Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Crossover SUV Comparison
7122 messages, Last post on Nov 09, 2009 at 1:24 PM
You are in the SUVs Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
Replying to: barnstormer64 (Mar 23, 2008 2:06 pm) Definitely not. This is the case for the GS and upcoming LS hybrids, but not for the RX. The RX is for fuel saving (though it doesn't do that great a job). It has the same displacement as the old Highlander. If you want performance (or what ever performance you can get in a Lexus RX) you should go for the regular V6. It makes more power than the Hybrid. And I believe it's lighter. As for the corolla, it will save fuel. But I wouldn't go near thatwith my checkbook. It's my least favorite small sedan. I'd much rather have a Civic or a Mazda 3. |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Mar 24, 2008 8:33 am) So it is coming- if this guy has any authority in the auto motive press world. I'm not sure what to say abou the article. He was a little too wrapped up in his "hipster" joke for him to really say anything. As for the Flex, sounds like it will be nice, and a step up from what they have now, but there is simply no way this could take the place of a minivan. Ford's still got a bit to do if they want a true van-replacement CUV.
|
|
|
Replying to: albook (Mar 31, 2008 2:55 pm) I don't think the Journey will be a hit the way the Lambdas are, though. The manufacturers simply have a different set of priorities. The RX400H does use the old 3.3l V6 (3MZ in Toyota-speak), which is too bad. The 3.5l (2GR) is a lot more powerful and in most cases slightly more efficient. Plus, the GS hybrid has the 2GR engine, so why Toyota didn't invest in getting that more modern mill in the RX hybrid I just don't understand. To top it off, the engine is supposedly lighter and costs a lot less to build. Maybe it was a capacity limitation?  Time to retire the 3MZ engine completely.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: albook (Mar 31, 2008 2:55 pm) - Chad
|
|
|
Replying to: saabturboid (Apr 01, 2008 7:31 am) In the Forester threads we're complaining that Subaru dropped the manual transmission option from the turbo models, but SoA answered back saying they only sold 10 per month nationwide. It was our fault for not buying enough of them. Whether the Flex will succeed where the Freestyle/Taurus X failed we'll have to wait and see. The latter were competent yet fairly anonymous. The Flex is not anonymous at all - people will love it or hate it. Ford is gambling that it will be noticed and get on more buyers' radars. I happen to like the Flex more. It looks like a super-sized Mini Cooper. A dose of personality may help it sell better, at least Ford hopes so.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Apr 01, 2008 7:27 am) True. However minivan sales peaked in 2000 at 1.37 million sales that year and have been down ever since. CUV sales OTOH are up up up and that's what Ford and GM are aiming at now I'd guess. This probably sounds familiar because they both did the same thing when the SUV craze took hold of our Nation. At least this time they are concentrating somewhat more on their cars so they have something to fall back on if/when the CUV craze dies.
|
|
|
Replying to: baggs32 (Apr 01, 2008 8:31 am) The catch is there is a lot more competitors fighting for pieces of that pie.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Apr 01, 2008 7:37 am) I disagree. I think there are plenty of people out there like me, but it seems at best Ford had no idea how to market this vehicle, and at worst didn't market it. The only advertising I ever saw for the Freestyle surrounded around a divorced family who came together for a brief time and drive around in the Freestyle before they go their separate ways again. I hope who ever came up with that concept to sell a vehicle has now found a different career. Ford also was an early adopter of the CUV concept before most people knew what one was. Instead of capitalizing on this new category of vehicles with a good marketing campaign, it seems they thought people would figure it out for themselves. All of this while most Ford dealers had 30 Explorers on the lot but only 1 or 2 Freestyles. It never felt like Ford wanted the Freestyle to succeed, or perhaps they were scared to sacrifice more profitable Explorer sales. Who knows, but what ever the case I believe many more people would have loved the vehicle had they known about it and given it a try. Today it is too late since there is now substantial competition and the Freestyle/Taurus X is considered a lame duck vehicle.
|
|
|
Replying to: saabturboid (Apr 01, 2008 9:44 am) I do think Ford needed to inject a bit more personality, though, especially if they expected the vehicle to sell itself without much marketing support. |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 GMC Acadia
2009 Mitsubishi Outlander
2010 Subaru Forester
2009 Hyundai Santa Fe
2009 Ford Taurus X
2011 Toyota RAV4
2010 Nissan Rogue
2010 Honda Accord Crosstour
2010 Dodge Journey
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
