Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Ford / Ford Cars / November 2009

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Results of Weekend Shopping for a New Car For My Mother

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
C. E. White - 18 Oct 2009 16:38 GMT
Earlier this month I asked for advice regarding a new car for my Mother to
replace a Ford Freestyle that was totaled in an accident. I mostly was
looking for advice regarding the Toyota Venza and Highlander. Well we
finally went shopping and my Mother is getting a new Highlander.

We visited dealerships for Toyota, Honda, and Ford. We eliminated Nissan and
GM from the shopping trip before we began, Where my Mother lives there are
not any other choices within reasonable driving distance.

We started out at the Toyota Dealership. First car was a Venza. I really
liked this, but my Mother seemed completely uninterested. I am not sure why,
but it was pretty much out of the running immediately. Next was the
Highlander. This seemed to be an immediate hit. My Mother didn't want the
third row seat, but it seems that is almost a universal option. I still
preferred the Venza, but I wasn't the buyer.

Next we visited the Honda dealer. The Pilot was immediately eliminated as
wildly overpriced. My Mother liked the CR-V but it seems that dealers load
them all up with options that jack up the price. To get one equipped
reasonably you ended up with a sun roof my Mother didn't want and a price
higher than the Highlander.

The Ford dealer was last on the list. We immediately dismissed the Flex as
too weird. My Sister liked the Edge and tried to find reasons why my Mother
should get it. Unfortunately the dealer had none properly equipped for my
Mother. The MSRP on the Edge was the highest of the vehicles we considered,
but there were rebates that made the price competitive with the Highlander
and the CR-V. I was really impressed with the new Taurus and thought my
Mother should consider it, but She was firm in wanting something taller.
I'll add a few comments oon the Taurus later.

So in the end we finally settled on the Highlander. The Highlander was the
cheapest of the vehicles (4 cylinder, cloth seats, third row seats). The
CR-V was the most expensive, noisiest, smallest, but best equipped (leather
seats, sun roof, electronic temperature control).  The Edge had the best
seating, biggest, most powerful engine, most attractive (to me), but got the
worst gas mileage, and was hard to find properly equipped for my Mother. All
the dealerships were very co-operative and none were busy. I believe my
Mother will be happy with the Highlander. It is a little dull, but it has
good room, decent gas mileage and the reliability is likely to be comparable
to the Fords she is used to (can't be better, since she hasn't had a problem
with a Ford in a decade). I was in agreement with the Highlander as the best
choice. It was the closest of the vehicles to the Freestyle (aka Taurus X)
that she owned. Too bad Ford decided to stop making those, I think if they
still made them, we would have just got another.

While the salesmen at the Ford dealer were trying to find a suitable Edge, I
sent a long time looking at a new Taurus. The one I looked at was a very
expensive Limited model with almost every option. It was $35K....way more
than I would consider paying for the car. Still, it was very nice. Looks
great, well assembled. My only gripe is with the width of the center
console. I can't figure why companies (not just Ford) have to install
consoles that eat up a third of the front passenger space. Because of the
ridiculously wide console, the hip space available to front seat passengers
is no better than in my much smaller Fusion. Other than this, I really liked
the car. If I was in the market for a new car, I'd definitely be interested
in a new Taurus - but not a Limited!

Ed
Ashton Crusher - 18 Oct 2009 23:14 GMT
>Earlier this month I asked for advice regarding a new car for my Mother to
>replace a Ford Freestyle that was totaled in an accident. I mostly was
>looking for advice regarding the Toyota Venza and Highlander. Well we
>finally went shopping and my Mother is getting a new Highlander

I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
Sharx35 - 19 Oct 2009 00:55 GMT
>>Earlier this month I asked for advice regarding a new car for my Mother to
>>replace a Ford Freestyle that was totaled in an accident. I mostly was
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?

For parking lot bumper car?
Stewart - 19 Oct 2009 04:39 GMT
>>Earlier this month I asked for advice regarding a new car for my
>>Mother to
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?

Maybe it was a preference as opposed to a technical need.
C. E. White - 19 Oct 2009 12:34 GMT
>>Earlier this month I asked for advice regarding a new car for my
>>Mother to
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?

First of all, the Highlnader is not an SUV. You might get away with
calling it a "Crossover" but in no way is it an SUV. In my opinion, it
is nothing more than a Camry Station Wagon. Of the vehicles we looked
at, the Edge was the closest thing to an SUV and it wasn't
particularly close, although Ford tries to pitch it as one. The Venza
is called a car, but the only substantial difference between it and
the Highlander is the height of the roof and the level of standard
equipment. The CR-V would like to pretend to be an SUV, but it misses
the mark by hundreds of miles. It is just a Civic Station Wagon with
an AWD option. Even the Pilot, although a nice vehicle, can't be
considered a legitimate SUV. Anything that is primarily front wheel
drive and has very limited towing capacity is just a station wagon (or
I guess a "Crossover" which in my mind is the new name for "Station
Wagon").

My Mother never said she wanted an SUV. She just wanted something that
she could sit up in and see out of. Until she got a Freestyle, my
Mother always drove a full size vehicles (Galaxie, LTD, Grand Marquis,
etc.). The Freestyle was the smallest car she had ever owned, and at
least it gave her a decent view. Most cars that claim to be full size
these days wouldn't have qaulified as an intermediate in the 60's and
they all tend to place you very low and don't provide a very good view
of the road in a world dominated by large trucks and SUVs (my Mom
lives in a rural area and more than half the vehicles are large trucks
or SUVs).

Anyhow, if you think a front wheel drive, four cylinder Highlander is
an SUV, I think you are using a different definition of an SUV than
would be reasonable.

Ed
Ashton Crusher - 20 Oct 2009 02:52 GMT
>>>Earlier this month I asked for advice regarding a new car for my
>>>Mother to
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>
>Ed

I know nothing about Highlanders except that I've seen pictures of
them.  Sounds like you got her what she needed.
Hachiroku ハチロク - 20 Oct 2009 04:12 GMT
>> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
>> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
>
> First of all, the Highlnader is not an SUV. You might get away with
> calling it a "Crossover

That's what it's marketed as. Two or 4WD, but around here they run 5-1 in
favor of AWD.
Ed White - 20 Oct 2009 18:43 GMT
> >> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
> >> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> That's what it's marketed as. Two or 4WD, but around here they run 5-1 in
> favor of AWD.

On the Toyota webpage it is in the SUV section, but they don't have a
crossover section.

At the dealers we looked at they had plenty of 2WD or AWD (seemed to
be more 2WD than AWD). My Mother lives in a relatively flat area, it
snows no more than a few days a year, and she has no need to go on bad
dirt roads. Her Freestyle was AWD, but I don't think she knew or cared
and I saw no reason to pay extra for AWD for the new Highlander. If
things are bad enough that 4WD is required, she still has my Dad's '99
4WD Ranger available.

Ed
Sharx35 - 21 Oct 2009 03:40 GMT
>> >> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
>> >> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Ed

Having the Ranger, why does she need to have TWO vehicles?
dr_jeff - 21 Oct 2009 15:10 GMT
>>> >> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
>>> >> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> Having the Ranger, why does she need to have TWO vehicles?

It's not her Ranger. It's her husband's. Apparently, she needs her own car.

Jeff
C. E. White - 22 Oct 2009 04:04 GMT
>>>> >> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
>>>> >> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> It's not her Ranger. It's her husband's. Apparently, she needs her own
> car.

Actually it is my Mother's (my Father passed away a few years back). But as
I said in another post, it is old and beat up and not really the sort of
vehicle a little old lady uses to haul her friends to their bridge games.

Ed
Ray O - 22 Oct 2009 05:13 GMT
<snipped>
>>> Having the Ranger, why does she need to have TWO vehicles?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Ed

Come to think of it, I don't see many little old ladies riding the back of
truck beds...
Signature


Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

Joe - 22 Oct 2009 05:35 GMT
>> It's not her Ranger. It's her husband's. Apparently, she needs her own
>> car.
>
> Actually it is my Mother's (my Father passed away a few years back). But as
> I said in another post, it is old and beat up and not really the sort of
> vehicle a little old lady uses to haul her friends to their bridge games.

Why not?  Plenty of room in the back for plenty of the old ninnies...  
;-)

Signature

Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X

Stewart - 22 Oct 2009 02:47 GMT
>> On Oct 19, 11:12 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...@e86.GTS> wrote:
>>> >> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> Having the Ranger, why does she need to have TWO vehicles?

My brother has 7 vehicles. I have know people with many more.
Kevin - 23 Oct 2009 00:36 GMT
>> ...
>>> On Oct 19, 11:12 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...@e86.GTS>
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
>
> My brother has 7 vehicles. I have know people with many more.

 heck I have three rangers with out counting anyother of my other
stuff.  KB

Signature

THUNDERSNAKE #9

Protect your rights or "Lose" them
The 2nd Admendment guarantees the others

Sharx35 - 23 Oct 2009 11:55 GMT
>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>  heck I have three rangers with out counting anyother of my other
> stuff.  KB

Little wonder that consumer debt is at an all time high and the savings rate
is at an all time low. Does anyone here know what FRUGAL means?
Stewart - 24 Oct 2009 02:18 GMT
>>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 51 lines]
> savings rate is at an all time low. Does anyone here know what
> FRUGAL means?

Rebuilding old cars is an industrious endevor.
Sharx35 - 24 Oct 2009 12:10 GMT
>>>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
>
> Rebuilding old cars is an industrious endevor.

No question about it. Far too many fools just dump a vehicle after 2 to 4
years, literally throwing away tens of thousands of dollars in depreciation.
Stewart - 26 Oct 2009 01:16 GMT
>>>>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 59 lines]
> to 4 years, literally throwing away tens of thousands of dollars in
> depreciation.

Yeah, he has 1 failry new Hyundai, the others range from 49 to 35
years old.  All American Motors Rambler Classics/Ambassador/Marlin.
Sharx35 - 26 Oct 2009 01:31 GMT
>>>>>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 51 lines]
> Yeah, he has 1 failry new Hyundai, the others range from 49 to 35 years
> old.  All American Motors Rambler Classics/Ambassador/Marlin.

AMC product. Hmm, you'll have enough to keep you busy until the 22nd
century.
clare@snyder.on.ca - 26 Oct 2009 03:13 GMT
>>>>>>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 54 lines]
>AMC product. Hmm, you'll have enough to keep you busy until the 22nd
>century.

Actually, some of the best stuff out there. Ecclectic, and
interesting.
Sharx35 - 26 Oct 2009 06:01 GMT
>>>>>>>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 64 lines]
> Actually, some of the best stuff out there. Ecclectic, and
> interesting.

Ah, yes. AMC had the first passenger car with reclining front seats, did it
not?
Kevin - 24 Oct 2009 15:35 GMT
>>>> "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:856ff4de-f170-4411-a2a0-
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
>
>  

 all of my stuff is all paid for. no new stuff here.  I wager I have
less in all 3 than most have in one.  KB

Signature

THUNDERSNAKE #9

Protect your rights or "Lose" them
The 2nd Admendment guarantees the others

Hachiroku ハチロク - 23 Oct 2009 00:44 GMT
>> Having the Ranger, why does she need to have TWO vehicles?
>>
> My brother has 7 vehicles. I have know people with many more.

Hey. I ain't yer brother!
Stewart - 23 Oct 2009 04:29 GMT
>>> Having the Ranger, why does she need to have TWO vehicles?
>>>
>> My brother has 7 vehicles. I have know people with many more.
>
> Hey. I ain't yer brother!

Well, 5 are registered as classics....
C. E. White - 22 Oct 2009 04:02 GMT
>>> >> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
>>> >> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> Having the Ranger, why does she need to have TWO vehicles?

The Ranger is 11 years old and beat to crap. However, we use it on the farm
for typical farm things. It is not worth a lot but is very useful for farm
chores. It would not be suitable for my Mom and her bridge laying buddies.

Ed
C. E. White - 22 Oct 2009 04:06 GMT
>>>> >> I'm not disagreeing with your mom's choice but why does she need an
>>>> >> SUV??  What were her needs from a technical perspective?
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> farm chores. It would not be suitable for my Mom and her bridge laying
> buddies.

I meant bridge playing...not laying. I suppose a Ranger would be a good
vehicle for someone building a bridge :)

Ed
Hachiroku ハチロク - 22 Oct 2009 20:02 GMT
>  It would not be suitable for my Mom and her bridge laying
> buddies.

I would think someone who does bridge laying would want a dump truck!  ;p
Brian Smith - 19 Oct 2009 00:58 GMT
> Earlier this month I asked for advice regarding a new car for my Mother
> to replace a Ford Freestyle that was totaled in an accident. I mostly
[quoted text clipped - 55 lines]
> than this, I really liked the car. If I was in the market for a new car,
> I'd definitely be interested in a new Taurus - but not a Limited!

    If you preferred the Venza (as stated in the third paragraph of your
post), why would you be interested in a Taurus? Does bad judgment run in
your family?

    My apologies for leaving Ed's entire post in my reply, I did it to back
up what I referred to in my response.
dr_jeff - 19 Oct 2009 01:02 GMT
<...>

>     If you preferred the Venza (as stated in the third paragraph of your
> post), why would you be interested in a Taurus? Does bad judgment run in
> your family?

He thought the Venza was a better choice for his mother, not himself.
For himself, he liked the Taurus.

Jeff

>     My apologies for leaving Ed's entire post in my reply, I did it to
> back up what I referred to in my response.
Brian Smith - 19 Oct 2009 02:14 GMT
> He thought the Venza was a better choice for his mother, not himself.
> For himself, he liked the Taurus.

    He didn't say that about the Venza at all.
dr_jeff - 19 Oct 2009 02:53 GMT
>> He thought the Venza was a better choice for his mother, not himself.
>> For himself, he liked the Taurus.
>
>     He didn't say that about the Venza at all.

Perhaps not. But it was clear from the context, perhaps including
previous posts.
C. E. White - 19 Oct 2009 12:50 GMT
> If you preferred the Venza (as stated in the third paragraph of your
> post), why would you be interested in a Taurus? Does bad judgment
> run in your family?

Why won't I be intereseted in the Taurus. It seemed to be a nice car,
very well assembled, and I am confident it would be at least as
reliable as the Toyota Venza. I liked the Venza too, but more for my
Mother than for me. She likes station wagons and the Venza seemed to
meet her needs. There is no longer a Taurus wagon. I did at least get
her to sit in the Taurus. She said it was a nice car, but I think she
didn't like it for the same reason she didn't like the Venza. She
wanted to sit up higher, which is why we ended up with the Highlander
(which has essentially the same drive train as the Venza, but is just
a little taller). As I said, if Ford still offered new Freestyles (or
the Taurus X) we probably would have ended up in one of those.
However, given my Mother's stated desires, it seems to me she
purchased the best vehicle.

My family as owned Fords for decades. I personaly have a Fusion and an
F150. Neither has had even one problem. The Fusion has 60k trouble
free miles. Given my very good experiences with Ford and my very poor
past personal experience with Toyotas, why wouldn't I consider a
Taurus? I know that current Toyota are a lot better than the junk they
sold 20 years ago, so I have no concerns about my Mother buying one.
Heck, if they made something I liked, I consider buying one also (for
sure if I wanted a Station Wagon, the Venza would still be my number
one choice).

Ed
Jim Warman - 19 Oct 2009 04:49 GMT
See what you started now, ya old fart????? 8^)
C. E. White - 26 Oct 2009 13:49 GMT
I actually drove the new Highlander this past weekend and I thought I
pass along my impressions:

The good:

- 4 cylinder engine has decent power and it moves the car just fine -
not much different than the V6 Freestyle it replaced, but ....(see
below)
- Transmission seemed flawless
- Great seats, better than the Freestyle
- Controls much better than the RAV4's my Sisters own.  I think Toyota
should fire the guys that did the RAV4 and let the Highlander guys
redo them. I do wonder about the Japanese obsession with HUGE control
knobs,. Does anyone need a 2.5" diameter knob to tune the radio? It is
like something from a WWII Shot Wave Radio (ditto forf the other
knobs). (see below)
- Third seat is very easy to raise lower, much better than the
Freestyles...but (see below). It worked like the third row seat in my
2003 Expedition (but easier to reach, but not split)
- Smooth ride but .... (see below)
- Interior is ver spacious
- For only a couple of thousand more than a similar RAV4, you get a
much better vehicle - I wonder how many RAV4 buyer ough to look at the
Highlander
- I was really happy with how much car my Mother got for the money

The bad:

- The 4 cylinder engine is very noisy - much louder than the V6 in the
Freestyle. The engine noise is very noticeable, especially since the
vehicle is otherwise very quiet. It is not too bad at a highway
cruise, but very noticeable when accelerating.
- While the ride is very smooth, the car is awfully "floaty." Reminds
me of some of the old Chryler stuff or the Grand Marquis my Mother
used to own. This won't be a problem for my Mother but I'd like
soemthing a little tighter. Manybe the suspension fior ther "Sport
Model" would suit me better.
- Although the controls are better than the RAV4's, they could use
some improvement. The knobs and buttons for the radio and HVAC are all
big and shiny and not particularly well laid out. The industrial
designers need to tone this down, Form should follow function. The
controls should not look like some bizarre modern art sculpture. This
is something the Japanese designers are addicted to and it is starting
to influence American designers. The controls in my current (2009)
F150 are showing this influence. They are easily the worst I've ever
had in a US designed vehcile (but still not as bad as the RAV4s my
sisters own). The F150 has two many big knobs arranged in some sort of
pattern that is not really related to the function. They are arranged
to look cool. And this cool looking arangement is just silly. There
are decades of study available on how to do controls and the Toyota
designers have tried to ignore all of them (Honda is just as bad, and
apparently Ford is copy catting the bad ideas becasue they think it is
what sells).
- Although the third row seat is much easier to deploy than the seat
in the Freestyle my Mother used to own, this ease comes at a price.
The Freestyle seat was a complicated arrangement that folded into a
well at the rear of the car and it had no significant effect on the
cargo load height. When the Freestyle seat was raised, there was a
huge well at the rear of the car that my Mother found perfect for
groceries. There is no well behind the Highlander's third row seat. It
folds on itself (thinner cushions than the Freestyle) and the rear
cargo floor is higher than it could have been with the Freestyle type
seat. It is a trade off. Given the choice, I'd go with the Highlander
stlye seat, but I think my Mother wishes it was more like the one in
the Freestyle (which she could not deploy herself...I always had to do
it for her). I think the Highlander third seat is potentially more
useful, but I doubt it will see much use. Still it is very easy to
raise and lower. It would have been nice if it was split so you could
raise half at a time, but this is only a minor (very minor) complaint.

Ed
C. E. White - 01 Nov 2009 20:00 GMT
Well my Mother finally had a complaint about the new Highlander - she didn't
like the cruise control switch. Otherwise the car is great. I do wander why
Toyotauses that weird crusie control switch.

Ed
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.