Review: 2010 Ford Flex
10-04-09, 04:33 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Review: 2010 Ford Flex
By CL member request, a Review of the 2010 Ford Flex.
http://www.fordvehicles.com/crossovers/flex/
In a Nutshell: Competent, roomy, and versatile, but top versions are pricey, and brakes could use some improvement.
I received a few requests from CL members for a review of the Ford Flex (preferably an EcoBoost model). The vehicle has stirred a fair amount of interest from the automotive press as well, especially for a mid-sized SUV, although I myself am not quite sure exactly where the Flex slots in the SUV world, and what its intended marketing position is (more on this in a minute). I had planned to review, by now, a new 2010 Buick LaCrosse, (as I know a number of CL members are still waiting) but the 2010 model is STILL not available in the D.C. area.
Ford, of course, is no stranger to the SUV world, having done its first off-road Broncos back in the mid-1960's.....some 45 years ago. Its F-150 pickup series has dominated American domestic truck sales for literally decades, with the Chevy C/K/Silverado series right behind. Ford's SUV's, over the years, have ranged from the small, compact Escape up to the enormous Excursion that political correctness and environmentalists drove off the market a couple of years ago. The Excursion, an enormous 7500-lb. beast, was simply too heavy for its chassis/suspension, and, on a new-vehicle test-drive, was probably the worst combination of ponderous ride/handling that I ever experienced, but, of course, that is a subject for another article, not this one. Happily, the Flex is far more civilized on the road than any Excursion.
Just where the rather low-slung (for an SUV), box-shaped Flex fits in among its Ford SUV brothers and sisters, and why Ford decided to market it, is somewhat unclear to me. The Flex is unibody and car-based, like its Escape and Edge brothers. Ford labels it as a so-called "Crossover" vehicle, but it is really more of a car-based SUV. It is roughly the same size as the Edge (and larger than the EScape), but has a boxier, square design for better space efficiency. It is also roughly the same size, on the outside, as the Explorer, a heavier-duty, truck-based SUV that is off-road capable, though the Flex sits lower to the ground than the Explorer, and definitely has a lower roofline. The big Expedition/Expedition XL, of course, since the huge Excursion got run off the stage, are currently Ford's largest SUV's....larger than the Explorer. They essentially compete with the truck-based Chevy/GMC Tahoe/Yukon/Yukon XL/Suburban series. So, to my way of thinking, the Flex (maybe?) is an attempt by Ford to make a mid-sized SUV that is more space-efficient than the rounded-off Edge....but, as I indicated above, that is unclear. There is also, at this time, no Lincoln version of the Flex, as there is of the Ford Edge, which Lincoln markets an upmarket MKX version of.
Three trim versions of the Flex are currently offered.....SE, SEL, and Limited. All three come standard with a 3.5L Duratec V6 of 262 HP and 248 ft-lbs of torque and a 6-speed automatic (this is a fairly impressive powertrain, as I'll describe later). SEL and Limited models offer the 3.5L "EcoBoost" V6 engine with 355 HP and 350 ft-lbs. of torque...a slightly detuned version of the 365 HP Ecoboost found in the Ford Taurus SHO. The Ecoboost is not available as an option on the base model SE Flex.....why, I don't know, as, mechancally, the SE is the same vehicle as its two upmarket brothers. All three versions come with standard FWD, and AWD is optional on the SEL and Limited (and included with the Ecoboost option). Again, why AWD is not an option on the base SE model beats me. Prices start at a little under 29K for the SE model, but increase drastically with trim and options.
Since most of the SUV's/Crossovers I review are AWD, I decided, this time, to check out a FWD model, for three reasons. First, not everyone wants AWD, or lives in an area where it is needed for the extra traction (AWD's extra weight/drag, of course, saps power and gas mileage). Second, the silver, top-line, FWD Limited model I chose listed at almost 42K, so it was, IMO, pricey enough, even without the AWD/Ecoboost option (AWD comes standard with the Ecoboost). Third, a couple of the review requests were for an Ecoboost if possible, and I waited a number of weeks for an Ecoboost to become available, to no avail. Ford is now, like with the Taurus SHO, building Ecobbost models only by special-order, and they are all either a long wait or pre-sold, so I decided to review a model which was readily available.
Except for a couple of quirks in the braking system, and too-slow steering response for my tastes, the Flex Limited actually turned out to be a fairly nice vehicle to drive....believe me, I've seen lots worse. Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Ford Flex Limited FWD
Base Price: $37,165
Options:
Rapid Spec Package: $3935
Rubber Floor Mats: $75
Destination/Freight: $775
List Price as Reviewed: $41,950
Drivetrain: FWD, Tranversely-mounted 3.5L Duratec V6, 262 HP @ 6250 RPM, Torque, 248 Ft-lbs. @ 4500 RPM, 6-speed automatic transmission.
EPA Mileage Rating: (FWD) 17 City, 24 Highway / (AWD) 16 City, 22 Highway
Exterior Color: Ingot Silver Metallic
Interior: Charcoal Perforated Leather
PLUSSES:
Torquey V6, even without Ecoboost.
Well-designed, responsive automatic transmission.
Easy-to-use, no zig-zag, fore/aft transmission shifter.
Firm but comfortable ride.
Good wind noise control.
Good road noise isolation (on smooth asphalt).
Good underhood layout.
Superb steering-wheel grip/feel.
Good outward visibility.
Excellent, solid body sheet metal.
Extra-heavy, solid doors.
Nice paint job for the ligher paint colors.
Good space efficiency from the boxy design.
Well-padded, generally comfortable seats.
Fairly nice-grade, multi-pattern seat leather.
Nice interior wood-tone trim.
Generally good interior hardware.....with a couple of exceptions.
Nice, clear primary gauges.
Nice ice-blue dash-gauge lighting.
Solid, well-designed split-third-row-seat folding mechanism.
Nice dual rear-seat Vista roof panels and covers.
Does not need running boards for entry/exit.
Easy-Fuel, no-cap filler pipe.
Wide selection of factory-approved accessories and custom-color seat covers.
Huge dealer network for service and repairs.
Ford's future, at the moment, looks brighter than GM/Chrysler.
MINUSES:
Wide price range between the various trim models.
Top-line Limited models rather pricey.
Slow steering response.
Significant road/tire noise on coarse surfaces.
Spongy, ineffective brakes.
Poorly-located brake pedal.
Awkward foot-operated parking brake.
No Manual-mode or paddle-shifters for the transmission, except with EcoBoost.
Stiff-folding outside mirrors.
Some cheapish-feeling exterior chrome and trim.
Flimsy-feeling manual front seat-rake adjuster.
Extra-cost for some paint colors.
Most standard exterior paint colors rather dull.
Darker paint colors show some orange peel.
No body-side moldings for paint protection.
Dated ignition switch.
Rather small fuel-level and engine-temperature gauges.
Higher-mounted-than-normal turn-signal-stalk takes some getting used to.
Slippery front leather seatbacks.
Questionable gas-filler-pipe security.
Temporary spare tire.
Fairly low ground clearance for a mid-size SUV.
EcoBoost V6 models now only special-order or pre-sold.
Ecoboost not available on SE models.
AWD not available on SE model.
Unclear market position between many rivals/corporate cousins.
EXTERIOR:
Well, the first impression of the Flex that you get, as you walk up to it, is that of a bigger, grown-up Scion xB. Like the xB, Kia Soul, and Nissan Cube, the Flex has classic shoe-box styling. Not that there's anything wrong with that in my book..........square, boxy designs have always been the best for interior space efficiency, and one often buys this type of vehicle to carry people and cargo. It does not look like any other existing American-market Ford product, even among its sister Ford Crossovers and SUVs, so its styling, by Ford standards, is unique. And, IMO, it is not an ugly vehicle either, especially in the high-trim Limited model with its extra front/rear chrome. The big chrome bars across both the front and rear ends, IMO, look smart and classy, though some of the other chrome trim's actual quality, like on the outsided mirrors, is not the best I've seen, with a light, cheap feel. The body sheet metal is excellent, and the heavy, rock-solid doors feel like those on the superb Acura RL, though they don't close with as much of a "thunk" as on the RL. Most of the exterior paint colors are funeral-home dull, and about the only way around that is to pay extra for the Candy Red or White Platinum paint jobs (no reasonable paint job, IMO, should cost extra). Two-tone roof packages, like on the Mini Cooper, are available if desired.....but the roof color choices are more limited than on the Mini......just white or silver. The paint job on my silver test car was smooth, even, and well-done (as it was on most of the lighter colors), but the dark Cinnamon Brown and some of the other dark colors seemed to have a fair amount of orange peel. The twin outside mirrors had reasonably solid plastic housings (and integrated turn signals), but the actual folding, swivelling motion felt awkward, heavy, and rough.
There are no body-side moldings to ward off dents/dings in the parking lot......that seems to be another growing cost-feature on new vehicles. The Flex sits a little lower to the ground than some other mid-sized SUV's, so there is less ground clearance for deep snow, sand, mud, etc.... On the other hand, it sits low enough that running boards are not needed for easy entry/exit either. The roofline is low enough, even with the boxy styling, so that washing the roof (some owners may want to keep the nice two-tone paint up there looking clean) shouldn't be too much of a problem for tall people, but it is, of course, not as low as on a typical sedan. Another reason I liked the conservative exterior styling was that it didn't have those ultra-sweep, multi-dimensional headlights/taillights...just simple, squarish, handsome lights, front and rear. The no-cap gas-filler pipe, also found in some other Ford products, eliminates the twist-on/off gas cap and uses a special no-cap sealing system, but the flip-door for it doesn't have a lock, and the security of the system inside to prevent gas-siphoning, without a lock, is questionable.
UNDERHOOD:
The underhood layout is very good...easily one of the car's better features. The hood, made of strong, solid steel, opens up with two nice gas struts to hold it up, and includes a nice hood insulation pad to keep noise and vibration down. The transversely mounted 3.5L V6 fits in OK, and there is a reasonable amount of room to work around the front and sides of the engine. Ford does not use annoying engine/battery covers on the Flex, so the battery, a number of other components, and most of the engine's upper-surfaces are easily reachable. Dipsticks, reservoirs, and filler-caps are, likewise, easily reached....though the yellow-coded oil dipstick, up front, is a little unusual in that it seems to have a twist-lock/unlock action to release it. Only the rear bank of spark plugs seems difficult to reach.....but, of course, that is the case in most transverse-mounted V-engines. Nowadays, many plugs go to 100,000 miles anyway, although it can be wise, for several reasons, to change them sooner.
INTERIOR:
Generally a nice, pleasant, well-finished interior....I didn't have many complaints with it. The boxy, high roofline provides good headroom, both front and rear....even under the sunroofs (in the rear seat, there was a split, dual, twin Vista-roofs). Legroom and footroom are also good, both up front and in back. The wood trim in the Limited version looks nice and gives the interior a little warmth. The rest of the interior, in my test car, was mostly dark charcoal gray/black, though the silver console and compartment gave it some contrast. Most of the interior trim/hardware felt solid and well-made, except for the manual loop-lever that controlled the front seat-back rake (the rest of the seat controls were power). The black, multi-pattern leather seats were generally well-padded and comfortable, and the leather seemed a nice grade, though my back had some tendency to slide around on the slippery leather used on the seatback (less so on the bottom-cushion part). Custom-colored leather seat covers (in many color choices), along with a wide range of other factory/dealer accessories, are available on the Flex.....it is almost Scion-like in that regard. The door panels had some hard plastic on them, but were otherwise generously appointed with soft-fabric materials, chrome door handles, and leather inserts. The sun visors and headliner also seem to have escaped the bean-counters, with a fairly nice, soft-fabric covering.
The stereo sound quality was pretty good, but not a killer (the Beastie Boys did the music honors today, with a classic........"You've Got to Fight for Your Right to Party"). All of the stereo and climate-control butttons were solid and well-marked, except for the fan speed, which took a little deciphering. The stereo readouts, however, integrated with the NAV system (a voice-activated NAV/stereo system is standard in the Limited model) were not the easiest to see, although the voice commands did at least part of the work. The steering wheel has a superbly-designed, smooth but beefy rim for grip comfort, and some nice silver trim inside, though, IMO, it would look better with three spokes instead of four. The turn-signal stalk was tilted a little higher up than is customary, so that took a little getting used to, though it worked easily and slickly. The actual click-clickers for the green turn-arrows were a little louder than usual. The circular speedometer and Tachometer were large simple, clear, and easy to read, and had nice ice-blue lighting, but the smaller, circular fuel and engine temperature gauges, though not overly small, could have been a little larger for quick, easy reading. I liked the circular, jeweled, Infiniti-style analog clock in the center of the dash/console, and the dash-vent mechanisms felt rock-solid. The shift lever for the transmission had, like on most Ford products, a nice, smooth, fore/aft motion without any annoying zig-zags, though it lacked a manual shift-gate. There were built-in footrests for back seat occupants. Power-folding rear seats, to expand the cargo area, are an option, and the typically small split-third-row seat had a clever folding system......I'll describe that more below, in the CARGO AREA section. My biggest complaint, inside, was probably the awkwardly high, step-on parking-brake release....my left knee kept hitting the lower-dash dash or steering wheel when I tried to use it.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The hatch lid (power-operated on my test car), like the rest of the exterior, has good sheet metal, and it opens up to reveal a fairly well-finished cargo area. There is a nice soft carpet on the floor, but the walls of the cargo area feel like hard-plastic panels. The boxy styling, of course, helps with the rear cargo room. The bean-counters, however, struck under the floor, where there resides a typical temporary spare tire. However, they definitely did not strike the third-row seats. The seats, though typically small and primarily for kids and small adults, were well-upholstered in the same nice multi-patterned leather the front two seat rows had (remember that, if you let your kids eat ice-cream cones or drink sodas back there without seat covers). They also have an ingeneous, multi-function manual-folding mechanism that is operated by choosing pull-straps marked "1" or "2". They fold upright, or flat, tilt-forward or even backwards, and have attached carpet-covers when they are down. Either seat can go in any one of several different ways. Nifty.
ON THE ROAD:
The bean-counters struck on the ignition switch....you start up the 3.5L V6 with an old-fashioned key/fob and side-column-mounted ignition switch. The engine turns over and idles fairly smoothly and quietly, though not with the same silky-smoothness of a Toyota/Honda V6. Once in gear, though, and on the road, though, this is, IMO, a surprisingly good drivetrain. The V6's 262 HP and 248 ft-lbs. of torque, judging by the response in my test car, may be a little underrated, though it is undoubtedly aided by the excellent 6-speed automatic....more on that in a minute. This engine gives you a significant shove in the back, even at fairly low RPM, so its torque band seems to be broad and flexible as well. The engne is also fairly quiet while cruising, and, even under moderately hard acceleration, neither it nor the exhaust is particularly noisy. Of course, my test car was a FWD model, with a lighter weight and less drag than the AWD version. The AWD version might not (?) be quite so responsive to one's right foot. Still, judging by its response with FWD, this engineshould easily be handle to handle AWD in any situation where the car was reasonably loaded. For most driving conditions, I don't see where the more powerful Ecoboost option is really necessary, unless you regularly drive with the car very heavily loaded, on steep grades, or at high altitudes where the Ecoboost's twin-turbos would help with thin air. So, just save your money (which will be hard enough to do in this moderately expensive vehicle anyway) and get the standard V6.
The well-designed 6-speed automatic transmission is also impressive, despite the fact that it lacks a manual-shift gate or paddles with the standard engine (shift-paddles come with the Ecoboost). It is smooth, quiet, has well-chosen ratios, transmits power very well, and kicks down instantly to a lower gear when needed, with no hesitation or lugging. It is also robust enough, mechanically, to allow a Class III Trailer-Tow package (see the website for towing details).
The chassis is not quite as impressive as the powertrain, but generally well-done. Ride comfort is firm, but still smooth and comfortable, with none of the fore/aft and porposing motions common to many SUVs. Bumps are felt a little, but there are no real jolts or loud noises. Road noise is low and well-controlled on smooth asphalt, but significant on coarse road surfaces. Wind noise is well-controlled, though not quite to Lexus standards. Steering response, though, is quite slow......not one of the car's better features, although the suspension doesn't produce much body roll. I think one reason it doesn't roll more is that the slow steering response just doesn't give enough yaw input to really put much side loads on the front suspension.
I didn't like the brakes at all.........easily the car's worst feature. The pedal was mushy, spongy, and unresponsive, though this, of course, is typical of many Ford and GM-designed trucks/SUV's. The brake pedal was also poorly-placed, not only for big, size-15 clodhopper shoes like mine, but for some smaller shoes as well. It is to high, too large, and too close to the accelerator pedal, and I had to be careful not to get my shoe hung up under the brake pedal going from gas to brake. I had less of a problem if I remembered to be careful every time, but, while driving, you sometimes have to brake in a hurry, with an instant reaction.....you can't always constantly dwell on exactly where your right foot is, or if it will get hung up.
THE VERDICT:
Though I was not satisfied with the brakes, steering response, or parking-brake pedal, I fould little else to really complain about in the Flex. It actually has more marketing problems (like the Ecoboost order policy or the lack of AWD or Ecoboost options in the SE model), than it does problems with the vehicle itself. It is a good all-around, versatile vehicle that is reasonably well-made, though, especially in the Limited models, somewhat pricey. The drivetrain, both engine and transmission, is excellent, even without the Ecoboost option, the interior is roomy and space-efficient, the trim is mostly of good quality, the underhood layout is good for accessability, and the sheet metal won't dent the first time you tap it with your finger.
Yes, there are some minuses, besides the ones I listed. Gas mileage is not particularly good, but that is often the case with V6 SUV's. The no-gas-cap filler-pipe system, without a lock, could be questionable in some neighborhoods. And, if I really wanted to nit-pick, I could bring up some things like the orange-peel on the darker paint colors and the extra charge for certain colors. But, overall, the Flex is a pretty nice vehicle, boxy but handsomely styled without a bunch of sweep-back, jelly-bean-shaped stuff.
But, though lower-line Flex models start well under 30K, the top-level versions, as I indicated, are pricey, even without AWD or the Ecoboost....you don't buy them for chump-change. The 42K my Flex listed at would easily buy a nice Lexus RX350, which is one of the most well-built, smooth, quiet, refined SUVs on the road. True, the RX350 lacks a nice third-row seat like the Flex, but, otherwise, it equals or exceeds the Flex in just about every category....especially brakes. So, while the Flex is admittedly a nice vehicle overall, you have to judge it not only by what it costs, but also by what competitiors can offer for the same price.
http://www.fordvehicles.com/crossovers/flex/
In a Nutshell: Competent, roomy, and versatile, but top versions are pricey, and brakes could use some improvement.
I received a few requests from CL members for a review of the Ford Flex (preferably an EcoBoost model). The vehicle has stirred a fair amount of interest from the automotive press as well, especially for a mid-sized SUV, although I myself am not quite sure exactly where the Flex slots in the SUV world, and what its intended marketing position is (more on this in a minute). I had planned to review, by now, a new 2010 Buick LaCrosse, (as I know a number of CL members are still waiting) but the 2010 model is STILL not available in the D.C. area.
Ford, of course, is no stranger to the SUV world, having done its first off-road Broncos back in the mid-1960's.....some 45 years ago. Its F-150 pickup series has dominated American domestic truck sales for literally decades, with the Chevy C/K/Silverado series right behind. Ford's SUV's, over the years, have ranged from the small, compact Escape up to the enormous Excursion that political correctness and environmentalists drove off the market a couple of years ago. The Excursion, an enormous 7500-lb. beast, was simply too heavy for its chassis/suspension, and, on a new-vehicle test-drive, was probably the worst combination of ponderous ride/handling that I ever experienced, but, of course, that is a subject for another article, not this one. Happily, the Flex is far more civilized on the road than any Excursion.
Just where the rather low-slung (for an SUV), box-shaped Flex fits in among its Ford SUV brothers and sisters, and why Ford decided to market it, is somewhat unclear to me. The Flex is unibody and car-based, like its Escape and Edge brothers. Ford labels it as a so-called "Crossover" vehicle, but it is really more of a car-based SUV. It is roughly the same size as the Edge (and larger than the EScape), but has a boxier, square design for better space efficiency. It is also roughly the same size, on the outside, as the Explorer, a heavier-duty, truck-based SUV that is off-road capable, though the Flex sits lower to the ground than the Explorer, and definitely has a lower roofline. The big Expedition/Expedition XL, of course, since the huge Excursion got run off the stage, are currently Ford's largest SUV's....larger than the Explorer. They essentially compete with the truck-based Chevy/GMC Tahoe/Yukon/Yukon XL/Suburban series. So, to my way of thinking, the Flex (maybe?) is an attempt by Ford to make a mid-sized SUV that is more space-efficient than the rounded-off Edge....but, as I indicated above, that is unclear. There is also, at this time, no Lincoln version of the Flex, as there is of the Ford Edge, which Lincoln markets an upmarket MKX version of.
Three trim versions of the Flex are currently offered.....SE, SEL, and Limited. All three come standard with a 3.5L Duratec V6 of 262 HP and 248 ft-lbs of torque and a 6-speed automatic (this is a fairly impressive powertrain, as I'll describe later). SEL and Limited models offer the 3.5L "EcoBoost" V6 engine with 355 HP and 350 ft-lbs. of torque...a slightly detuned version of the 365 HP Ecoboost found in the Ford Taurus SHO. The Ecoboost is not available as an option on the base model SE Flex.....why, I don't know, as, mechancally, the SE is the same vehicle as its two upmarket brothers. All three versions come with standard FWD, and AWD is optional on the SEL and Limited (and included with the Ecoboost option). Again, why AWD is not an option on the base SE model beats me. Prices start at a little under 29K for the SE model, but increase drastically with trim and options.
Since most of the SUV's/Crossovers I review are AWD, I decided, this time, to check out a FWD model, for three reasons. First, not everyone wants AWD, or lives in an area where it is needed for the extra traction (AWD's extra weight/drag, of course, saps power and gas mileage). Second, the silver, top-line, FWD Limited model I chose listed at almost 42K, so it was, IMO, pricey enough, even without the AWD/Ecoboost option (AWD comes standard with the Ecoboost). Third, a couple of the review requests were for an Ecoboost if possible, and I waited a number of weeks for an Ecoboost to become available, to no avail. Ford is now, like with the Taurus SHO, building Ecobbost models only by special-order, and they are all either a long wait or pre-sold, so I decided to review a model which was readily available.
Except for a couple of quirks in the braking system, and too-slow steering response for my tastes, the Flex Limited actually turned out to be a fairly nice vehicle to drive....believe me, I've seen lots worse. Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Ford Flex Limited FWD
Base Price: $37,165
Options:
Rapid Spec Package: $3935
Rubber Floor Mats: $75
Destination/Freight: $775
List Price as Reviewed: $41,950
Drivetrain: FWD, Tranversely-mounted 3.5L Duratec V6, 262 HP @ 6250 RPM, Torque, 248 Ft-lbs. @ 4500 RPM, 6-speed automatic transmission.
EPA Mileage Rating: (FWD) 17 City, 24 Highway / (AWD) 16 City, 22 Highway
Exterior Color: Ingot Silver Metallic
Interior: Charcoal Perforated Leather
PLUSSES:
Torquey V6, even without Ecoboost.
Well-designed, responsive automatic transmission.
Easy-to-use, no zig-zag, fore/aft transmission shifter.
Firm but comfortable ride.
Good wind noise control.
Good road noise isolation (on smooth asphalt).
Good underhood layout.
Superb steering-wheel grip/feel.
Good outward visibility.
Excellent, solid body sheet metal.
Extra-heavy, solid doors.
Nice paint job for the ligher paint colors.
Good space efficiency from the boxy design.
Well-padded, generally comfortable seats.
Fairly nice-grade, multi-pattern seat leather.
Nice interior wood-tone trim.
Generally good interior hardware.....with a couple of exceptions.
Nice, clear primary gauges.
Nice ice-blue dash-gauge lighting.
Solid, well-designed split-third-row-seat folding mechanism.
Nice dual rear-seat Vista roof panels and covers.
Does not need running boards for entry/exit.
Easy-Fuel, no-cap filler pipe.
Wide selection of factory-approved accessories and custom-color seat covers.
Huge dealer network for service and repairs.
Ford's future, at the moment, looks brighter than GM/Chrysler.
MINUSES:
Wide price range between the various trim models.
Top-line Limited models rather pricey.
Slow steering response.
Significant road/tire noise on coarse surfaces.
Spongy, ineffective brakes.
Poorly-located brake pedal.
Awkward foot-operated parking brake.
No Manual-mode or paddle-shifters for the transmission, except with EcoBoost.
Stiff-folding outside mirrors.
Some cheapish-feeling exterior chrome and trim.
Flimsy-feeling manual front seat-rake adjuster.
Extra-cost for some paint colors.
Most standard exterior paint colors rather dull.
Darker paint colors show some orange peel.
No body-side moldings for paint protection.
Dated ignition switch.
Rather small fuel-level and engine-temperature gauges.
Higher-mounted-than-normal turn-signal-stalk takes some getting used to.
Slippery front leather seatbacks.
Questionable gas-filler-pipe security.
Temporary spare tire.
Fairly low ground clearance for a mid-size SUV.
EcoBoost V6 models now only special-order or pre-sold.
Ecoboost not available on SE models.
AWD not available on SE model.
Unclear market position between many rivals/corporate cousins.
EXTERIOR:
Well, the first impression of the Flex that you get, as you walk up to it, is that of a bigger, grown-up Scion xB. Like the xB, Kia Soul, and Nissan Cube, the Flex has classic shoe-box styling. Not that there's anything wrong with that in my book..........square, boxy designs have always been the best for interior space efficiency, and one often buys this type of vehicle to carry people and cargo. It does not look like any other existing American-market Ford product, even among its sister Ford Crossovers and SUVs, so its styling, by Ford standards, is unique. And, IMO, it is not an ugly vehicle either, especially in the high-trim Limited model with its extra front/rear chrome. The big chrome bars across both the front and rear ends, IMO, look smart and classy, though some of the other chrome trim's actual quality, like on the outsided mirrors, is not the best I've seen, with a light, cheap feel. The body sheet metal is excellent, and the heavy, rock-solid doors feel like those on the superb Acura RL, though they don't close with as much of a "thunk" as on the RL. Most of the exterior paint colors are funeral-home dull, and about the only way around that is to pay extra for the Candy Red or White Platinum paint jobs (no reasonable paint job, IMO, should cost extra). Two-tone roof packages, like on the Mini Cooper, are available if desired.....but the roof color choices are more limited than on the Mini......just white or silver. The paint job on my silver test car was smooth, even, and well-done (as it was on most of the lighter colors), but the dark Cinnamon Brown and some of the other dark colors seemed to have a fair amount of orange peel. The twin outside mirrors had reasonably solid plastic housings (and integrated turn signals), but the actual folding, swivelling motion felt awkward, heavy, and rough.
There are no body-side moldings to ward off dents/dings in the parking lot......that seems to be another growing cost-feature on new vehicles. The Flex sits a little lower to the ground than some other mid-sized SUV's, so there is less ground clearance for deep snow, sand, mud, etc.... On the other hand, it sits low enough that running boards are not needed for easy entry/exit either. The roofline is low enough, even with the boxy styling, so that washing the roof (some owners may want to keep the nice two-tone paint up there looking clean) shouldn't be too much of a problem for tall people, but it is, of course, not as low as on a typical sedan. Another reason I liked the conservative exterior styling was that it didn't have those ultra-sweep, multi-dimensional headlights/taillights...just simple, squarish, handsome lights, front and rear. The no-cap gas-filler pipe, also found in some other Ford products, eliminates the twist-on/off gas cap and uses a special no-cap sealing system, but the flip-door for it doesn't have a lock, and the security of the system inside to prevent gas-siphoning, without a lock, is questionable.
UNDERHOOD:
The underhood layout is very good...easily one of the car's better features. The hood, made of strong, solid steel, opens up with two nice gas struts to hold it up, and includes a nice hood insulation pad to keep noise and vibration down. The transversely mounted 3.5L V6 fits in OK, and there is a reasonable amount of room to work around the front and sides of the engine. Ford does not use annoying engine/battery covers on the Flex, so the battery, a number of other components, and most of the engine's upper-surfaces are easily reachable. Dipsticks, reservoirs, and filler-caps are, likewise, easily reached....though the yellow-coded oil dipstick, up front, is a little unusual in that it seems to have a twist-lock/unlock action to release it. Only the rear bank of spark plugs seems difficult to reach.....but, of course, that is the case in most transverse-mounted V-engines. Nowadays, many plugs go to 100,000 miles anyway, although it can be wise, for several reasons, to change them sooner.
INTERIOR:
Generally a nice, pleasant, well-finished interior....I didn't have many complaints with it. The boxy, high roofline provides good headroom, both front and rear....even under the sunroofs (in the rear seat, there was a split, dual, twin Vista-roofs). Legroom and footroom are also good, both up front and in back. The wood trim in the Limited version looks nice and gives the interior a little warmth. The rest of the interior, in my test car, was mostly dark charcoal gray/black, though the silver console and compartment gave it some contrast. Most of the interior trim/hardware felt solid and well-made, except for the manual loop-lever that controlled the front seat-back rake (the rest of the seat controls were power). The black, multi-pattern leather seats were generally well-padded and comfortable, and the leather seemed a nice grade, though my back had some tendency to slide around on the slippery leather used on the seatback (less so on the bottom-cushion part). Custom-colored leather seat covers (in many color choices), along with a wide range of other factory/dealer accessories, are available on the Flex.....it is almost Scion-like in that regard. The door panels had some hard plastic on them, but were otherwise generously appointed with soft-fabric materials, chrome door handles, and leather inserts. The sun visors and headliner also seem to have escaped the bean-counters, with a fairly nice, soft-fabric covering.
The stereo sound quality was pretty good, but not a killer (the Beastie Boys did the music honors today, with a classic........"You've Got to Fight for Your Right to Party"). All of the stereo and climate-control butttons were solid and well-marked, except for the fan speed, which took a little deciphering. The stereo readouts, however, integrated with the NAV system (a voice-activated NAV/stereo system is standard in the Limited model) were not the easiest to see, although the voice commands did at least part of the work. The steering wheel has a superbly-designed, smooth but beefy rim for grip comfort, and some nice silver trim inside, though, IMO, it would look better with three spokes instead of four. The turn-signal stalk was tilted a little higher up than is customary, so that took a little getting used to, though it worked easily and slickly. The actual click-clickers for the green turn-arrows were a little louder than usual. The circular speedometer and Tachometer were large simple, clear, and easy to read, and had nice ice-blue lighting, but the smaller, circular fuel and engine temperature gauges, though not overly small, could have been a little larger for quick, easy reading. I liked the circular, jeweled, Infiniti-style analog clock in the center of the dash/console, and the dash-vent mechanisms felt rock-solid. The shift lever for the transmission had, like on most Ford products, a nice, smooth, fore/aft motion without any annoying zig-zags, though it lacked a manual shift-gate. There were built-in footrests for back seat occupants. Power-folding rear seats, to expand the cargo area, are an option, and the typically small split-third-row seat had a clever folding system......I'll describe that more below, in the CARGO AREA section. My biggest complaint, inside, was probably the awkwardly high, step-on parking-brake release....my left knee kept hitting the lower-dash dash or steering wheel when I tried to use it.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The hatch lid (power-operated on my test car), like the rest of the exterior, has good sheet metal, and it opens up to reveal a fairly well-finished cargo area. There is a nice soft carpet on the floor, but the walls of the cargo area feel like hard-plastic panels. The boxy styling, of course, helps with the rear cargo room. The bean-counters, however, struck under the floor, where there resides a typical temporary spare tire. However, they definitely did not strike the third-row seats. The seats, though typically small and primarily for kids and small adults, were well-upholstered in the same nice multi-patterned leather the front two seat rows had (remember that, if you let your kids eat ice-cream cones or drink sodas back there without seat covers). They also have an ingeneous, multi-function manual-folding mechanism that is operated by choosing pull-straps marked "1" or "2". They fold upright, or flat, tilt-forward or even backwards, and have attached carpet-covers when they are down. Either seat can go in any one of several different ways. Nifty.
ON THE ROAD:
The bean-counters struck on the ignition switch....you start up the 3.5L V6 with an old-fashioned key/fob and side-column-mounted ignition switch. The engine turns over and idles fairly smoothly and quietly, though not with the same silky-smoothness of a Toyota/Honda V6. Once in gear, though, and on the road, though, this is, IMO, a surprisingly good drivetrain. The V6's 262 HP and 248 ft-lbs. of torque, judging by the response in my test car, may be a little underrated, though it is undoubtedly aided by the excellent 6-speed automatic....more on that in a minute. This engine gives you a significant shove in the back, even at fairly low RPM, so its torque band seems to be broad and flexible as well. The engne is also fairly quiet while cruising, and, even under moderately hard acceleration, neither it nor the exhaust is particularly noisy. Of course, my test car was a FWD model, with a lighter weight and less drag than the AWD version. The AWD version might not (?) be quite so responsive to one's right foot. Still, judging by its response with FWD, this engineshould easily be handle to handle AWD in any situation where the car was reasonably loaded. For most driving conditions, I don't see where the more powerful Ecoboost option is really necessary, unless you regularly drive with the car very heavily loaded, on steep grades, or at high altitudes where the Ecoboost's twin-turbos would help with thin air. So, just save your money (which will be hard enough to do in this moderately expensive vehicle anyway) and get the standard V6.
The well-designed 6-speed automatic transmission is also impressive, despite the fact that it lacks a manual-shift gate or paddles with the standard engine (shift-paddles come with the Ecoboost). It is smooth, quiet, has well-chosen ratios, transmits power very well, and kicks down instantly to a lower gear when needed, with no hesitation or lugging. It is also robust enough, mechanically, to allow a Class III Trailer-Tow package (see the website for towing details).
The chassis is not quite as impressive as the powertrain, but generally well-done. Ride comfort is firm, but still smooth and comfortable, with none of the fore/aft and porposing motions common to many SUVs. Bumps are felt a little, but there are no real jolts or loud noises. Road noise is low and well-controlled on smooth asphalt, but significant on coarse road surfaces. Wind noise is well-controlled, though not quite to Lexus standards. Steering response, though, is quite slow......not one of the car's better features, although the suspension doesn't produce much body roll. I think one reason it doesn't roll more is that the slow steering response just doesn't give enough yaw input to really put much side loads on the front suspension.
I didn't like the brakes at all.........easily the car's worst feature. The pedal was mushy, spongy, and unresponsive, though this, of course, is typical of many Ford and GM-designed trucks/SUV's. The brake pedal was also poorly-placed, not only for big, size-15 clodhopper shoes like mine, but for some smaller shoes as well. It is to high, too large, and too close to the accelerator pedal, and I had to be careful not to get my shoe hung up under the brake pedal going from gas to brake. I had less of a problem if I remembered to be careful every time, but, while driving, you sometimes have to brake in a hurry, with an instant reaction.....you can't always constantly dwell on exactly where your right foot is, or if it will get hung up.
THE VERDICT:
Though I was not satisfied with the brakes, steering response, or parking-brake pedal, I fould little else to really complain about in the Flex. It actually has more marketing problems (like the Ecoboost order policy or the lack of AWD or Ecoboost options in the SE model), than it does problems with the vehicle itself. It is a good all-around, versatile vehicle that is reasonably well-made, though, especially in the Limited models, somewhat pricey. The drivetrain, both engine and transmission, is excellent, even without the Ecoboost option, the interior is roomy and space-efficient, the trim is mostly of good quality, the underhood layout is good for accessability, and the sheet metal won't dent the first time you tap it with your finger.
Yes, there are some minuses, besides the ones I listed. Gas mileage is not particularly good, but that is often the case with V6 SUV's. The no-gas-cap filler-pipe system, without a lock, could be questionable in some neighborhoods. And, if I really wanted to nit-pick, I could bring up some things like the orange-peel on the darker paint colors and the extra charge for certain colors. But, overall, the Flex is a pretty nice vehicle, boxy but handsomely styled without a bunch of sweep-back, jelly-bean-shaped stuff.
But, though lower-line Flex models start well under 30K, the top-level versions, as I indicated, are pricey, even without AWD or the Ecoboost....you don't buy them for chump-change. The 42K my Flex listed at would easily buy a nice Lexus RX350, which is one of the most well-built, smooth, quiet, refined SUVs on the road. True, the RX350 lacks a nice third-row seat like the Flex, but, otherwise, it equals or exceeds the Flex in just about every category....especially brakes. So, while the Flex is admittedly a nice vehicle overall, you have to judge it not only by what it costs, but also by what competitiors can offer for the same price.
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-04-09 at 04:45 PM.
10-04-09, 07:11 PM
#2
Thanks for the review Mike.
I've suggested the Ford Flex to a bunch of friends who needed an SUV with third-row seating. It seems like a good option against the Toyota Highlander (which also has a wide variety of prices due to the Limited and Hybrid versions) and Honda Pilot (which does well due for Honda loyalists, but is rather rudimentary and gas guzzling compared to its competition).
You mentioned that the price variation for the models may be disappointing to someone that's looking for a car in the mid-high $20ks and ends up looking at something near $40k.
Should Ford dumb it down a bit, and leave the pricier options to a "rebadged" Lincoln/Mercury model?
I've suggested the Ford Flex to a bunch of friends who needed an SUV with third-row seating. It seems like a good option against the Toyota Highlander (which also has a wide variety of prices due to the Limited and Hybrid versions) and Honda Pilot (which does well due for Honda loyalists, but is rather rudimentary and gas guzzling compared to its competition).
You mentioned that the price variation for the models may be disappointing to someone that's looking for a car in the mid-high $20ks and ends up looking at something near $40k.
Should Ford dumb it down a bit, and leave the pricier options to a "rebadged" Lincoln/Mercury model?
10-04-09, 07:27 PM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Sure. Anytime. 
The Flex, IMO, competes well against the Highlander and Pilot, except for its somewhat lousy brakes. It also, as you note, lacks the Highlander's Hybrid option. It is unlikely to be quite as reliable as either the Highlander or Pilot, but, overall, appears pretty well made.
Interesting point. The Flex Limited version, with its classy looks and fairly plush interior, could easily be an upmarket Mercury instead of a Ford. It wouldn't take much, IMO, outside of some work on the coarse-road tire noise and too-spongy brakes, to make it into a Lincoln. I also agree, as you suggest, that Ford should consider a decontented, less-expensive base SE version.......but make the AWD and Ecoboost available as options on the base model for those who would want them without having to pay for higher-line trim.
I've suggested the Ford Flex to a bunch of friends who needed an SUV with third-row seating. It seems like a good option against the Toyota Highlander (which also has a wide variety of prices due to the Limited and Hybrid versions) and Honda Pilot (which does well due for Honda loyalists, but is rather rudimentary and gas guzzling compared to its competition).
You mentioned that the price variation for the models may be disappointing to someone that's looking for a car in the mid-high $20ks and ends up looking at something near $40k.
Should Ford dumb it down a bit, and leave the pricier options to a "rebadged" Lincoln/Mercury model?
Should Ford dumb it down a bit, and leave the pricier options to a "rebadged" Lincoln/Mercury model?
10-04-09, 08:20 PM
#5
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 4,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, this vehicle should cost $10k less. You are right, a more upscale version should be offered as a Mercury and a more stripped down as a Ford. As a consumer, I would definately be more inclined to buy a Highlander Hybrid for the same money.
10-04-09, 08:37 PM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thanks Mike, this is also another vehicle I really like and recommend. I do have to say while on paper it seems worth the money, another Ford and over $40,000 just makes me SMH.
Any torque steer? I think I missed it if you mentioned it.
I will disagree though and say the Eco Boost is a no brainer option to me.
Any torque steer? I think I missed it if you mentioned it.
I will disagree though and say the Eco Boost is a no brainer option to me.
10-05-09, 06:16 AM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Trending Topics
10-05-09, 06:25 AM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
But, for 40K, I'll take a Lexus RX350 intread.
Any torque steer? I think I missed it if you mentioned it.
I will disagree though and say the Eco Boost is a no brainer option to me.
I also said that, even though I didn't feel any significant torque steer or go all-out with it, the standard 3.5 may (?) be underrated in its actual torque. That is also the case with the VW/Audi 2.0T. Drive a standard 3.5 Flex yourself and see if you then agree.
And, last, I made the point, in the review, that there are indeed a few conditions where the Ecoboost might be worth considering.......if you often drive fully loaded, in hilly areas, or at high altitudes where the Ecoboost turbos would compensate for the thin air.
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-05-09 at 11:29 AM.
10-05-09, 12:36 PM
#10
Lexus Test Driver
But--how comparatively equipped is a $40K RX? It's certainly not fully loaded. Personally, I think it's tough to compare a Ford to a Lexus, but I'd rather take, say, a $40K Highlander than a $40K RX.
10-05-09, 03:20 PM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Well, first of all, I don't need (or necessarily want) the NAV system.....it just adds a lot of unneeded complexity to the stereo controls, and, as a pilot and Cartographer for years, I know how to read maps (I made them). So that, right there, cuts a couple of thousand off the price, though, with the Flex Limited, the NAV is standard......you don't have a choice. Nor do I particularly care for the mouse-pad control in the new LX. So, I would be looking at an RX350, probably in the high 30's....maybe 40K. Second, driving an RX is pure silk, NAV or no NAV......its smoothness, quiteness, and refinement is legandary, though the new double-wishbone suspension rides a little stiffer over bumps than I'd like. Third, although the Flex is a competent vehicle, with a good powertrain, and is no piece of junk by any means, it does have, IMO, poorly-designed brakes and brake pedal, and the RX is built like a Swiss watch. So, given the choice between a 40K RX350 and a 40K Flex, no matter what the equipment/options level, I'd still take the RX.
Now, as for comaring a 40K Highlander Limited with a 40K RX350, I have a lot of respect for the Highlander (I reviewed a Highlander Limited a while back). It is smooth, quiet, and refined, well-made and has a reasonably plush interior, but it is not an RX. You can also tell some difference in hardware and interior material quality between the two.
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-05-09 at 03:26 PM.
10-05-09, 03:32 PM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
It could also (nominally) serve as a Lincoln, but the engineers would have to work on some of the road-noise problem you get on coarse surfaces (It's quiet on smooth roads), add a power control for the seat-rake instead of a flimsy manual lever, and, of course, redo the spongy brakes.
10-05-09, 05:00 PM
#13
Pole Position
The present Limited version could easily be offered as a Mercury, probably without any changes except for redoing the brake pedal. The Ford planners, though, perhaps (?) didn't think there would be a market for it among Mercury customers.
It could also (nominally) serve as a Lincoln, but the engineers would have to work on some of the road-noise problem you get on coarse surfaces (It's quiet on smooth roads), add a power control for the seat-rake instead of a flimsy manual lever, and, of course, redo the spongy brakes.
It could also (nominally) serve as a Lincoln, but the engineers would have to work on some of the road-noise problem you get on coarse surfaces (It's quiet on smooth roads), add a power control for the seat-rake instead of a flimsy manual lever, and, of course, redo the spongy brakes.
10-05-09, 10:19 PM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
they start at 28550 http://www.fordvehicles.com/crossovers/flex/ and this is a BIG vehicle. for 10k LESS what the heck are you going to get?except you can't get an RX350 out the door for 40k. but comparing a fully loaded flex with a 'base' RX350 doesn't make much sense nor is it realistic because dealers NEVER sell base RX350s.
Personally, I think it's tough to compare a Ford to a Lexus, but I'd rather take, say, a $40K Highlander than a $40K RX.
10-05-09, 10:22 PM
#15
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
mike, great review as always.
i've had a flex as a loaner from the dealer so got to use a 'worn in' one for a couple of days. i disagree with you on the brakes. i found them, like my explorer and like the f-150 to be 'progressive' but firm once the pedal goes down if you need big stopping.
steering is light but this isn't supposed to be driven like a sports car as you know.
overall i just found the flex to be very much a 'no brainer' to drive around, big but still easy to maneuver, TONS of space, and i liked the controls.
looks are a bit funky, but not terrible.
i've had a flex as a loaner from the dealer so got to use a 'worn in' one for a couple of days. i disagree with you on the brakes. i found them, like my explorer and like the f-150 to be 'progressive' but firm once the pedal goes down if you need big stopping.
steering is light but this isn't supposed to be driven like a sports car as you know.
overall i just found the flex to be very much a 'no brainer' to drive around, big but still easy to maneuver, TONS of space, and i liked the controls.
looks are a bit funky, but not terrible.