2012 Ford Focus SE, SEL, Titanium

I'll try to keep updating far more frequently than I did last year. Any way, onto this review.

Introduction: The Ford Focus has been Ford's compact car since the end of the 20th century. The original Focus was developed for the European market. Ford of America once again decided to use another Ford of Europe design despite the failure of the older Contour/Mondeo, as Ford had no successor to the domestic market Escort. The Focus was altered mechanically for US factories and regulations, however it appears this is the prime reason for the Focus to earn its reputation as the most recalled vehicle of the year. By 2004 the amount of recalls issued were severely reduced, few were sure of whether the Focus' reputation would recover. By 2007, the Focus was redesigned, however this version did not follow the European Focus which was based on a new platform. As a result this was merely an extension of the original Focus without the option of a wagon and an unsuccessful coupe. Ford CEO Alan Mulally signaled that the whole Ford lineup regardless of where it competed would use World models meaning there will no longer be regional or national differences on Ford models. The goal was to significantly reduce the amount of models Ford has in its global lineup. As a result the 2012 Ford Focus will no longer sport any real differences from its European counterpart, often seen as the better car. For the first time in North America, Ford will be offering its performance version of the Focus called the Focus ST.

I was pretty excited to get a chance to drive this new Focus. I've always been hearing that the European Focus drove better than any of the North American Focus models. Part of the reason has been the NA Focus never had a sport tuned version in the same way as Europe got the Focus ST, Focus RS and Focus RS500. The day this lot arrived I was eager to see whether Ford deserved to be taken seriously for the first time in this segment.

Performance: Regular Ford Focus models use a 2.0L 4-cylinder engine regardless of which trim level. The only changes to be made in 2012 will be the addition of the ST model which will feature a turbocharger. This 2.0L engine produces about 160 hp and 146 lb.ft of torque. This is one of the first few direct injection engines made available by Ford and it seems to show in its fuel economy numbers. You're given a choice in transmissions, a 5-speed manual or a 6-speed dual clutch automatic. Now there have been some issues surrounding the dual clutch automatic Ford uses, the most notable is that its rather jerky in low gears like 1st and 2nd. Due to its dual clutches it does have minor amounts of roll back on hills as well before the 2nd clutch engages. Ford has issued a software update, this still does not seem to satisfy some users. If you're worried about these issues, then go for the 5-speed manual which has no issue but it has a higher highway fuel consumption due to lacking that extra gear. The car itself, despite its somewhat high hp numbers isn't all that quick, this is where torque matters. Its acceleration time from 0-100 km/h is about 8.7 seconds. Still good for the class but not what one expects from a direct injection engine.

My Score: 8/10 - Acceptable performance, good fuel economy but the dual clutch transmission is not for everyone.

Handling: As is the case with modern cars, the Ford Focus is also equipped with electric power steering. To be brutally honest, even Ford hasn't got the tuning correct on this. At low speeds the steering is very light but a bit numb, its only when the car is moving faster that the steering feel is more noticeable. That said when taking the Focus on corners, it handles very well for a family vehicle. To me it makes no difference if you have the Titanium package wheels or the regular wheels with hubcaps. Both vehicles have decent ride comfort, its a tad more firm than a few of its competitors but not bone shaking as say the terrible Dodge Caliber. For true handling feel though, I'd have to pick the Mazda3 over the Focus because that car still uses a hydraulic assist system, and that just feels way better.

My Score: 8/10 - Good handling, good ride comfort, steering is a bit lacking in feel however.

Interior: This is where the differences start to show in the trim levels. The SE will be equipped with a pretty standard interior, nothing totally unusual. Controls are relatively simple to use and despite not being a MyFordTouch model it still has a two small LCD screens, it has voice activated controls, cruise control, etc. The SEL and Titanium models however replace the small center LCD screen and replace it with a much larger touch screen in the center known as MyFordTouch. You still have HVAC controls available should you not like using the touch screen, which are button based instead of knobs like the cheaper versions. The stereo controls however are mostly gone and will have be operated using MyFordTouch. The MyFordTouch system is something you either love or hate, once in a while its also prone to glitching. Should your unit glitch, unplug the battery for 5 minutes tends to reset the whole system. A software recall has also been issued, due to complaints. The higher trim levels come with seat warmers. Another difference between the two is the hand brake, on the lower trim levels its relatively small, the higher trim level models have a very large one. Not available in base spec of any trim level however are rear parking sensors, self parking(for parallel parking), electric seats and leather, those are optional extras even in Titanium spec. There are lot of pockets in the rear to put things in. When it comes to hatchback versus sedan, I definitely would go with the hatchback, it has a lot more useable space in the tailgate. The atmosphere of the interior is mostly dark, and even in the SEL/Titanium version way too much hard plastic. The build quality on these cars is average, generally acceptable but lemons do occur. The Focus is built in Wayne, Michigan, USA.

My Score: 7/10 - A somewhat high tech interior of the bunch, MyFordTouch is hit or miss, many items are still an optional extra and the materials definitely could be better.

Styling: Gone is the Gillete grille that Ford was using for the past few years, which I'm happy to say. It looked terrible on the previous Focus. This car is a lot closer to the European styled cars, the front may seem a bit busy near the bottom. The side profile of the car easily makes the hatchback look very good, the sedan is not nearly as nice. The wheels you get depend on which trim level you bought, the hubcap wheels are obviously cheap looking, the Titanium's wheels do look good. Its a bit more generic however considering Hyundai's new styling. So I'll just say its good but not great.

My Score: 7/10 - A nicer looking car than before, looks quite good as a hatchback but at the same time is a bit generic.

Value for money: With this new entry, this segment is extremely competitive. On the one hand you have the Ford Focus, Chevrolet Cruze and Hyundai Elantra all being the newest and hitting the 40 mpg highway numbers or 5.88L/100 km for metric. On the other hand some of the older stuff like the Mazda3 and Civic are getting upgraded to match these newer cars or in the case of the Dodge Caliber is already dropped with a new model ready to come out. Where the Ford sits is probably being one of the better all rounder, its offered as a hatch or sedan, its got loads of options, its reasonably well equipped at the start, and its priced pretty competitively. If this is what you require, a car that's pretty good at most or not all levels, then the Focus is probably your best choice. If you have more specialized tastes where you want your car to excel at certain areas, you'll have to look elsewhere. As for which options to pick, I find the Titanium not really worth the cost unless you like those wheels, you get much of the toys in the SEL. If you hate MyFordTouch the SE will do fine. Still, a good car at a good value.

My Score: 8/10 - Good all rounder choice, however the market is very competitive and the car doesn't excel in any specific area.

Overall: 38/50 - Its a good car, for me though it just wasn't as good as I was hoping it would be.

2008-2011 Ford Escape XLT & Limited

I apologize again for the very late update. Today's review is on a vehicle that has sold fairly well even to this day.


Introduction: The Ford Escape was designed in a joint effort with Mazda as a compact crossover in 2000. Ford decided to place this vehicle below the truck based Ford Explorer which has grown into a medium size SUV. Ford also realized that most of its SUV customers rarely go off-roading and therefore the Escape was designed much like a car using a monocoque design rather than the body-on-frame truck based design. The hybrid version of the Ford Escape was introduced in 2004. The Escape was redesigned in 2008 using the same platform as before. The hybrid version is continued from the previous generation, this is the family vehicle Barack Obama purchased before becoming US President. This version of the Escape will be discontinued in the fall of 2011 and a newly designed Escape to be available for the 2013 model year. During the US Cash for Clunkers program, the Ford Escape was the only crossover to make the top 10 models sold under the program, possibly due to the high amount of old Ford Explorers being sent for trade-in.

By the time I started driving the Escape, most of the Ford products have started slowly impressing me. Thus I wasn't expecting any of the disappointment I would from say a Chrysler product. In this review I will be looking at the low level trim XLT and the higher end Limited vehicles, technically there's few differences.


Performance: Due to the trim levels the only engine available is the 3.0L V6 Duratec engine. This is the final version of this engine and thus produces 240 hp and 223 lb.ft of torque. This engine is able to accelerate this vehicle from 0-100 km/h in about 8.1-8.7 seconds depending on whether it has AWD. As a result the Escape with this engine moves reasonably quick although not blisteringly quick as its size suggests. Its not the smoothest engine I've encountered but on the cruise its generally fine. The fuel economy numbers are actually rather decent considering it has a V6, you don't save a whole lot with the 4-cylinder. If you wish to have a fuel efficient Escape, you'd be better off with a Escape hybrid which does remarkably well in the city.

My Score: 8/10 - Decent engine, the only criticism being its not all that quick.

Handling: With the Escape's smaller size one would think it would handle decently compared to the traditional SUVs. In many ways yes, the Escape easily rides better than many SUVs. When taking the Escape into a corner it generally is capable of taking it, but do keep in mind it has body roll and it will understeer even with AWD. In all honesty the handling is only compromised by the higher center of gravity which plagues any taller vehicle except the Subaru Outback and Tribeca.

My Score: 8/10 - Good handling all around and rides well but of course its not perfect with roll and understeer.


Interior: This is the only category where the XLT and Limited have their differences. In the standard XLT you will be given most of the typical options you really need but you won't get certain things. The Limited comes in leather, sunroof, SYNC, rear parking sensors, etc. In general the Escape's interior is reasonably spacious considering its size, its only a 5 seater even in Limited trim. The rear visibility is actually pretty good for a car of this class and the seats even the cloth ones are comfortable. The center console is stacked full of buttons which may be a turn off for some. Some of the plastic in the XLT is noticeably on the cheap side as well. Nothing about this interior even in the Limited trim is spectacular but fortunately there's nothing wrong with it either. The build quality of the Escape is pretty decent, rarely did I find anything particularly bad about it. The Escape is assembled in Claycomo, Missouri in the United States.

My Score: 7/10 - Good interior, but nothing hugely impressive even in the top of the line Limited.

Styling: The Escape in its current form is a decent looking crossover, it doesn't diverge from the SUV styling. Ford didn't introduce its tri-bar grille on this vehicle either so it has a rather normal looking truck grille. It looks much like an evolution of the older Ford Escapes which may be what Ford was trying to get at. Unfortunately this won't excite anybody based on the styling.

My Score: 5/10 - Very conventional, no interesting styling details to note.

Value for money: This comes down to whether you want AWD, the tall ride height and are willing to spend midsize sedan money for a vehicle that's actually smaller than a new 2012 Focus. For its class its a rather good vehicle, however with Ford and the 2012 Focus hatchback...it begs the question of whether the small crossover is practical anymore. In practical terms the Focus hatch has more cargo space, costs less to maintain and costs less to buy. To make the Escape worthwhile you'll have to get the AWD and maybe even the V6 but that makes it a bit expensive basically adding $15K to the base $20K vehicle.

My Score: 6/10 - May not be worth the money on the practical side with newer hatchbacks being far more practical and sensible.

Overall: 34/50 - A good small crossover vehicle. I just question its usefulness in light of poor economic situations and higher fuel prices.

2011 Ford Fiesta SE

The reason for the lack of updates is the amount of things going on in my life. Anyways on to the review.



Introduction: The Ford Fiesta is an old model dating back to the 1976, the North American market did get the Fiesta until 1981 when it was replaced along with the Ford Pinto with the American Ford Escort. Ford would enter the subcompact segment again with the Mazda designed Festiva which in actuality is a Ford badged Mazda 121. This car was replaced by the Kia designed Ford Aspire. In Europe however, the Ford Fiesta didn't end in 1981 rather it got redesigned 4 times until North America would receive news the 6th generation Fiesta was coming to this market with CEO Alan Mulally's plan for a global lineup but also to boost Ford's average fuel economy.

I heard great things about the Ford Fiesta over in Europe. When I was watching earlier interviews with CEO Alan Mulally he seemed very excited about the prospect of bringing this particular car over to North America. You can't help but wonder how good is it when the CEO is extremely eager to show reporters the least expensive car in the company's entire global lineup. I expected good things from it so onto the review.


Performance: The Ford Fiesta in North America get only one choice of engine, the largest engine available being a 1.6L 4-cylinder engine. This engine produces 120 hp and 112 lb.ft of torque. As expected of a car with this amount of power its not going to be blisteringly quick. Its acceleration time from 0-100 km/h if about 10 seconds on the automatic, its slightly faster with a manual transmission at 9.5. Still the Fiesta is the heaviest of the lot weighing at about 2600 lbs making it the heaviest of the bunch. In spite of its weight, engine size and standard equipment, this is easily the most fuel efficient subcompact currently on sale today by a long way even without the SFE package. When driving like all small 4-cylinders its a bit noisy when thrashed but with civilized driving its not all that noticeable and it gets its torque a bit earlier than most subcompacts as well. Its quite nice, sacrifice some acceleration for a lot of fuel savings.

My Score: 9/10 - Wish it was faster but its hard to argue when it does what its supposed to do very well.

Handling: This was where I was hoping for a car to drive like the ones the Europeans keep saying is so great. Its not quite as I was expecting, but its better than what some naysayers were also saying. The steering is very light, but its surprisingly easy to drive and you get some inkling of feel which is difficult to achieve with electric power steering. The car is also quite tossable and agile, so you don't exactly feel the 2600 lb weight. Ride comfort is much better than what you get in the Honda Fit.

My Score: 8/10 - Not quite what I was expecting given the European reviews but for once if there was any watering down, it wasn't drastic.


Interior: Many say this is the Fiesta's party piece among the subcompacts that it had the best interior amongst them all. Certainly in SE form the Fiesta is well equipped with things like power windows, power locks, a decent stereo and a dash computer. The materials as you'd expect is mainly plastic. Yet despite this, the center console is rather interesting to look at, you can tell the stylist had some say in its layout. The seats are quite comfortable with good adjustment. On the visibility its quite good, although the sedan's trunk line is quite high. This interior does have some colour to it making it not as boring as its Japanese rivals. I didn't notice build quality issues with the Fiesta at all, these come from Hermosillo, Mexico.

My Score: 8/10 - Yes its mainly plastic but if you go one step up in class, that's still the norm and therefore it actually has a better interior than some cars in the next class.

Styling: I will say it right now, the hatchback looks pretty good, I liked the one in Europe and the one for North America is nearly identical. In hatchback form its definitely a good looking car as its got personality. Ford even used a normally unappealing green on the Fiesta and it looks fine with it, most cars would look awful with that colour. The sedan is less interesting, the rear is pretty standard looking while the front has to have the not very good looking tri-bar Ford grille. If they given the sedan the hatchback's face...you easily have the best looking subcompact.

My Score: 9/10(hatch) - Best looking hatchback for sale today.
My Score: 6/10(sedan) - Ruined by the stupid tri bar grille, sort of bland rear end.

Value for money: The Fiesta SE is not the cheapest car in the segment in fact it can be quite expensive the moment you start adding options. Your best hope making sense for buying a Fiesta is that for the price you pay for a decently equipped car like the SE you can save a lot more at the pumps giving you an overall nice car that's saving you money as gas gets expensive and the hybrid is out of the question because of costs. I personally believe this is the best subcompact you can buy today, its just a question of how tight you want to be with your money. You can spend a whole lot less with no frills Accents, Versas and Yarises but if you don't mind the lack of equipment there is a Fiesta S which is quite a bit cheaper.

My Score: 8/10 - In its class its pretty good value but its a bit on the high side. Fortunately the fuel efficiency and the nicer interior do soften the blow of the higher price.

Overall: 42/50(hatch) - A really good car in hatchback form subcompact or not.
Overall: 39/50(sedan) - Still a good car, just a bit uglier.

2010-2011 Ford Fusion SE, SEL V6

First review of 2011, this one may be of some interest.


Introduction: The Ford Fusion was introduced in 2005 as Ford's newest vehicle for the important midsized car market. Ford used to use the Taurus for this important segment which originally sold very well to tie the Honda Accord for the #1 most sold car(not vehicle since the F-150 truck dominated this). Unfortunately Ford never continued with the success of the first Taurus and allowed the car to age eventually losing even the Taurus' iconic jellybean shape for conservative. Ford decided to use the Fusion name for this new midsized car even though a completely different car uses the same name in Europe. The Ford Fusion is the first of the cars introduced by Ford of America to use the 3-bar grille. The Fusion saw enough success to be redesigned for the year 2010. The new redesigned Fusion sports a newer look and while retaining much of the architecture of the older car has for the most part been completely changed. Sales of the Ford Fusion have managed to pass 200,000 a year during 2010, a feat last seen by a Ford car all the way back in 1986 in the Ford Taurus' debut year when it was tied with the Honda Accord for America's best selling car.

If you've read my old Ford Fusion review the lasting memories of that car for me was how bland and slow the car was. Although a somewhat competent effort by Ford to regain its position in this segment it long lost. This new one caught my eye with its new tri-bar styling and considering many Ford products have increasingly gotten better over the years I had similar expectations for this car.



Performance: In this review I've actually driven two of the three engines offered on the Ford Fusion. I've driven many Fusions with the standard 2.5L 4-cylinder engine, but I've also driven a few with the 3.0L V6 flex fuel engine. The third engine available is the Sport trim's 3.5L V6. Starting with the 2.5L engine, this engine produces about 175 hp and 172 lb.ft of torque which is a modest power increase over the older car's 2.3L but more noticeable torque increase. Acceleration numbers from 0-100 km/h is about 8.9 seconds, so its faster than the older car and it also doesn't feel that slow. Its a bit buzzy at the higher rpm range and thus better off for cruising. The 3.0L V6 produces 240 hp and 223 lb.ft of torque which should mean a better time, it accelerates from 0-100 km/h in about 7.3 seconds which is quite a bit better than the 4-cylinder. To drive the V6 is much more quieter and smoother, its not as razor sharp quick as Nissan's 3.5L V6s but for ordinary driving its good and sounds nicer too. It may be the automatic transmission that's causing some of the delay in the engine. I personally liked the 3.0L quite a bit better than the 4-cylinder, you don't suffer much on fuel economy either for it since it uses the same fuel saving technology as the 2.5L does.

My Score(SE): 7/10 - A good engine, particularly good on fuel economy although lacking on performance.

My Score(SEL V6): 9/10 - A very very good refined engine, capable of running on flex fuel, good fuel economy for its size, obviously not as quick as competing 3.5L V6s.

Handling: The old Fusion's best item was how it took corners over the likes of some of its competitors apart from the Mazda6 its based on. This new Fusion doesn't really change this, although I must say the ride comfort is better on this model. This car is pretty confident on the corners for the most part. The steering is relatively heavy compared to its competition but this is one of the better drivers cars in its class as it actually has steering feel many of its competitors don't have. As expected from a modern front wheel drive car, understeer is present when pushed into corners hard. Not a whole lot of roll though, which is nice in a car like this sometimes. Personally I wish it felt more sharp than it does, perhaps this is solved on the Sport model.

My Score(both): 9/10 - Better ride quality from last time, still pretty good on the corners, just lacking some of the sharpness on nicer handling cars.


Interior: Here's a big change from before, gone are the bland buttons, also gone is the lack of colour since there's now a few and boring dials of the old car have disappeared. You're now greeted with a new digital dash(analog displays), the new SYNC system and Ford also didn't follow other automakers in keeping cheesy knobs. Many of the controls are now simple buttons. The touches are all nicer and styled with purpose. Having tried both leather and cloth seats, the leather seats are much nicer. The cloth seats are a bit on the stiff side. The biggest downside to this interior is mainly the interior materials could have been even better, there isn't a whole lot of soft touch plastic that you'll find in a 2011 Sonata for instance. The interior spacing is pretty average and the trunk is a reasonable size. This comes down to the fact the Fusion isn't actually very large in its segment. On the build quality, the Fusion is still built in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico like before, this is one of the best assembled vehicles I've seen from Mexico. Normally I'd find several build quality issues, but Ford must have very good quality control since I've never encountered one poorly made or falling apart.

My Score(SE): 7/10 - Well equipped, smarter console design, well built but material choices questionable, no SYNC and interior spacing is just average.

My Score(SEL V6): 8/10 - Same as the SE but with good leather seats and has SYNC.

Styling: I'll be honest I actually think this Fusion from the front actually looks pretty good. This is one of the first Fords I think the tri-bar grille actually flowed with the styling with that headlight design. While I quite like the front, the rear makes it hard to tell the difference from the old car and the new one since they're very very similar. The wheel covers on the SE do seem to look a bit weird in my opinion. Overall I think this is a pretty well styled car...I just wish they went beyond just half the car.

My Score(both): 7/10 - Nice unique front but same boring rear from before.

Value for money: I'm actually surprised about the cost of the basic Fusion S, it actually starts out rather low. The SE is about the starting price of cars like the Camry and Accord. To get the SEL V6 you do have to pay nearly 30K where its price advantage does go away. Surprisingly it appears its pricing was designed to target the Chevrolet Malibu trim by trim ensuring it was less expensive each time. The Fusion can be had in AWD, but you have to then buy the SEL V6. Still if you want AWD this is one of the few midsized sedans with it, you're only other options are the Subaru Legacy, Suzuki Kizashi, and the VW Passat. All things considered the Fusion is a rather good package, as it has good driving dynamics, a decent interior, some unique styling and a reasonable price all in one.

My Score(SE): 8/10 - A pretty good value considering its better equipped than some of its rivals which are base models at that price.

My Score(SEL V6): 7/10 - While better equipped a tad pricey since rivals at this price point are better equipped...fortunately AWD is available that isn't an option on several rival products.

Overall(SE): 38/50 - A pretty good value packaged car, one can understand why its one of the best selling vehicles today.

Overall(SEL V6): 40/50 - Despite the higher price, I feel this is an even better trim level particularly with the V6 which is a nicer engine overall.

2007-2010 Ford Expedition XLT

This time an SUV which I haven't done in a while.


Introduction: The Ford Expedition is Ford's full size SUV and currently the largest it makes. It replaced the original Ford Bronco in 1997 and it later also replaced the Ford Excursion in 2007 with the Expedition Max. The Expedition uses the T platform which is based off of the F-150 truck. For much of its time the Ford Expedition has been made in Wayne, Michigan and only in 2009 has been built in Louisville, Kentucky because of Ford's expansion of the Wayne plant for the upcoming 2012 Ford Focus.

In all honesty before I got to drive the Expedition I've actually never heard of it. I also never really saw that many on the roads which meant it never came to my mind. I guess it was poorly advertised since I do see a lot of F-150 commercials and Explorer ones but never seen a Expedition ad. So I had no expectations having never of heard of the vehicle in the first place.


Performance: Due to its truck nature and its size the Expedition is given the 5.4L Triton V8. This engine produces 300 hp and 365 lb.ft of torque during 2007-2008, in later years the power is increased to 310 hp with the same engine. The transmission is a 6-speed automatic. With this much power and torque the Expedition accelerates from 0-100 km/h in about 8.1 seconds which is pretty quick considering its size and weight. Now there's no easy way to put this, the Expedition's fuel economy is pretty terrible. Its a very nice cruising motor and it doesn't make a whole lot of noise but unless you need a vehicle this size it will hurt at the fuel pumps quite badly. The low range gearbox works well even when the truck is sort of beached on ice.

My Score: 8/10 - Moves quickly, low range makes it capable of terrain issues, cruises very nicely...but awfully thirsty.

Handling: Like any full size SUV there are big drawbacks to having a tall vehicle with a massive amount of weight. While its turning circle is good for a vehicle its size, it still needs more room to turn compared to a car. You don't really want to take an Expedition into a corner very quickly as its weight can easily make it roll over. The steering is a slight bit heavy although its not all that exciting. Its what you would expect from a truck really, not good at cornering but driving sensibly it shouldn't be an issue. Ride comfort is average for a truck based SUV, not as soft as a CUV but not as bouncy on a real truck either.

My Score: 5/10 - Its not meant to be aggressive, its more happier on freeways.


Interior: Much like all Fords designed from this period of time, it was a better interior than what it used to be. Its not stylish but its functional and its pretty easy to use. There's a good amount of space for those in the front row and in the middle row. The rear seats are not as spacious as one would want despite its size. This may be different on the Expedition Max, but this review specifically focuses on the standard SUV. To fold the second row seats is straight forward, the third row folds with buttons which makes it really easy. Even with the third row up there's still trunk space unlike the Chevrolet Tahoe which doesn't. The leather material used is nothing significant its of pretty average quality. The build quality of these SUVs is pretty good from both plants 2007-2008 being made in Wayne, Michigan, USA and the 2009 to current cars made in Louisville, Kentucky, USA.

My Score: 8/10 - Reasonable interior, seating for 7, trunk space even with seats up, easy to use, a bit bland on styling.

Styling: The Expedition doesn't really have much to say on styling. It looks pretty generic as an SUV, removing the blue oval badge it could look like it might have come from General Motors. It may be two tone, but it doesn't really stand out in spite of that.

My Score: 3/10 - Generic.

Value for money: The Expedition's primary competition comes from the Chevrolet Tahoe/GMC Yukon, the Dodge Durango and Jeep Commander and the Toyota Sequoia. Its really all down to the Tahoe being its serious competition since the Durango and Commander are rubbish while the Sequoia is quite expensive($61,000!). On fuel economy the Tahoe is better because of cylinder deactivation. On practicality technically the Tahoe seats 8 but it really depends on whether you want to use the front bench seat with no airbag. The Expedition however has actual trunk space and is easier to use. The Expedition seats also fold in, while the Tahoe requires removal of the 3rd row seats. The Expedition is more versatile, the Tahoe is more economical.

My Score: 8/10 - Its very versatile in its utility, its just not as cheap or as fuel efficient.

Overall: 33/50 - A pretty good SUV focusing on being versatile, so long as you really need its size the fuel bills can then be excusable.

2007-2010 Ford Edge SEL and Limited AWD

I'm sorry, my last update was back in November and now its nearing Christmas time. This last set of reviews will likely be the last for the year so hopefully I'll get a few through. Starting with this vehicle.


Introduction: The Ford Edge is a midsize crossover introduced in 2006. This is one of the first vehicles by Ford to implement the Ford tri-bar grille. This vehicle uses the CD3 platform shared by the early Mazda6. This is Ford's first attempt in the segment after seeing Toyota's success with the Toyota Highlander and the Nissan Murano. The Edge comes in 4 trim levels, the base SE, the SEL, the Limited and the Sport. This review will look at the SEL and the Limited. Sales of the Edge have been very good to the point where Ford has redesigned it for the 2011 model year and is currently a market leader.

Like all CUVs I didn't really have much expectations for them and because of what I require in a car wouldn't consider them. Although this vehicle I knew was one of Ford's better selling vehicles of the time so it did give me some insight into it being at least decent.


Performance: All Ford Edge models come with the same engine and transmission. A 3.5L V6 that's mated to a 6-speed automatic. This V6 engine is capable of producing 265 hp and 250 lb.ft of torque. This means the acceleration from 0-100 km/h is about 8.3-8.4 seconds which is reasonable. The engine is rather quiet and refined making it a rather smooth and comfortable vehicle. The fuel economy is acceptable, not particularly outstanding but its better than the Explorer. All in all its a nice engine although it won't excite a performance oriented driver its good for regular calm driving.

My Score: 8/10 - Reasonably performance, alright fuel economy, quiet and smooth.

Handling: Being a tall, heavy vehicle the Edge is not an ideal vehicle to take corners too quickly. I was sort of hoping it acted close to how the Mazda CX-7 did but it seems Ford would rather focus on ride comfort over cornering ability. By taking the Edge in the corner while it will do it, you'll know the understeer is coming and the roll is very present. If you wanted a more agile vehicle its best to look at the Mazda. The steering is good for this sort of vehicle meaning it should communicate enough to allow confident driving.

My Score: 7/10 - Its good enough for most, ride comfort is good, noticeable understeer and roll.


Interior: Being a new key product for Ford this was where we would see whether they were capable of surviving. As a result Ford did spend a lot more resources on the interior where in the past they wouldn't. The interior in the Edge is rather simple and straight forward. It didn't have the cheap knobs we were used to seeing in less expensive cars although on the earlier Edges the stereo was mediocre. Interior materials are reasonable, nothing that looks out of the ordinary but crucially nothing that looks cheap and nasty. There's a lot of space for the 5 passengers in the vehicle while also having a big tailgate area. The interior is very easy to work with and if you have the limited the power options make things even easier. Some Ford Edges have a rubber mat for the tailgate area which means its easier to preserve the carpet if you know you'll put something that will make it messy. There's a leather parcel rack but not being solid it doesn't look that good and with the high tailgate ultimately useless. Knowing its visibility with the C and D pillars is not great, the mirrors provide two angles one for the blind spot and one to see the car's side. Its a well thought out interior despite it not being flash and interesting to look at. I've never seen a build quality issue on the Edge so it shouldn't fall apart. The Edge is assembled in Oakville, Ontario, Canada.

My Score: 8/10 - Well made, well thought out, well designed but slightly lacking in aesthetics.

Styling: I must admit the Edge is a rather distinctive vehicle. Ford went with a rather egg shaped vehicle which is risky since the last time we saw an egg shaped vehicle was the Previa and it didn't succeed on styling. Its not my favourite tri-bar grille vehicle but its the interesting shape that draws your attention to it being a Ford and not some random CUV. The rear doesn't have much interesting details but the front does have unique headlights in an attempt to match the grille.

My Score: 8/10 - Pretty noticeable, unique shape, the rear however doesn't is rather ordinary.

Value for money: Pricing for the Edge is rather high considering its supposed place in the Ford lineup. For much of the same money you could have a Taurus X which is bigger. The Toyota Highlander actually starts out less expensive as well. Its not as practical as a minivan since it only seats 5 which is as good as the Escape. The Ford Flex offers more seating capacity again for the same money. With these things in mind, I don't see the Edge offering much to a consumer looking purely at statistics. What the Edge does offer is the unique styling. It appears many liked the way it looked because evaluating the Edge against even other Fords it seems overpriced mainly since it doesn't offer anything special.

My Score: 5/10 - If you like the looks it'll do well, if you're not as interested in that the Flex is better or you can save money with the Escape which is just as good.

Overall: 36/50 - Its a good CUV on its own merits, its done rather well. Value within the Ford lineup is the only part where I'm a bit confused at its success.

2008-2011 Ford Focus SE and SES

I noticed that I've been doing a lot of crossovers, today I will post a car for a change. Unfortunately there are still quite a lot of crossovers still to do.


Introduction: As I stated in my old Ford Focus review, it had a bit of a bad start. When Ford brought it to North America dealing with 21 recalls in its first three years, most in its early two, gave a rather negative perception to the car. Alan Mulally the CEO of Ford, decided that in order to not only rid the company of excess waste but also to improve quality with more focused global vehicles. He was going to unite Ford of America, Ford of Europe and Ford of Australia by making sure that no matter where you went the Ford lineup is pretty much the same in each country. Ford of Europe doing very well would have the most surviving models, this left Ford of America to shed much of its excess like the Mercury brand. When it came to the North American Ford Focus, since Ford was redesigning the global vehicle for the 2012 model year, it appears they decided to not import the Mk II Focus design from Europe but rather redesign the current Mk I to keep it fresh without investing too much into it.

I wasn't sure about the changes, having driven cars on the C1 platform I knew it wouldn't be as good since its still on the aging C170.


Performance: Due to the way Ford has only intended this Focus to be a stopgap for the upcoming 2012 Focus this car doesn't get any interesting engines. It still makes do with the old 2.0L Duratec you get from the previous Ford Focus. Its not entirely the same it does gain 4 hp meaning in total 140 but with the same 136 lb.ft of torque. Still the old car wasn't very slow so the new car with its newer body accelerates from 0-100 km/h in about 8.3 seconds. When it comes to noise, it can be a but buzzy but its more quiet than it used to be. Its pretty respectable even with an aging motor.

My Score: 8/10 - Very much the same engine as before, still reasonable.

Handling: Now I remembered the old Focus having a steering wheel that moved like an anvil, it never seemed like they had any power steeering. This car has changed this, while its still not the lightest wheel out there its a lot more manageable and therefore it was much easier to find out if it had any feel to it instead of getting tired and not really enjoying the drive. Taking this car around a corner it didn't seem to feel as good as I was hoping. Its competent so you shouldn't crash that easily but somehow it didn't excite me. It was a bit dull. In removing some of the crude feeling of the old system it didn't inject much life into it. The ride comfort is quite alright, its reasonable but not as cushy as you might get on softer riding cars. It also made no difference in the SES version, supposedly the sporty one which is a shame.

My Score: 7/10 - It cleans up the problems of the old system, but sadly its not very lively.


Interior: This is where I see the biggest improvement from the older car. I remembered how puny the seat levers were in the older car, this one has a proper lever. The cup holders are no longer ugly and come off with little effort. The door handles are much nicer. The stereo is better and the controls have much better touches than they used to. The seats depend on the trim level, on lower grades like the SE you get cloth and they're alright. The SES and SEL provide leather and its a bit nicer. The SYNC system is alright to use as well. While I haven't explored everything it could do, it handles most of what you need without too much complications. Nothing about the interior is luxurious but its functional and overall pretty simple. Trunk space is pretty good for its class and it was reasonable with interior space. There is something to note though, they left out the trunk release button in 2008 models, I thought I couldn't find it but when a 2009 model came out it was under the fuse box meaning they really did leave it out. Silly mistake by Ford to leave it out, at least it was rectified though. The build quality is alright, much better than before although I've found some of the plastic covers like to come out. The Focus is made in Wayne, Michigan in the United States.

My Score: 7/10 - While not luxurious it fixes the old interior's massive problems.

Styling: This is probably the most controversial thing about this Focus. I rather liked the previous Focus, this one attempts to marry the current tri-bar Ford grille with something a bit radical. In coupe form it looks terrible especially with the spoiler. In sedan form its a bit better but I don't think the tri-bar grille worked on this design. The rear I don't think worked out either it kept some of the triangles from the older design but left the trunk with a blank space full of badges. I don't find the car very appealing, this is the redesign's biggest problem.

My Score: 3/10 - Styling didn't work out too well.

Value for money: One of the things Ford left out this time unfortunately was a Focus wagon or hatch. This design thus won't appeal to the new growing hatchback segment and must wait until the 2012 model to see if they left that intact. This is also a very fiercely competitive segment meaning it has a lot of competition to deal with even if its not an entirely new design. That said, the satellite radio being equipped starts it off ahead of the older designs out there. The new SYNC system might also intrigue some people. The styling will keep others away. The handling while not bad, its much less exciting than a Mazda and considering the SES is the sport package but makes nearly no difference that might disappoint. Its not spectacular but against its Detroit rivals its significantly better. It could have been more convincing if it were based on the European Mk II Focus, but we'll have to wait for the 2012 Mk III for Ford's real Focus. In the end it could have been better, but for a vehicle coming from a Detroit automaker its not a bad buy.

My Score: 6/10 - Overall its not spectacular on many areas, but it doesn't exactly flounder either.

Overall: 31/50 - Its a decent car, but we'll have to wait for the 2012 to see what Ford's really capable of in this segment.

2009-2010 Ford Flex SEL & Limited AWD

I'm still trying my best to get 2 reviews a week. Today is yet another crossover review.


Introduction: The Ford Flex was introduced in 2009 as Ford's replacement for the Freestar minivan. Unlike most crossovers, the Flex is Ford's attempt to combine the minivan and the SUV. Much of the whole design came from the 2005 Ford Fairlane concept, the differences between concept and production vehicle are minor. Initially Ford anticipated 100,000 units of sales for the Flex, unfortunately Ford hasn't come close to meeting this. Still Ford wants the Flex to live on despite its modest sales now offering incentives.

This is the first of the new Fords I've come across. I was glad it wasn't a minivan but I wasn't so sure about it as a crossover. I thought it looked interesting so at the minimum it seemed creative.


Performance: The Ford Flex is given 2 engines the standard 3.5L V6 which this review will be focusing on. The other engine is the Ecoboost 3.5L twin turbo V6, the same engine available in the Taurus SHO. The standard Duratech V6 produces 262 hp and 248 lb.ft of torque. On acceleration the Flex is capable of getting from 0-100 km/h in about 8.5 seconds. Considering how big and heavy it is, this is reasonable performance. The engine is particularly quiet on highway drives and overall is pretty smooth. Fuel economy isn't great but what did you expect from a vehicle this big. Despite being the base engine its a good one.

My Score: 8/10 - Reasonable performance, quiet and smooth.

Handling: There are small differences when you choose SEL and Limited, the SELs get 18 inch wheels while the Limited gets 19 inch wheels. Despite having rims this large, ride quality doesn't actually suffer. Due to its weight, its not able to take corners as quickly as cars can. If you push it, you'll feel the understeer very early. It does well for a vehicle that's heavier than 4500 lbs much to my surprise which might have to do with how short it is compared to SUVs of the same size. Steering is weighted well making it a pretty easy vehicle to drive. Its certainly nicer to drive than any minivan.

My Score: 7/10 - On the whole its pretty good at handling but its weight means it also suffers from major understeer in a corner.


Interior: One of the things you'll notice inside the Flex is how spacious it is. First things first, a lower range model will have the 6 seater arrangement, while a higher one will have a 7 seater arrangement. Both are fine, the 6 seater is just the easier one for getting people into the back as its layout is much like a minivan's with space in between the 2nd row unless you decide to have the 2nd center console added. With 7 seaters to enter the back you need to fold a seat, fortunately Ford thought of this and decided this should be done with a single push of a button. To put return the seats in position is very easy and straight forward, no muscle required. To fold the 3rd row its not electrically done like a Explorer but its still pretty easy by pulling the straps as indicated on the seats. The 3rd row is spacious enough for medium sized adults and since the Flex can still carry cargo they don't sit so close to the tailgate. The tailgate itself is rather heavy, but Ford again thought about this and made opening and closing easy with the use of a button. I didn't really find much difference between the cloth and leather seats, of course the leather is softer and smoother but neither is a bad choice. Driver control layout is much as what you would expect from a Ford, everything is pretty much where you'd expect it to be. Visibility isn't great I'm afraid, the D-pillars are particularly large but most Ford Flexs come with rear parking sensors which will help. Interior materials are of modest quality, none look or feel particularly awful. Build quality is very good, the Ford Flex is assembled in Oakville, Ontario, Canada. The most impressive thing about this interior is just how user-friendly it is, Ford hired someone who has made a crossover very easy to live with, everything annoying on most crossover interiors seems to have been addressed in the Flex.

My Score: 10/10 - I've never come across an interior that should be complicated to work out, made so easy with little effort to understand how everything is done. The overall interior is good, this just stands out as excellent interior design, because its so well thought out.

Styling: This appears to be the Flex's biggest problem when it comes to its sales. It does look a bit like its been shaped from a tetris block. Much of the exterior tries to emphasize how square it is. Some people think it looks particularly ugly, I'm not one of those. I think it looks alright, it just looks even better if you bought the rather expensive Titanium package where it looks a bit like a Range Rover. It may be polarizing, but I'd rather have a vehicle that tries too look different than your typical minivan.

My Score: 7/10 - Its a bit square but its more interesting than the shapeless blobs that many cars are.

Value for money: Sales for the Flex aren't as hot as Ford wanted so when it comes to value its going to start off well with employee pricing discounts. The Flex's target is primarily minivan drivers who don't want a boring vehicle to drive but still want much of the capacity and flexibility of a minivan. On this front the Flex does well, the interior is much easier to work out than any minivan I've encountered. The problem with most minivans, they require muscle to get their full use either by removing heavy seats or operating a rickety contraption that's in the floor. Unlike many crossovers it has room for full passenger capacity and some room for luggage like a minivan. The only places where the Flex does scare off people is the price and the styling.

My Score: 8/10 - A bit pricey if no discounts are available and it depends on how it looks to you, otherwise its the best alternative to a minivan.

Overall: 40/50 - A very good crossover, with a clever interior. If all crossovers were done like this, perhaps the minivan might be extinct.

2011 Ford Mustang GT Convertible

Well I'm doing slightly better with updating now that I've been given more time, obviously at the expense of pay...but that's the way things are in this wretched economy. I changed the template a bit and thought this was a bit more suitable and less plain. Anyways my first review of a convertible and considering how few convertibles are left at all possibly my last.


Introduction: The Ford Mustang is one of Ford's most iconic models from its glorious past. The Mustang was an 18 month project under Donald N. Fey who was Lee Iacocca's assistant and chief engineer. It was originally supposed to be a 2-seater, mid-engined roaster but due to the 2-seater Thunderbird's sales failure thus the Mustang was changed into a 4-seater front engined coupe. To lower costs the Mustang shared various components with the Fairlane and Falcon. It was released in 1964 and to Ford's surprise and an even bigger surprise to an unsuspecting GM in its first 2 years the Mustang sold nearly 1.5 million vehicles. It was then the Ford Mustang created what's called the Pony car. The 1973 OPEC oil embargo meant the original Mustang's days had to end with stricter pollution laws this had Ford create the Mustang II. While Mustang II's sales were good, it was not well received with much more competitive cars in the market. One of the most popular trim levels from the original the Mustang GT was discontinued since the Mustang II. The original Mustang is still much loved, the Mustang II didn't bring such attachment. In 1979 the Mustang was once again changed this time to be applied on the Fox platform. As the Mustang reached the mid 1980s Ford believed the Mustang was falling out in favour as sales was becoming more dismal and wanted to replace the rear wheel drive Mustang for a front wheel drive derived from Mazda. Ford received plenty of angry letters from Ford enthusiasts and decided to leave the Mustang alone while still initiating the Mazda MX-6 derived vehicle now known as the Ford Probe. The Mustang underwent another redesign in 1994, using the SN platform which was a updated Fox platform. This version revived the Mustang GT thought to be have been gone. In 2005 the Mustang received a complete update on its own platform known as the D2C. Styling has also takes on a retro theme as its styling has been greatly influenced by the original Mustang. This version of the Mustang also brought the return of the Shelby Mustangs back from the original version's days, now known as the Shelby GT500. This Mustang was updated in 2010 with a updated look and adding a few more retro items, the next set of updates occurred in 2011 with both the V6 and V8 engines receiving a much needed power upgrade with increased competition from the new Chevrolet Camaro.

Yeah the Mustang has an incredibly rich history. The car has always embodied the greatness of the old American muscle cars. Its actually a good thing Ford didn't succumb to pressure to kill off the Mustang during its dark days as its returned to some of the glory it once had. Its very difficult for Ford to sell 1.5 million in 2 years with fuel economy and practicality taking priority for most families but for simple cheap fun the Mustang has usually been there. I heard great things about the V6 Mustang, but was pretty surprised about receiving the GT which comes with a new 5.0L V8.


Performance: This is really what the Mustang GT is all about. With its massive 5.0L V8 by using premium fuel this engine can produce 418 hp and 390 lb.ft of torque. Much of the excitement starts just by starting the engine and hearing the snarl. Normally I would comment about how good the engine is being quiet...this car isn't quiet and you don't want it to be because this snarling V8 sounds so good. Due to its massive power increase, Ford needed a heavier duty transmission to deal with the power and thus you get either a 6-speed manual or automatic, dealing with fleet cars I only got to use the automatic. The hardtop Mustang GT can blitz through from 0-100 km/h in 4.3 seconds, my convertible is likely an extra .2 or .3 seconds more. This car is so quick that 100 km/h feels rather slow because its over with so soon. This is easily the most corrupting car I've ever driven. Fuel economy is actually not terrible either, its horrid in the city but its capable of mid 20 mpg if your doing highway driving.

My Score: 10/10 - Brilliant, love the noise, seriously quick, not terrible fuel economy numbers as one would expect, most corrupting engines ever.

Handling: The Mustang has never really done the greatest job when it came down to handling in much of its career. Many blame it all on the live rear axle, it was indeed a problem for many of the older Mustangs compared to modern independent rear suspensions. Yet it can be argued the live rear axle lowered weight and is far more suitable for drag racing which is what the Mustang does very well at. Taking this revised 2011 Mustang around a corner, I actually didn't really notice the live axle hindering my ability to take corners. Where live axles cause problems is when the road is uneven causing it to bounce around instead of cornering flat. Depending on how well paved your roads are may determine how good or bad the live axle is for you. The Mustang GT easily has a tendency to oversteer thanks to brutal power going straight to only the rear wheels. While I believe the Infiniti G37 is a more solid and capable handling, the Mustang is pretty competent but more capable of providing fun(also danger) making it a more exciting car to take around corners.

My Score: 10/10 - Not the best car I've taken around corners but definitely the most fun


Interior: This has been the biggest drawback of the original Mustang the woeful interior. Well the seat was pretty comfortable, not as supportive as the Maxima's I'm afraid which I would prefer on a car that loves to oversteer. The interior materials are definitely better than the last Mustang but I can't say they're great. The plastic is of mediocre quality and it overall doesn't look all that appealing unlike a few of the newer Fords. There's very poor amount of legroom for those who're thinking of using the backseats for people. A tall driver pretty much negates the use of one of the back seats its still not good even with the seat up and I'm quite small. The convertible has a very small amount of trunk space, though space is better than no trunk. The build quality...I'm not that impressed there are a few trim pieces I thought were a bit flimsy. In the end there is a price to pay, the Mustang is not very expensive for what it is but the interior took much of the sacrifice.

My Score: 4/10 - Mediocre plastic, woeful legroom for rear seats, puny trunk and disappointing build quality.

Styling: This is the revised version of the previous 2005-2009 Mustang. I must say I rather like the revisions over the older one a lot. Your rear turn signal lights up in an arrangement very much like it once was done by cars in the 1960s specifically Mustangs and Cougars, a great nostalgic item. It retains much of the looks of the 1960s Mustang which has a timeless look to it. The curving of some of the sharper touches makes this version seem very modern in contrast to the previous version which tried to look 1960s. This way it doesn't look old but keeps much of what's great of old car styling.

My Score: 10/10 - Great mix of old and new car styling to create a beautiful car.

Value for money: The Mustang has some fierce competition as of late with the Chevrolet Camaro's return. It used to be down to the Mazda MX-5 which has a completely different philosophy to the Mustang's. The Dodge Challenger's return has also complicated things too. However in the case of the Challenger its appeal is directly to those who miss the 1960s. The Camaro and the revised Mustang embrace the future. The Camaro offers a rather unique challenge since its down to how much you prefer GM over Ford, the differences between the two are statistics. We'll be certain a revised Camaro will be capable of beating this revised Mustang. However as it stands the Mustang is a great value for money when it comes to brute power, but for total sports car handling you'll still have to look at the Mazda MX-5.

My Score: 8/10 - Its very good value for its money, it mainly comes down to your tastes and wants for sports cars.

Overall: 42/50 - A handsome brute of a car, truly an experience...shame about that interior.

2010 Ford F-150

I think this will be the final one today, but perhaps I'll change my mind.


Introduction: The Ford F-150 is easily Ford's best selling vehicle of all time. This truck has managed to break sales records and often dominate sales charts for the world despite selling a enormous amount mostly for North America. The F-150 spans from 12 generations with the earliest truck produced from 1948. The only time the F-150 fell in sales was during the high oil prices during 2007-2008 where the Toyota Camry finally managed to beat the F-150 on a few monthly sales numbers when it normally dominated. Lately the GMC Sierra and the Chevrolet Silverado combined has also taken the #1 spot for pickup trucks, on their own the F-150 still leads in sales. With oil prices down from record highs, its unknown whether the F-series can still dominate sales like it once did now that Ford has redesigned it.

By the time I got to drive the F-150 I've driven the two Rams and the Sierra meaning it was down to Ford to show whether it was still capable of competing in this lucrative segment. Seeing as how both the new Ram and the Sierra are good, I wanted to see if the F-150 was even better.


Performance: The F-150 has 4 engine choices to choose from. Between two 4.7L V8s or two 5.4L V8s. The truck I drove had the 5.4L V8 capable not capable of taking the E85. This engine produces 310 hp and 365 lb.ft of torque. Acceleration numbers for the F-150 are about 8 seconds for a 0-100 km/h run. The V8 powers the F-150 pretty well but definitely not as well as the 2009 Ram with the Hemi V8. Still the engine is a rather pleasant one and at first it doesn't seem apparent its a powerful V8 as it cruises rather quietly. A pretty relaxing engine.

My Score: 8/10 - Good power, very quiet, reasonable fuel economy its just not as excellent as the Ram's Hemi V8.

Handling: The big trucks are often a surprise as I have a hard time believing they drive so easy. The F-150 isn't much different from this aspect as I found it pretty easy to drive despite its massive size compared to many cars and even SUVs. I was even more surprised at how calm it handled bumps while not really sacrificing cornering ability. Steering is rather precise, just the way I like it and just for that reason I think its one of the better trucks when it comes to agility.

My Score: 9/10 - Really easy to drive, handles good for a truck and rides pretty comfortably.


Interior: This is normally an area where pickup trucks often put very little effort into however with GM taking the initiative to produce a good pickup truck interior this forced both Ford and Dodge to come up with better interiors. The Ford interior is in my mind...pretty good. It doesn't have the same problems as Dodge did when it came to the plastics. The interior is very user friendly and the materials are of good quality. The dash is simple and visibility is as good as any truck. The build quality on the F-150 is probably the best of the American trucks which is better than what it used to be. The F-150 is assembled in Dearborn, Michigan in the United States where Ford's HQ is located.

My Score: 10/10 - A good pickup truck interior, can't actually find anything wrong with it.

Styling: The F-150 once had a simple look, rather generic for a truck. With Ford embracing its tri-bar grille, the F-150 now uses it as well. It turns out it wasn't as bad as I was thinking although it does now look a bit too similar to the GMC Sierra. The headlights are of a unique shape and if the grille is chrome it does stand out, the black plastic grille in my mind doesn't look good.

My Score: 7/10 - Still prefer both the GM and the Dodge trucks in style but the F-150 isn't bad.

Value for money: Much of the F-150 is very good and its in a very competitive, lucrative market. In all honesty due to how good all the trucks are it all comes down to style and preference and the F-150 in my mind is the best all rounder. Its not the very best in most areas but its probably the best when you take several things into account. Still its very difficult to go wrong with any of the American trucks.

My Score: 8/10 - Very competitive, plainly down to what's the right truck for you?

Overall: 44/50 - Ford has proven its not ready to give up on pickup trucks

2007 Ford Focus

Here's a car I almost forgot about, I've driven quite a few of the newer Focus but somehow I kept forgetting about the older one.


Introduction: The Ford Focus was an effort by Ford of America to sort of bring its European lineup to North America. The last effort was the Contour being a near replica of the Mondeo but ended up not doing as well as Ford hoped. The North American Focus did not bring a replica of the European Focus but instead used mostly American designed parts and was built in the US. This brought the Focus into attention as one of the most recalled vehicles in US history. A staggering 21 recalls were made for the Focus for the 2000-2003 models. This lead to the Focus to being repealed from Car of the year for a few North American car publications.

My cousin drives one of these cars, he told me things about it so I knew before hand what this car was going to be like.


Performance: I got the base model so it only had the 2.0L 4-cylinder engine that produced 136 hp and 136 lb.ft of torque which is an improvement over the previous unit that had 110 hp. This means the acceleration from 0-100 km/h is about 8.7 seconds which is actually pretty good for a small car with low amounts of power. The engine however is a bit noisy and not very pleasant especially compared to the newer Focus. Not enough however to make this a bad engine.

My Score: 8/10 - A surprisingly quick vehicle considering how small the engine is.

Handling: One of the key items from the C170 platform is this platform is used on the European Focus which did give it a distinct advantage over its European rivals. The North American one uses this same platform but somehow I didn't get the sense its handling was all that brilliant. Possibly one of the annoying things was how stiff the wheel was, I normally criticize cars with very light wheels being vague...this one is very heavy but didn't seem to match how the car cornered. It would be wrong to say the Focus handled badly, but I couldn't say it felt that great to put it into a corner since a car like this would get tiring.

My Score: 7/10 - The very heavy wheel might have ruined the potentially great handling. You just don't feel it because of how much effort it takes to move the wheel.


Interior: This is something that was most displeasing in the Focus. The interior of the Focus all I can say is...cheap. Lots of cost cutting occurred in the Focus and I believe an accountant styled this interior, I just can't think of a real designer going through such lengths to cut costs. The door handles are very cheap, the seat levers are small and cheap, the cup holders are awful looking and removable, its a sea of grey and I just couldn't see anything attractive inside. Don't bother to look the European one looks like this too. As said its built in the USA, the recalls in question...unfortunately a few are a result of how well built this car is. Its functional but compared to its competition its pretty lacking.

My Score: 3/10 - Not a good looking interior, lots of cost cutting and not built very well.

Styling: The North American Focus got a face lift over the original European design. I must say, this face lift actually puts it in line with the rest of the European lineup and even though its not a pretty average looking car...I actually like the way it looks. I actually prefer this to the original style which was a bit more outrageous. Every bit fits the car so well.

My Score: 10/10 - I can't think of anything wrong with the styling, it somehow works so well.

Value for Money: The recalls have hurt the Focus' reputation and as a result it suffered. By this point the Mazda 3 has established its the driver oriented car with the improved C1 platform, while the C170 is clearly outdated. Reliability is already weaker considering the recalls leaving it down to driving something American that is decent but clearly not refined. I guess another reason to buy it is it does look good.

My Score: 5/10 - Not great considering the recalls, if Ford put a lot more effort into making it right then this should have been a success.

Overall: 33/50 - There are worse cars than the Focus but I do think it looks good and after all that's said and done it did need polishing which is what the newer one does.