Interesting to see how this breaks down.

Ford:.................2/05........YTD
Exped..................9230.....16801
Excursion.............1100.......1971
Total.................10330......18772

GM......................2/05.......YTD
Tahoe/
Yukon................15229......27789
Suburban/
Yukon XL.............8860......16999
Total.................24089......44788

Link to Ford's numbers
Link to GM's numbers

These numbers pretty much speak for themselves, but a few things strike me.

1) I'm working on the assumption that there's nothing intrinsically inferior to the Ford designs vs. GM's. Based on extensive service history with both makes, I think that's a fair statement.

2) From a capability standpoint, Ford generally trumps the GM designs (towing, payload, etc)

3) All these vehicles price out from the high $40's to the mid $50's in loaded trim- so price shouldn't be a critical factor.

4) GM's running with an old design that goes back 6 years. The prior body style Expedition shellacked the Tahoe in sales numbers for years.

Sooo...what's required to get Ford back on track? I guess that's the real question here.

 

Since it's still true, yes, I am.
No, the expedition is along the lines of the Tahoe/Yukon, not the Suburban/Yukon XL. And it's sales numbers are a bit better than 1 sold for every 2 of the shorter GM models. If you add in the 'burb/YXL and Ex numbers, it gets pretty ugly for ford, as you can see from polarbear's numbers.
Slam the Ex? When? If the truth is slamming, I guess I see where you're coming from. I've always said I liked my Ex. Disappointed with the motor and the soft suspension? Sure. But I always liked the truck.

 

I do, too. Both are very nice trucks. Each have their strong and weak points but nothing glaringly negative. Probably the two biggest things I see from having owned both is that the Ex is too softly sprung for a 3/4 ton and there is no diesel option in the 3/4 ton 'burb/YXL.
Not in the case of the 3/4 ton's in this class. But it's pretty close as far as official ratings go (11k vs 12K max numbers).
Agreed. The Ex is a little better deal money-wise, actually.
But isn't the Ex has the same body style since it came out? What was the first year for the Ex? I believe the SD body style has been around since 99, right? They put a little lipstick on it this year but it's still the same body.
And a good one. I don't understand why it doesn't sell better either. Very nice truck, a little better deal, has a diesel option. All I can think of is that the folks don't like the higher and/or longer truck. Maybe it just looks and feels too trucky for the market they're trying for?

 

In a sense it does.

In my area 3/4 ton suburbans are a rarity, meanwhile X's (and even superduties) are like cockroaches; they're everywhere! The only real reason (that I can think of) that the X beats the 'burb in the 3/4 ton market is because they don't have a diesel option. I had a nice chat with my brother about this and he said that chevy would have to completely redesign (or seriously cut up) the front end of the suburban to accomodate the Duramax AND it's transmission; otherwise, the 3/4 suburban would have had the Duramax a long time ago.

 

I think it's naive to think Ford only intended the Excursion to compete with the 3/4 ton suburban.

 

If ford would have put any money into a sales campaign for the Excursion the picture would look better for the X. About every other time I pull up to the pumps to fuel up I get the comment "I didnt know they put a diesel in those things" when I tell people there has been a diesel X for many years now I get a look of dis-belief. Seriously the public has no clue about what the X is or what it offers.

 

you are right, i had a tahoe, i though it could pull my 8000 pound boat, it was 4x2 and when it came time at the ramp to pull it up i was stuck. the trans shifted like garbage.....ect. i my self didnt know that the excursion had a diesel in it until i was fed up at how crappy my tahoe was and wanted to trade it in. ever since i found that out i would never even consider trading in my 6.0 ex for aything elce.

 

Well, you're right Jeb, I should have been a little more open minded when I wrote that post. While I stupid asking this, I simply must; whatelse was the Excursion designed to compete with?

 

whatelse was the Excursion designed to compete with?

Both 1/2 and 3/4T Subs. It was a practical matter- the Expy rides on the "smaller" platform, while the Ex rides on the SD platform. To save money, the Ex was only offered as a HD version. The miscalculation, I think, was in thinking that the HD SUV market was larger than it really was. Put another way, they underestimated the influence Ms. SUV purchaser had in the decision-making process.

 

Polarbear nailed it, as usual.

I responded to your private message, Toreador_Diesel, but your message file is full and will not accept any new PM's.

 

This is another good point. I remember when the Ex was announced that the greenies piled all over Ford for producing such a large gas guzzling vehicle, calling it the Exxon Valdez, etc. I think that embarrassed Ford a bit and may be why they never really tried to sell it.

OTOH, I don't see many (any?) commercials for the Suburban/Yukon XL/Tahoe, either. All the GM truck commmercials I can think of are for the pickups. You'd think with the profit margins on these big SUV's, they'd pour some dollars into advertising them.

 

The burban doesnt need any ads anymore, an 80+ year old nameplate, and every tv show on has some tahoe getting some rediculous 28 inch wheels put on it....free advertising. If ford wanted to take a run at the longest standing nameplate in automotive history they should have had a media field day, not let the greenies pave the way. They could have had a huge win with a powerstroke excursion ad campaign, towing the camper / boat, hauling the kids and extended family and safety....seems they just gave up when the greenies dubbed it the Ford Valdez. The excursion is no longer than a crew cab F150 and it still got ripped. Ford had/has a winner on its hands but a **** poor marketing structure to support it.

 

I have driven Fords all my life and think that they make the best vehicles, but their marketing arm has failed the company repeatedly. In my lifetime there have been many perfectly competent and competitive vehicles that were dropped because of their poor marketing strategy. Though I don't really remember much about it, I have read that the Edsel, ridiculed by many at the time as a huge debacle, could have changed the playing field in the auto industry at the time had Ford stayed the course and marketed against the negativism. In the 80's Ford introduced the Merkur nameplate. What followed was a poor example of marketing support for what represented a new nameplate. Those cars that are still on the road today are a testimony to their excellent handling and performance. Currently, Ford doesn't seem to know what to do with the Lincoln line-up. Their hope that the Mark LT will boost interest and sales I think is short sighted and naive. Lincoln should have owned the luxury SUV market with the jump they had with the Navigator, but they rested on their laurels and let Cadillac kick their butts. Same is true of the LS vs the Caddy CTS. I blame the reversal of fortune between the Yukon/Tahoe vs the Expy on Ford's misguided belief that the consumer would appreciate that the torque curve of the 5.4L was superior in real life to the HP of the venerable 350. That's a poor marketing strategy pure and simple. And the EX should have been marketed as the SUV of the Super Duty line-up and it should have been in your face, big dog of the road, with the same grille work as the PU's. The popularity of the PU line would have helped carry the EX to better sales figures and would have been more representative of what the vehicle was meant to be. But, I guess we'll never know.

 

I for one think the excursion is a great tow -people hauler, and what ever ford does to the design they should keep it truck worthy, If I wanted a mini van then I would buy one. On the other hand after having a 00 expy and looking at the new style of expys I would have to say GM has it over on ford with the tahoe not so much the exterior style but ford uses the pos independent rear suspension, they thing in 4x4 is a joke. I see alot more gm tahoes with lift kits and nice looking tires that look real good, have yet to see a newer expy look as tough offroad speaking. So imo I hope whatever ford does with the new EXCURSION or EXPEDITION that it will have a solid rear axel way better for towing and customizing just my02

 

While I may get flamed for this, right you are. I have to say I firmly agree with you on this, especially the whole "SUV of the Super Duty line-up" thing. That in and of itself would have boosted sales and sold more people on it. Everytime I see a Ford truck or SUV commercial, they hardly ever mention the Excursion (or even confirm that it still exists). I remember way back in 2000 and early 2001 they had 1 or maybe even 2 commericials that advertised the whole SUV lineup; inlcuding the Excursion! Then during summer 2000 and even 2001 they had the "summer savings days" commericials. Because of such a commercial (and the fact that they were offering $10k off the MSRP at the time) I bought my '01 X. Most people tend to go out and buy (or atleast look into) whatever product they see on tv and/or hear about on the radio. I knew I wanted to buy a Ford SUV for one (seeing as I had a Chevy van at the time and was sick of vans); I wanted more room, more towing power, and I wanted to own a diesel powered vehicle without having to buy a truck. I decided I could make a few sacrifices, so it was between the Expedition and the Superduty. The Expedition was nice, but was a little cramped for myself and my freakishly tall family (there are 6 of us after all). The same applied to the Superduty, so naturally, the Excursion was just what I was looking for. Reverting back to my point, advertising works, but it's **** poor marketing that has had the X hanging by a thread each model year since late 2002 and early 2003.