MM Review: 2013 Ford Escape SEL
06-05-12, 11:17 AM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
MM Review: 2013 Ford Escape SEL
By CL-member-request, a review of the all-new 2013 Ford Escape.
http://www.ford.com/suvs/escape/
IN A NUTSHELL: The first world-platform Escape in America, and no more shoe-box styling.
CLOSEST COMPETITORS: Chevy Equinox, Dodge Journey, Mazda CX-5, Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV-4, Subaru Forester, Mitsubishi Outlander, Hyundai Tucson, Kia Sportage, VW Tiguan, Nissan Rogue, Suzuki Grand Vitara.
OVERVIEW:
Several CL members have requested a review of the 3rd-Generation 2013 Ford Escape, which will be essentially an Americanized version of the small Ford Kuga SUV that has been sold in Europe since 2009. I got to view a couple of them at the Washington, D.C. Auto Show last January. Ford, to their credit, had them out on the floor, unlocked, so I was able to sit in them and check them out. I had mixed feelings about the new design, but, of course, I'll save that for later, and won't go into that in detail here.
Following on the heels of the outstanding success of the Ford Explorer in the 1990s (the Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee basically created the huge suburbia, family-SUV market), Ford decided to capitalize on their success by introducing a smaller and more economical brother to the Explorer. Market research on their customers, added to the growing success of the small, so-called "Cute-Utes" like the Toyota RAV-4/Honda CR-V/Subaru Forester had convinced Ford product-planners that the future of small, unibody, car-based SUV would be as good as the Explorer and Grand Cherokee had been in the 1990s.
Basically, they were correct. Sales of the Cute-Utes continued to explode, even with the growing number of vehicles in this market all competing for a share of the pie. The first-generation Ford Escape was introduced for the 2000 model year (I remember helping a neighbor of mine go shopping for a new bright-yellow one), and, like the Explorer ten years earlier, was an immediate success. A few recalls hit them in the first couple of years, and, though not lemons, they were somewhat less-reliable than their Japanese competitors. I liked the first-generation versions. IMO, they were handsome, basically well-designed, comfortable, and pleasant to drive. The only fly in the ointment that I can remember was on the versions with the column-mounted automatic-transmission shift-lever.....the lever, in most of its positions, tended to closely block the radio controls, and you had to twist your fingers around it to make some radio adjustments. But, except for that, IMO, they were a pleasure to drive, especially the V6 AWD versions (AWD didn't come with the standard four). At the time, several car magazines agreed with me.....they all rated the Escape either first or very high against a number of competitors.
A slight more-expensive Mercury Mariner twin was offered a few years later, with Ford's Japanese-partner Mazda offering the Tribute, which was basically an Escape with a Mazda-designed front-end/grille, slightly different body-creases, and firmer Mazda steering/underpinnings for the Mazda's traditional emphasis on sportier handling (I preferes the Escape's softer ride). A gas-electric hybrid version was introduced, with some Toyota-sourced electronics (which Ford later got the license-rights to). For a while, the hybrid verson was the highest-MPG SUV in the American market.
The second-generation version, introduced for 2008, carried on the boxy-styling theme for good space-efficiency, and dropped the annoying column-shifter which blocked the radio. It also carried on the hybrid, Mercury Mariner, and Mazda Tribute versions. But, despite good solid sheet-metal on the body/doors, some cost-cutting was noted on the second-generation models by the bean-counters. The interior took a step backwards in plain, dull-plastic cheapness, undersized disc/drum brakes were used that gave poor spongy braking-performance, and the Roly-Poly suspension cornered and steered more or less like a beach-ball. Nevertheless, even with these deficiencies, I still found it relatively pleasant to drive, especially in a relaxed, cruse-mode, and continuing high sales proved that the public still liked it, too. But Mercury's continuing overall sales-decline in the market, combined with newer Mazda SUVs like the CX-5/7/9, eventually spelled the demise of both the Mariner and Tribute (a co-worker of mine and his wife, though, bought a new Mariner and loved it). The entire Mercury division, of course, was axed, and Mazda first restricted Tribute sales to California, eventually axing them, too.
So now, for 2013, comes an all-new (to America) third-generation Escape. The new version dumps the long-held boxy styling of the first/second-generation models for more-creased/angular styling outside and a somewhat busier-looking interior (I'll get into both in more detail below). Prices for the new 2013 models are significantly higher than for the last-generation model. The gas Titanium versions, now, start out at over 30K...which was basically in the territory of the old gas-electric hybrid versions. Ford seems to be gambling that demand for the new version will justify the prices...I'm not so sure, though, admittedly, the Escape has always sold well, and been quite popular. And, of course, with the higher prices, if the new version turns out (as expected) to be popular, will likely go low depreciation.....some of that money will come back at trade-in or selling time.
In the American market, four trim-versions of the new Escape are offered....S ($22,470), SE ($25,070), SEL ($27,870), and Titanium ($30,370). All four versions come with a 6-speed Select-Shift automatic (this is NOT the same twin-clutch automanual 6-speed from the Focus)...no manual-transmission is offered. FWD is standard on all four versions, with optional AWD available on all but the base S model (Ford, IMO, needs to explain why S models can't get the AWD...that is what many people obviously buy SUVs for). Three different engines are offered. Base S models come with a normally aspirated 2.5L Duratec in-line 4. SE and SEL models get a standard Ecoboost Turbo in-line 4 and an optional 2.0L Ecoboost in-line 4. Titanum models get the 2.0L Ecoboost standard. According to Ford specs, the Ecoboost engines can (apparantly) run on either regular or premium fuel....a plus with today's high gas prices. The base 2.5L four produces 168 HP/170 ft-lbs. of torque, the 1.6L Ecoboost 178/184 (not much of an increase, probably because of the smaller-displacement), and the 2.0L Ecoboost 240/270 (that's more like it). Unlike with the first and second-generation models, Ford, as of this writing, has not formally announced a hybrid gas/electric version for the new 2013 model, although that market may (?) be at least partially-covered by the upcoming Ford C-Max Hybrid later this year. The C-Max will be about the same size as the new Escape, but be more of a purpose-built people-mover.....somewhat like the current Mazda5 or the old Mitsubishi Expo/Plymouth Colt Vista/Eagle Summit Wagon triplets of the 1990s, for those of you who still remember them.
For the review, I chose a gray SEL AWD 1.6L Ecoboost automatic with no options. It listed for just over 30K. It had an all-black leather interior. Overall, as with most vehicles, I had mixed-opinions of it. Details coming up.
MODEL REVIEWED: 2013 Ford Escape SEL AWD automatic.
BASE PRICE: $29,620
OPTIONS: None
DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $825 (a little steep for this size vehicle)
LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $30,445
EXTERIOR COLOR: Sterling Gray Metallic
INTERIOR COLOR: Black Leather
DRIVETRAIN: AWD, Transversely-mounted 1.6L Ecoboost Turbocharged in-line four, 178 HP @ 5700 RPM, Torque 184 ft-lbs. @ 2500 RPM, 6-speed Select-Shift automatic transmission.
EPA MILEAGE RATING: 22 City / 30 Highway
PLUSSES:
Smooth quiet turbo four....surprisingly so for a Ford product.
Less-expensive regular gas can be used with the turbo.
Smooth-shifting 6-speed automatic.
Generally good handling.
Fairly flat cornering.
Reasonably good road/wind-noise isolation for the class.
MUCH better brakes than on previous models.
Solid feel to the body-structure on the road.
Excellent paint job.
Nice-quality bodywork.
Lower-body cladding helps protect paint.
Small convex exterior mirror-inserts widen side-vision.
Mirror-mounted turn-signal indicators.
Comfortable and supportive front leather seats.
Acceptable (but not overly-plush) interior-trim materials.
Good headroom, front and rear.
Clear, legible gauges.
Generally easy-to-use controls/buttons.
Excellent stereo sound quality.
Nice fore/aft transmission shift-lever motion.
MINUSES:
Significant price increases this year (though low depreciation may help).
Adequate but not strong power from the 1.6L Turbo.
IMO, stiffer-than-necessary ride.
Awkward (IMO) body-styling.
Sloping rear-roofline not as space-efficient as squared-off earlier version.
Awkward-feeling windshield wiper arms.
So-so underhood layout.
Overly-styled (IMO) dash.
No standard body-side mouldings for parking-lot protection.
No standard cargo-cover in back on the SEL trim.
Heavy hood to lift.
Manual prop-rod for the hood.
Temporary spare tire.
Uncomfortable, slab-like rear seat.
Awkwardly-placed A/C vent-adjusters.
All-black interior a little too much black for my tastes (two-tones, IMO, much nicer).
Cargo area a little less-roomy than before.
Uncomfortable-to-hold leather-wrapped steering wheel (vinyl-covered ones better).
Complex Ford MyTouch system (but some voice-commands help).
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the new 2013 Escape for the first time, one finds the exterior styling rather strongly reminiscient both of the new Ford Focus compact and of the latest-generation Hyundai Tucson (it actually is a modified version of the Focus platform). As I stated earlier, I'm generally not a big fan of the new styling on the Escape (I liked the last-generation boxy-shape much better for space-efficiency). But there are, nevertheless, still a number of good things on the new exterior.....starting with an excellent paint job. The metallic gray was ultra-smooth, shiny, reasonably free of orange-peel, and I liked the way the metallic texture was done, though the color itself was a little too dull for my tastes. Ten different exterior colors are offered (Ford didn't seem to cut costs in the paint-department) and there's a nice selection to choose from. The exterior sheet metal is a little on the thin side (what vehicle isn't these days), but the doors actually felt and shut more solidly than the thin-gauge metal would suggest. Even more so for the rear cargo-hatch, which felt like the Rock of Gibraltar as you lifted and shut it (a power-opening/closing hatch-lid is an option on some Escape models). The black window-frames, on the upper sides of the doors, felt solid but didn't close solid with the doors, making a slight rattle in the process. All of the exterior trim, including the chrome, was well-done and solid-feeling. But I would have prefered chrome window-frames to the black ones used. The twin outside mirrors are well-shaped for vision and generally snap/swivel/lock smoothly and cleanly, though not quite as slick as on many small Asian-designed SUVs. The mirrors, like those on the Ford Escape and Fiesta, also have small convex-shaped inserts that widen the field of vision...a nice feature. Another nice feature on the mirrors, on SEL models, are the integral-mounted turn-signal flashers. Nice black-cladding runs all around the lower-edge of the vehicle and up into the wheel wells to help protect the paint from road debris, chips, salt, etc..... IMO, this feature should be standard in all vehicles. The silver alloy wheels on the SEL model were a little busily-shaped, but, IMO, still generally looked good. The slight droop to the rear roofline does impact a little on the cargo space (more on this below), but, surprisingly, not on rear seat headroom (also more on that below). But I still prefer the older, more squared-off roofline.....you can't beat a box for interior room. The rear D-pillars impede a little on rear-visibility, but not a huge amount.....still, you don't see as much out the back as with the old roofline and pillars. And, as with most new vehicles, the bean-counters removed the protective body-side mouldings that help prevent at least some parking-lot dings. The salespeple said that the mouldings could be dealer-added, though I didn't see them listed in the Escape-acccessory list. Last, the twin wiper-arms on the windshield had soft floppy blades, an awkward feel, and a tendency to swivel all over the place when you tried to gently raise or lower them back again to clean the windshield. I have never felt anything else like it.....truly unique.
UNDERHOOD:
Open up the quite-heavy steel hood and you must fumble with a cheap manual prop-rod instead of nice struts or springs. There is a small and somewhat thin insulation-pad underneath....to more or less match the small hood itself. The small insulation pad, though, is surprisingly effective.....more on that later. The underhood layout itself is not one of the better ones I've seen compared to other small SUVs, and not as spacious as the one in the old squared-off Escape's engine-compartment. The new, more sleeker styling up front definitely impacts on the underhood space. The 1.6L Ecoboost four fits in with at least some space to reach things up front. But the big plastic cover on top of the engine, and, more important, the way that the engine is shoved back and partly hidden under the top firewall-extension, severely limits access to much of the rest of the block and components. The battery is hidden away, under a cover. Fortunately, most of the rest of the layout seems OK. Dipsticks, filler-caps, and fluid-reservoirs are generally well-marked and easy to reach. Just a guess on my part, but the new, more cramped underhood space could (?) be one reason why a V6 is no longer offered.
INTERIOR:
On the whole, the new interior seems reasonably well-done, though it has a couple of marked faults. As with the exterior styling, I wasn't particularly impressed with the overstyled, Focus-type dash (And, of course, I wasn't impressed with the Focus's dash, either). But the overall quality of most of the materials inside was generally acceptable, though not plush. Given their rather small size, the front seats were surprisingly comfortable for my big frame, had decent support, and used a nice (but not Jaguar/Lexus-grade) of leather. The sun visors (a cheap spot for many newer vehicles) had a soft covering on them, not just hard plastic like in some competitors. The gauges, though set in somewhat overstyled housings, were clear and easy to read. Most of the buttons and controls were clearly laid-out and easy to use, though the column- stalks could be improved....more on that in a second. My particular test-car lacked a sunroof, and, even with the newer, lower-droop roofline, there was plenty of headroom front and rear.....or at least more than I expected. The trim materials were generlly well-done, including the rather soft materials on the door-panel trim and dash, and the chrome-plastic trim was also well done (notwithstanding the somewhat overstyling of the things it was applied to). The transmission shift-lever, as in most Fords (and in most American-badged vehicles) had a nice fore/aft motion instead of the (IMO) annoying zig-zags found on so many Asian-designed vehicles.
But there were several things inside that, besides the general styling, I felt needed improvement or re-design as well. The sea of monotone black trim, broken up by a few applications of chrome-plastic here and there, was a little too Darth Vader for my tastes (much nicer two-tone versions are available). The thumbwheels that adjust the center-dash A/C vents, because of the weird dash-styling, are jammed way forward up on the flat-dash, where they are awkward and require a fairly long stretch stretch to reach. I thought the steering wheel, despite the chromed spokes, looked ugly and was uncomfortable to hold. The leather-wrapping used on it felt rough, had hard rough stitching, and overly-large thumb-bulges at the 10 and 2 O'Clock positions......not something you'd want to repeatedly use on a winding road. The uncomfortable rear seat-cushions felt like (to borrow an old phrase from Jethro Tull) "Sitting on a Park Bench", though a manually-adjustable seat-back angle helped some. The rear seats also had a metal support-structure on the edges that tended to dig into the side of your outer-leg as you got in and out. I know that Ford, if it tries, can do comfortable rear seats....look no further, for example, than the superb ones in the Ford Taurus family sedan, whose classic-overstuffed padding would support a freight-locomotive. The stereo itself sounded great, but the system is integrated with the video screen and the notoriously complex Ford SYNC/MyTouch system, which has generated a lot of customer-complaints. I found the system quite complex to use myself, though some of the voice-actuation-commands help.
CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:
The cargo area was, IMO, one of the car's nicer features, though, as previously mentioned, the new more droop-down rear roofline takes away some of the space that was formerly available in the old square-roofline for carrying tall items. The hatch-lid, as also mentioned earlier, had a pleasantly solid feeling to it, though a optional power-motor for it is available for those with weak arms or shoulders. The trim materials inside and black floor-carpet were reasonably nice for the vehicle-class. The usual temporary spare was located under the floor, where, of course, it is easier to reach than under the vehicle like with some SUVs. But some of the Escape's competitors (the 2012 Toyota RAV-4, for one, comes to mind) give you a real spare tire/wheel instead of a temporary one. There was no standard cargo-compartment cover on the SEL verson to hide valuables from prying eyes, but the cutouts and slots in the plastic frame-mouldings on the wall indicate that one is available as an option or dealer-installed accessory. Or, of course, you can simply toss a blanket or sheet over anything you don't want people outside to see.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 1.6L turbo four with a conventional side-column ignition and key (push-button ignition is available on some models). The engine settles down immediately into a very smooth, quiet idle....something that Ford-designed-fours are generally not noted for. The engine's power level, with its 184 ft-lbs. of torque, is adequate for most lightly-loaded normal driving. But, if you want any real response when you hit the gas, consider opting out for the top-line Titanium verson and its larger 2.0 turbo four (though, admittedly, I didn't sample one). The engine is quiet through mid-RPM revs, and, by the time you start to really hear engine noise, you are close to 5000 RPM...faster than you should normally take a brand-new engine that is not broken in. Yes, I let the RPMs briefly get a little higher than I usually do with a brand-new engine on a review, but that's a just a testament to the nice job Ford has done keeping the engine quiet and smooth. And, even nicer, you don't have to waste your money on expensive premium gas.....regular can be used if desired, with no loss of torque and only a very small HP loss. (Still, I'd consider the 2.0L turbo if it's power you want). To some extent, I miss the old normally-aspirated V6, though the Ecoboost fours seem to be a good replacement for them.
The 6-speed Select-Shift transmission shifts smoothly and quietly, and is much better than some of the old four-speed automatics. The lever itself, as stated above, as a nice fore-aft shift motion instead of those zig-zags that I dislike, but two things need improvement. First, instead of a separate gate for manual bump-lever shifting, it has a somewhat awkward rocker-switch on the side that bumps the gears up and down. Second, when in the PARK and REVERSE positions, the lever blocks some access to the climate-***** on the lower-dash....it has to be pulled back to give large hands and fingers easy access to those controls.
The chassis, for the most part, is tight and generally well-done, as is the excellent unibody-stiffness itself. On the road, there's a feeling of solidity and quality to the body-structure that is drum-tight...and, of course, no creaks/squeaks or rattles. Steering reponse is fairly quick, and handling is generally good......fairly flat cornering without much body-roll. Road noise and wind-noise are both well-controlled, and OK for the vehicle-class, but, of course, not Lexus LS-quiet. I was a little disappointed in the ride quality....I thought it was somewhat stiffer than it needed to be. Just to be sure, I double-checked all of the tire pressures, which were only a couple of pounds over the factory-recommended 35 PSI front/rear....so that itself wasn't a factor. Ford says that they deliberately tuned the suspension for in a stiff ride, as their (supposed) research showed that most of the new Escape's potential buyers wanted that type of suspension. Fine, but I'm not convinced. As I see it, these are primarily family-oriented or soccer-mom vehicles, not sport-specials designed to carve corners on twisty roads.
The new brakes are MUCH improved over the old, excessively-spongy, Push-and-Pray disc/drum brakes of older Escapes. The brakes on those older Escapes were aguably their weakest points. The new brakes have quicker response, a noticeably firmer pedal, and inspire far more driver-confidence, though the brake pedal itself could be a little better-located. My big, men's-size-15 circus-clown shoe, as it does in a number of vehicles, tends to catch the underside of the brake pedal when lifting off of the gas.....something I sometimes have to be careful with.
THE VERDICT:
Well, as you can tell from reading the review, I have some strong mixed-opinions about the new Escape series, both pro and con. The new unibody-stiffness, responsive all-disc braking system, paint-job, front-seat comfort, stereo-sound, solid (if thin) sheet-metal, and versatile multi-purpose exterior mirrors are all major improvements from the older models. But the loss of the boxy, squared-off body style for cargo space, the awkwardly overstyled dash, the uncomfortable leather-covered steering wheel, the Flop-O-Matic wiper arms, the kidney-unfriendly suspension, and and the increased prices this year are all minuses in my book. If the new Escape proves as popular as the old ones did, though (200,000+ sales a year), low depreciation may recover some of the higher prices this year. And I'm still undecided if the combination of the 1.6L and 2.0L turbo fours are better or not than the older, tried-and-tested V6....though the 1.6L was definitely smoother than I expected.
And, of course, though its firm ride may not agree with everyone, in general, the new Escape compares very well with its many small-SUV competitors. I predict that it will be successful in the American market-place, as it has been in Europe, though it may or may not exceed the massive sales-numbers of the older versions....only time will tell.
And, as always, Happy Car-Shopping.
MM
http://www.ford.com/suvs/escape/
IN A NUTSHELL: The first world-platform Escape in America, and no more shoe-box styling.
CLOSEST COMPETITORS: Chevy Equinox, Dodge Journey, Mazda CX-5, Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV-4, Subaru Forester, Mitsubishi Outlander, Hyundai Tucson, Kia Sportage, VW Tiguan, Nissan Rogue, Suzuki Grand Vitara.
OVERVIEW:
Several CL members have requested a review of the 3rd-Generation 2013 Ford Escape, which will be essentially an Americanized version of the small Ford Kuga SUV that has been sold in Europe since 2009. I got to view a couple of them at the Washington, D.C. Auto Show last January. Ford, to their credit, had them out on the floor, unlocked, so I was able to sit in them and check them out. I had mixed feelings about the new design, but, of course, I'll save that for later, and won't go into that in detail here.
Following on the heels of the outstanding success of the Ford Explorer in the 1990s (the Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee basically created the huge suburbia, family-SUV market), Ford decided to capitalize on their success by introducing a smaller and more economical brother to the Explorer. Market research on their customers, added to the growing success of the small, so-called "Cute-Utes" like the Toyota RAV-4/Honda CR-V/Subaru Forester had convinced Ford product-planners that the future of small, unibody, car-based SUV would be as good as the Explorer and Grand Cherokee had been in the 1990s.
Basically, they were correct. Sales of the Cute-Utes continued to explode, even with the growing number of vehicles in this market all competing for a share of the pie. The first-generation Ford Escape was introduced for the 2000 model year (I remember helping a neighbor of mine go shopping for a new bright-yellow one), and, like the Explorer ten years earlier, was an immediate success. A few recalls hit them in the first couple of years, and, though not lemons, they were somewhat less-reliable than their Japanese competitors. I liked the first-generation versions. IMO, they were handsome, basically well-designed, comfortable, and pleasant to drive. The only fly in the ointment that I can remember was on the versions with the column-mounted automatic-transmission shift-lever.....the lever, in most of its positions, tended to closely block the radio controls, and you had to twist your fingers around it to make some radio adjustments. But, except for that, IMO, they were a pleasure to drive, especially the V6 AWD versions (AWD didn't come with the standard four). At the time, several car magazines agreed with me.....they all rated the Escape either first or very high against a number of competitors.
A slight more-expensive Mercury Mariner twin was offered a few years later, with Ford's Japanese-partner Mazda offering the Tribute, which was basically an Escape with a Mazda-designed front-end/grille, slightly different body-creases, and firmer Mazda steering/underpinnings for the Mazda's traditional emphasis on sportier handling (I preferes the Escape's softer ride). A gas-electric hybrid version was introduced, with some Toyota-sourced electronics (which Ford later got the license-rights to). For a while, the hybrid verson was the highest-MPG SUV in the American market.
The second-generation version, introduced for 2008, carried on the boxy-styling theme for good space-efficiency, and dropped the annoying column-shifter which blocked the radio. It also carried on the hybrid, Mercury Mariner, and Mazda Tribute versions. But, despite good solid sheet-metal on the body/doors, some cost-cutting was noted on the second-generation models by the bean-counters. The interior took a step backwards in plain, dull-plastic cheapness, undersized disc/drum brakes were used that gave poor spongy braking-performance, and the Roly-Poly suspension cornered and steered more or less like a beach-ball. Nevertheless, even with these deficiencies, I still found it relatively pleasant to drive, especially in a relaxed, cruse-mode, and continuing high sales proved that the public still liked it, too. But Mercury's continuing overall sales-decline in the market, combined with newer Mazda SUVs like the CX-5/7/9, eventually spelled the demise of both the Mariner and Tribute (a co-worker of mine and his wife, though, bought a new Mariner and loved it). The entire Mercury division, of course, was axed, and Mazda first restricted Tribute sales to California, eventually axing them, too.
So now, for 2013, comes an all-new (to America) third-generation Escape. The new version dumps the long-held boxy styling of the first/second-generation models for more-creased/angular styling outside and a somewhat busier-looking interior (I'll get into both in more detail below). Prices for the new 2013 models are significantly higher than for the last-generation model. The gas Titanium versions, now, start out at over 30K...which was basically in the territory of the old gas-electric hybrid versions. Ford seems to be gambling that demand for the new version will justify the prices...I'm not so sure, though, admittedly, the Escape has always sold well, and been quite popular. And, of course, with the higher prices, if the new version turns out (as expected) to be popular, will likely go low depreciation.....some of that money will come back at trade-in or selling time.
In the American market, four trim-versions of the new Escape are offered....S ($22,470), SE ($25,070), SEL ($27,870), and Titanium ($30,370). All four versions come with a 6-speed Select-Shift automatic (this is NOT the same twin-clutch automanual 6-speed from the Focus)...no manual-transmission is offered. FWD is standard on all four versions, with optional AWD available on all but the base S model (Ford, IMO, needs to explain why S models can't get the AWD...that is what many people obviously buy SUVs for). Three different engines are offered. Base S models come with a normally aspirated 2.5L Duratec in-line 4. SE and SEL models get a standard Ecoboost Turbo in-line 4 and an optional 2.0L Ecoboost in-line 4. Titanum models get the 2.0L Ecoboost standard. According to Ford specs, the Ecoboost engines can (apparantly) run on either regular or premium fuel....a plus with today's high gas prices. The base 2.5L four produces 168 HP/170 ft-lbs. of torque, the 1.6L Ecoboost 178/184 (not much of an increase, probably because of the smaller-displacement), and the 2.0L Ecoboost 240/270 (that's more like it). Unlike with the first and second-generation models, Ford, as of this writing, has not formally announced a hybrid gas/electric version for the new 2013 model, although that market may (?) be at least partially-covered by the upcoming Ford C-Max Hybrid later this year. The C-Max will be about the same size as the new Escape, but be more of a purpose-built people-mover.....somewhat like the current Mazda5 or the old Mitsubishi Expo/Plymouth Colt Vista/Eagle Summit Wagon triplets of the 1990s, for those of you who still remember them.
For the review, I chose a gray SEL AWD 1.6L Ecoboost automatic with no options. It listed for just over 30K. It had an all-black leather interior. Overall, as with most vehicles, I had mixed-opinions of it. Details coming up.
MODEL REVIEWED: 2013 Ford Escape SEL AWD automatic.
BASE PRICE: $29,620
OPTIONS: None
DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $825 (a little steep for this size vehicle)
LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $30,445
EXTERIOR COLOR: Sterling Gray Metallic
INTERIOR COLOR: Black Leather
DRIVETRAIN: AWD, Transversely-mounted 1.6L Ecoboost Turbocharged in-line four, 178 HP @ 5700 RPM, Torque 184 ft-lbs. @ 2500 RPM, 6-speed Select-Shift automatic transmission.
EPA MILEAGE RATING: 22 City / 30 Highway
PLUSSES:
Smooth quiet turbo four....surprisingly so for a Ford product.
Less-expensive regular gas can be used with the turbo.
Smooth-shifting 6-speed automatic.
Generally good handling.
Fairly flat cornering.
Reasonably good road/wind-noise isolation for the class.
MUCH better brakes than on previous models.
Solid feel to the body-structure on the road.
Excellent paint job.
Nice-quality bodywork.
Lower-body cladding helps protect paint.
Small convex exterior mirror-inserts widen side-vision.
Mirror-mounted turn-signal indicators.
Comfortable and supportive front leather seats.
Acceptable (but not overly-plush) interior-trim materials.
Good headroom, front and rear.
Clear, legible gauges.
Generally easy-to-use controls/buttons.
Excellent stereo sound quality.
Nice fore/aft transmission shift-lever motion.
MINUSES:
Significant price increases this year (though low depreciation may help).
Adequate but not strong power from the 1.6L Turbo.
IMO, stiffer-than-necessary ride.
Awkward (IMO) body-styling.
Sloping rear-roofline not as space-efficient as squared-off earlier version.
Awkward-feeling windshield wiper arms.
So-so underhood layout.
Overly-styled (IMO) dash.
No standard body-side mouldings for parking-lot protection.
No standard cargo-cover in back on the SEL trim.
Heavy hood to lift.
Manual prop-rod for the hood.
Temporary spare tire.
Uncomfortable, slab-like rear seat.
Awkwardly-placed A/C vent-adjusters.
All-black interior a little too much black for my tastes (two-tones, IMO, much nicer).
Cargo area a little less-roomy than before.
Uncomfortable-to-hold leather-wrapped steering wheel (vinyl-covered ones better).
Complex Ford MyTouch system (but some voice-commands help).
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the new 2013 Escape for the first time, one finds the exterior styling rather strongly reminiscient both of the new Ford Focus compact and of the latest-generation Hyundai Tucson (it actually is a modified version of the Focus platform). As I stated earlier, I'm generally not a big fan of the new styling on the Escape (I liked the last-generation boxy-shape much better for space-efficiency). But there are, nevertheless, still a number of good things on the new exterior.....starting with an excellent paint job. The metallic gray was ultra-smooth, shiny, reasonably free of orange-peel, and I liked the way the metallic texture was done, though the color itself was a little too dull for my tastes. Ten different exterior colors are offered (Ford didn't seem to cut costs in the paint-department) and there's a nice selection to choose from. The exterior sheet metal is a little on the thin side (what vehicle isn't these days), but the doors actually felt and shut more solidly than the thin-gauge metal would suggest. Even more so for the rear cargo-hatch, which felt like the Rock of Gibraltar as you lifted and shut it (a power-opening/closing hatch-lid is an option on some Escape models). The black window-frames, on the upper sides of the doors, felt solid but didn't close solid with the doors, making a slight rattle in the process. All of the exterior trim, including the chrome, was well-done and solid-feeling. But I would have prefered chrome window-frames to the black ones used. The twin outside mirrors are well-shaped for vision and generally snap/swivel/lock smoothly and cleanly, though not quite as slick as on many small Asian-designed SUVs. The mirrors, like those on the Ford Escape and Fiesta, also have small convex-shaped inserts that widen the field of vision...a nice feature. Another nice feature on the mirrors, on SEL models, are the integral-mounted turn-signal flashers. Nice black-cladding runs all around the lower-edge of the vehicle and up into the wheel wells to help protect the paint from road debris, chips, salt, etc..... IMO, this feature should be standard in all vehicles. The silver alloy wheels on the SEL model were a little busily-shaped, but, IMO, still generally looked good. The slight droop to the rear roofline does impact a little on the cargo space (more on this below), but, surprisingly, not on rear seat headroom (also more on that below). But I still prefer the older, more squared-off roofline.....you can't beat a box for interior room. The rear D-pillars impede a little on rear-visibility, but not a huge amount.....still, you don't see as much out the back as with the old roofline and pillars. And, as with most new vehicles, the bean-counters removed the protective body-side mouldings that help prevent at least some parking-lot dings. The salespeple said that the mouldings could be dealer-added, though I didn't see them listed in the Escape-acccessory list. Last, the twin wiper-arms on the windshield had soft floppy blades, an awkward feel, and a tendency to swivel all over the place when you tried to gently raise or lower them back again to clean the windshield. I have never felt anything else like it.....truly unique.
UNDERHOOD:
Open up the quite-heavy steel hood and you must fumble with a cheap manual prop-rod instead of nice struts or springs. There is a small and somewhat thin insulation-pad underneath....to more or less match the small hood itself. The small insulation pad, though, is surprisingly effective.....more on that later. The underhood layout itself is not one of the better ones I've seen compared to other small SUVs, and not as spacious as the one in the old squared-off Escape's engine-compartment. The new, more sleeker styling up front definitely impacts on the underhood space. The 1.6L Ecoboost four fits in with at least some space to reach things up front. But the big plastic cover on top of the engine, and, more important, the way that the engine is shoved back and partly hidden under the top firewall-extension, severely limits access to much of the rest of the block and components. The battery is hidden away, under a cover. Fortunately, most of the rest of the layout seems OK. Dipsticks, filler-caps, and fluid-reservoirs are generally well-marked and easy to reach. Just a guess on my part, but the new, more cramped underhood space could (?) be one reason why a V6 is no longer offered.
INTERIOR:
On the whole, the new interior seems reasonably well-done, though it has a couple of marked faults. As with the exterior styling, I wasn't particularly impressed with the overstyled, Focus-type dash (And, of course, I wasn't impressed with the Focus's dash, either). But the overall quality of most of the materials inside was generally acceptable, though not plush. Given their rather small size, the front seats were surprisingly comfortable for my big frame, had decent support, and used a nice (but not Jaguar/Lexus-grade) of leather. The sun visors (a cheap spot for many newer vehicles) had a soft covering on them, not just hard plastic like in some competitors. The gauges, though set in somewhat overstyled housings, were clear and easy to read. Most of the buttons and controls were clearly laid-out and easy to use, though the column- stalks could be improved....more on that in a second. My particular test-car lacked a sunroof, and, even with the newer, lower-droop roofline, there was plenty of headroom front and rear.....or at least more than I expected. The trim materials were generlly well-done, including the rather soft materials on the door-panel trim and dash, and the chrome-plastic trim was also well done (notwithstanding the somewhat overstyling of the things it was applied to). The transmission shift-lever, as in most Fords (and in most American-badged vehicles) had a nice fore/aft motion instead of the (IMO) annoying zig-zags found on so many Asian-designed vehicles.
But there were several things inside that, besides the general styling, I felt needed improvement or re-design as well. The sea of monotone black trim, broken up by a few applications of chrome-plastic here and there, was a little too Darth Vader for my tastes (much nicer two-tone versions are available). The thumbwheels that adjust the center-dash A/C vents, because of the weird dash-styling, are jammed way forward up on the flat-dash, where they are awkward and require a fairly long stretch stretch to reach. I thought the steering wheel, despite the chromed spokes, looked ugly and was uncomfortable to hold. The leather-wrapping used on it felt rough, had hard rough stitching, and overly-large thumb-bulges at the 10 and 2 O'Clock positions......not something you'd want to repeatedly use on a winding road. The uncomfortable rear seat-cushions felt like (to borrow an old phrase from Jethro Tull) "Sitting on a Park Bench", though a manually-adjustable seat-back angle helped some. The rear seats also had a metal support-structure on the edges that tended to dig into the side of your outer-leg as you got in and out. I know that Ford, if it tries, can do comfortable rear seats....look no further, for example, than the superb ones in the Ford Taurus family sedan, whose classic-overstuffed padding would support a freight-locomotive. The stereo itself sounded great, but the system is integrated with the video screen and the notoriously complex Ford SYNC/MyTouch system, which has generated a lot of customer-complaints. I found the system quite complex to use myself, though some of the voice-actuation-commands help.
CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:
The cargo area was, IMO, one of the car's nicer features, though, as previously mentioned, the new more droop-down rear roofline takes away some of the space that was formerly available in the old square-roofline for carrying tall items. The hatch-lid, as also mentioned earlier, had a pleasantly solid feeling to it, though a optional power-motor for it is available for those with weak arms or shoulders. The trim materials inside and black floor-carpet were reasonably nice for the vehicle-class. The usual temporary spare was located under the floor, where, of course, it is easier to reach than under the vehicle like with some SUVs. But some of the Escape's competitors (the 2012 Toyota RAV-4, for one, comes to mind) give you a real spare tire/wheel instead of a temporary one. There was no standard cargo-compartment cover on the SEL verson to hide valuables from prying eyes, but the cutouts and slots in the plastic frame-mouldings on the wall indicate that one is available as an option or dealer-installed accessory. Or, of course, you can simply toss a blanket or sheet over anything you don't want people outside to see.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 1.6L turbo four with a conventional side-column ignition and key (push-button ignition is available on some models). The engine settles down immediately into a very smooth, quiet idle....something that Ford-designed-fours are generally not noted for. The engine's power level, with its 184 ft-lbs. of torque, is adequate for most lightly-loaded normal driving. But, if you want any real response when you hit the gas, consider opting out for the top-line Titanium verson and its larger 2.0 turbo four (though, admittedly, I didn't sample one). The engine is quiet through mid-RPM revs, and, by the time you start to really hear engine noise, you are close to 5000 RPM...faster than you should normally take a brand-new engine that is not broken in. Yes, I let the RPMs briefly get a little higher than I usually do with a brand-new engine on a review, but that's a just a testament to the nice job Ford has done keeping the engine quiet and smooth. And, even nicer, you don't have to waste your money on expensive premium gas.....regular can be used if desired, with no loss of torque and only a very small HP loss. (Still, I'd consider the 2.0L turbo if it's power you want). To some extent, I miss the old normally-aspirated V6, though the Ecoboost fours seem to be a good replacement for them.
The 6-speed Select-Shift transmission shifts smoothly and quietly, and is much better than some of the old four-speed automatics. The lever itself, as stated above, as a nice fore-aft shift motion instead of those zig-zags that I dislike, but two things need improvement. First, instead of a separate gate for manual bump-lever shifting, it has a somewhat awkward rocker-switch on the side that bumps the gears up and down. Second, when in the PARK and REVERSE positions, the lever blocks some access to the climate-***** on the lower-dash....it has to be pulled back to give large hands and fingers easy access to those controls.
The chassis, for the most part, is tight and generally well-done, as is the excellent unibody-stiffness itself. On the road, there's a feeling of solidity and quality to the body-structure that is drum-tight...and, of course, no creaks/squeaks or rattles. Steering reponse is fairly quick, and handling is generally good......fairly flat cornering without much body-roll. Road noise and wind-noise are both well-controlled, and OK for the vehicle-class, but, of course, not Lexus LS-quiet. I was a little disappointed in the ride quality....I thought it was somewhat stiffer than it needed to be. Just to be sure, I double-checked all of the tire pressures, which were only a couple of pounds over the factory-recommended 35 PSI front/rear....so that itself wasn't a factor. Ford says that they deliberately tuned the suspension for in a stiff ride, as their (supposed) research showed that most of the new Escape's potential buyers wanted that type of suspension. Fine, but I'm not convinced. As I see it, these are primarily family-oriented or soccer-mom vehicles, not sport-specials designed to carve corners on twisty roads.
The new brakes are MUCH improved over the old, excessively-spongy, Push-and-Pray disc/drum brakes of older Escapes. The brakes on those older Escapes were aguably their weakest points. The new brakes have quicker response, a noticeably firmer pedal, and inspire far more driver-confidence, though the brake pedal itself could be a little better-located. My big, men's-size-15 circus-clown shoe, as it does in a number of vehicles, tends to catch the underside of the brake pedal when lifting off of the gas.....something I sometimes have to be careful with.
THE VERDICT:
Well, as you can tell from reading the review, I have some strong mixed-opinions about the new Escape series, both pro and con. The new unibody-stiffness, responsive all-disc braking system, paint-job, front-seat comfort, stereo-sound, solid (if thin) sheet-metal, and versatile multi-purpose exterior mirrors are all major improvements from the older models. But the loss of the boxy, squared-off body style for cargo space, the awkwardly overstyled dash, the uncomfortable leather-covered steering wheel, the Flop-O-Matic wiper arms, the kidney-unfriendly suspension, and and the increased prices this year are all minuses in my book. If the new Escape proves as popular as the old ones did, though (200,000+ sales a year), low depreciation may recover some of the higher prices this year. And I'm still undecided if the combination of the 1.6L and 2.0L turbo fours are better or not than the older, tried-and-tested V6....though the 1.6L was definitely smoother than I expected.
And, of course, though its firm ride may not agree with everyone, in general, the new Escape compares very well with its many small-SUV competitors. I predict that it will be successful in the American market-place, as it has been in Europe, though it may or may not exceed the massive sales-numbers of the older versions....only time will tell.
And, as always, Happy Car-Shopping.
MM
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-08-12 at 08:50 AM.
06-05-12, 02:27 PM
#4
Lexus Champion
C&D just tested a new Escape Titanium AWD that listed at $34,735 (it weighed in at a hefty 3408 lbs.). Its list price compared to some of the competition is kind of high. I'm sure it will sell well though.
06-05-12, 05:25 PM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
And, by the term "loaded" Escape, do you mean a top-line model like the Titanium, or simply a lower-line with options and packages? You don't have to pay anywhere near 37K to get an Escape with a pretty fair amount of equipment....the leather SEL version I tested listed for just over 30K. A lower-line white SE model right next to it, with several packages on it, listed for 31K.
My gray SEL lacked some options, but still had a lot of features on it.
As always, thanks for the Awesome review Mike!
Sorry it took so long to get the review done. Ford was late in getting this car released here on the East Coast. At the D.C. Auto Show last January, we were (more or less) led to believe that we would see some by April.
06-05-12, 05:41 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks, Hoovey. Like I told blacksc400, I wish I could have done it a little sooner.
Seems like the jury's still out a little on whether the new Ecoboost fours are really upgrades over the old V6, though I have to admit that, at least at lower RPMs, the 1.6L turbo was virtually Lexus-refined, and, of course, gives decent economy.
As for the handling dynamics, the handling is pretty good by small-SUV standards. But the price for it, of course, is, at least IMO, a stiffer-than-necessary ride. BMW, Mercedes, and, to some extent, newer Subarus and Buicks, seem to be the manufacturers that best combine good handling with a good ride....it takes a lot of good engineering skill.
I totally agree. The boxy, squared-off lines of the older models probably didn't win any awards for sport-oriented looks, but it was space-efficient, and the public also seemed to agree......they bought them up in droves.
Ford's reasoning for this seems to be that the upcoming C-Max Hybrid (which will debut later) will siphon off a lot of what would be the Escape Hybrid market, though the C-Max seems to be designed more as a small people-carrier, not necessarily an SUV.
Like I told blacksc400, I wish I could have done it a little sooner.
I certainly love the powertrain upgrades and the handling dynamics.
As for the handling dynamics, the handling is pretty good by small-SUV standards. But the price for it, of course, is, at least IMO, a stiffer-than-necessary ride. BMW, Mercedes, and, to some extent, newer Subarus and Buicks, seem to be the manufacturers that best combine good handling with a good ride....it takes a lot of good engineering skill.
I'm still iffy on the exterior, I prefer the more truckish style like the last generation.
The omission of a hybrid for this generation is an interesting call.
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-05-12 at 05:46 PM.
Trending Topics
06-05-12, 11:30 PM
#9
Lexus Test Driver
Great review as always. I generally agree with just about everything listed here. I'm surprised Ford did away with a hybrid option, when hybrids are heating up more and more. Even with the new C-Maxx coming, I still think offering a hybrid is requisite. Also agree with the overstyling. We've talked about this before here, and when I see things like that, it makes me think of old-school gimmicks which is a turn-off. Lastly, I'd prefer a refined and smooth V6 to the turbos. At least with off the line power and longterm longevity, the V6 plants it's roots a bit better.
06-06-12, 04:58 AM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Less-expensive Escape models, of course, are available....starting at 22-23K without options.. But there is no denying that there was a significant price increase with the new version.
Thanks.
Nice review Mike....well done again.
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-06-12 at 06:05 PM.
06-06-12, 05:06 AM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
I tend to lean to your point of view on the V6s, but there is no denying that the new Ecoboost fours may be decent replacements. The 1.6L I sampled was smooth, quiet, and refined until the RPMs really came up. It seemed to work well with the 6-speed automatic, and could use regular gas. But its power, though adequate for unloaded conditions, wasn't quite a match for the old V6. The 2.0 Ecoboost in the top-line Titanium model (which I didn't sample) may help solve the power difference.
Lastly, I'd prefer a refined and smooth V6 to the turbos. At least with off the line power and longterm longevity, the V6 plants it's roots a bit better.
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-06-12 at 05:12 AM.
06-06-12, 07:55 AM
#13
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Next planned MM reviews:
2013 Dodge Ram Pickup
2013 Subaru XV
2013 Subaru BRZ/Scion FRS Test-Drive (static-review already posted)
2013 Buick Verano Turbo test-drive
2013 Dodge Ram Pickup
2013 Subaru XV
2013 Subaru BRZ/Scion FRS Test-Drive (static-review already posted)
2013 Buick Verano Turbo test-drive
06-06-12, 12:42 PM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
06-06-12, 12:47 PM
#15
2013-model GLKs start around 36K, so if he got a loaded one for 36K, that's quite a deal. You also didn't say if that 36K was out the door or included tax and tags. I'd bet that it probably wasn't out the door for that price. Also demand for the GLK is typically much lower (which means discounts) than it would be for a hot new vehicle like the Escape which typically sells hundereds of thousands annually. Ford dealers, right now, are not likely to be giving major discount on new Escapes that, right now, will probaby sell almost as fast as they get in. On top of that, as I pointed out in the review, there was a significant price-increase on the new 2013 Escapes compared to the old models.
And, by the term "loaded" Escape, do you mean a top-line model like the Titanium, or simply a lower-line with options and packages? You don't have to pay anywhere near 37K to get an Escape with a pretty fair amount of equipment....the leather SEL version I tested listed for just over 30K. A lower-line white SE model right next to it, with several packages on it, listed for 31K.
My gray SEL lacked some options, but still had a lot of features on it.
Sure....glad you enjoyed it. Sorry it took so long to get the review done. Ford was late in getting this car released here on the East Coast. At the D.C. Auto Show last January, we were (more or less) led to believe that we would see some by April.
And, by the term "loaded" Escape, do you mean a top-line model like the Titanium, or simply a lower-line with options and packages? You don't have to pay anywhere near 37K to get an Escape with a pretty fair amount of equipment....the leather SEL version I tested listed for just over 30K. A lower-line white SE model right next to it, with several packages on it, listed for 31K.
My gray SEL lacked some options, but still had a lot of features on it.
Sure....glad you enjoyed it.
Sorry it took so long to get the review done. Ford was late in getting this car released here on the East Coast. At the D.C. Auto Show last January, we were (more or less) led to believe that we would see some by April.
The original sticker for it was more than 39K if I remember right, he did get a huge discount. Wish I could do this good on my purchase. 
I just read the new CD issue and it stated it as well, a loaded Titanium is pushing 37K. Like I said, I never looked into this car, but it's a 23K-28K CUV to me.