My wife likes it (she thinks) based upon seeing them out and about. She is practical and knows about stuff like the costs and downsides of giant 18" wheels. She looks at fuel economy and engine size. She would prefer an MT.
Looking at the MT write-up, it is ridiculous. 9.2 seconds to 60 MPH is bad? Why? 28 MPG is bad? Why? Even if that is an unloaded value, how do most use these vehicles? As single person commuters. If the vehicle is truly loaded all the time that is justification for a bigger powerplant.
One can buy HD trucks with a variety of engines to meet needs and requirements. People dont gripe when a tractor trailer is powered with a six-cylinder engine. Why gripe over a mere four cylinder engine in a relatively small (on the GVWR scale) vehicle.
Ill be the first to dislike stuff that is "oriented" towards one group, especially gullible women/mothers. That stuff generally becomes impractical in terms of fashion. Im not concerned with cramped seats, because 70+% of Americans are obese, and I cont care to be part of that crowd.
Poor space utilization is another thing...
I never like touchscreen controls. Its not an accuracy or a annoyingness issue - touchscreens are getting ever-better and that is a given (look at any tablet PC or smartphone). It is a lifecycle issue, in that I care to keep my vehicles for 10-20 years if possible, and well over 200k. This means manual, cable actuated, serviceable controls are the best way to efficiently and effectively get there.
I find the article half full of reasonable things and half full of ridiculous stuff.
Now that said, my wife and I have shopped some SUVs because in many years we will need to buy one.
The reality is that any one youre going to pay high 30's to mid-40s for any reasonable unit. IMO the hybrid highlander and RX450h are the gold standards. There is no real "hybrid premium" if you compare their outfuit level and cost to something like the explorer, where we have seen $47k units on the lot. The proven economy of those vehicles is established, and so they have good bang for the buck.
Thing is for a car like the highlander, there is no useful three-row space. There is actually more cargo space on the explorer when the third row is invoked than on the highlander. The RX doesnt have a third row. If you really need three rows and space, the next step from the explorer is the suburban. Go big if you really, consistently need it. The reality is that even the tahoe (and likewise the highlander) is useless when you put up the third row and expect to move cargo.
I like the explorer, and hope that they make a loss-leader type with smaller wheels, simpler components and better cost.
It looks like the FWD v6 explorer is on par economy wise with the FWD 4cyl highlander, FWIW.
