Archive for August, 2012

Not long ago, Ford relied on low prices (even lower after hefty incentives) to sell its cars. But in the last few years it has sought, with a fair amount of success, to take a big step upmarket. The average transaction price of the 2012 Ford Focus has been about $5,000 higher than that of the 2011. Are they attempting as big a jump with the 2013 Escape?

Based on the vehicle, yes. The new Escape is essentially a Focus in crossover form. Like the Focus it was developed to be competitive in Europe, which has historically expected (and been willing to pay for) a much higher level of build quality and content in a compact vehicle.

And the price? Well, compared to the 2012 the 2013 isn’t much more expensive. The old XLT plus SYNC is roughly equivalent to the new SE–and the new SE actually checks in a couple hundred dollars lower, $25,895 vs. $26.090. Adjusting for feature differences using TrueDelta’s car price comparison tool adds another $300 to the 2013′s advantage. This is despite the 2013 having a more powerful (178 vs. 171 horsepower) yet more efficient (23/33 vs. 21/28 MPG) engine and 18-inch wheels instead of 16s. So, compared to the 2012 the 2013 is looking like a much better value (assuming incentives are the same, though they won’t be).

(more…)

Inputting the interior dimensions for the redesigned crossover, the combination of 43.1 inches of front legroom and 36.8 inches of rear legroom surprised me. I’ve been in the new Escape, and its rear seat is considerably tighter than most in the segment. Yet these specs from the brochure (and various popular car sites) suggest it should rank among the roomiest.

Suspecting a typo, I checked the official specifications sheet on Ford’s media site. There they have not one but two front legroom specs, 40.4″ and 43.1″, the latter labeled “Max legroom.” This makes some sense, as there are two legitimate ways to measure front legroom, one with the front seat set for an x-percentile male (which generally yields a number in the 40-to-41-inch range) and another with the front seat as far back as it will go. Most manufacturers publish only the first spec, but others (most notably Nissan and Hyundai) often publish the latter.

So what’s wrong with Ford’s technique? When other manufacturers release the max spec, they also measure rear legroom with the front seat all the way back. Ford, on the other hand, is providing front legroom with the front seat all the way back plus rear legroom with the front seat pushed forward 2.7 inches. I’ve entered specs for hundreds of different cars over the years, but I can’t recall anyone doing this before.

If Ford had released two sets of numbers, I’d praise them, as the Escape could then be compared to competitors measured with either method. But the logical complement of a “maximum front legroom” spec, “minimum rear legroom,” is nowhere to be found. They’re only using the alternate method when it makes their car look better. Not only this, but in the numbers car buyers will see they’re combining one stat measured using one method with another measured using the other to misleadingly suggest that the new Ford Escape’s total legroom is nearly three inches greater than it actually is. This isn’t a trivial amount. It’s enough to move a car from near the bottom of a segment to near the top.

Ford has already recalled the Escape for a fuel line issue. Perhaps they should recall the brochures as well?

It wasn’t so long ago that the Chevrolet Aveo seemed to small for American car buyers. But in addition to getting a new name, Sonic, when it was redesigned, the once-smallest Chevy also got larger. So for 2013 Chevrolet is introducing an even smaller car, the Spark.

How much smaller? Compared to the Sonic, the Spark has a half-foot less between its wheels, 14.3 inches less overall length, and 5.4 inches less width. But it is 1.3 inches taller; a higher seating position enables a touch more legroom within the car’s much smaller footprint. The Spark is also 299 pounds lighter. Good thing, as its 1.2-liter engine kicks out only 84 horsepower, compared to the Sonic’s 138 (tops in its class). The Spark’s highway fuel economy, 38, is no better than you’ll find in a number of much larger cars, but its city rating of 32 is among the best for a non-hybrid.

(more…)

Chrysler recently introduced the first product of its relationship with FIAT, the 2013 Dodge Dart. The Dart is based on the Alfa Romeo Giulietta, and is available with many upscale features not offered elsewhere in the segment. They’re clearly attempting a premium position. But does this mean a premium price?

The least expensive model most people will consider, the Dart SXT, checks in at $19,890 with an automatic transmission ($1,100). A 2012 Ford Focus SE with Sport and Convenience Packages and 17-inch wheels (to match the standard size on the Dodge) lists for $21,175, nearly $1,300 more. Adjustments for feature differences shave about $500.

With both the Ford Focus and the Dodge Dart, higher trim levels are actually better values. Especially in the case of the Ford Focus SEL, their higher prices are more than compensated for by their additional features. A loaded Dodge Dart Limited lists for $26,255. A loaded Ford Focus lists for $26,090 in SEL trim and $26,695 in Titanium trim. So all three stickers are within a few hundred dollars.

(more…)

We’ve enhanced our fuel economy survey and results. Now you can:

• edit previous entries
• enter the fill-up date on a tank
• indicate heavy cargo or towing (for exclusion from the public stats)
• enter comments
• report on electric vehicles
• toggle the units used in the results (either MPG or g/100m, for example)

Also, you can now view fuel economy results and record your fill-ups on mobile devices! (A lot of people have been asking for this.) Go to m.truedelta.com/mpg on your mobile device to get started.

We’ll have another round of updates later this year or early next. If you have something else you’d like us to add, let us know.

Members outside the U.S. and Canada have enrolled over 6,000 cars. In many cases either the model or the powertrain isn’t offered in the U.S. And, if we hadn’t entered specs for it in the database, no information could be posted about the car.

I’d love to see information on these cars, so for the past week I’ve been entering specs for nearly every 2012 model offered in the UK by a volume manufacturer (so still no Morgans), and some from the Continent and Australia as well. This was quite the task, as European-market cars tend to have far more powertrain options than the U.S. and Canada.

Information can now be posted for all of these cars.

Have a car for which we haven’t entered the specs yet, so you can’t post information about the car? Let us know, and we’ll add it. Now that the 2012s are in there, it’s much easier to add specs for an earlier model year.