitors are at 0.375. By comparison, the 8-year old 2001 Acura MDX 7-passenger Luxury SUV/Crossover has a .36 Cd. Did someone miss the memo?

The Flex's aerodynamics equates to one mile per gallon improvement in fuel economy vs. what, we do not know? Overall, the AWD Flex achieves a paltry 16/22 mpg city/highway with an 18 mpg combined rating per the 08 EPA test cycles. Given Gasoline has tripled since early winter of 03 and the Flex was engineered to achieve another 1 mpg, maybe we should break out the champagne and celebrate! :woot: Better yet, maybe we should crack open a bottle of Bud and start crying into it :ccry:

The Ford Engineers involved were doing their homework

Flex designers and engineers made multiple design tweaks and ran hundreds of tests, in the digital realm and in the Drivability Test Facility's Wind Tunnel No. 8.

"We faced a unique challenge with Flex because the basic prototype design and unique body shape had generated so much positive appeal and interest early on that we didn't want to do anything radical like change the shape of the roof or the rear - design cues that were inherently Flex," said Wayne Koester, Ford's aerodynamic engineer, "We had to look for more subtle, detail changes that could reduce drag."

Wind tunnel testing resulted in slight changes to the shape of the front air dam below the front fascia to reduce air flow under the car. Radius changes to the rear header - where the rear window on the lift gate meets the roof - were also optimized for less drag. Tail lamps were given a more rounded shape. Combined, these changes resulted in a .02 coefficient of drag reduction.

Also, cooling drag, the penalty associated with air going through the radiator, was minimized by blocking off the top third of the grille, forcing the air to glide over the outside of the vehicle.

One of the most intriguing features of the Flex is its wide, low-riding stance, which gave the aero team a little wiggle room to play with ride height - a major factor in a vehicle's aerodynamic performance. "The underbody creates a lot of drag so the closer the vehicle body is to the ground, the more airflow goes over the top, creating less drag," said Koester.

Flex's unique design allowed the team to lower the ride height by almost an inch for a ground clearance of 130 millimeters - the standard for most Ford cars. This inch equates to a .015 coefficient of drag reduction.

And there in ends the good news. A 16/22 city/highway rated anything released as a breakthrough makes the management and launch marketing teams look foolish in this day and age. No matter how you dress it up, a pig is still a pig. In this case, a Fuel Sucking Pig or FSP for short. All at a time when Ford can ill-afford to waste a nickel let alone half a Billion or more in wasted development $’s.

Hi All:

___ Of course I am pissed! Given all the trouble the domestics automakers are currently in and have been the last 3-years, when this one came across my desk, I decided it is time to tell it like it is instead of placing some sugar on it.

___Ford, I hope you sell 1,000,000 Flex’s and prove me wrong but the way I look at it, upper level management screwed the pooch and screwed all of us in the process with release of the Flex… Once again :mad:

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Sigh.

So the market for this is people looking to trade their expeditions who are not yet concerned with fuel economy?

Good job Wayne!. You can bet your last gallon of gas that someone at Ford has cut and pasted this post into the company email. Maybe Ford will get busy and do something. Or maybe, when the dust of this recession and fuel crisis ends, they'll be found on road dead. Sorry, couldn't pass that one up.

Faithful and True.

Hi All,

Yep form FOLLOWS function. Not the other way round. If people really want fuel economy they need to get over classy looks at the expense of thousands of dollars of gas over the life of the vehicle.

All those sharp Granada-esqe (Iacocca-esqe?) corners are creating vorticies. And they go down the side of the car effectively expanding the effective cross-section of the vehicle.

One thing they could have looked into is turbulators at the leading edge directional changes. These might trip the flow and degenerate the vortices. And they are not going to change the lines of the style at all.

So Wayne, how did you feel about the Flex?;)

Seriously, one thing that gets lost in the car manufacturers' presentations is that the wind drag depends on the drag coefficient Cd times the frontal area. So a lower drag coefficient may mean little if the vehicle has a larger frontal area than a vehicle with a slightly higher Cd.

That's suppose to be classy? I might agree with the middle 3 letters in classy. Personally I think a box looks like a box and cars shouldn't look like boxes. ;)

So Wayne, how did you feel about the Flex?;)

Seriously, one thing that gets lost in the car manufacturers' presentations is that the wind drag depends on the drag coefficient Cd times the frontal area. So a lower drag coefficient may mean little if the vehicle has a larger frontal area than a vehicle with a slightly higher Cd.

Not to mention weight! That monster weighs 2.25 tons :eek:
The Ford site didn't seem to want to mention that so I went here (http://www.leftlanenews.com/ford-flex.html).

What a shame. I like the car's looks...

The style isn't bad but 16/22 just ain't gettin' it in 2008. Ford, you're late for the party- again. And while we're at it: are you serious about the positively AWFUL styling of the updated Focus? You're supposed to make it MORE attractive to prospective buyers.

The new face of Ford is ugly. I got rid of the stock grill with the chrome strip on my Mazda 6 and installed a body color sport grill. Looks much better IMO.

Ford actually sold quite a few of these last month - shame it doesn't come with a 180 HP engine, with 180 HP - it would get 30+ HWY MPG and be a good replacement for unsafe SUV's - The Flex has a 120" wheelbase !

It massively outsold VW's Sportwagon which is a midsized wagon ( 103" wheelbase) - with 50% better MPG

both cars had their first month of sales last month.

don't blame Detriot - blame your friends and neighbors, they are the ones buying these monsters.

don't blame Detriot - blame your friends and neighbors, they are the ones buying these monsters.

Yea, this is very true. And its how I phrased my response. The main reason I hear people not considering a Prius is the looks of the car. Its makes no economic sense, but they go off and buy just as expensive vehicles with 1/2 to 1/3 the mileage.

For this reason alone, I think we need to have gas peak out at $6 for a year or so to get the ostriches out of their holes.

Hi Vooch:

___Ford Flex sales in June (the release month) = 1,379.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Yikes! 2.25 T, that's 4500 lbs, I didn't realize that is was so heavy. That's heavier than my Dodge Ram 1500 SB, which I never drive, at 4373 lbs. Maybe Ford will be the first company ever put in the Smithsonian museum. I be a-riding the bus every day.

If someone made an ugly car, maybe as ugly as the old Edsel, that got 50-60 MPG all day long they would sell them like hotcakes. What are they waiting for?

Faithful and True.

Please tell me that this is a super high priced car for the very rich!
(and they Ford is only going to make a few thousand of them)..

Otherwise, Ford has
http://www.michaelkarmstudio.com/Method/picsMethod/ShootFoot.jpg
big time..

No wonder the stock market has been tending downwards..
What's going on? Brain shrinkage??

I saw one of these a week or so ago (with a "Manufacturer" plate") on I-75 on my way to work. It was much bigger than I had supposed from pictures and ads. I somehow got the impression it would be Focus-sized, but I was wrong. It really reminds me more of a Mini Clubman, without the "mini".

Because of the scope of auto manufacturing, we often see vehicle releases that are ridiculously out of tune with public opinion and market needs. It takes several years and lots of money to develop, test, and produce a new model. Contracts go to suppliers to build all the parts and those contracts cannot be broken. The factory is tooled to stamp the sheet metal and the robots are programmed to weld in the right spots. Powertrain factories allocate parts and labor to build the specified number of engines and transmissions. The millions given to the government to certify the powertrains has already been spent.

With all the money invested, and having to buy the parts anyway, there is actually a lot more to money to be lost by suddenly pulling the plug than by rolling it out and letting Madison Avenue put lipstick on the (fuel sucking) pig. GM is having the same issues with the G8 GXP (with even larger engine) and sport truck (again with big V8), and the upcoming Camaro. And Chrysler's new Ram pickup is marching into battle with a "kick me" sign taped to its back. Ford also has their new F150 pickup delayed a few months, but after that, it's ready or not - here it comes. Ford loses more money by not building them than by building them and shoving them out to dealers, who in turn get to wash them every weekend for the eight months they'll be parked there.

Funny that the Edsel was mentioned before. It was conceived at a time when Americans wanted longer/lower/wider and more horsepower, chrome, and space-age gadgets. Ford responded with what it predicted would be a smash hit for the buyers of the late 50s. But nobody saw the recession of 1958 coming, and Edsel, along with all the other fancier cars, sat on dealer lots as people raced past them to buy Ramblers and imports like the Beetle and the Dauphine.

That recession and explosion of Rambler sales put "compact cars" back on the front burner in Detroit and gave us the Falcon, Valiant, and Corvair for 1960. Six months after, we saw the Comet compact, which was actually to be sold as an Edsel! When Edsel folded, they rebranded it as a Mercury. Over the next two years, we saw the Tempest, F85, Special and Skylark, Lancer, and Chevy II (Nova). All sold very well at the time. The short turnaround time noted (one to three years) proves that Detroit can do it, and so they can do it again, if they have the operating capital to keep going. With today's government regulations, it's not as simple to bolt it together and slap a sticker in the window. But where there's a will, there's a way.

What I see in that story is a parallel between the economy and auto market in 1958 and 2008. Recall that the 1959 cars had tailfins almost four feet high. And that was after Americans already decided the compact was the better buy. Fifty years from now, we will look at late model FSPs in the same way we look at a '58 Buick Roadmaster. "Who the hell would want to buy this circus-wagon and pay all that money for gas?!"

So the Flex is essentially a modern interpretation of the bat-winged '59 Buick. Very much out of step with public demand, and a victim of a major miscalculation of market preferences and economic conditions.

Apparently Ford was listening to "the highly regarded Daniel Yergin" at CERA, the IEA, and the EIA, who predicted oil prices would soon drop to $20/barrel (The IEA is now making realistic predictions -- saying there will be a shortfall in production ~2012. Probably the only way to avoid a huge price spike ~2012 is a worldwide recession. Either way, the Flex won't be selling very well.).

disappointment. first gm, now ford....what will chrysler do??

Also, the bad news, the base price is quite a bit more (thousands not hundreds) than the Taurus X that it will replace

Is it just me, or does it look like an oversized Mini-clubman in that picture?

Wayne,

Thanks for the Flex sales figure: Here's some comparables for June:

Flex Wagon = 1,371 units
Volvo V70 = 883
Jetta Sport Wagon = 275

Very annoying. I wonder how much of that extra weight is due to the aero design, how much is to maximize safety, and how much is other "optional" stuff.

Hopefully they will offer a smaller/hybrid engine package in the near future, but knowing the way Detroit works, if it sells well they will produce 8 near identical products, then wonder why all the models are selling only a 10th of the original, only to cancel them all. If it doens't sell well, they won't try to figure out why, they will just cancel it and start a full, new, expensive devolopment process for a different car that no one ones.

Hi Vooch:

___That Jetta Wagon is not selling well either... They need the 2.0LTDI in it ;)

___In the case of the Flex, unless Ford was considering the ECOboosted 2.0L (with even more HP than the 3.5L), the Flex will be a massive failure and Ford has NO TIME to be screwing around. I spoke with a Ford mid-level manager not 6 weeks ago who said the 3.5L w/ the 6-speed and ECOBoost is Ford’s direction whereas development $’s for the smaller I4’s was limited. WTF buddy, $4.00 + gasoline, you really should be ramping up to even more HP from the 3.5 that is not very fuel efficient to begin with :confused: HP my @$$!

___Good Luck

___Wayne

The Jetta wagon only seats 5, right? There's one strike against it, and could be a deal-breaker for many.

This thing is replacing the freestyle/taurus X? That's the worst news of it all! :rolleyes:

On the other hand...
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/17/further-proof-that-future-fords-will-have-euro-flair/

I think that they should have just called the Flex the Country Squire. For good and for bad the car reminds me of a lot of the qualties of those classic family trucksters.

Wayne,

don't get me wrong - the Flex is a monster in the worst possible sense. It represents all that is wrong, wrong,wrong with people's basic assumptions about cars (a 120" wheelbase for crying out loud what were they thinking ?) - BUT

The Flex is at least a tiny step in the right direction - if it gets FSP's thinking that its a-okay to drive something other than a SUV or Extended Cab Pick-up - thats a good thing. Once a the door is opened on a FSP's thinking - who knows where it will end ?

the key is to get people thinking beyond the SUV-Pick Up truck paradigm - The Flex helps.



Alexander


BTW -If only VW would sell its 1.4TDI here............ look at Mike from England his Passat Wagon has a 115HP engine in it - If only they'd offer it here.

Wayne,

Thanks for the Flex sales figure: Here's some compatibles for June:

Flex Wagon = 1,371 units
Volvo V70 = 883


By the end of 2009 Volvo plans on closing 30% of their dealers across North America.
autoblog.com (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/11/volvo-to-trim-dealers-by-30-percent-by-the-end-of-next-year)

Reason? Exchange rates, depreciation and most of their vehicles have become FSP's
Example My 97 960 .36 Cd has the exact EPA rating that a 2008 .28 Cd S80 has. Yet they get the same fuel mileage in real world driving.
Don't you love how Ford ruined a great car company. The old late 80's early 90's 240's with a .42 Cd and a 5 speed are getting in the low 30's on the highway. The new S60's with a .28 Cd can't do that.

Here are Fords total sales broken down by model for May
It's Ugly.

bloomberg.com (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=F:US&sid=axF5HEpnfHiM)

Wow, 16/22 , it beats a V-8 Suburban - 14/20 - by 2 mpg -sign me up!
Charlie

That's suppose to be classy? I might agree with the middle 3 letters in classy. Personally I think a box looks like a box and cars shouldn't look like boxes. ;)

Hey be careful- I resent and resemble that remark!:D

go scion xb!
http://www.cleanmpg.com/garage/images/294.png

I liked the xBox er, xB until they removed the fuel-efficient engine and replaced it with a Fsp. :(

I like exactly one box on wheels. The eBox. That sucker is cool. :cool:

A question for the Ford engineering staff. Can you say "Rise to the level of your incompetence?"

And you ask why our automobile industry is going the way of the dinosaurs.

A box-shaped car is ok as long as its maximum speed is under 35mph. It would be fine for an NEV so long as you didn't mind the reduction in range that the boxy shape would produce. Above that speed, form should follow function and the shape should be heading toward a teardrop shape. The function of a car at highway speeds is to penetrate the air in an efficient manner. Most of the vehicles on the road fail miserably in this regard.

The airline industry has much less tolerance for non-fuel efficient shapes, so all airliners have very similar shapes and you don't see boxy fashion statements lining up for takeoff from the runways.

I think there's a market for these these things.. People will be dying to ride in them!


Notice the similarity in these two images??

http://image.automobilemag.com/f/car-ramblings-reviews/2009-ford-flex-wont-be-marketed-as-a-minivan-replacement/9430081+cr1+re0+ar1/2009-ford-flex-in-new-york-city.jpg


http://www.mcfarlandfh.com/images/image008.JPG

The function of a car at highway speeds is to penetrate the air in an efficient manner. Most of the vehicles on the road fail miserably in this regard.
The airline industry has much less tolerance for non-fuel efficient shapes, so all airliners have very similar shapes and you don't see boxy fashion statements lining up for takeoff from the runways.

We need to send the stylists off to jazz up the radio knobs or something. My daily driver is a Chevy Malibu Maxx. It is a rebodied/rebadged Opel Signum. The published drag coefficient for the Opel Signum is 0.330. But then they turned the Chevy stylists loose on it, and the Maxx has a 0.370 number. That's 12% more drag, with most of it due to the sharper lines of the Chevy body relative to the softer contours of the Opel.

On the Maxx, the rear wiper/washer and rear wing was bundled as a package. Why, you ask? Well, the engineers shaped the tail of the Maxx in a way that airflow over the roof remained attached to the rear window and kept it clean. No rear wiper needed. Then the stylists had their turn and added a low spoiler/wing at the rear edge of the roof to add a sporty touch. It ruined airflow and made a rear wiper/washer mandatory. So they hastily added one into the finished product, bundling it with the wing which made it a necessity.

I'm not sure what's worse - That Detroit is stuck on the idea that we buy cars as fashion accessories, or that their attempts to jazz up the appearance actually mitigate any efficiency advantages the engineers sweated over.

Duh, how freakin' hard would it be to just take a mold of the Prius scale it up a bit ,and plop it down on whatever motor trans combination you want.

I'm tempted to tape cardboard to the Prius , lay fiberglass over the front 2 feet ,and "stick" that nose on the Suburban . Maybe put the nose on the rear also.

There isn't any mystery to getting a low CD and low drag .

We will put up with slightly odd ,slightly longer vehicles to get 25% better hy FE. We will also put up with slow acceleration. In 1979 tiny cars and tiny motors took over in about 2 years. 12 second 0-60 was FAST then,and we didn't care! The average car did about 14 seconds 0-60.

There isn't any passenger vehicle on the road that couldn't be adequately propelled with a 4 cyl .This includes Suburban sized Trucks etc. The 1985 diesel Suburbans had just 150hp the gas ones had very little more- maybe 170 hp. There are plenty of 2.4 lt 4 cyl that make 160 hp . Gearing and small motors just like 1980 - We don't even need turbos , but I wouldn't object to them.

A 1200 cc 4 cyl could propel all the cars on the road- not turbo -just a 80 hp 4 cyl.

I'm not advocating volume production of 4 cyl Suburbans , but a Turbo 4 cyl certainly could tow 5000 lbs - a TDI might be even better , but not necessary. Maybe a 3 liter 4 cyl would be better.

Charlie
Charlie

I liked the xBox er, xB until they removed the fuel-efficient engine and replaced it with a Fsp. :(

Too bad indeed. The old xB used to get up to 40 mpg highway and for a vehicle like that it was phenominal. However, in all fairness to Toyota, the car wasn't as safe as the newer model is with the steel reinforced doors and the side-air curtains. Pity they had to up the engine size. :( But I guess that was the marketing department's handywork.

Wayne,

don't get me wrong - the Flex is a monster in the worst possible sense. It represents all that is wrong, wrong,wrong with people's basic assumptions about cars (a 120" wheelbase for crying out loud what were they thinking ?) - BUT

The Flex is at least a tiny step in the right direction - if it gets FSP's thinking that its a-okay to drive something other than a SUV or Extended Cab Pick-up - that's a good thing. Once a the door is opened on a FSP's thinking - who knows where it will end ?

the key is to get people thinking beyond the SUV-Pick Up truck paradigm - The Flex helps.



Alexander


BTW -If only VW would sell its 1.4TDI here............ look at Mike from England his Passat Wagon has a 115HP engine in it - If only they'd offer it here.

Quite right, Alex, the Flex is a tiny step in the right direction, as is the Yukon Hybrid, a tiny step in the right direction. That is what the BIG 1/333 have been doing for the last few years. They have been making "tiny" advances toward high MPG while keeping vehicles like the VW 1.4 TDI that you mentioned above, out of this country, simply because they want to continue to manufacture big cars that get low MPG. They do not care what the impact is on the economy. They do not understand the Japanese concept of "Kaizen-culture" based on economy and efficiency. They only understand their blind, hopelessly misguided route to a fatter bottom line. The only thing getting fatter is their losses and their bud, the oil industries profits.

I listen to the people I work with. They do not know which way to go. They do not know what to believe. I overheard one say;

"These gas prices are killing me. Maybe I'll get me one of these new hybrid vehicles. Maybe that will help a bit".

If it is a big 3 hybrid I am sure it will be a very "tiny" bit.

Bob.

I saw a couple of interesnting comments just above. Can you buy an underpowered American car in America? Not even. They are are set up to tow something heavy. For every 1000 Suburbans sold, how many actually do any towing for more than, let's say, 5%of their annual mileage?

Also, while reading above, I had an idea for a cleanmpg mascot. His name? F. S. Pigg, of course. Wayne could make him a distant descendant of N.S. Rubashov, the main character in the book Big Brother (?), I don't recall now for sure.

As for cars, the uglier the better, as long as it got really, really good MPG. At 100 MPG it could be so ugly that people would __________.

Nevertheless, Ford has big problems. Too bad, because there will be lots of casualties; employees, share holders, suppliers, etc. Ford stands for what again, found on road dead?

Charlie makes a really good point above, take the Prius and upsize it. Isn't that basically what the Japanese did after WWII with cars?

Faithful and True.

... Also, while reading above, I had an idea for a cleanmpg mascot. His name? F. S. Pigg, of course. ...

F&T, is this what you had in mind??? :D
http://www.artifactsli.com/images/FSP.jpg
Funny that they used as FSP, too!

Only one thing to say:

DOH!

By the end of 2009 Volvo plans on closing 30% of their dealers across North America.
autoblog.com (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/11/volvo-to-trim-dealers-by-30-percent-by-the-end-of-next-year)

Reason? Exchange rates, depreciation and most of their vehicles have become FSP's
Example My 97 960 .36 Cd has the exact EPA rating that a 2008 .28 Cd S80 has. Yet they get the same fuel mileage in real world driving.
Don't you love how Ford ruined a great car company. The old late 80's early 90's 240's with a .42 Cd and a 5 speed are getting in the low 30's on the highway. The new S60's with a .28 Cd can't do that.

Here are Fords total sales broken down by model for May
It's Ugly.

bloomberg.com (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=F:US&sid=axF5HEpnfHiM)


The new C30 is a sharp-looking little car, but of course they've got that overpowered 227-hp inline-5 turbo, yielding only 19/28 mpg. Ugh! A smaller turbodiesel would work great, but I suppose that's too much to ask...

Volvo has only sold 1,200 V70's in 5 month ????????????????

And the Flex sold 1,370 in its first month !

Never liked the look of the Flex nor it's prototype. Actually, I don't like the current Ford "razor blade grill" styling. Accords and Camrys have been outselling much of American automakers and it sure as hell isn't for their styling.

Hey Ford !
READ THIS.

I am a serious potential customer.
I buy AMERICAN. :flag: If there is such a thing anymore.
I want to keep our money at home and Pay American's First.
(Love to hear our candidate's say that.....)

I also like the new look.
I need a bigger than Prius Vehicle. 5 adult passengers minimum.

Styling isnt bad.
But, It's a big Scion B.

I will give it a serious look soon. BUT it's too damn HEAVY.
Looks like a baby step in development.
The FLEX's areo spec's are interesting.
But just like your SOY seat's. It wont sell a car.
Maybe this design was just too far along to stop the process.

I understand it will take time to develop new technologies. No one wants a recall.


BUT, HEAR THIS CLEARLY.
Lighter weight composite materials.
Engine shutoff at lights and Mazda (your sister company) cylinder firing quick start technology is needed.
Energy Conserving tires.
Smarter Transmissions.
A/C compressors that use less power than my home.
That's what I want. Keep refining it.

Many others are ready and willing to buy such a vehicle......Build it NOW!

If your new F150 isn't better than this, Your toast.

CALL ME When it's ready.
I really want to pick it up soon.


Tom
________
Ecig Forum (http://www.ecigarettes123.com/)

This car was parked beside me when I left the mall today... The first think that came to my mind is.. "Yuck! Another Honda element except it's bigger.." ... I am surprised this car sells so well. This car reminds me of a herse.

From Detroit News review, Scott Burgess, July 2 2008:

"The Flex SE starts at $28,995 (including destination), but an all-wheel drive Flex Limited needs another $8,000. My test vehicle, a top-of-the-line all-wheel drive Flex Limited with more bells and whistles than all of the railroad crossings on Gibraltar Road, topped out at $44,000. That's like buying a base model Flex and a Ford Focus."

Or perhaps, two-and-a-half Focuses. Or even, one-and-a-half Euro Focuses....

Ford may be getting a few clues....

http://www.fordvehicles.com/transitconnect/

...but it's taking a while. :rolleyes:

No thanks, I'll keep my 30+ MPG 05 Freestyle with the CVT. The Flex is just WAAAY to expensive, regardless of it's looks.

Ford should revisit the Probe. Design it more like the Probe V concept...that car had a CD of 0.137!

Ford may be getting a few clues....

Sure they are. (Insert extreme sarcasm emoticon.) When they claim 19/24 mpg is "fuel efficient"?

Hi jamesqf,

If this is the same vehicle I see parked out in front of the local Ford dealer, its quite large. Not as tall, but looks to be every bit as long as a Suburban. If I had to choose the Flex, or a 15 passenger van to rent to hail some people cross country, the Flex would probably be it.

I know, Ford can sell them in Mexico near the border.

if I really need a vehicle this big for a trip I'll rent one.

if I really need a vehicle this big for a trip I'll rent one.

Awww, c'mon Dave... You don't want to lose $20k in depreciation before you make the 13th payment? :rolleyes:

What's scary about these big-ticket FSPs is that people are taking 6 year loans to buy them because that's the only way to keep the car payment below the mortgage payment. So by the time they realize their gas bill is the same as their car payment, it's too late. That $20k bath leaves them seriously upside-down for well over 2/3 of the life of the loan.

I would be interested in insurance industry statistics that track how many late model FSPs were suddenly and inexplicably stolen or caught fire in the last six months. Excepting Ford's famous cruise control switch, these vehicles don't burn or disappear all that often unless they get a little help. I remember reading that the most stolen vehicles were a few models of Chrysler cars that have a defective engine that fails just after the warranty runs out. It's very interesting to ponder why thieves would pass by so many other opportunities to select a target that may snap a timing chain as they are speeding to evade the authorities. I know if I decide to live out my Grand Theft Auto fantasy anytime soon, I certainly won't be selecting an FSP as my next target!

haha

Yeah, I'll buy a large SUV just in case one year I decide to buy a full size camper and tow it to a campground down the road. I talked to one guy who bought a full size truck to tow his boat. Says he enjoys going fishing. I thought he had a big bass boat. Nope. He had a small aluminum flat bottom boat with a small outboard motor and a small trolling motor. My wife's Protege could tow that thing! I'd feel more comfortable towing it with my 03 Malibu though. Point is, a midsize sedan with a V6 or a small/midsize truck could easily tow that kind of boat for nearly double the mpg.

Ha. If you want to see something small trailering something big, take a look at this (http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/sailboat-trailering.html).

Water ballast has its advantages. So do sails.

F&T, is this what you had in mind??? :D

Ahhhh...thats so cute...and it looks like a giant two prong electrical plug in the nose.