Ford 500

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Feb 25, 2005 | 01:44 AM

#31

tmyers

Posting Guru

Joined: Jun 1999

Posts: 2,404

Likes: 1

From: Everett, Wa

Frank, welcome. I think you might be right but not for any reason other than rangers buyers have all updated in the last 3 years. I traded a 1 year old Ranger for a new one just because of 0% interest. If not for need a larger truck I would of trade my 2002 for a 2004 with 0% and $5k back last year. Even if they don't take the crown this year I don't think its a big deal. Its a money maker even at deep discounts. I didn't buy the Ranger I own because its the best I bought it because of price and its a good vehicle.

Concerning the 500 I just finished reading the C&D article on it and think it was very fair. Most of the cripes are about the motor but that is expected. Others where the CVT, it takes getting used to but the 2 I have test drove I love. I don't need that neck stapping down shift in the family car. I am still amazed at the rear leg room and truck space. If I was thinking about buy a car like this it would be on the top of the list.

Feb 25, 2005 | 09:27 AM

#32

FrankGiovinazzi

New User

Joined: Feb 2005

Posts: 3

Likes: 0

All:
It seems I have mistakenly vioated the board rules and I want to apologize. I understood "no commercial links" to mean no posting this week's special on lambskin seat covers.

No offense intended. Just wanted to post links to stories on my site.

Last edited by FrankGiovinazzi; Feb 25, 2005 at 09:36 AM.

Feb 25, 2005 | 09:35 AM

#33

amish77

Cargo Master

Joined: Oct 2004

Posts: 2,148

Likes: 0

From: Seneca, SC

my only reservation is that new transmission, I'm not sure I would buy one of the first ones they made. This car is supposed to replace the taurus, so they're gonna probably keep it around for a while. I would buy one of the next three years models. Just to let them get all the bugs out of that tranny. Not too many shiftless transmissions on the market these days.

Feb 25, 2005 | 11:25 AM

#34

Rockledge

Post Fiend

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 9,748

Likes: 16

From: Connecticut

Didn't I read somewhere that the CVT tranny was jointly developed by Ford and GM, or maybe that there was some kind of sharing of technology between the two, or something along those lines?

Feb 25, 2005 | 11:56 AM

#35

AG4.0

Posting Guru

Joined: May 2003

Posts: 1,211

Likes: 0

From: York, NE

I remember reading something similar a while back. Not sure specifically if it was the CVT, but there was something about a joint effort on some new transmissions between the two.

Feb 25, 2005 | 12:28 PM

#36

1956MarkII

Lead Driver

Joined: Apr 2002

Posts: 7,746

Likes: 7

From: Tampa Bay, FL USA

It's a joint effort between Ford and ZF of Germany. A rubber-belt-driven CVT I'd have qualms about, but this one uses a meshed chain; it should be very durable.

Feb 25, 2005 | 07:29 PM

#37

Fordtastic

Senior User

Joined: Oct 2004

Posts: 279

Likes: 1

The deal between Ford and GM was the development of light and I think some medium duty 6-speed automatic transmissions.

Feb 26, 2005 | 01:16 AM

#38

polarbear

Post Fiend

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 10,728

Likes: 1

From: Damascus-Boring, Ore

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1956MarkII

According to AMCI-certified testing, the CVT uses that 203 hosepower very efficiently. In 0-60 and merging/passing tests, the 500 out-accelerated the Camry XLE V6, Chevy Impala LS, Chrysler 300 Touring, and the Toyota Avalon XLS. 0-60 for the 500 was 7.45 sec, Camry 7.79, Impala 7.99, 300 Touring 8.00 and Avalon 8.61.

We can squabble about horsepower numbers all we want; it's the numbers on the board at the end of the quarter-mile that count.

I can't speak for the other cars, but the Impala LS gives the impression of having a fatter torque curve over a broader RPM band. This is especially noticeable in passing on a two lane road, and partially due to GM's Automatic, which always seems to be able to choose the right gear at the right time. I really struggle with the CVT every time I get behind the wheel of one- the transmission defies every "seat of the pants" impression I've learned over 40+ years of driving. I am looking forward to some extended seat time behind the wheel of a six-speed, if Ford ever gives us enough inventory to put one or two in demo service.

FTE Stories

Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies

Joe Kucinski

AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make

Brett Foote

Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!

Michael S. Palmer

Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home

Verdad Gallardo

10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!

Joe Kucinski

2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?

Brett Foote

2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!

Michael S. Palmer

10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!

Joe Kucinski

Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026

Brett Foote

5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time

Joe Kucinski

Feb 26, 2005 | 01:30 AM

#39

polarbear

Post Fiend

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 10,728

Likes: 1

From: Damascus-Boring, Ore

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankGiovinazzi

Now for something a little controversial. I am curious to hear from Ford truck folks about the plight of the Ranger. It seems to this new auto writer that Ford has abandoned this product in the cold. I have written a tough article on this issue, titled:

Crystal Ball Prediction: Toyota Tacoma will be the best-selling small pickup in 2005

And FYI -- I was wrong in January! The Colorado actually took the top spot, Tacoma #2, Ranger #3! Sales figures below. But I'm not such a punk I'll go back and edit an error of that category. I still thnk the Tacoma's going to win in '05 anyway.

So as not to violate forum rules, I am posting this here. If any moderators or other members want to start a new thread, I would follow that discussion there. Again, I'm looking for feedback, not flames!

<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="93" width="340"> <col style="width: 194pt;" width="259"> <col style="width: 61pt;" width="81"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15.75pt;" height="21"> <td class="xl32" style="height: 15.75pt; width: 194pt;" x:str="'Chevrolet Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " height="21" width="259">Chevrolet Colorado . . . . .
</td> <td class="xl31" style="width: 61pt;" x:num="10176" align="right" width="81">10,176 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15.75pt;" height="21"> <td class="xl32" style="height: 15.75pt;" x:str="'Toyota Tacoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." height="21">Toyota Tacoma . . . . . . .
</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="9435" align="right">9,435 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15.75pt;" height="21"> <td class="xl32" style="height: 15.75pt;" x:str="'Ford Ranger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." height="21">Ford Ranger. . . . . . . . . </td> <td class="xl31" x:num="7634" align="right">7,634 </td> </tr></tbody> </table>

Honestly, I think it'll depend on what Ford decides to do with incentives on the Ranger. The $1500 currently offered in the Nwst isn't going to get the job done, IMO. The Ranger still outsells the Colorado at our store by a wide margin, but we tend to sell Rangers in the lower priced tiers, while Colorados seem to move better in the well-equipped versions.

The Tacoma's a strong product, but it's expensive. A nicely equipped Tacoma 4X4 puts it price-wise against a F150 or a Z71 (after a variety of rebates/incentives). Unless gas rockets to $3+/gallon, it'll limit the appeal. If gas goes above that level, all bets are off.

Mar 4, 2005 | 07:21 PM

#40

Rockledge

Post Fiend

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 9,748

Likes: 16

From: Connecticut

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1956MarkII

It's a joint effort between Ford and ZF of Germany. A rubber-belt-driven CVT I'd have qualms about, but this one uses a meshed chain; it should be very durable.

Jeff, to confirm and elaborate a little bit on what you've said, this is pretty good reading: