5 New SUVs/Crossovers in North America.

[silvrsvt]

The next Grand Cherokee will be based on the same platform as the Alfa Romeo Guilia and Stelvio. In other words, it will be a crossover.

 

 

The GC is already a Unibody design...so technically is it is a CUV

 

Which points out that CUV vs SUV is more about marketing vs actual differences in product.

Edited February 9, 2017 by silvrsvt

[bzcat]

 

Yes but we've never had C-max and Ecosport at the same time.

 

Well, we will next year. Plus it's the new "normal" so not sure what your point is... CUVs are the new "cars" and Ford always had a B and C segments entries.

 

I can't imagine a Focus hatchback sized CUV and a properly B size Ecopsort are not high on the priority list for Ford Europe and US. They are two of the fastest growing segments right now.

 

 

2 small crossovers below Escape are not completely different market segments. Might be 2 different price points.

 

There are many ways to skin a cat but the results are the same

 

I think there is plenty of evidence that the market can support two Ford CUVs below Escape as people continue to replace cars with CUVs.

Edited February 9, 2017 by bzcat

[akirby]

Europe might be a different story. But have we ever seen 3 B/C sized cars here before? It's always been one B and one C as far as I can remember. So I'm not so sure it's the same as cars.

 

I'm not saying they can't sell all 3 but I question whether the sales of 2 smaller ones would be that much better than 1 (short C).

 

I guess we'll see how Ecosport does.

[AGR]

It was the Grand Cherokee, along with the Durango(forgot about it), Charger, Challenger, 300, and every Maserati.

The current GC is an oddity, with a unibody but truck running gear.

[jpd80]

 

What new Durango? The current model came out in 2011.

Sorry my bad, I didn't type SRT......

Edited February 10, 2017 by jpd80

[jpd80]

 

The GC is already a Unibody design...so technically is it is a CUV

 

Which points out that CUV vs SUV is more about marketing vs actual differences in product.

Unitbody Vs BOF is not necessarily fthe decider in the SUV versus CUV argument. Generally, SUVs have a squarer body

with a more upright rear hatch where as crossovers are more like converted stationwagons and 5-door hatchbacks.

 

Sure. it's all tied into marketing but that also touches into the vehicles intended use and lifestyle.

I'm sure you could site evidence to the contrary and I probably wouldn't dispute that, so much

of what is sold today is marketing image and governed by the needed capability.

Edited February 10, 2017 by jpd80

[probowler]

 

The GC is already a Unibody design...so technically is it is a CUV

 

Which points out that CUV vs SUV is more about marketing vs actual differences in product.

 

Don't ask a jeep guy if it's a true SUV

[bzcat]

Europe might be a different story. But have we ever seen 3 B/C sized cars here before? It's always been one B and one C as far as I can remember. So I'm not so sure it's the same as cars.

 

I'm not saying they can't sell all 3 but I question whether the sales of 2 smaller ones would be that much better than 1 (short C).

 

I guess we'll see how Ecosport does.

 

You are not thinking about this problem in the right comparative frame. It's not the number of name plates. I'm talking about but the actual size of the vehicles.

 

Ford sells a Focus hatch and a Focus sedan, which are C-segment cars of different length. VW sells a Golf hatch and a Jetta sedan, which are C-segment cars of different length. etc.

 

Ford sells a ____ and a Escape CUV, which are C-segment CUVs of different length. VW sells a Tiguan and a Tiguan Allspace, which are C-segment CUVs of different length. etc.

 

If you believe Ford will keep Escape (Kuga) competitive with its peers, then you will have to assume that it will grow longer to match Tiguan Allspace, Buick Envision, Nissan Rogue, Toyota RAV4, Jeep Cherokee etc. That opens up a lot of real estate for a shorter C-segment CUV roughly the same size as C-Max.

Edited February 11, 2017 by bzcat

[akirby]

You missed the point. I agree they need a short C and a longer Escape. But I don't think they necessarily need a short C and an Ecosport. I think Ecosport and short C would simply be splitting the sales and not adding incremental volume.

[SoonerLS]

Unitbody Vs BOF is not necessarily fthe decider in the SUV versus CUV argument.

Generally speaking, IMHO, CUVs are cars pretending to be trucks and SUVs are trucks pretending to be cars; CUVs are FWD/AWD, while SUVs are RWD/4x4. Also IMHO, the Escape has always been a CUV; the redesign just acknowledged its true nature.

[jpd80]

Generally speaking, IMHO, CUVs are cars pretending to be trucks and SUVs are trucks pretending to be cars; CUVs are FWD/AWD, while SUVs are RWD/4x4. Also IMHO, the Escape has always been a CUV; the redesign just acknowledged its true nature.

And that's why you'll get no real argument from me, Utilities actually draw from both ends trucks and cars to get the desired attributes.

and when I see this from BMW, anything is possible, could you imagine both Focus and Fusion/Mondeo transformed thus:

 

 

We used to think that car platforms were pretty broad in potential application with sedans, station wagons, a pick up

and maybe a LWB larger vehicle but then hatchbacks arrived and then Utilities came along.

 

I sometimes wonder if Ford actually has too much to choose from and feels a little overwhelmed the weight of not knowing how much

to back itself and take a leap of faith that all of the CUVs and SUVs have a place and role to play. the cars are much less important now.

 

i'm actually heartened by the thought that cars will survive thanks to the strength of Utility sales, I guess that's the way of things...

There's just so much potential with Utilities, they're an open book to bake in whatever attributes and capacity the buyers want

Edited February 11, 2017 by jpd80

[2b2]

You missed the point. I agree they need a short C and a longer Escape. But I don't think they necessarily need a short C and an Ecosport. I think Ecosport and short C would simply be splitting the sales and not adding incremental volume.

 

catching up on this thread, something makes me wonder if

having both an EcoSport and something else not too-diff in overall-size, based on the Focus/Escape architecture,

might give factory-flexibility ... just in case of any external uncertainties

 

tho dunno/doubt if utilization(s) support that thought

[akirby]

One thing that probably would work is of the short c had radical styling like a soul or juke.

[jpd80]

Or a jacked up Focus hatch with AWD?

I think the solution is mostly already there and different

enough to the Escape and subcompact Ecosport

[rmc523]

One thing that probably would work is of the short c had radical styling like a soul or juke.

 

I actually like the Soul. Juke on the other hand.....I refer to it as the Puke.

 

Makes me wonder if a mini Flex look could be successful in that market.....but make it look better than the Scion xB.

 

Or a jacked up Focus hatch with AWD?

I think the solution is mostly already there and different

enough to the Escape and subcompact Ecosport

 

I think that's what we'll end up with, a la Subaru Crosstrek.

[probowler]

I really would prefer if Ford stayed away from the "quirky" and "radical" game. Leave the jukes and the scions to the hipsters.

[MKII]

And that's why you'll get no real argument from me, Utilities actually draw from both ends trucks and cars to get the desired attributes.

and when I see this from BMW, anything is possible, could you imagine both Focus and Fusion/Mondeo transformed thus:

 

 

We used to think that car platforms were pretty broad in potential application with sedans, station wagons, a pick up

and maybe a LWB larger vehicle but then hatchbacks arrived and then Utilities came along.

 

I sometimes wonder if Ford actually has too much to choose from and feels a little overwhelmed the weight of not knowing how much

to back itself and take a leap of faith that all of the CUVs and SUVs have a place and role to play. the cars are much less important now.

 

i'm actually heartened by the thought that cars will survive thanks to the strength of Utility sales, I guess that's the way of things...

There's just so much potential with Utilities, they're an open book to bake in whatever attributes and capacity the buyers want

 

Rendering is right up that alley

[Harley Lover]

 

Rendering is right up that alley

 

MKII, where did those originate?

[SoonerLS]

I really would prefer if Ford stayed away from the "quirky" and "radical" game. Leave the jukes and the scions to the hipsters.

Meh. If Ford can turn a profit on a new quirky model and bring new buyers into the fold, I say go for it. If you don't like it, you don't have to buy one, but that's not a good reason for them ignoring a potential market.

[akirby]

I really would prefer if Ford stayed away from the "quirky" and "radical" game. Leave the jukes and the scions to the hipsters.

 

Revenue is revenue.

[SoonerLS]

Revenue is revenue.

Hipster money is the same color as regular people money, it was just that color first, before it became mainstream.

[tbone]

 

Rendering is right up that alley

This is not my style of vehicle but that looks pretty Sharp.

[silvrsvt]

This is not my style of vehicle but that looks pretty Sharp.

 

Yeah I'd have to agree....not a huge fan of the X6 (reminds me of a bullfrog for some reason) but this looks decent

[rmc523]

I really would prefer if Ford stayed away from the "quirky" and "radical" game. Leave the jukes and the scions to the hipsters.

 

That wouldn't become a theme throughout the lineup, it'd just be for this one vehicle as part of a multi-pronged approach to the small crossover market. You'd have the more traditional looking "EcoSport+" (I'll call it that for now), as well as a more quirky and unique model targeted at different buyers in the same segment.

 

 

Rendering is right up that alley

 

Actually that looks pretty good. Not sure about the position of the Ford badge in the grille, but otherwise, I like it. My problem with the X6 is it looks too bloated, and the roofline oddly enough exaggerates that. I think the GLE coupe looks better than the X6......and this rendering is further toward it than the X6, depsite being based on it. And despite being based on it, it somehow loses that bloated look. Would be interesting if they did it, though I don't see it happening.

[tbone]

Yes, the X6 looks like it has a fat ass. The rendering does the style better.