Here are things they didn't like:

-No 3rd row of seats
-Rear-set cushion is hard and low
-With optional Panaromic Vista Roof, Edge weights just 113 pounds less than Expolorer 4x4
-Highway fuel economy is just 2 mpg better than Chevy Suburban with V8
-3.5L is falling short of power and refinement standards compares to Nissan's 3.5L and GM's 3.6
-They didn't like 6 speed automatic either

Ratings:
Engineering 2/5
Design 3/5
Interior 2/5
Performance 2/5
Off-road 1/5
Safety 5/5
Value 2/5

Lincoln MKX didn't do much better. Interior got 3/5 and performance got 3/5, but every other rating was same as Edge.

 

We're getting conflicting reviews from the magazines. This is what Car and Driver had to say about the 3.5L in a review of the MKX:

This is why I don't base my opinions on magazine reviews. I base them on my own experience.

 

More Ford bashing. I should be used to it by now, but I'm not.

 

Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator got pretty good ratings by MotorTrend.

 

And the CEO of AutoNation, Inc calls the Edge, "the best vehicle Ford has ever produced."

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a.../1014/BUSINESS

 

I didn't get to test the power of the 3.5 but, I can tell you that it is definitely smooth and quiet. Almost too smooth and quiet. http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showth...348#post774348

 

Motor Trend basically lost all creditiblity with me when they picked the M/B GL as their SUV of the Year! Its nice that they picked a $66,000 vehicle as the best, considering that alot of people can't afford that model! I sure know I cannot afford one (if I was in the market that is). Plus, that vehicle has one of the worst miles per gallon of all tested!

 

So, a car can't be good if it's expensive? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. And MPG is only one criteria on which to base a comparison, so that hardly disqualifies it either. Out of curiousity, is there a vehicle that deserved the award more, or are you just giving M/T guff for no reason?

 

That's the Suburban with Variable displacement, btw.

I buy the interior ranking, it is not as good as it could have been, and after their orgasims over the F-150's interior a coupple years ago their standards are pretty high. Compared to the Escape, US Focus, and Mustang I think it's bland but acceptable. It falls short of the imports.

The design rating I don't buy. They were lauding this look 12 months ago now they don't like it? The Value rating's even worse. Everyone else has called Edge a great deal, yet the Edge gets a 2 and the GL wins the calipers?

The off-road ratings on this and the other crossovers just plain ****ed me off. None of the CUVs from any maker are marketed as off-road machines, and yet it was given equal weight to the rest of the ratings? That's why the GL won, it was a crossover with MB's $$ put into offroad ability. Any way on Earth that Ford could match that off-raod capability in a car-based CUV under $30k?

What was odd to me is their gripes on "thrashyness" and lack of power were almost identical to the sentiment on the MOD V6. Either they just don't like the way Ford tunes engines, or they were just pulling stuff out of their standard playbook.

I think they're grearing up to hand all their Ford kudos to the Fairlane. They've decided they like it better and want it NOW, and so the Edge gets the short end of the stick.

 

You totally took it the wrong way. Most recently the cars that win their awards are realitively in the price range for most americans to afford it. Last year the X-Terra won. This vehicle is affordable to a whole lot more people than a small section. Same with them picking the Ridgeline last year. While that really isn't a REAL truck, its affordable. Mostly in the past, they picked a vehicle that excelled in most catagories AND was affordable to boot. Hence why they picked the F150 that year. It started at $21K, and went to $40, with many, many trim levels to boot. That is why I posted what I said.

No reason for gruff? Have you read their review of the Edge, and have you read C & D's version. Its like those two magazines tested 2 different vehicles. Motor Trend always has a tendency towards the imports, IMO. Plus just read Moosetang's comments above, about the value section. He too didn't like the choice. Personally, in most day to day driving, would any of these SUV/CUY's EVER see major off roading? You may get the occasional buyer getting an FJ or Wrangler to to some driving, but thats it. The way they score things is on a major curve.

 

+1
According to MT, "Our readers trust us to select the vehicle that best demonstrates overall superiority, significance and value." While a $66,000 SUV may be superior (it **** well better be at that price!), the value portion of their criterion was obviously not well represented in the selection of the winner. If price means that little in the selection of the winner, than why not pick the Aston Martin DB9 as car of the year? It certainly is superior than just about any other car, and if its $180,000 price tag is consedered a 'value' by MT, than it should win.

Now back to topic...

 

but they probably like it's almost identical Mazda twin

 

Perhaps they will when the Mazda variant (CX-9) is available. The CX-7 is not related to the Edge.

 

I just found out on BlueOvalNews.com, that the vehicle that MT used in the test was one of the oldest pre-production prototypes that Ford had. The vehicle has been changed drastically in regards to quality, shift patterns and such. They used it since the testing started months ago.

 

Sounds like MT should have noted that they were using a pre-pro vehicle.

 

Knowing how the are, they won't tell anyone. They just assume that everyone knows. Considering that the production of the Edge started on October 16th, and this test was most likely taken around July/August, then that vehicle would be one of the 1st anywhere. MT gets a from me on this one.

 

Yeah, i think they've had it in for Ford ever since Ford insisted the Freestyle be included with the SUV of the year competition instead of COTY. I had to agree with MT on that one, cause they definitely seem to value the traditional and functional side of SUVs... like all that off road stuff that nobody uses.

I've always had trouble with this one. What's stupider? The SUV with tons of off road capability that most people never use? Or the SUV that just looks like a truck, but doesn't bother with any off road capability cause nobody would use it anyways? I still don't know what my answer to that question is.
Either way, seems like they should divide that SUV of the year award into two sub categories.

And ya... wtf? You get a pre production car for a comparison and you don't mention that it might see some touch ups before it hits the market? I've always backed up MT with all the flaming they get on these boards, but this Edge business is stupid.

 

AutoExtremist had an interesting "Rant" on Motor Trend's COTY awards process. It's gone from the site now, but here's a link to google's cache of it.

 

Edmunds online review I read yesterday said it is a solid vehicle and the engine is a vast improvement over the previous V6....

 

Very interesting read, thanks!!!