In actuality, the "standard" 4x4 Explorer is a $31K vehicle. Your assertion that the price is what makes for a luxury vehicle is not correct. Here's some luxury vehicles that are priced similarly to the base 4x4 Ex:
Mercedes Benz C250 $34,800
Volvo C30 $24,950
Volvo S60 $31,300
Volvo XC60 $33,000
Lexus CT $29,120
Lexus IS $33,595
Infiniti G25 $32,600
Infiniti EX35 $35,800
Audi A3 $27,270
Audi A4 $32,400
Audi Q5 $35,600
Acura RDX $34,320
If you are positing that the maxim, "If a donkey flies, don't get mad if it doesn't stay in the air long" defines the Explorer, then fine. What follows, then, is that we should be happy that the car has a given feature, and don't be too hard on Ford if it doesn't work as expected, or at all, for that matter; just be glad it's there.
This is a hard pill to swallow when you consider that the same features exist on similarly priced "luxury" vehicles and they work as expected.
aww comon man, that's a bit extreme. Of course he isn't saying price = luxury across the entire board. You can't just pull out random cars, totally different class, to use as your example.. no 'duh' a small car (like the A3) luxury price is going to be lower than even perhaps a starting (non luxury) SUV price. That's like saying my high-end detailed out motorcycle isn't 'luxury' (it is) because it's not 30k.. we all know that's not what he meant.
If you're IN-class though, it's a pretty darn good assessment. You called your Volvo a crossover yourself - a somewhat similar class, if smaller at that (which proves his point more.) The explorer starts 30k ish (I'm not going to quibble over a few thousand) - with up to 20k in accessories available.
His POINT is that that base price to base price, similar class, can be used as a judgement. A base-price SUV of brand X cannot be expected to perform at SUV brand Y's level, whose base price is 10k more, DESPITE the fact that SUV Brand X may have ran 10k above Brand Y after bells and whistles were thrown on it. Brand X is still a 'cheaper' car at its core.
Top Gear BBC does this all the time and it drives me nuts. They'll take "similarly priced" cars and compare them. Catch is they threw on all kinds of "extras" to bring the 'lesser' car in-line (price-wise) with the other vehicle, saying "oh ya performance should be similar" then mock it when it gets blown away by the other car. They actually got in trouble a few years ago (when they were testing a mustang ironically) for claiming it was a GT v8 model when it was in fact a v6 model. They were known for doing this to make the comparisons more exaggerated. (I'm going off on a tangent here). Anyway, if you watch carefully now (Like the recent one last season where they were in a focus), they'll say one VERY quick time "It has RS badges but it's not an RS" and that's it. From that point forward they call it a "Focus RS" (as it's getting stomped on) without calling any more attention to the fact it ISN'T a focus RS LOL.
Your point (after your list of cars) though is very valid, and I couldn't agree with you more man! If the feature is there, make it work. Period. If it doesn't, fine, don't offer it! The downer is that the first few years of a new vehicle usually has trouble - you'll see this with almost any line. Doesn't help that this new explorer is nowhere the same as any past explorer - it's basically a 'done up from scratch' design. Scary and exciting at the same time lol!
I do think 'truck' handling is a bit extreme though.. can you clarify what you mean by that? Is it loose steering, lots of body sway, lack of grip, etc?
I'll tell ya what, all of this makes me glad I have a 2006