07 gone

[kam327]

In a sense- it's also small for what it is for that $$ though. We don't have a turbo four, but I'm getting 30 highway, about 27-28 overall with the Escape I4 AWD, so that's not bad compared to the turbo four. I have a moonroof, wouldn't even own MFT right now, (the Ford nav was an additional $2k on the 2012) and ours is a Limited, so it's optioned out. I really don't see how I need to spend almost $10k more to get the new Escape vs. the 2012. Just my personal preference. For almost 40k, it has to be a larger cuv/suv than that. Plus, I just don't like how the 2013 looks. I like the old "truck" style, not the "every cuv looks the same" of the new style. Same reason I like the look of the current Honda Pilot I think.

Hey, not saying everyone will appreciate what they get for the extra coin. In your case the real question how much would the new Escape be similarly equipped to your current one: base 4, moonroof - not panoramic roof, etc.

And yeah the styling change is questionable from a business sense since the boxy '12's were flying off the lots. They could have differentiated themselves by staying boxy.

By the way, I had a loaded '08 Tribute (escape clone), V6 AWD and got 19mpg overall, maybe 22 on highway trips. On one highway trip I really hypermiled and got around 26. You must be hypermiling all the time to get 28 overall.

 

[EX-SV]

Note: Joe Dirt has Escape I4 AWD, (not V6). No doubt conservative driving technique contributes to 27-28mpg overall.

Sorry for the somewhat offtopic Escape discussion, that was my doing when I mentioned it my shopping for replacement for Explorer. We have a Escape section in this forum but it's pretty dead. Ford certainly recognizes the importance and growth potential of the segment of small SUVs. Other car makers want a piece of this business too, which so far has been dominated by CRV and Escape. My opinion is the new 2013 Escape is the right direction to go from a product design standpoint. It's a brave move for Ford, since the old boxy Escape sold very well til the end but holding on to the past can be fatal.

 

[kam327]

Note: Joe Dirt has Escape I4 AWD, (not V6). No doubt conservative driving technique contributes to 27-28mpg overall.

Understood, but just downgrading to an I4 doesn't get you from 19 to 28. And I drive pretty conservatively.

But anyway, just priced out a '13 Escape SEL on the website to be pretty close to my '08 Tribute, which stickered for around $27k, and came up with about $29.5k. As near as I can tell (the website is still preliminary and not very complete), that price does not get you a moonroof but does include several features the Tribute didn't have, including MyFord Touch, great stereo, 1.6L Ecoboost, 17" wheels and a number of other bells + whistles. Five model years later and for what should be a vastly improved vehicle all around, another $2,500 does not seem like an unreasonable increase.

Let's be honest, doesn't everyone get sticker shock these days? The key is to look at prices relative to inflation. Probably not much more than 30 years ago.

 

[willied]

EX-SV, sad to see you sell your Explorer but you did get a pretty nice vehicle to replace it, and I'm sure the MPG increase is worth it.

Can we hear some more about it? Maybe a mini review of it?

 

[Joe Dirt]

23 overall isn't really conservative in ours- and no hypermiling at all. The highway number is the fill up, drive long stretches then fill up again. We do road trips. The 23 is the combined daily monotony of dropping off the kid at school, drive 25 miles hwy, city for lunch and after work, then 20 miles home with trips to the store, ~5-8 miles every few days.

I kind of liken the twin turbo mileage numbers to the new Ex- some see it, most are to the lower range of the scale so far. Could be break-in though, but it will be better than the Ex, since it's lighter. It is a nice vehicle, just not my type of design.

I completely support Ford selling the 2013 Escape as the design it is- that's the cuv they had to sell, just like they had to build the new Explorer. It just isn't my favorite Escape design, but that's why I bought a 2012 Escape.

 

[EX-SV]

In a sense- it's also small for what it is for that $$ though. We don't have a turbo four, but I'm getting 30 highway, about 27-28 overall with the Escape I4 AWD, so that's not bad compared to the turbo four. .

Joe Dirt - You said 27-28 overall in this post (post#20) (not 23 overall), so no wonder everybody is confused and spinning their wheels thinking hypermiling going on, lol. 23 makes more sense.

 

[EX-SV]

EX-SV, sad to see you sell your Explorer but you did get a pretty nice vehicle to replace it, and I'm sure the MPG increase is worth it.

Can we hear some more about it? Maybe a mini review of it?

Willied - I will be glad to to mini review soon enough on CX-5. To keep it relavant to this forum, I will include comparisions to the Eddie Bauer Explorer (which had similar level of luxury equipment and was being used in same way).

btw, while owning the Explorer, I found this forum to be extremely valuable. I was able to get the most accurate facts here. I really appreciate the input from the owners here.

 

[Joe Dirt]

Good Lord... Sorry about that! <fixed>

 

[kam327]

Joe Dirt - You said 27-28 overall in this post (post#20) (not 23 overall), so no wonder everybody is confused and spinning their wheels thinking hypermiling going on, lol. 23 makes more sense.

Yes, that does make far more sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Some early predictions put the '13 model at 5 mpg better than the '12. We'll know for sure in pretty short order.

Anyway, back to talking about Explorers.......

 

[EX-SV]

EX-SV, sad to see you sell your Explorer but you did get a pretty nice vehicle to replace it, and I'm sure the MPG increase is worth it.

Can we hear some more about it? Maybe a mini review of it?

Below is a mini-review of the 2013 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring AWD (recently purchased to replace 2007 Ford Explorer EB V8 4WD) Typical use is mostly weekdays for commuting with some trips to mountains, etc.

Size/weight: The Explorer is over a foot longer and 1500 pounds heavier, the main resulting difference for me is cargo space in rear, CX-5 is only adequate in terms of cargo space. I never used the 7000 pound towing capability or offroad capability of Explorer, hopefully the next owner will. Both vehicles are nearly the same width, but the additional 5 inches of height (72" vs. 67") of the Explorer is a plus in traffic.

Ride/handling: The Explorer's ride is nearly as good as CX-5, amazing for a real truck with all that unspgrung weight. Handling and steering not so close, but again for a real truck the Explorer did very well, very Range Rover-like.

Engine/tranny performance: No contest, the effortless power of the 292hp V8 versus a high reving 155 hp I4 (even if curb weights are 4900 vs. 3400 pounds). That V8 (Mustang GT-derived) is an especially sweet engine in terms of power, refinement, smoothness. As 4 bangers go, the I4 is very good with above average refinement, maybe Honda's best 4 bangers are just slightly more refined, but maybe not it's that close. Both have very good 6 speed auto trannys. The Mazda version is significantly more efficient and advanced and it needs to be in order to extract as much performance from limited power source.

MPG: Driving in mostly congested suburban/urban conditions with some 75+mph freeway, Explorer 14-15mpg versus CX-5 26-27mpg. Chevron regular for both.

Exterior fit and finish: Both are very good.

Interior fit and finish: 07 Explorer was just okay, but looks like junk compared to the CX-5 interior. (The 2012 Explorer interior quality is much better and compares well to CX-5 interior.)

Fun to drive: Closer than I expected, CX-5 slightly more fun due to handling and driver ergonomics. (The power of a V8 does add fun value.)

Reliabilty: Explorer-average at best, CX-5-tbd.

Summary: The V8 Explorer is probably near the best of it's kind being a true BOF truck (and it ended in m.y.2010). But people like me never used it's truck capabilities. Therefore one of the better unibody crossovers is a better fit.

 

[willied]

Nice review of it. I'm surprised the Explorer was so close in certain respects. And I agree, nothing can replace a good V8 (well, maybe a V12 ).

How does the view out of it compare to your old Explorer and the new (5th gen) Explorer?

I can definitely imagine the interior is much better in the Mazda. That's (the interior) probably what I like least about my Explorer, as the quality of materials is quite sad. The new Explorer's interior is much better.

 

[EX-SV]

Nice review of it. I'm surprised the Explorer was so close in certain respects. And I agree, nothing can replace a good V8 (well, maybe a V12 ).

How does the view out of it compare to your old Explorer and the new (5th gen) Explorer?

Yes my favorites are OHC V8s and Porsche flat sixes, they just sound so good when revving.

Visibility is pretty good in all of these at least looking forward. Backing up requires extra care and all really need backup cameras or sensors which is optional and/or included in certain packages.

My CX-5 has a good camera fortunately.

 

[willied]

Yes my favorites are OHC V8s and Porsche flat sixes, they just sound so good when revving.

Visibility is pretty good in all of these at least looking forward. Backing up requires extra care and all really need backup cameras or sensors which is optional and/or included in certain packages.

My CX-5 has a good camera fortunately.

That seems to be how it is for most crossovers these days. My mom has a 2011 Explorer and looking out the back was such a huge change from the 2000 Expedition she previously had. But you get used to it. It is hard to tell where the corners of the vehicle are, though. She's already scraped it on another car getting out of a parking spot, something she never did with the Expedition. But then again the new Explorer is very wide, too wide I'd say.

 

[EX-SV]

That seems to be how it is for most crossovers these days. My mom has a 2011 Explorer and looking out the back was such a huge change from the 2000 Expedition she previously had. But you get used to it. It is hard to tell where the corners of the vehicle are, though. She's already scraped it on another car getting out of a parking spot, something she never did with the Expedition. But then again the new Explorer is very wide, too wide I'd say.

Yes, the 2011 Explorer is huge, which is one reason why the 3rd row back seat is actually usable. The 2011 Explorer is much wider and longer than 4th gen and driving it in tight situations requires more attention. For me I didn't need all that extra room or bulk. But for those using it as a family mini van, the 2011 is one of the best.