Author Topic: Need advice on new SUV  (Read 1183 times)

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18204
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #15 on: May 12, 2003, 02:50:06 PM »
Cayenne Turbo, Porsche

http://www2.us.porsche.com/english/usa/cayenne/cayenneturbo/default.htm

turbo $100,000

don't forget to take it off road - LOL
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18204
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #16 on: May 12, 2003, 02:55:08 PM »
dup
« Last Edit: May 12, 2003, 02:58:49 PM by Eagler »
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Syzygyone

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #17 on: May 12, 2003, 03:09:21 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Dune
I always wanted one of these:



[


Damnation Alley was, very probably, the worst movie ever made, what with all those mutant cockroaches and Jan Michael Vincent escaping from a missle silo and running around on a motorcycle.

Blehhhhhhhhhh!!!:D

Offline SOB

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10138
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #18 on: May 12, 2003, 03:13:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy
I cannot buy into the "safe" agrument.  Ever try an emergency lane change in one of those monsters?

Give me something that can move out of the way or avoid the wreck and I call that safe.


My 97 Tahoe was deceptively agile...don't take their size at face value.  It definitely had more body roll than anything you'd consider sporty, but it was very controllable and responsive.


SOB
Three Times One Minus One.  Dayum!

Offline -ammo-

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5124
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #19 on: May 12, 2003, 03:14:42 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by SOB
My 97 Tahoe was deceptively agile...don't take their size at face value.  It definitely had more body roll than anything you'd consider sporty, but it was very controllable and responsive.


SOB


Even with you in it?:D
Commanding Officer, 56 Fighter Group
Retired USAF - 1988 - 2011

Offline Mini D

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6897
      • Fat Drunk Bastards
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #20 on: May 12, 2003, 03:17:26 PM »
When SOB says it was responsive, he means it was able to actually move.  He's not a very good source for information when it comes to the ride of various vehicles.

MiniD

Offline SOB

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10138
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #21 on: May 12, 2003, 03:17:33 PM »
Hell yeah...as long as I only turned left, it handled even better!  :D
Three Times One Minus One.  Dayum!

Offline Skuzzy

  • Support Member
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31462
      • HiTech Creations Home Page
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #22 on: May 12, 2003, 04:16:19 PM »
Welp,..I have avoided close calls that, in one instance, 5 people died in 2 SUV's as they could not avoid the problem.

Being witness to that pretty much made up my mind about the "safe" argument.

Sorry, but you cannot take a 2 ton vehicle with a COG higher than most cars roofs and call it "nimble".  It goes against the very grain of physics.  It may "feel" nimble,..but it isn't.
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
support@hitechcreations.com

Offline RightF00T

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1943
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #23 on: May 12, 2003, 08:03:17 PM »
Lincoln Mortifier LOL!:D

Offline Mark Luper

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1626
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2003, 09:19:30 PM »
Skuzzy is right, a SUV or pickup (with one possible exception) won't handle as nimbly as a car with a much lower center of gravity. The main thing to remember is that though the case he pointed out was two SUV's not avoiding each other, there are as many if not more cases where two cars didn't avoid each other.

Safety on the road is not just a result of vehicle design, but the alertness and aptitude of the "connection" between the steering wheel and the seat.

My wife and I both drive trucks. She drives a 2003 Expedition, I drive a F150 SuperCrew. We both drive with the vehicles limitations in mind.

Alertness and awareness of the traffic around you and your vehicle of choice handling charactaristics are what really matters. (sounds a lot like SA doesn't it :D )
MarkAT

Keep the shiny side up!

Offline Ike 2K#

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #25 on: May 12, 2003, 09:46:24 PM »

Offline Skuzzy

  • Support Member
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31462
      • HiTech Creations Home Page
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #26 on: May 12, 2003, 10:27:03 PM »
Mark is quite right.  I should not be lumping the SUV into the category I did.

It is the drivers that make SUV's dangerous.  I have seen too many people drive those vehicles at 70-80mph, 3-4 car lengths behind someone.  Idiots putting thier families at risk as the ones in front at risk as well.

Know this; virtually all SUV's/pickups take 30-35% longer to stop from 70mph (typically 225-240feet) than any ordinary car (typically 175feet) on the road.  Sports cars stop even quicker.

Emergency lane changes at 60mph take 4 times longer than the typical car.


This is why I won't own one.  They take too long to stop, and move like bricks in an emergency.  But as Mark pointed out, if driven as designed, then they are probably no more dangerous than any other vehicle on the road.
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
support@hitechcreations.com

Offline -Concho-

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 784
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #27 on: May 12, 2003, 11:35:26 PM »
Fords burn easy.  especially the Expedition.

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #28 on: May 12, 2003, 11:51:58 PM »
The Mercedes G-Wagen rivals the Hummer in performance and beats it in interior comfort and milage.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline Mark Luper

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1626
Need advice on new SUV
« Reply #29 on: May 13, 2003, 12:24:07 AM »
Some specs on our Expedition, this is exactly the same one we bought. A Candy Apple Red Eddie Bauer edition. Doesn't give the stopping distances from 70, but from 60 it's not too bad for a 2.5 ton vehicle.            
 
                   
       
   
 
 
 ( May 12, 2003)
2003 Ford Expedition
Brute Gets Civilized: Ford bruiser becomes a better cruiser

 
LIKES

Surprisingly smooth ride

Big, functional interior

Loaded with improvements

DISLIKES

Cheap interior material

Tranny needs another gear

The engine is no fuel sipper

OTHERS CONSIDERED

Chevrolet Suburban

Toyota Sequoia

GMC Yukon Denali XL

 

AS IMPOSING AS THE 2003 Ford Expedition is when you first walk up to it, its ride and handling are surprisingly good for such a big vehicle.

That refinement is the main reason owners who contacted us bought this new, second-generation Expedition. The many changes and upgrades to this version make it a far cry from its 1997-debuting predecessor.

Among the improvements are an independent rear suspension, bigger brakes, rack-and-pinion steering, stability and traction control, and a tighter ride (70 percent stiffer frame and 42 percent stiffer body).

We tested an Eddie Bauer Edition, with a Triton 5.4-liter engine that makes 260 hp at 4500 rpm and 350 lb-ft of torque at 2500 rpm. Ninety percent of that torque is available from 1870 rpm. This 4x2 tips the scale at 5416 pounds, and with a full tank of gas and one person, it weighs more than two and a half tons. The gas is devoured fairly quickly, but at least the V8 only requires 87 octane.

We got 14.1 mpg on one tank that included track testing, then 15.0 mpg on the way home via mostly freeway. The EPA combined estimate is 15.37 mpg, based on a 13-city/18-highway mpg rating. (The base 4.6-liter V8 produces 232 hp at 4750 rpm and 291 lb-ft at 3450 rpm, with a 14-city/19-highway EPA mpg estimate.)

For such a big SUV, the Expedition displayed impressive stability on the freeway. We heard some wind noise, but overall, the interior had good road isolation. The mud-and-snow Continental tires, for all their knobbiness, weren’t especially noisy.

In our acceleration tests, the Expedition went a bit quicker on each successive run, as if it wasn’t yet completely broken in. We used the identical, non-wheel-spinning technique for this four-speed automatic-equipped tank, so something mechanical must have been changing. Maybe it was the engine warming or loosening up, or oil thinning for less friction.

On the skidpad, the Expedition was somewhat sedate.

The tires didn’t plow too much, though they squealed a lot.

It’s fairly neutral considering the type of vehicle it is. It hit 0.72 g, slightly better than the $70,000 Range Rover we recently AutoFiled. The 38.5 mph the Expedition recorded in the slalom is a half mph slower than the Rover.

Besides the Expedition’s ride and handling, the owner respon- dents were most impressed with its capacious interior. It can handle eight passengers, and that independent rear suspension allows the third row to fold flat into the floor. (A power folding third row is an option.)

But owners, along with test drivers and staffers, criticized the quality of some of the interior materials. The top of the dash on our test vehicle was a cheap, rattly piece of hard plastic. “With some Expeditions around $50,000, Ford should have used more interior bits from the Navigator to spruce this thing up,” said one staffer. “Also, the heater controls are the same ones you could find in a nearly decade-old Explorer.”

 
Another staffer who used it as a tow car from Detroit to Maine (averaging 12.8 mpg) praised its roominess and rated it above the Chevrolet TrailBlazer except for the Ford’s drivetrain. “There’s more power,” he wrote, “but also more mass, and the midrange is lacking. It needs a five-speed overdrive automatic instead of the four so you can get the right gear when you need it. I did a lot of turning the overdrive on and off. Several stretches of second gear running in the mountains weren’t too hard, but the Rockies would be trouble.” A few owners had similar complaints.

While our Eddie Bauer Edition cost some $44,000, Ford offers 17 models of the Expedition, starting with a $31,000 4x2 base vehicle. The Expedition may not have the styling of its sibling Lincoln Navigator or distant relative Range Rover, but it’s a solid, functional SUV that drives a lot smaller than it actually is thanks to chassis improvements. “Compare that,” one editor said, “to an old-technology Suburban, and I think Ford is gaining major ground in the big SUV battle.”

OWNERS SAY...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
It trudges up sand dunes and snowy roads and easily breezes past cars on hills thanks to its 5.4-liter engine. I considered the Lincoln Aviator, Chevy Suburban, GMC Denali XL, BMW X5 and had previously owned a 1999 Eddie Bauer model, but I picked the ’03 Expedition because I find it to be in another world. It feels more like a running back than the hippo on roller skates it replaced. There is ample room for my family of five and their friends without the soccer-mom baggage of a minivan. -Orson D. Munn, New York

We love you Ford! We bought our ’03 Eddie Bauer Expedition with the navigation system and DVD on New Year’s Eve and we negotiated $8,000 off the MSRP over the phone. The Ford has the best creature comforts. It has a very smooth ride with the rear independent suspension, and the controls and cupholders are where you want them. Our only disappointment was the three-year/36,000-mile warranty. -Al Hoheb, Manhattan Beach, Calif.

I chose the Expedition because I prefer the ride height and sturdy build of truck-based SUVs. There’s about 12 inches difference in height between my wife and I, making memory seats and mirrors very desirable, and power-adjustable brake and accelerator pedals almost a necessity. Otherwise, one of us is just too close to the driver’s airbag. Perhaps Ford should add another 40 to 60 horsepower. -Doug Perkinson, Alachua, Fla.

The Expedition handles sand dunes, East Coast blizzards and daily urban combat in stride. I’m very pleased with it overall. Though it came with wiper blades that were falling off and a broken DVD player, it has since given no trouble at all. I’m getting about 10 mpg in town and 17 mpg highway. It handles the 70-mph beltway rush like a giant 5000-pound roller skate with 10 inches of ground clearance. The only thing missing is an “I love the Prius, I had one for breakfast” bumper sticker. -Tony Fuisz, Bethesda, Md.

VECHICLE SPECS & ROAD TEST INFO:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
MANUFACTURER INFO
Ford Motor Co.
The American Road
Dearborn MI 48126
Customer assistance: (800) 392-3673
Internet address: http://www.fordvehicles.com
Country of origin: United States
Number of dealers: 4000 (est.)

STICKER
Base: $38,485
As tested
(includes $740 delivery): $44,230
Owners paid; average: $35,442 to
$41,000; $38,691

OPTIONS AS TESTED
Navigation system ($1,995); rear-seat DVD
($1,295); Advance Trac ($795); climate-
controlled seats ($625); side-impact airbags
($580); Eddie Bauer package, which includes
5.4-liter V8 and 3.73 axle ratio ($515); third-
row power folding seat ($455)

OTHER MAJOR OPTIONS
Self-leveling suspension (not available with
Advance Trac, $815); power moonroof ($800);
second-row leather captain’s chairs ($795);
tire-pressure monitor ($150)

CHASSIS
Body-on-frame, four-door
sport/utility vehicle

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase (in): 119.0
Track (in): 67.0 front,
67.3 rear
Length/width/height (in): 205.8/78.7/77.6
Curb weight/GVWR (lbs): 5416/6900

CAPACITIES
Fuel (gal): 28
Cargo (cu ft): 20.2 (60.9 with third row folded)
Towing (lbs): 8900

ENGINE
Front-longitudinal 5.4-liter/330-cid sohc V8
Horsepower: 260 @ 4500 rpm
Torque (lb-ft): 350 @ 2500 rpm
Compression ratio: 9.0:1
Fuel requirement: 87 octane

DRIVETRAIN
Rear-wheel drive
Transmission: Four-speed
automatic
Rear axle ratio: 3.73:1

SUSPENSION
Front: Double wishbone with coil springs,
gas-charged shock absorbers, antiroll bar
Rear: Double wishbone with coil springs,
gas-charged shock absorbers, antiroll bar

BRAKES/WHEELS/TIRES
Discs front and rear, ABS,
aluminum 265/70R-17
Continental Contitrac SUV

STANDING-START ACCELERATION
0-60 mph: 9.29 sec
0-100 km/h (62.1 mph): 9.76 sec
0-quarter-mile: 16.96 sec @ 80.5 mph

ROLLING ACCELERATION
20-40 mph (first gear): 3.0 sec
40-60 mph (second gear): 5.0 sec
60-80 mph (second and third gear): 7.4 sec

BRAKING
60 mph-0: 145 ft

HANDLING
490-foot slalom: 38.5 mph
Lateral acceleration
(200-foot skidpad): 0.72 g

INTERIOR NOISE (dBA)
Idle: 44
Full throttle: 77
Steady 60 mph: 64

FUEL MILEAGE
EPA combined: 15.37 mpg
AW overall: 14.54 mpg

RESIDUALS
$20,573 after 36-month lease,
46.51 percent of new vehicle price

 
 
SEARCH THE AUTOWEEK ARCHIVES
MarkAT

Keep the shiny side up!