My first car was a Pontiac Parisian Safari station wagon. Not only could it cruise I-5 all day, but I once hauled eleven people and a drum set from Sonoma County to Sacramento and back. When one of the cylinders lost compression, the attempted engine rebuild was a testimony to the strength of our relationship. Before the block cracked, the Safari provided my family, friends and I with nearly three hundred thousand miles of motoring bliss. Sadly, the SUV craze and seat belt legislation killed off the full-size American station wagon. Aside from the chop top, third row deficient Dodge Magnum, Ford’s Freestyle is the closest the Big 2.5 has come to reviving this classic, all-American ride.
I remember reading about Ford’s new “cross-over” when it was co-launched with the Five Hundred. And then, nothing; it simply disappeared off my automotive radar. Turns out Freestyles abound. Trouble is, they don’t look like anything. It’s not a wagon, nor an SUV, nor a weird-ass people mover like Chrysler's Pacifica or Mercedes' R-Class. The Freestyle is more of a metal lump with doors. In terms of design, buff book fans will recall the never-ending string of “future” haulers from the mid-80s. Ta-da. Ford did a nice job with the humongous wheels that mask the Freestyle’s super size. And the Freestyle’s front is the best interpretation of the Focus/Five Hundred design language yet. Pity the pretty Fusion showed up and rendered all of them obsolete…
The inside is a revelation. Props to Ford for dipping into the tough luxury bin and extracting a first-class, mass-market interior. From fingertip-friendly buttons, to materials that don’t make you yak, to ergonomics that are faultless to the point of invisibility, the Freestyle’s cabin is a huge step forward for Ford. OK, the overall design is about as bold as David Hasselhoff, but there are plenty of compensatory joys. The Freestyle’s touch-screen nav system is a generation ahead of BMW/DCX/Audi in terms of usability. The stereo sounds as good as the Germans', encroaching on Lexus/Infiniti type sonic-sweetness. Plus, there are enough bins and cubbies to hold all your stuff.
Although I rarely risk a torn MCL to check out a vehicle’s third row, the Freestyle’s way back was the exception that proved my flexibility. A full-sized adult will find the rear-most seats as comfortable (or not) as any domestic airline seat. Passengers in both the middle and way out yonder enjoy their own AC vents and controls. Even better, you can sit yourself in the third row, drop the middle seat, prop your feet up and watch a DVD. That, my friends, is righteous American luxury. Alternatively, you can use an empty second row as a kind of de-militarized zone; let little Jimmy and Sally beat each other senseless in back as you concentrate on the task at hand.
With MacPhersons up front and multi-link with trailing arms out back, the Freestyle is a long-haul commuter's dream come true: smooth, refined and, well, American. Although you could say the same thing about Volvo’s SUV's (which share both a platform and the Ford’s optional AWD system), the Freestyle’s greater proximity to terra firma adds an extra level of confidence. I dare the Germans to do it better. Sure, the Freestyle is a station-wagon trying its hardest to be a minivan, but even as a very-single dude, I don't care. I love driving this, um, car. Corners? Yeah, you can go around corners, but why bother? Better to maintain a leisurely pace and enjoy the waft, rather than attempt anything laterally ambitious.
I’ve got two major gripes with the Ford Freestyle. First, there‘s no possible justification for making the third row “safety canopy system” optional. That’s both bad business and bad joss for a company selling itself as family-friendly innovator. Second, the Freestyle’s powerplant is pathetic. Ye olde 3.0L Duratec V6 pits 203hp and 207 lbs. feet of torque through a not-ready-for-primetime CVT against 4150lbs. Guess who wins? The oil companies. I averaged 16.6mpg. (Getting on the freeway is getting on the freeway.) Not keeping up with the Jones’ minivan is embarrassing, annoying and, lest we forget, unsafe. A $37k vehicle with so little power underhood is a sad reminder that, beneath all the good stuff, the Freestyle is still a bean-counted Ford.
Even so, Ford's Freestyle is a winner: a latter-day family truckster that’s comfortable, practical and, um, practical. So where’s the next generation prototype? Where’s the high output model? Where are the Super Bowl ads? Despite the dreadful mileage, the Freestyle is the answer to America’s misguided love affair with the SUV. Perhaps Ford didn’t want to bite the Explorer/Expedition hand that is/was feeding it? It’s a new ballgame, Billy Boy. Time to bring in the family station-wagon.
That’s funny, I almost never see a Freestyle down here in TX. (too many Explorers) Except for the dull styling and weak engine, both the Five Hundred and Freestyle feel like quality machines that behave pretty well. Hopefully that 3.5L transplant next year and new Fusion-faced redesign turns the tides.
That, and a sport model (SHO) perhaps? Pretty please?
Jonny, you mention in the first paragraph that seat belt legislation helped kill the full size wagon. That sounds interesting, I love hearing that kind of car history – could you go into a little more detail how that happened?
Jonny, the question I’d have is not is the Freestyle objectively OK (which it seems to be) but is it as good as (or better than) other vehicles in its price class. I don’t shop for luxury cars as a hobby, so all my research is limited to what I find on autotrader.com and Edmunds, but it seems to me that $37k will buy you a Volvo XC-70, a BMW X3, or a Lexus/Infiniti SUV, not to mention a fully loaded Subaru Tribeca (Gag!) or 6-cyl Outback. Other than the issue of size, is the Freestyle any better than any of those import competitors? Is it even as good? The other question is, with the Big Two viciously discounting just about everything on their lots, what is that Freestyle going to be worth at trade-in time vs. the Volvo, BMW, Lexus, Infiniti, etc?
I may be the only person in the world who thinks a Volvo XC-70 is sexy, but given their reputation for reliability and safety, I think if I had $37k to throw around (and believe me, I don’t) the Volvo would get the nod for overall quality and the BMW would get it for snob appeal.
Mike: I think Jonny may have been referring to car-seat legislation. Back when we were kids mom and dad could throw 3 or 4 rug rats into the back seat or the far-back of the Vista Cruiser and be OK. Nowadays kids have to be in car seats until they’re in Junior High, so a family with 3 or more kids has to get a minivan or SUV in order to be able to accomodate all the car seats.
The old Town and Country-type station wagon was famous in these parts for its ability to take extreme numbers of passengers: three in the front, four in the middle, three in the way back. Or more.
With the advent of seatbelt legislation and enforcement, station wagons became strict five seaters. At that point, many families faced the choice of leaving a child or two on a hillside or buying a minvan. When SUV’s came-up with the third row, it was game, set, match for the wagonistas.
Of course, there are some terrific station wagons with rear-facing third row seats, The Mercedes E55 AMG wagon all but won TTAC’s car of the year in ’05. But the idea didn’t really catch on. So now we’re morpin’ and freestylin’ our way back.
Oh, and the fact that the Freestyle doesn’t get Volvo’s roll-over protection system highlights Jonny’s point about the third row airbag curtain. Tsk-tsk.
I hate-hate-hate anemic vehicles. I wanna see a 500 hp ford five hundred. Somebody has to do it, hell I would if I had the money. Someday…
-SexCpotatoes
future retaining wall pancake
Martinjmpr,
Yes, it is. First of all, it is not an SUV — it doesn’t ride like an SUV, it doesn’t make me think I am going to tip over through a curve like an SUV, and compared to the Mercedes GL450, which is 1,000 lbs heavier yet hauls exactly as many people, doesn’t get SUV gas mileage.
So, granted, the GL450 would roll up the Freestyle and smoke it in a drag race or off-road. But honestly, how many soccer Moms drag race and venture off-road? We all know the answer, and the answer is none.
OK, but what about the Subaru’s? I own a Subaru. I’ve owned two Subaru’s. That said, you get more car in the Freestyle than you do in a fully-loaded Outback. The interior is better, the Nav system just cannot compete (stereo, too) and there is probably twice as much room. As nobody actually buys B9 Tribeca’s, let’s just skip that one.
Re-sale? I don’t know… I think the Freestyle is a cult sleeper.
See…this is what I was talking about – perspective – and very well written. And was that a backhanded compliment to the Fusion that I saw there? (that car actually drives pretty nice, and it’s priced well…)
A few quick points:
First, pricing. I created a website to enable quick, accurate price comparisons. I suggest people interested in making price comparisons use it.
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Five.php
For example, the Volvo XC70 costs about $10,000 more than the Freestyle. They are not close in price. That’s before incentives. The Subaru is closer, about $2,000 more. None of the other vehicles listed in the comment offers a third-row seat. They appeal to a totally different set of customers.
What Mr. Karesh said.
But again, I maintain that the Freestyle trumps all, as it is not an SUV — it is the long forgotten big, American Station-Wagon. And it beats hell out of Chrysler’s goofy Pacifica.
Mike/Jonny:
The Volvo is not an SUV either.
According to Edmunds, the base MSRP of the XC70 is $36k. Around here (Denver) there are at least a few dealers offering the XC70 at near MSRP. Granted, we’re talking about base model vs. loaded up, but a base model Volvo is still pretty loaded up.
Keep in mind you would never actually pay $37k for this vehicle. Also you can get one for around $25k also.
Martinjmpr,
Right you are — I was thinking of the XC90.
But again, no third row in the XC70 — a different vehicle.
I second Sajeev – SHO pretty please! Volvo has the small Yamaha V8 putting out just over 300 HP. JUST DO IT!
I have spent the last year or 2 agonizing over a new vehicle purchase – my main car is a manual 1993 Taurus SHO. In its own way, that car has been as much fun as my 1986 MR2. I need the space for a monthly trip for my work and the Taurus has filled the bill. I looked at the Ford Five Hundred, but driving it gives vanilla a bad rap. I loved the space and I did like the interior design generally.
I have leased 2 Expiditions – great as SUV’s, but I want a car or something very much like it.
My wise and zen-like 13 year old son asked me as we were looking for cars – “would you buy/like a new SHO?” – bingo – that is exactly what I would like. Instead I will settle for a 300 HP Volvo V70R wagon. I briefly looked at a Buick Lucerne – my son said: “Dad, you can’t get a Buick”.
It does sadden me that the big three carmakers did not make the cut with me and I am not confident of the path they are on. The Dodge Magnum was kinda cool, but the interior was horrible – I could not spend a good part of my life in such a torture chamber.
Keep up the good work TTAC – tell us the truth!
miked:
NHTSA regulations required shoulder belts in all rear outboard seating positions on all cars, trucks, vans, or SUVs manufactured for sale in the US after September 1, 1989. Chrysler was already long out of the big-wagon business by then. Ford built Country Squire/Colony Park wagons for the 1991 model year which complied with the new regs, but never built big wagons after the 1992 Crown Vic/Grand Marquis redesign. (Post-’89 Taurus wagons have rear shoulder belts in all required positions, obviously.) GM built its B-body wagons with rear shoulder belts even in the “nausea seats” from 1991 through 1996, but got out of the big rear-drive body-on-frame business after that. For now, at least.
The NHTSA regs also forced a few interesting moves. All 1990 Caravans and Voyagers were built prior to September 1 and were thus exempt from the rear shoulder belt requirement. The 1990 Lumina debuted early so GM wouldn’t have to install rear shoulder belts on the Chevy Celebrity, even though the Celebrity’s A-body platform mates would remain in production for one to seven (!) more model years. (A limited run of ’90 Celebrity wagons was built, all prior to September 1, 1989.)
On September 1, 2007, a new regulation goes into effect requiring a shoulder belt at all seating positions, period.
This is the kind of family vehicle that could sell like crazy except that the Ford is the only roomy domestic wagon and the import competitors are priced plenty higher compared to most SUVs. Without the third row the Magnum just has a large trunk and the chop look makes it only marginally more useful than a large sedan with a trunk pass-through.
With a third row (front or rear facing), the Big 2 could sell plenty of wagons in this class instead of trying to sell subpar minivans. I’m sure they’d get plenty of looks just based on the mileage numbers… assuming the Freestyle gets a real powertrain.
Sorry, Jonny, but a third row is available on the XC70. It faces rearward and there’s no well for your feet, but it is available ($995). It’s the one thing that might make a V70R a candidate for my garage in the future. But I’m hoping for something with a decent third row that handles better than the Volvo.
The outlook is not promising. So the current plan is to replace my current car with two cars, a Mazda RX-8 and perhaps a Ford Freestyle. I like the interior versatility of the Ford, especially how easy it is to fold every seat save the driver’s.
Holy cow! A comments thread that didn’t reduce itself to a pissing contest! I love it!
Great review. Once the 3.5 kicks in, and a little more aggressive front end treatment, I think the Freestyle will awaken from it’s sleep. Overall I think it’s a very classy, subtle design. I just wish they’d change that bumper car steering wheel…..
From the Pittsburgh paper here today…front page of the business section…
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06187/703679-185.stm
An interview with Peter Horbury, exec.vp of design for Ford…
Q: Why is Ford taking so much criticism for some of its designs these days?
A: We are an American car company…
An Audi A6 avant with the smallest available engine, comparable space and equipment (minus the DVD entertainment, still) runs… gasp, $ 62,000. Ouch!! It is better. But at what price????
Johnny Lieberman, what is the available storage space in a Freelander if all of the seats are occupied? Sure, the Freelander maybe have third row seating, but does that come at the expense of storage in the rear of the car?
Most people who need more than 5 seats are going to go after a vehicle large enough to carry everyone AND their luggage. What good is a third row of seats if you have to leave your luggage behind?
Its not a bad vehicle, IMO. $36,000 for a wagon? Nah. I do like the Fusion though, but alas, will never buy a Mexican car. If Ford wants to move teh Fusion to the US, I may consider it. Of course I loath autos, so I would have to get eh 4cyl manual, then put a turbo on it. Wouldn’t that be rare. That definitely puts me in the minority. Back to the point, a wagon is uaually just a modified platform of a car. I wouldn’t pay more thn a couple grand more than the car’s price for one. Fusion is what, 25 for a decent one? I know the Freestyle isn’t based on the same car (is it?), but I have not seen much a difference in size. But i will admit I have only seen a couple, and they looked like a Ford clone of an Outback. The review is correct, Ford is neglecting the product. I am tired of f150 commercials, put other product up there!
Couple things but first, I like this review. Its more of a potential customer type of take on the car and I appreciate that as I too was a potential customer for this vehicle.
Long before this car was released to the public, I saw photos and was very impressed. I love wagons and this seemed like a VW jetta wagon crossed with a Volvo X70 type that looked right on to me. However, what simply astonishes people is just how large this car really is. Its massive for a car, try opening a door of a freestyle sometime. thats an airplane wing. This isnt bad, but…
I wound up price shopping the wishlist and while Ill admit that the third row may be important to some, I will also bet a good number of those its important to are more than willing to go to a minivan also. I wasnt. I wanted AWD, space (not econoline but more than a sedan), a V6, leather etc and a elevated position. Wound up shopping the Freestyle, immediately dumped due to pricing, looked long and hard at a Mariner and then ulimtately bought a V6 pkg 2 Tribute for 21K out the door and easily a better value for the money (even without considering the extra factory warranty). There are those that would say the tribby isnt half as refined but for 21K, this is like the famliy Jeep that isnt…well…a jeep (an thats a good thing). This is the vehicle that I pull a 5×10 trailer with, haul bags of mulch in, cart my dogs in the back after running through mud…you get the picture. It isnt a metoo lexus wannabe, but it cleans up very nicely and best of all its a UTLITY vehicle and isnt too damn expensive. Each and every person Ive carted around has been suprised at how nice it is. The plastics blow, and the body could stand to firm up a bit but the handling more than makes up for these shortcomings. Oh yeah, and I consistently get 22mpg as well.
The issue here is that this car failed to pull from the market its current buyers are in…and I WANTED to buy the car. Arguable? Sure, but those wagon lovers out there are driving subarus, volvos, minivans and SUVs right now (myself included). Drop in a 4.6 V8, and I would have been somewhat more willing to write the check and treat it a bit kinder than I do the tribute. But then why wouldnt I just buy an Eddie Bauer Explorer that pulls more, has the V8 and still gets the same MPG for 30K? Unless the point is to save some money! For ten grand in my pocket, I hardly think it makes sense for a third row and dual zone climate control…but then again…my hounds just arent that picky as passengers.
PS that Freestyle for 25K bit is a keys and heater FWD version so lets be honest here the going rate locally (at the one price megavolume dealer) here for a limited AWD is 34+k sticker and 31+k discounted. And THATS the truth about the pricing.
Sounds like Ford has produced yet another indistinct, underpowered product. It would be one thing if the undersized blue oval engines made up for their lack of heft with superior MPG, but they fail miserably at that as well.
I had the opportunity to drive a Pontiac Montana 1400 miles over the course of a weekend, and even though a Montana is not anything to rave about, either, it did manage to post 20 MPG on the highway.
As badly as GM has been beat up on TTAC due to is model lineup, it seems that their counterparts at Ford are in even worse shape. If it weren’t for the Mustang, it would be a near total loss.
There’s actually about a foot and a half of space behind the third row, about as much as you’ll find in any minivan. A few suitcases should fit.
Most owners report much better mileage than Jonny experienced. You can find discussions here:
http://www.myfordfreestyle.com
From a functional standpoint, the Freestyle is the best seven-passenger crossover/SUV you can buy right now. A large amount of room and seats that fold easily to form a flat surface in a reasonably maneuverable package.
I’m very interested in checking out the Saturn Outlook when it arrives this fall, though. It probably will feel larger and bulkier.
A foot and a half of space? I seem to recall my sister’s Odessy had quite a bit more room in the back (though my recollection could be faulty) behind the third row of seats.
Honestly though, Nissan’s Pathfinder has third row seating, around 100 more HP and ft-lbs of torque, gets about the same gas mileage, costs less and looks better.
The Freestyle is a peculiarity that does no one thing well and everything that it does do is half-assed. Expensive, limited storage capacity, limited towing, poor gas mileage, and ultimately poor resale.
The knock on the Freestyle has always been that it’s underpowered. I would adamantly disagree. For what it is designed to do, it’s very adequately powered. I have a 2005 FWD SEL purchased in July 2005 for about $25,000 that is NOT a “keys and heater version.” We have over 12,000 miles on it and I’ve been completely satisfied hauling around my family of 5.
It is an enthusiast’s bias that every car must be powered by more than 300 hp. This car is not unsafe with the 3.0 Duratec. I have never once felt a problem in very busy highway traffic in southern California. Lest you assume that I’ve probably lived a life of driving underpowered imports, I should say that my other vehicles are a 2003 Corvette and a 2006 Saturn VUE with the 250hp Honda engine. The Duratec is fine in this application. If you need more towing ability, you’re shopping the wrong car. I just drove this car for a week’s vacation through the Sierra Nevadas and apologized to no one for the power. When choosing the powerplant, there needs to be a balance of expected use, safety, and efficiency. I think Ford did well with this choice.
Regarding the gas mileage – I understand you were driving an AWD, but driving through the Sierras with a loaded car and a car top carrier, I averaged 22 mpg for the week. I don’t drive like a grandpa, but driving style can certainly affect your mileage.
This is the first Ford I ever bought and the 8th car I’ve owned at the age of 36. I would certainly consider another Ford product based on my experience. I think it was well designed for it’s intended purpose and I can’t believe Ford isn’t promoting it more. We have been very pleased so far and haven’t had the first problem with it.
I seriously looked at this car before buying a mini-van. What killed the deal for me was lack of access to the third row when the 2nd row is filled with car seats. You can’t fold up the second row seats when there is a childs car seat in it. We ended up buying a Toyota Sienna.
My current daily drive is a ford 500. I purchased it well below the MSRP. I imagine Ford is still giving the ‘human being’ discount on the Freestyle as well. What sold me on the 500 was aslo the interior. The ergonomics were nearly perfect for me. My commute is 40 miles each way, with a 3,500 foot elevation change. The old 3.0 handles drive just fine, and get 27mpg on a regular basis.
For me personally, if you gave me a choise between a 3.0 and a 3.5 in this car, I would have taken the 3.0 for the fuel economy.
–C. Alan
Just a few comments from a Freestyle owner:
1) I got my AWD SEL for about $26K. Not stripped.
2) I have 25000 miles on the car, averaging 23.3 mpg overall. Mostly suburban/highway miles–mileage is much lower in the city.
3) I got the six-seat version (middle row captain’s chairs) and the split rear seat. This provides tremendous flexibility. I put a 9 foot christmas tree down one side, and my wife and daughter in the two seats behind me.
It actually worked better than it had in my minivan.
4) I live in a hilly area, and the power is adequate. You have to floor the pedal if you want to accelerate, but the CVT works really well. Except for things like merging onto a highway, you can keep the engine around 2000 rpm and everything is good. If I lived in the mountains the power might not be adequate–I haven’t tried it yet.
4) I really like the car.
I grew up riding in station wagons. My parents had a ’57 Ford Ranch Wagon Del Rio, a ’62 Country Sedan and a ’71 Country Squire. When it came time for me to buy a family car, I bought a ’88 Mercury Colony Park. Took the family all over, from NYC to LA.
Although my children are grown and gone I still have the Colony Park and it is my preferred ride for road trips. Just recently finished a 3000 mile round trip to NYC. Its amazing how much interest the car attracts. The doorman at the Sheraton New York let me park the car at the front door along with a Bentley Flying Spur.
We have grandkids now and its the car they want to ride in. Have no plans on replacing the Mercury but if I did the Freestyle would be on the top of the list. Ford definitely has a sleeper on its hands.
Perfection for me would be: ditch the Freestyle moniker, put some 3M Di-Noc wood grain on the sides and call it the Country Squire.
Over to you FoMoCo…
Might be two feet of space, roughly equivalent to what you’ll find behind the third row in an Odyssey or Sienna.
The Pathfinder is much tighter inside. Even the second row is tight in the Nissan, and the third row is very tight. And there’s less cargo space behind the third row. Maybe 60 more horsepower, in a heavier, thirstier vehicle. Nissan engines tend to lose a few ponies with the new SAE standard. The 3.5 in the 2007 Quest is rated at 235.
I drove a Freestyle last summer, for a week’s time, and also found it a well screwed together, pleasant people conveyor. However – and this is a big however – that CVT (continuously variable transmission) behind the V6 was the modern-day equivalent of the “Powerslush” of olden times (1950s through ’60s), that went into Chevrolets.
The damn thing hunts all over the planet – or so it seems – looking for the appropriate gear. Meanwhile, you (as the driver) are wondering, is it going up in gear now, or down?
In fairness, I took the Freestyle to a shop whose owner, Larry Dreon, I have known since 1981. He works on Volvos and helps me with my old crock of a ’72 Volvo, from time-to-time. Larry has owned a Dodge Viper and now drives a Mercedes-Benz SLK AMG. He is a certified ASE (Automotive Service Excellence) auto technician and overall, an outstanding judge of automotive character and demeanor.
“This transmission is a piece of shit!” he opined with uncharacteristically negative vigor, as he drove the Freestyle in a 2.5 mile loop down the roadway in front of his shop – Daiseywagen (sic) Foreign Car Service – onto the I5 North freeway and then back to the shop. He, like Johny Leiberman, thought the Duratec V6 a bit anemic.
If Detroit is going to compete with the likes of Volvo and Audi station wagons, they’re going to have to come up with a platform better than the Freestyle. I too love the old Chevrolet Nomads and Pontiac Safaris; but for how they look, rather than how they drive.
C. Alan – you are correct about access to the back two seats…..they wouldn’t work well with car seats. My oldest is 8 so she doesn’t sit in a seat. We needed something that would allow us to cart the grandparents when they visit or an extra friend with the kids.
ktm – regarding the Nissan Pathfinder…..I don’t think 16/23 vs 20/27 is about the same gas mileage and it’s a difference of 63 hp, not about 100 hp. I haven’t priced a Pathfinder, but I can’t imagine it’s that much cheaper. If you need to do a lot of towing, the Pathfinder probably would be better.
One other thing I didn’t mention in the previous post – I was very pleased with the handling in the mountains. Did it handle like the Vette? Of course not. However, I thought it handled very securely on the winding mountain roads. We certainly weren’t slowing anyone else down in our familymobile.
I really don’t think this is a “half-assed” car. Is it a Lexus? No. But for a young family, it’s a very efficient way of getting around. Would a mini-van do it better? Perhaps. But if your wife refuses to drive a mini-van, the Freestyle is a great choice.
As a matter of full disclosure, my only concern with this car was the CVT. Given my choice, I’d have probably chosen a durable 6 speed automatic. However, I decided to roll the dice because the rest of the vehicle was such a compelling value.
Hmmm… maybe the newly approved-for-production Ford Fairlane will improve on all these flaws that people commented on. It could even be considered a direct replacement for the freestyle. Of course, people think its actually closer to a minivan than a wagon. but oh well… we can only hope. My dad has a 2002/3 escape XLT with the V6, and i have to say i really like the power from that engine. acceleration is a beeze… and oomh comes pretty effortlessly, except for those tricky times when the tranny goes to sleep and doesn’t let you fly out as early as you’d like to. If its the same duratec we’re talking about here… can someone explain to me why its being billed as under-powered in this particular application??
PS. great review, johnny. Autblog also reviewed this vehicle some time ago.. and they were also very pleased with it. heres a link: http://www.autoblog.com/2005/08/02/2005-ford-freestyle-sel-in-the-autoblog-garage-day-1/
Wow, upper teens and low 20s for fuel economy? That’s pathetic! I drive a 2003 Jetta TDI, and on a bad day I get about 45 MPG.
I’ve never driven a Freestyle, so I can’t judge as to whether or not it’s junk, but it doesn’t look bad on the road. If only Ford/GM would start equipping some of their passenger cars with Diesel engine options. VW’s old 1.9 litre TDI only generates 90 hp, but it also puts out 155 lb-ft of torque. I’ve never been disappointed in the power or economy of it after almost 90000 miles.
For 2008, VW is supposed to start using a 2.0 litre TDI that puts out 140 hp and about 250 ft-lbs of torque. If they throw that in something like a Passat or Jetta wagon, Ford could have some serious competion. Honda and Toyota are rumoured to be bringing Diesel options to the U.S/Canada as well. I hope the domestic companies aren’t still sleeping when they start showing up over here…
You have to admire Ford’s honesty in proclaiming their Freestyle is “Limited.”
My question would be how Ford will differentiate this vehicle from the upcoming Edge? Aside from the third row seat that I think is going to be fixed in a forthcoming Edge, there is going to be a big design discrepancy in terms of dated look for the Freestyle.
I know the dealers will view the Freestyle as their minivan offering when the Freestar gets MD’d but with the Fairlane coming, it’s going to be a tight squeeze to have the Explorer, Edge, Freestyle, and Fairlane all in the 5-7 passenger game all at about the same price points.
RE: the Volvo XC70: We chose the V50 as a more fuel efficient option with the T5 in it but remember, at the end of the day, all those profits go to Dearborn as well. Ford’s preference is that they want their customers to buy from PAG– it’s been a stated goal for years. The profits are there and the tooling on that vehicle is long ago paid for. It will better justify PAG’s existence and further strengthen the Volvo / LR all stars of the group.
KTM:
We are unfortunately (and fortunately) limited on space in these reviews, however, there is plenty of room behind the third row for “stuff.” There is a fairly deep well so groceries won’t slide all over the joint, too.
Hoosier Red:
The car is underpowered and the CVT is a dog. Unfortunately, I think the reason the car is so underpowered is because the CVT is such a dog — it can’t handle huge torque loads.
I was coming off the 134 merging onto the 5 North — that is two lanes that merge onto the 5. Traffic was flowing. I was in the right lane and was trying to get over. But, after glancing in the (awesomely sized) side mirror, I see a Range Rover bearing down on me. I floor it, Pedal all the way down. The RPMs refuse to go above 4,000 and there is nothing I can do — The range rover flys by me, followed by other cars and I can’t get on the freeway like I want to — not good.
Solution. High Output model for me. You like it as is, fine. But, choices man, choices.
As far as mileage goes — I picked the Freestyle up and the trip computer said 16.8 mpg. When I dropped it off after a week of mixed driving, it said 16.7 mpg. And I really wasn’t hammering it — mostly because it felt weird to floor the CVT.
mastermik – the Escape is a small SUV. the engine performs very well in that package, which weighs 3464lbs. The Freestyle is 3825lbs. The escape holds 4 comfortably (IMO), now load up the freestyle with 5-7 people. thats another 150-400 pounds on top of the nearly 400 pounds it was already heavier. It would definitely feel different. I have not driven it. I know the subaru is called underpowered as well, but it sells well enough. I know who's AWD system I would rather have under me, and it is not Ford's. My wife hates minivans too, so i do not know what we will look at in a few years. She likes the Pilot, but I am tired of moms driving SUV's because of 'image' issues. I like minivans, versatile. so its not me that is the hangup here.
Terry P.
Your mechanic friend is correct — CVT is not good.
mastermik, the Escape is lighter than the Freestyle. Same thing with the Five Hundred, I felt it was doggish, but the same Duratec in a friend's '96 Sable is a screamer.
I had never even heard of this vehical until it started coming up around here, and I think I stay pretty up on cars. That is a pretty huge problem. Has Ford chosen not to market this vehicle at all?
For some reason I had 170 hp in my head for the power of the Freestyle. I have no idea where I got that number. Still, it gives up 67 hp and 84 ft-lbs of torque to the Pathfinder. As for fuel economy, I beg to differ. Johnny indicated that in mixed driving he got around 16 to 17 mpg and he was not hammering it. Hell, I get 18 mpg in my FX35 (that has the same engine as the Pathfinder) and I hammer it ALL the time. My FX is rated at 17/23, which is quite close to the Pathfinder. So either Ford is lying, the computer in the car is faulty, or Johnny had a lemon. I would say that 16 to 17 MPG is quite close to my 17 to 18 mpg, wouldn't you? As for storage, Nissan rates the Pathfinder at 16.5 cu. ft. with all the seats up; Ford rates the Freestyle at 15.8 cu. ft. with all the seats up.
Odd, I typed up a response, hit post, and it's no where to be found. Johnny, I am not talking about groceries but luggage. The problem with the 'smaller' 7 passenger vehicles is that they sacrifice storage for people carrying. A volume of 15.8 cu. ft. (or 16.5 – see below) is not very much, especially if you have a stroller. I had 170 hp in my head for the power of the Freesytle, though I have no idea from where. Regardless, it still gives up 67 hp and 84 ft-lbs of torque to the Pathfinder. As far as the gas mileage, I beg to differ. Johnny Lieberman indicated that the computer indicated around 16 mpg after mixed driving. My FX35 gets 18 mpg after mixed driving and I hammer it all the time. Though the Freestyle is rated at 20/27, real world results are rather different. The FX is rated at 17/23, similar to the Pathfinder. So either Johnny's computer was wrong, the car was rather thirsty those days, or Ford is lying. I would say that 18 mpg and 16 mpg are rather close, wouldn't you? As far as storage, Nissan indicates that the Pathfinder has 16.5 cu. ft. behind the third seats. Ford claims 15.8 cu. ft. behind theirs.
Sheesh, someone really borked up the comment script. I have tried to reply all day and nada, now it tells me that my response is a duplicate. Here goes nothing: Odd, I typed up a response, hit post, and it's no where to be found. Johnny, I am not talking about groceries but luggage. The problem with the 'smaller' 7 passenger vehicles is that they sacrifice storage for people carrying. A volume of 15.8 cu. ft. (or 16.5 – see below) is not very much, especially if you have a stroller. I had 170 hp in my head for the power of the Freesytle, though I have no idea from where. Regardless, it still gives up 67 hp and 84 ft-lbs of torque to the Pathfinder. As far as the gas mileage, I beg to differ. Johnny Lieberman indicated that the computer indicated around 16 mpg after mixed driving. My FX35 gets 18 mpg after mixed driving and I hammer it all the time. Though the Freestyle is rated at 20/27, real world results are rather different. The FX is rated at 17/23, similar to the Pathfinder. So either Johnny's computer was wrong, the car was rather thirsty those days, or Ford is lying. I would say that 18 mpg and 16 mpg are rather close, wouldn't you? As far as storage, Nissan indicates that the Pathfinder has 16.5 cu. ft. behind the third seats. Ford claims 15.8 cu. ft. behind theirs.
We looked at the Freestyle last summer. Boy, my wife loved it in every way, and the powertrain was fine for her purposes. Then we looked at a new Honda EX-L Pilot. Bigger, at least as good gas mileage, great quality record vs no real quality record. We would have still got the Freestyle, but Honda offered it to us for less than any of the dozen local Ford dealers was willing to go. Talk about a no-brainer. Bought the Honda, knowing resale in a few years will be way ahead of the underpromoted, overpriced and prematurely orphaned Ford product
Pontiac "Parisian"? Are you sure that is the correct name? Even though the term "Pontiac Parisian" turns up over 4,000 hits on Google, I think the correct name is "Parisienne" – a Pontiac model sold only on the Canadian market back in the sixties.
Good review. My wife is on her second Freestyle (I drive a BMW 330i). I think the Freestyle is a relatively undiscovered gem of a vehicle. Very versatile compartment for people or hauling lots of bulky items, and it has lots of useful storage cubbys. Good on the highway. We just dove to Texas and back from Michigan and got close to 25 MPG. Around town she gets 21 MPG commuting. The CVT takes some getting used to, but once a driver gets the feel, the only real downside is that it feels a bit slow and strained if you tromp down on the accelerator from a standing start. It has surprising passing agility once you are up to cruising speed. The Freestyle should not be compared with performance oriented vehicles, but it is very good at what it is meant to do. When it gets the 3.5L engine sometime in the 2007 model year it may be an all around winner.
mastermik Your Escape is an animal (relatively speaking) because its about 500lbs lighter. Yeah, its the same motor, but its pulling much less weight. I feel the same way about the Five Hundred: even with a 6-speed, that thing gets its ass handed to it by the last Duratec powered, 4-speed '96 Sable I drove. That Volvo-sourced chassis is heavy.
Jonny L – I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. My concern with the CVT is long term reliability – not performance. The scary car to drive for me was my wife's first gen Honda CR-V. There were relatively mild inclines that made that car huff and puff. I traded in an Olds Aurora with the shortstar V-8 (250 hp) and I approached my first drive with significant skepticism considering the heft of the vehicle and the 203 hp Duratec. In a year of driving, I've never found myself in a difficult position b/c of lack of power. Perhaps we all approach driving differently……I wouldn't try to race the Range Rover onto the highway – I'd let him pass and then safely merge. It's worked for me in 20 years of accident free driving. If I'm in the Vette – there's not much that will beat me onto the highway. My point is that there are some people who would prefer a smaller, more efficient engine rather than always having more horsepower. Personally, I think my Saturn VUE is overpowered with the 250 hp Honda engine. It still gets decent mileage, but I would be willing to sacrifice some of the power for more efficiency. I think there are some horsepower wars played out for the sake of the enthusiasts' media – I guess that's ok, but the trend is almost always larger and more powerful. Sometimes, I would just prefer more reliable or more refined. As for the CVT – I don't know exactly what you mean by labelling it a dog. I'm not an engineer. Perhaps it will fail in a couple years and I'll be very disappointed. However, if it continues to perform as it does now for the next 10 years, I'll be a very satisfied customer. Personally, I think Ford gets away with the 3.0 b/c of the CVT – the engine can stay in the power band more effectively when not limited to 4 or 6 discrete gears. I'm no apologist for Fords. Again, this is the first I ever purchased. I still believe Ford did a good job with this one and if I was a Ford exec, I would push for continual improvement and refinement of this vehicle especially as I was leaving the minivan market.
Just saw one today. To my eyes it looked like a rather long, lowered Explorer.
Okay, the comments still seem to be screwy. For those who criticize Ford for not doing more to promote the Freestyle, my memory may be hazy, but I don't recall seeing/hearing a lot of ads for station wagons back during the 60's-70's, either. Granted, I was several years below car-buying age at that time, but I was a bit of a car enthusiast even then. I recall seeing/hearing lots of ads for sedans and compact cars, but not much on wagons. Maybe the idea is (and was) that people who need a wagon know where to find one, so there's no point in advertising them? Not sure if it worked back in the old days, but with so many competing SUVs/Crossovers out there now, it does seem a bit odd not to tout the new product in public.
The Pontiac Parisienne was sold in the US in the 1980’s, when the Bonneville was downsized but gas prices went down, leaving Pontiac without a full-sized entry.
test
After owning a Freestyle Limited AWD for about 7 months I absolutely love it. It combines the best of a lot of worlds. It’s not an SUV, so it gets better gas mileage (20 city, and close to 26 highway for me – spend $50 on a K&N air filter! It’ll help). I don’t need to haul a boat or anything (yet), so I don’t want a V8 or a leaf-spring rear. It’s not a minivan, but I can still dump two rows of seats (and the front passenger seat, too) and haul stuff around without having to borrow dad’s Odd-ysey. It’s not a car, so I can get more than 5 people into it…comfortably too. Throw in the DVD player option ($995 is a bargain for a built in system these days) and the rear air..and everybody’s happy. The audio quality is quite good on the Limited too. It doesn’t rival the sound in my uncle’s CLS500 or LX430, but it’s quite close. Not bad for a vehicle that’s 1/4 to 1/3 the price of those.
Plus, if you are on good terms with your local dealer, you can get a Freestyle stickered at 35k for closer to 27k…that’s great if you plan on keeping the car till it dies (like I do).
I’m not worried about reliability with this thing either. The Duratec is a great engine that Ford has worked the bugs out of already. Coil-on-plug ignition, timing chain (so no unexpected broken belt to leave you stranded), and that chain-driven CVT that has no owner-accessible anything. That’s right. There is NO service called for on the CVT until 60k miles. Then it goes in for a fluid change. There isn’t even a dipstick to check tranny fluid level. It’s practically sealed. The AWD system will be nice in inclement weather (they don’t know how to plow around here).
This will be my third Ford, the first running to 97000 miles before getting a new one, the second still going strong at 75000 miles, and now the Freestyle. It really is a great vehicle. One that Ford needs to advertise and promote more. Oh, the new Ford Edge crossover, while a good looker, isn’t nearly as roomy as the Freestyle. While it will have the new 3.5 liter V6, it’s just not a complete package, at least for my needs.
Hoosier Red,
First, don’t confuse efficiency with economy (mileage). Typically, an internal combustion engine is most efficient at full throttle. In other words, the engine is getting the most output from the input. Economy is different. Many times, a larger, more powerful engine gets better mileage. My brother and I both own F150s. I have a crewcab with the 5.4 liter and he has a regular cab with the 4.6 liter. By your logic, he would get better mileage, but does not. We live in the same town and, if anything, I probably drive mine harder. The difference is minor (1-2mpg) but with the larger engine and heavier truck, I should do worse. I have seen this many times before.
I think the Ford’s real problem isn’t that it has a relatively small V6, it’s that it has a comparatively old V6. The Duratec engine in the Freestyle is essentially unchanged from when it was in the Taurus before the year 2000.
Two easy – possibly identical – comparisons come to mind. The 3.0 liter V6 in the 2000 Toyota Camry was rated for 200 horsepower and mileage 20/27. For the 2007 model year, the Camry V6 engine is 268 horsepower and rated for mileage 22/31 on regular fuel. The 3.0 liter V6 in the 2000 Honda Accord was likewise rated for 200 horsepower, and for mileage 20/30. For the 2003 model year, Honda introduced a redesigned version of the 3.0 liter V6 in the Accord that provided 240 horsepower and kept the same mileage.
Ford’s new 3.5 liter V6 is rated at a respectable 265 horsepower, hopefully it also can deliver on dramatically improved efficiency over the older Duratec 30.
I’ve had my 2006 AWD Freestyle since 21 January 2006. It now has just about 25,000 miles on it. My daily commute is just a bit over 185 miles. I drive all of I-66 in Northern VA from I-81 into DC. The Freestyle and CVT have been just about perfect for my commute. It is the most comfortable car I have ever owned. It has no problems going thru the hills in the Western part of my commute and is perfect for my daily 5-mile backup every morning in Gainsville. It’s just really nice not to have the car shifting back and forth as the cruise control floors it to keep speed up the hills or when I’m barely crawling in a traffic jam. I get about 21 MPG average. I read a complaint in a previous post were someone stated that as they were attempting to merge on to the highway the tach wouldn’t go above 4200 RPM. That particular Freestyle was broken, the RPMs go up to about 5600-5800 RPM when you truly mash on the gas and I have never had a problem passing the endless line of Pickups that constantly cruse in the left lane at 75 MPH. I know that the 3.0 makes a lot of noise when the RPMs go up and I’m sure that turns off a lot of buyers. Ford really should look into reducing the engine noise getting into the cabin. You can also do what I did and put a bike rack up on the roof. It makes enough noise at speed to drown out everything else (engine noise, radio, wife???). When I wear this one out (hoping to get three years out of it) I won’t hesitate to buy another one no matter which engine is in it, but I will miss the CVT. The imports are just starting to advertise how great their CVTs are and Ford is closing the only plant where they make them. Now if Ford only made a Freestyle with that cool fake wood grain on the side. That would be sweet.
I love the Freestyle, and intend to get one sometime after the new V6 comes out next year. The interior is very roomy, useful, and well thought out while the car’s driving dynamics are very good (something confirmed in the initial tests of the D3 cars, yet forgotten in the strange push for people to hate out on them).
The nose in understyled and the V6 is outclassed by other similar engines. However, anyone saying that it’s not up to the car’s duties is obviously overstating things…bigger, heavier vehicles did with less than 200 hp for years. God forbid a big, roomy crossover wasn’t made for drag racing…!
Does anyone know if you can exchange the 2nd row bench for captain’s chairs after-the-fact?