Where did all the Ford Excursions go?

[CKN]

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by CKN
Total Suburban Sales in the same time Period-

2005 87.011
2004 119.545
2003 135.222
2002 151.056
2001 154.782
2000 133.123
1999 138.977

Your chart appears to show all Suburban sales.

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/chevrolet/chevrolet-suburban/


Yes, that was my intention, showing total Suburban sales and then using the 10% figure for the 2500-series to indicate that even at the height of their popularity, the 2500 version sold far fewer units than the Excursion.

GM lumped both the 1500 and 2500 version under a common moniker, whilst Ford produced them as two separate products: Expedition and Excursion.


So-it seems that only Ford loyalist wanted something heavier/more capable. I will bet also most of the 2500's went to fleet/government duty. Unless that's broken out somewhere else. At any rate-200,000 units (or less in the case of the 2500 Suburban-using your 10% statement) translates in to vehicles few wanted.

 

[emmett442]

Originally Posted by CKN
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by CKN
Total Suburban Sales in the same time Period-

2005 87.011
2004 119.545
2003 135.222
2002 151.056
2001 154.782
2000 133.123
1999 138.977

Your chart appears to show all Suburban sales.

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/chevrolet/chevrolet-suburban/


Yes, that was my intention, showing total Suburban sales and then using the 10% figure for the 2500-series to indicate that even at the height of their popularity, the 2500 version sold far fewer units than the Excursion.

GM lumped both the 1500 and 2500 version under a common moniker, whilst Ford produced them as two separate products: Expedition and Excursion.


So-it seems that only Ford loyalist wanted something heavier/more capable. I will bet also most of the 2500's went to fleet/government duty. Unless that's broken out somewhere else. At any rate-200,000 units (or less in the case of the (2500) Suburban-using your statement) translates in to vehicles few wanted.


If this is your case for calling the Excursion a failure, I think you're misguided in using only sales volume to make that determination.

For their time, these were very high profit vehicles. They sold for big money (even compared to a Suburban) and at the same time they were basically just a Super Duty pickup chassis and driveline with a SUV body bolted on it. Not expensive to produce. This was an extremely lucrative vehicle for Ford.

Many high end luxury vehicles are also low volume/high profit vehicles. Just because Maybach can't convince 200,000 people to buy their car this year does not mean it's unsuccessful.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted by CKN
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by CKN
Total Suburban Sales in the same time Period-

2005 87.011
2004 119.545
2003 135.222
2002 151.056
2001 154.782
2000 133.123
1999 138.977

Your chart appears to show all Suburban sales.

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/chevrolet/chevrolet-suburban/


Yes, that was my intention, showing total Suburban sales and then using the 10% figure for the 2500-series to indicate that even at the height of their popularity, the 2500 version sold far fewer units than the Excursion.

GM lumped both the 1500 and 2500 version under a common moniker, whilst Ford produced them as two separate products: Expedition and Excursion.


So-it seems that only Ford loyalist wanted something heavier/more capable. I will bet also most of the 2500's went to fleet/government duty. Unless that's broken out somewhere else. At any rate-200,000 units (or less in the case of the 2500 Suburban-using your 10% statement) translates in to vehicles few wanted.


Nobody would ever call me a Ford loyalist. I made a good living fixing plenty of Ford piles. But the Excursion was an exception, and it fulfilled it's intended purpose well. That it was ridiculously demonized by simpletons, which ultimately affected it's popularity and continued production. Mine was vandalized by cowardly green movement kids, that no doubt still live in their parents basement. The hysteria was similar to the hate for the H2, which wasn't much more than a Tahoe.

 

[SZR48207]

Originally Posted by exranger06
Originally Posted by Reddy45
Cash for Clunkers.. such a wasteful program that impacted lower income people who rely on used cars.

Cash For Clunkers happened in 2009. That means all Excursions were between 4-10 years old at the time. Given the high price they sold for new, and the high price they're still commanding even today, I HIGHLY doubt hardly any were "clunkered" for a measly $4500. Maybe a couple with 300k+ miles were "clunkered," but I'd say 99% of them were not. You really think a truck that had an MSRP of $40k ($40k in 2003 is now $55k today when adjusted for inflation) that is only 6 years old is now worth less than $4500?

Oh yeah, that doesn't fit into the "Blame Cash For Clunkers for everything" agenda everyone's been using for the last 10 years.


Your 1 rebuttal doesn't change the fact that dumping liquid glass into engines in order to satisfy the requirements for CfC was an incredibly wasteful strategy, period.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by CKN
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by CKN
Total Suburban Sales in the same time Period-

2005 87.011
2004 119.545
2003 135.222
2002 151.056
2001 154.782
2000 133.123
1999 138.977

Your chart appears to show all Suburban sales.

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/chevrolet/chevrolet-suburban/


Yes, that was my intention, showing total Suburban sales and then using the 10% figure for the 2500-series to indicate that even at the height of their popularity, the 2500 version sold far fewer units than the Excursion.

GM lumped both the 1500 and 2500 version under a common moniker, whilst Ford produced them as two separate products: Expedition and Excursion.


So-it seems that only Ford loyalist wanted something heavier/more capable. I will bet also most of the 2500's went to fleet/government duty. Unless that's broken out somewhere else. At any rate-200,000 units (or less in the case of the 2500 Suburban-using your 10% statement) translates in to vehicles few wanted.

What other products do you buy simply because they are popular? If you needed/wanted something like an Excursion, it's an awesome vehicle. If all you need/want/can afford is a Civic obviously an Excursion isn't going to interest you.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by CKN
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by CKN
Total Suburban Sales in the same time Period-

2005 87.011
2004 119.545
2003 135.222
2002 151.056
2001 154.782
2000 133.123
1999 138.977

Your chart appears to show all Suburban sales.

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/chevrolet/chevrolet-suburban/


Yes, that was my intention, showing total Suburban sales and then using the 10% figure for the 2500-series to indicate that even at the height of their popularity, the 2500 version sold far fewer units than the Excursion.

GM lumped both the 1500 and 2500 version under a common moniker, whilst Ford produced them as two separate products: Expedition and Excursion.


So-it seems that only Ford loyalist wanted something heavier/more capable. I will bet also most of the 2500's went to fleet/government duty. Unless that's broken out somewhere else. At any rate-200,000 units (or less in the case of the 2500 Suburban-using your 10% statement) translates in to vehicles few wanted.

What other products do you buy simply because they are popular? If you needed/wanted something like an Excursion, it's an awesome vehicle. If all you need/want/can afford is a Civic obviously an Excursion isn't going to interest you.



Cheap (flat screen) TV's at Walmart for one. Samsung Galaxy phone for another. I could go on.........

 

[JustinH]

I see a lot of Excursions in Texas. Probably more than Expeditions.

Most are v10 gassers, some are diesel. They are nice trucks, I wouldn't want to feed it even at cheap prices.

 

[exranger06]

Originally Posted by Reddy45
Originally Posted by exranger06
Originally Posted by Reddy45
Cash for Clunkers.. such a wasteful program that impacted lower income people who rely on used cars.

Cash For Clunkers happened in 2009. That means all Excursions were between 4-10 years old at the time. Given the high price they sold for new, and the high price they're still commanding even today, I HIGHLY doubt hardly any were "clunkered" for a measly $4500. Maybe a couple with 300k+ miles were "clunkered," but I'd say 99% of them were not. You really think a truck that had an MSRP of $40k ($40k in 2003 is now $55k today when adjusted for inflation) that is only 6 years old is now worth less than $4500?

Oh yeah, that doesn't fit into the "Blame Cash For Clunkers for everything" agenda everyone's been using for the last 10 years.



Your 1 rebuttal doesn't change the fact that dumping liquid glass into engines in order to satisfy the requirements for CfC was an incredibly wasteful strategy, period.


I was never a fan of cash for clunkers and I never said it was a good idea. I'm just sick of everyone blaming everything on it, especially when what they're complaining about has absolutely NOTHING to do with cash for clunkers. Like your post, for example.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by exranger06
Originally Posted by Reddy45
Originally Posted by exranger06
Cash For Clunkers happened in 2009. That means all Excursions were between 4-10 years old at the time. Given the high price they sold for new, and the high price they're still commanding even today, I HIGHLY doubt hardly any were "clunkered" for a measly $4500. Maybe a couple with 300k+ miles were "clunkered," but I'd say 99% of them were not. You really think a truck that had an MSRP of $40k ($40k in 2003 is now $55k today when adjusted for inflation) that is only 6 years old is now worth less than $4500?

Oh yeah, that doesn't fit into the "Blame Cash For Clunkers for everything" agenda everyone's been using for the last 10 years.



Your 1 rebuttal doesn't change the fact that dumping liquid glass into engines in order to satisfy the requirements for CfC was an incredibly wasteful strategy, period.


I was never a fan of cash for clunkers and I never said it was a good idea. I'm just sick of everyone blaming everything on it, especially when what they're complaining about has absolutely NOTHING to do with cash for clunkers. Like your post, for example.


Not only that, but it's clear that people have an axe to grind. If you look up the list of cars crushed, you don't actually see any Excursions on the list. Talk about an agenda.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5...0MjMzLWJiYTAtZDVlODc2ODFlZWY3/view?hl=en

 

[dlundblad]

I see most of them around here being used to haul construction crews since they're basically a 4WD HD van.

I've always liked them, but they're just too long for my liking.. I don't need a magic bus.

 

[01rangerxl]

We don't buy Excursions in Muskogee...

 

[DoubleWasp]

Ford Excursions are still built to this day, for almost twice the adjusted MSRP. Not by Ford, but it's still done.

There's still plenty of them down here. Not a hard vehicle to find.

Never understood the Excursion hate. Anything "bad" about the Excursion could be said about any of the 3/4 ton vans being made at the time.......or today.

People seemed to believe the Excursion was a Horseman of the Apocalypse.

It was pretty much unmatched as a tow SUV. Knew plenty of folks who considered it to be the go-to vehicle for trailering the family and a large boat to the water on weekends.

If anything "did in" the 3/4 ton SUVs, it was in-house competition from the increasingly nicer 4-door 3/4 ton pick-up trucks.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Ford Excursions are still built to this day, for almost twice the adjusted MSRP. Not by Ford, but it's still done.


I just discovered the F-250 Tropivan...freaking awesome! I love the shorter wheelbase.

Looks like Brazil also has regular cab short bed F-250s.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted by uc50ic4more
There are a couple that I see around my area (both sound like they have diesels), which surprises me because there is a LOT of road salt used through the winter here in Canada; and vehicles develop rust quickly unless you take some aggressive preventative measures otherwise. If I am correct that the last model year they were made was '05 then I am impressed by how nice they both look.

I had mentioned to Overkill I saw one online for sale in Ontario that was in reasonable shape, but not fantastic, with miles out the wazoo and they wanted over $30,000 for it. Nice try.

 

[meadows]

I got one in the driveway, not for sale!