Model Bloat: Ford Edge vs. Ford Escape?

"SonorousSpeedJoe" (SonorousSpeedJoe) 10/24/2013 at 21:35 • Filed to: None

0

35

Model bloat seems to have been a popular topic today. With that in mind, I'd like to ask: what is it about the Edge that convinces Ford to sell it alongside the Escape? I think the difference in size could play some role, but what else is there?

offroadkarter > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 21:38

0

I wish SVT would make a version of the edge sport with a 3.5L ecoboost, god damn does the edge sport just look GOOD

The escape, I believe, is smaller than the edge. The edge has a 3.5 N/A, or the sport has a 3.7 N/A. I think the edge only gets the 1.6 ecoboost or the 2.0 ecoboost at this point.

Tom McParland > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 21:39

1

Some want V6 powaa for towing and...uh going but not the giganto Explorer.

Milky > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 21:39

0

I've never understood why the Edge exists. Besides a V6 whats the point?

Dunnik > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 21:41

0

If those are press photos, I think the differences become obvious.

The red Edge on the black and white background is a more "urban" SUV. Correspondingly it has an...edgier design. Sigh.

The green Escape in the obligatory SUV With Trees n' Nature shot is meant to...escape to the country, and so it's positioned as a more, um, "traditional" SUV. Also comes with lots of badges that say "Eco-something".

GhostZ > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 21:43

1

The Ford Edge is based on the Lincoln MKZ/X and Mazda 6, making it much more comfortable and complex compared to the Ford Escape, which is based on the Ford Focus and Mazda3 platform. I think the Edge is a way to make volume sales of the Lincoln platform, whereas the Escape is a way to get a cheap crossover without designing anything new.

For a while, the biggest difference was that the Edge was significantly more powerful. As in, twice as much. Even the new Escape's turbo I4 is still 45HP down from the 3-year-old Edge. If the Edge loses its V6 option though, they may get closer in performance.

MtrRider Just Wants Doritos > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 21:45

2

The Escape is based on the Focus, the Edge on the Fusion. The Edge is bigger and has a v6 option. That's why.

GhostZ > Milky 10/24/2013 at 21:45

0

It's a Lincoln MKZ with 4WD, 285HP, and a tall ride height for less money?

I drove an Edge for 17 hours over 2 days. It's actually a pretty good car, for a crossover. At least, unlike the Escape, the Edge starts off on a great platform.

FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 > Tom McParland 10/24/2013 at 21:54

1

yeah i was going to say towing. But they are both actually rated up to 3,500. Im kinda disappointed in the edge.

http://www.ford.com/resources/ford…

http://www.ford.com/resources/ford…

JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 22:44

0

Its funny I have the same question about the Dodge Avenger and Dart... I thought the Dart was replacing it.

SonorousSpeedJoe > JQJ213- Now With An Extra Cylinder! 10/24/2013 at 22:50

1

The Dart is a compact sedan that replaced the Caliber. The Avenger is a midsize sedan.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/24/2013 at 23:46

0

Edge, or more likely, a early 07-10 MKX, is on my list.

The new Escape is over styled, and ridiculous looking from most angles. Considering the older one, but not thrilled about the rear drum brakes.

New Explorer is nice, especially the sport version, but as mentioned... it is huge, and ever more expensive, and not everyone needs that much space for that much expense.

JDMatt > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/25/2013 at 04:06

0

The reason my parents bought a ford edge is because they're old. Because the edge is heavyer than the escape, they thought that meant it was safer. plus the edge had a fancier stereo, which was nice at the dealer, but a nuisance to live with on a daily basis.

the kicker, we could have gotten an escape for $200 a month for 5 years. we got an edge for $375 over 9 years (orignally $424 over 8 years and then refinanced 6 months into the contract to be $375)

bourgeoisie > MtrRider Just Wants Doritos 10/25/2013 at 10:58

1

I was just going to say, this is like asking why Ford sells the Fusion alongside the Focus. As my dad used to say about the car industry, "there's a butt for every seat".

bourgeoisie > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 10/25/2013 at 11:00

0

Comparing the Escape with the CRV and Rav4, the over styling is perfectly logical.

bourgeoisie > JDMatt 10/25/2013 at 11:03

0

There is something to be said about a heavier vehicle with regard to comfort. I used to own a Focus, and while it was a great car in many ways, I constantly felt like I was being thrown around on the road by expansion joints and manhole covers. It got to where the car was miserable to drive in the city.

My next car went to the opposite end of the spectrum, a Yukon XL with "premium smooth-ride suspension". It was like floating down the road sitting in a leather recliner.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > Milky 10/25/2013 at 11:24

0

They sell 120,000 of them a year, that's why they exist.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/25/2013 at 11:24

1

Because the market gobbles up 120,000 of them each year.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > bourgeoisie 10/25/2013 at 11:51

0

And I think all three of them, and the new Forester to a slightly lesser extent… are ridiculous looking. CRV has been for several generations now.

They look like they have been designed by people who design handbags solely on impulse-buy over-styling and attention getting for women, not by people who design cars for men or women, and a durable, big-ticket item that isn't impulse purchased, and is kept for more than 6 months before getting something else.

I am in the market for a CUV/SUV, and will likely be buying one in the next week or couple weeks. I want a vehicle with good AWD, good ground clearance, decent ride quality, even if it isn't a sports car in terms of handling, good durability, and a vehicle that LOOKS like a utility vehicle with a long roof should look.

New Escape, Most CRVs, most RAV4s, Hyundais, and other over-styled, rounded and soft-looking CUVs are not on the list.

MKX.1 is on the list. MKX.2 is a bit too new and over our budget, and the wife doesn't like the touch-sensitive dash anyway.

MDX. previous Pathfinder, XTerra, SH Forester (09-13 generation), Jeep Grand Cherokee, maybe a Liberty Limited (but I am wary of their build quality), XC90, LR2… maybe some others.

Not CRV, Rav4, new Escape, or new Forester.

Milky > GhostZ 10/25/2013 at 11:53

0

Isn't the platform difference just focus -to- fusion? I'm not saying its a bad car, just seems weird to me that they would have 2 relatively small 5 seat crossovers. For some weird reason, I actually prefer Chevy's SUV line up.

Milky > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 10/25/2013 at 11:55

1

In all honesty, thats the best argument. Well played sir. #AmericasSUVBuyingPower

bourgeoisie > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 10/25/2013 at 12:01

1

That is, quite literally, the entire reason we have choice in the marketplace. I respect your taste and opinions, but your tone seems to imply that you're almost angry that the CRV, Rav, Escape, etc., weren't designed for you personally .

There is a massive portion of the consumer market which loves the "handbag" design of these cars. The curvy, free-form shapes are "fun" or "cute" or "neat" to these people, so they buy them.

There is also a massive portion of the consumer market which loves a more traditional utilitarian vehicle design (not sure how you include the MDX in this category), and for them we have cars like you mention—the Pathfinder, Xterra, Explorer, etc.

I realize this is the internet, where people go to complain about things which don't appeal to them, but if we're speaking frankly: I can't be the only one who doesn't want to see that crap on oppo.

There's plenty to like in the marketplace—whether your a handbag lover or a traditionalist—but why should we sneer at each other's differences of taste and opinion?

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > bourgeoisie 10/25/2013 at 12:09

0

I don't care that they are not designed for me personally, I care that they are designed BADLY, and bad design is contagious.

They are designed to be a fad, to get attention now, and screw tomorrow, and fads fade quickly… But cars don't turn over that fast.

Used car buyers are stuck with bad, out of date design, and good design gets harder to find.

More-over, if they are getting disposable with their design and styling… they may be getting disposable with their durability, as well. If they intend to sell you a car more often, the car that they do sell you doesn't need to hold up as long… and who cares if it crumbles after 90K miles…

For those who can't afford a brand new 30-40K car, and end up buying those cars when they are used, and running them after that for a number of years… that SUCKS, because that means those cars fall apart for the second owner, or are lucky to be worthwhile to a third owner… if they can even stand to look at the vehicle in the first place.

bourgeoisie > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 10/25/2013 at 12:22

0

The fact that you define the design of these cars as disposable really just highlights your bias. To hundreds of thousands of people, there is nothing disposable about these designs. Many of those same people probably wonder why vehicles like Xterras and Jeeps are still so boxy and boring, does that make your personal taste invalid? I say no.

You make a good point about mechanical reliability, but again it's colored by your intense bias. Manufacturers cut corners every day, they use plastic where metal should be, vinyl where leather should be, and that's because the choice I talked about in my last comment demands it. If Ford decided to make an indestructible Escape, they would never be able to compete with the prices on CRVs, Ravs, etc. and you know it (or you should know it).

But the larger point is that mechanical durability and the supposed "disposable" nature of these designs have absolutely nothing to do with one another. Your view of the marketplace is myopic and extremely biased. As my dad used to say about the car industry, "there's a butt for every seat". Lucky for us, there are manufacturer's which employ designers of all different tastes, and so I wish you luck in your search.

For the record, these "handbag" car designs aren't my taste either. I prefer boxier more utilitarian designs, but I'm not mad at Ford or Toyota over it, I just look for something that at least tries to walk the line (currently shopping a new Mazda5).

TL;dr—design is subjective, my friend.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > bourgeoisie 10/25/2013 at 12:40

0

CRV bad design becomes Rav4 bad design. Which in turn becomes the JUKE, which in turn becomes the new Cherokee.

If it were a static balance, and designs that appeal to me, and likely men in general weren't becoming scarcer, it wouldn't be as big of a deal. But the balance is swinging with each new model year, and more of these vehicles getting less appealing than their predecessors.

Aesthetic design and Technical design may be somewhat independent, in theory.

However, I ascribe trends in BOTH to business decision makers, and both aesthetics and technical aspects as symptoms of the same decision making mentality, and thus linked.

And if they are dictating styling that is more short-lived and more easily dated sooner, that is a symptom of short term thinking, and planned obsolescence. This is on purpose, because they would rather sell you another car every two years, instead of 4, 5, or more…

Technical design by the same short term thinking leads to higher costs of ownership and maintenance, especially after the warranty period, and a shorter functional life.

I have driven my current car for 7 years, and the suspension is crumbling, and has needed significant service over the last 15-20K miles, and due to the economy, I cannot spend the same amount of money I was able to spend 7 years ago, for another car. I am actually planning on spending at least $5K less than I did before… which means buying a car with higher miles already, and the potential for it crumbling in significantly less than another 7 years.

And it is hard for me to find a car that I like looking at, and like driving, that will be viable for the next half decade or more, in my budget.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > Milky 10/25/2013 at 12:49

0

Doesn't mean it's a great reason for buying one, but it's certainly the reason it exists in Ford's lineup.

On the more qualitative end, the V6 availability is one part, but it's also bigger than the Escape, subjectively many think it's better looking, and most importantly, it looks and feels upmarket from the Escape, which is what I think is driving most of the consumer demand for the Edge.

Milky > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 10/25/2013 at 13:02

0

Don't they only sell it here in north america though? With Fords "Global" thing, I wonder how much longer it will last. Esp since the escape/kuga has double the sales in the US then overseas sales too.

GhostZ > Milky 10/25/2013 at 13:52

1

The Focus and Fusion platforms seem similar on paper, but they're considerably different in terms of size, build quality, weight, etc. And most important of all, cost and available engines. The Focus platform can't fit a V6, from what I've read.

I like the Edge and the Explorer, the escape doesn't do anything for me.

SonorousSpeedJoe > bourgeoisie 10/25/2013 at 14:03

1

I knew that the Escape was based off of the Focus, but somehow it slipped my mind that the Edge could be based off of the Fusion.

When I asked this question, all I saw were two vehicles that were close in size even though one was slightly larger and had a V6 option. As everyone's told me, the Edge is larger than I thought, so it doesn't leave Ford in the position of selling two very similar cars.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > Milky 10/25/2013 at 14:04

1

Current model is US only, new model will be global.

SonorousSpeedJoe > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 10/25/2013 at 14:08

0

True enough; I was just asking about this from the standpoint of how similar they were. I thought that the Edge was smaller than it actually is, but everyone's pointed out that I'm wrong on that count. I knew that the Escape was Focus-based, but it completely slipped my mind that the Edge could be based off of the Fusion.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/25/2013 at 14:12

0

Yeah, the size, the V6 availability (becoming less of an appeal), and I think what's driving the demand most, it's viewed as upmarket from the Escape. Interior trimming is better, and the styling is a little less econobox and little more aggressive.

bourgeoisie > SonorousSpeedJoe 10/25/2013 at 14:56

0

I hope I didn't come off like a dick, that certainly wasn't my intent. They are very similar cars (size difference aside), but I think they appeal to very different demographics even if they were the same size, hence the "butt for every seat" comment.

SonorousSpeedJoe > bourgeoisie 10/25/2013 at 15:08

1

I'm familiar with the phrase "there's an ass for every seat" - you didn't come off as a dick, so don't worry about that.

As I said, I was completely unaware of the fact that the Edge is based off of the Fusion and haven't really looked at the Edge and Escape side-by-side; it seemed to me as if Ford risked weakening sales of the Edge 2.0T by offering the Escape 1.6T/2.0T, and only had the V6 and a slight size difference to justify what I perceived as filling one hole in their lineup with two vehicles.

Mario Gravina > SonorousSpeedJoe 02/23/2014 at 17:47

0

I've purchased an Edge six weeks ago. I test drove a 2013 Escape and then a 2011 Edge SEL. While both had similar interior features, the Escape did seem smaller, and more like my wife's RAV in the feel of it. The price was about the same for both, but the larger engine (3.5L), SEL Features, and low mileage pulled me towards the Edge.

Though I drove a CrownVic for several years and spent the last 5 stuck in a base model Chev Malibu, the V6 3.5 engine REALLY appealed to me. Taking kids to school I am about 19mpg, commuting 22-24, and a good 26-28 cruising at the speed limit on the freeway. The Edge has everything I could want in a Car, with a couple perks of an SUV. Neither the Escape or Edge are Suburbans or Tahoes. They way I see it, these are 21st Century versions of the Griswald Family Car, a ballsy sedan with good trunk/"Cargo" area but powertrain to rule over the Prius and other wimpish planet saving cars.

Though I love this vehicle so far, I never kid myself. It's a glorified Station wagon.

SonorousSpeedJoe > Mario Gravina 02/23/2014 at 18:03

0

I'm glad that you're happy with the Edge.

I posed the question of Escape vs. Edge in this post several months ago because I hadn't given much thought to the potential size difference between the two, as well any differences in interior quality and features. I was unaware that the Edge was Fusion-based, and most everyone here has corrected me on that count.