The new 2004 Ford Rollover SUV
- Thread starter keith
- Start date
- Status
"Explorer Sport Trac two-wheel drive posted the single worst rating"
I think it's had this distinction for several years now. Or maybe that's another Explorer?
Ford is getting a lot of mileage out of that Explorer chassis. I drove a newer one back in '99 and I couldn't imagine why anyone would want one. The feeling of sitting up high didn't outweigh the lousy suspension.
I think it's had this distinction for several years now. Or maybe that's another Explorer?
Ford is getting a lot of mileage out of that Explorer chassis. I drove a newer one back in '99 and I couldn't imagine why anyone would want one. The feeling of sitting up high didn't outweigh the lousy suspension.
That police car review posted on here earlier talked about how police SUVs are not suitable for high speed driving or pursuit duty. Just this week, a Tumwater, WA cop rolled his
SUV making a turn at an intersection.
SUV making a turn at an intersection.
The explorer is a prime example of poor suspension tuning.
During the firestone tire/ford rollover debacle, ford threw all the blame on firestone and none on their tired design/handling. Can't imagine why.
[ August 10, 2004, 01:36 AM: Message edited by: seotaji ]
During the firestone tire/ford rollover debacle, ford threw all the blame on firestone and none on their tired design/handling. Can't imagine why.
[ August 10, 2004, 01:36 AM: Message edited by: seotaji ]
I didn't save the article, but there was some really disturbing commentary from Ford in an Autoweek a year or two back. A Ford spokesman said, straight out, that in the Explorer redesign (to the current generation) they did not have enough money to engineer a new suspension to make the vehicle safer! This comment came some time after Ford were able to stick all the blame on Firestone, so perhaps they felt innoculated against responsibility.
Sure, SUV's are not as safe as cars. Ford know they can and should do more. When Mercedes introduced a vehicle that didn't do well in avoidance tests (1997 A-Class), they pulled the vehicle off the market and changed it.
I found this formula:
A vehicle's stability is measured by the formula---t/2h---where t is the 'track width' (center of the right front tire to the center of the left front tire) and h is the vehicle's center of gravity. When this number is 1.2 or greater, the vehicleis unlikely to roll. However, the further the ratio dips below 1.2, the greater the likelihood of rollover. While many vehicles have safe ratios, the addition of passengers, cargo and a full tank of gas all occurs above the center of gravity, increasing the chance of a rollover accident.
Keith.
Sure, SUV's are not as safe as cars. Ford know they can and should do more. When Mercedes introduced a vehicle that didn't do well in avoidance tests (1997 A-Class), they pulled the vehicle off the market and changed it.
I found this formula:
A vehicle's stability is measured by the formula---t/2h---where t is the 'track width' (center of the right front tire to the center of the left front tire) and h is the vehicle's center of gravity. When this number is 1.2 or greater, the vehicleis unlikely to roll. However, the further the ratio dips below 1.2, the greater the likelihood of rollover. While many vehicles have safe ratios, the addition of passengers, cargo and a full tank of gas all occurs above the center of gravity, increasing the chance of a rollover accident.
Keith.
Uhh... maybe because the explorer sport track is a compact truck complete with ranger frame and suspension????
No surprise that it did poorly against a bunch car designed based SUVs.
The new Explorers are a totally different design, and will run laps around previous Explorers as far as suspension goes.
No such thing as a explorer chassis, all '99 and earlier Explorers were based of the Ranger frame and suspension.
Ford has a compact truck that did poorly against a bunch of car based SUV's, but yet kept in line with all other styles (Truck, car, etc), and some how they are branded with a poor roll over rating for all their vehicles???
If any company should be nervous about its rollover stats, it's Toyota.
The Tundra is tested, but not the Ranger or Dakota, or Colorado?????
What about the Titan???
Or the the absence of the Dodge full size trucks?
QUOTE
"NHTSA scores only 68 2004-model cars and trucks, out of about 300 on sale. The agency ranks 36 SUVs, 20 cars, eight pickups, four minivans — models NHTSA thinks people are likely to buy. Popular vehicles missing from the list could be tested next year."
Pretty dang hard to make a legitimate comparison when only 23% of 300 vehicles is being shown.
I never said that. I looked at the stats for the 2004 Mustang and it has a VERY GOOD roll over rating--better than most cars out there.
My apologies, I was refering to the article, but I can see how my statement may have come across.
Man, a beer would sure go down good right now.
The media loves to trash Ford.
That's just the way it is.
Headlines scream "FORD RECALLS 50,000 FORD CONTOURS/MERCURY MYSTIQUES FOR CATALYTIC CONVERTOR PROBLEMS"
...but BMW had the same problem and not a peep out of the media about that.
That's just the way it is.
Headlines scream "FORD RECALLS 50,000 FORD CONTOURS/MERCURY MYSTIQUES FOR CATALYTIC CONVERTOR PROBLEMS"
...but BMW had the same problem and not a peep out of the media about that.
Supercrew,
"Ford has a compact truck that did poorly against a bunch of car based SUV's, but yet kept in line with all other styles (Truck, car, etc), and some how they are branded with a poor roll over rating for all their vehicles???"
What are you talking about in the paragraph above?
The Toyota 4-Runner is a car based chassis? I don't think so!
Whats with the comment about the Tacoma owners having to worry? Its a truck it has a higher center of gravity.
Daily Drives:
-2003 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner XtraCab, 2.7 Liter , Mobil1 Synthetic SS 5w30.
ODO 9800 Miles.
-1995 Toyota 4-Runner 3.0 V6, Mobil1 Synthetic SS 10w30.
ODO 91800 Miles.
http://community.webshots.com/user/amkeer
"Ford has a compact truck that did poorly against a bunch of car based SUV's, but yet kept in line with all other styles (Truck, car, etc), and some how they are branded with a poor roll over rating for all their vehicles???"
What are you talking about in the paragraph above?
Whats with the comment about the Tacoma owners having to worry? Its a truck it has a higher center of gravity.
Daily Drives:
-2003 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner XtraCab, 2.7 Liter , Mobil1 Synthetic SS 5w30.
ODO 9800 Miles.
-1995 Toyota 4-Runner 3.0 V6, Mobil1 Synthetic SS 10w30.
ODO 91800 Miles.
http://community.webshots.com/user/amkeer
Propflux01
$100 Site Donor 2025
An SUV....Rollover? Sure. It is designed to be higher off the ground. common physics, higher centre of gravity, higher rollover chance. When are these people who make/drive/test these vehicles going to understand that they will not behave like a low-to-the-ground Mustang? Why should a vehicle manufacturer make an SUV-a vehicle designed to be higher off the ground any less rollover-prone? SUV's were never meant to be daily drivers for the masses, they were made for inaccessible areas/roads. yet almost none are used for that purpose, and people drive them like sports cars. what is it about this fact that is so hard for people to understand?
Why do Ford U.S push this crap on you and yet Ford Oz has been braining them with the new Ford Territory available in two and 4 wheel drive versions. It's guaranteed to win the top Aussie car award next year (Wheels car of the year) and the motoring writers are saying it's by far the best vehicle ever designed here. Something just doesn't make sense.
No argument there..quote:
Originally posted by Amkeer:
Supercrew,
"Ford has a compact truck that did poorly against a bunch of car based SUV's, but yet kept in line with all other styles (Truck, car, etc), and some how they are branded with a poor roll over rating for all their vehicles???"
What are you talking about in the paragraph above?The Toyota 4-Runner is a car based chassis? I don't think so!
Whats with the comment about the Tacoma owners having to worry? Its a truck it has a higher center of gravity.
I was merely tying to point out the hypocracy(sp?) of the article. Like I said earlier, its hard to make a legit comparison on any scale when less than %25 are being shown.
Hey! This is actually good news! Consider it thinning of the herd, i.e., cleaning up the gene pool. Cause you know, cleanliness is next to Godliness.
- Status
Similar threads
