Ford to Dump Aviator, Excursion

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:24 pm

Quote Â»Ford to dump Aviator, ExcursionAutomaker will cease production after 2005 model yearBy Amy WilsonAutomotive News / December 13, 2004DETROIT -- Ford Motor Co. will kill two of its priciest SUVs after the 2005 model year.Production of the Ford Excursion, the automaker's biggest SUV, is expected to end in September, according to an internal Ford document.A supplier source also confirmed the vehicle will be dropped from the lineup next year.Lincoln Aviator production will end in July, according to the Ford document. Lincoln will revive the nameplate with a car-based SUV in 2006.The St. Louis assembly plant that produces the Aviator and its sister Ford Explorer and Mercury Mountaineer SUVs is dropping one of its two shifts in January.Ford officials refused to comment on the demise of the two vehicles.But the end of the Excursion and Aviator is not surprising.Ford once said it would drop the fuel-hungry Excursion, a frequent target of environmentalists, after the 2004 model year.But Ford Division President Steve Lyons this year said that production would continue through at least the 2005 model year.The decision to end Excursion production comes as Ford seeks production capacity for its F-250 and F-350 Super Duty pickups, a Ford source says. Those pickups and the Excursion are assembled at the same plant in Louisville, Ky.Also, Ford plans to introduce an extended version of its Expedition SUV during the 2007 model year.Ford is scheduled to produce 15,277 Excursions in 2005, the internal document said.Lincoln's Aviator nameplate will return. But Lincoln dealers face a year-long gap without a mid-sized SUV or crossover. Good riddens!The Excursion has always offended me because it's absurdly large, and I'm sorry, but no one I've ever seen operating one can park, maneuver, or just drive the damn thing...

nismo · Post by **nismo** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:11 pm

Yeah. Those things are ridiculously big. And I agree, most people around here can't even park the Exploders, let alone an Excursion.Inder

ToolGuy · Post by **ToolGuy** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:48 am

Yeah if I wanted a school bus that does not fit in a garage, I would just go buy one. Bigger does not mean better Ford.

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 1:27 am

It's about time... Bye bye, Mr. Excursion! Don't let the door hit you on the, uhh, tailgate on the way out. C'mon now, don't feel so down about the fact that your demise is looming, Mr. Excursion - I'll give you a going away present in an attempt to try to cheer you up! I present to you one gallon of petrol! That's good for what, 10 miles, Mr. Excursion? lmaoThis is good news for us, since this thing puts people who drive smaller cars at risk... You know, the smaller cars cars like we drive? The vehicle itself is heavy enough to be quite dangerous, but when you throw a suburbanite soccer mom (or dad) type person who doesn't know how to handle all that mass behind the wheel and tries to drive it like it were a "car," it gets worse. I do feel sorry for the Joneses of Suburbia, what are they to do now once their Excursion is due for replacement? No other vehicle is as capable of shuttling little Suzie to the mall! They're going to have to *gasp* DOWNSIZE! Well, at least then, they may have something that fits in their garage. Alright now, enough sarcasm from the tree huggin' hippie.

Kari · Post by **Kari** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 1:36 am

Every time I've seen someone in an Excursion, they have absolutely no ability to keep it in their lane. Maybe it's just too wide, I don't know, but whatever. They never needed a vehicle that big anyway, and that's exactly how it was marketed: bigger is better.Good riddance, Ford-a-saurus!And on the safety note...one of Ford's larger pickup trucks is actually so heavy that if you were to just turn it over and *set* it on its roof, it would crush itself. Now that's a safe vehicle.

nismo · Post by **nismo** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:16 am

Most of the people I have seen driving Excursions are using their god forsaken cell phones! It's not like that truck is dangerous enough. Give em a phone to along with the stupidity.Inder

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:24 am

lol! Indeed! Hang up and focus on driving the stupid thing, people!

nismo · Post by **nismo** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:26 am

O, and I love it when they look at you and start yelling at you because you're drivin like an a$$. And they're the stupid ones.Inder

Robert G · Post by **Robert G** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:42 am

They can replace it with the International CXT. http://www.internationaldelive...t.asp

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:44 am

LOL!I remember the thread on that thing...I hope this move by Ford shows the beginning of a new tread...if not a progressive move back to cars, at least a move towards smaller and more efficent trucks and SUV's...One can only hope....

futseal04 · Post by **futseal04** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 3:12 am

I want an Excursion to sit right next to my H1....not because they are practical, but because they tick people off. A big brush guard on the front of each, and just try to cut me off.....

ToolGuy · Post by **ToolGuy** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 4:28 am

Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»I do feel sorry for the Joneses of Suburbia, what are they to do now once their Excursion is due for replacement? No other vehicle is as capable of shuttling little Suzie to the mall! They're going to have to *gasp* DOWNSIZE! Well, at least then, they may have something that fits in their garage. Ha Ha!! Yes what will they do? International Harvester or Caterpillar make large vehicles, maybe their sales will take off. Most only haul one person at a time and move too slow, so that will fit along the lines of most of these drivers. Freightliner, Mack, Kenworth.................

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 6:57 pm

...and don't forget the Peterbilt's! A local hauling broker has a couple of beautiful Pete's that are all decked out with chrome trim, aluminum beds that shine like chrome, and tons of lights. He wins all kinds of commercial truck shows with them. I was on the highway heading out of town one day and saw one of them well behind me in the mirror (they are custom painted and can't be mistaken) as I headed through the tunnel. At the end of the tunnel is a long, steep upward grade that most cars lose momentum on. The road widens to 3 lanes and I downshift and start to head up the hill around 70 MPH (posted limit is 45 MPH). The truck caught me--on the way up the hill--and blew past me, continuing to gain speed. I work with a fleet of commercial trucks, and I figured that the bed HAD to be empty for him to be just cruising up the hill like that. As he continued to get ahead of me I looked in the back of the truck (a dump truck) and saw that he had a full load of slag in the bed. That's about 46,000 lbs of material and probably 25,000 lbs of truck! Later that week, I found out from a guy I work with whose dad drives for that company that the truck that blew my doors off with a full load was the company owner's new Pete. The thing has 700+ HP and some ungodly amount of torque with the new CAT diesel motor--that he sent out to have specially tuned. That thing is amazing.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:01 pm

Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»I want an Excursion to sit right next to my H1....not because they are practical, but because they tick people off. A big brush guard on the front of each, and just try to cut me off.....H E L L yeah! I've wanted an Excursion since they first came out but they cost so darn much. I would have the engine tuned and the interior fully customized. Oh well, they can pull the plug on them but there will always be the used ones to play with!!!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:04 pm

Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»I do feel sorry for the Joneses of Suburbia, what are they to do now once their Excursion is due for replacement? No other vehicle is as capable of shuttling little Suzie to the mall! They're going to have to *gasp* DOWNSIZE!Yeah--to a Navigator!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:18 pm

Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»They never needed a vehicle that big anyway, and that's exactly how it was marketed: bigger is better....and who exactly are WE to decide for everyone else how big THEIR vehicle needs to be??? >>Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»And on the safety note...one of Ford's larger pickup trucks is actually so heavy that if you were to just turn it over and *set* it on its roof, it would crush itself. Now that's a safe vehicle. This would have to be something along the lines of a commercial-duty F-650 or F-750. And if one of those ends up on its' roof, there are going to be MUCH bigger things to worry about than the roof collapsing.In any case, the cancellation of the Excursion and the shifting around of the smaller truck platforms is most likely due to yet another reduction of the CAFE standards that are expected to be enacted sometime by 2010. There is talk that trucks and truck-based vehicles will no longer be excluded from the average or that they will somehow be factored in. I thank God that they were excluded in the first place because three-quarters of the population would be condemned to driving Ford Aspires and Geo Metros.

michaelgt · Post by **michaelgt** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:27 pm

I am glad Ford is dropping the Excursion. That will put the only 3/4 ton SUV a GMC Yukon XL or Suburban (and give the market to GM). I am glad that I drive a GMC, all of you that complain cannot tell the difference between my 8.1 V8, 340 hp, 450 ft-lbs torque and a "regular" Yukon XL. Yes, I am lucky to get 12 mpg highway with this thing. However, I have never been successful in stringing multiple Vibes together (train-like) to pull my 31ft travel trailer and seat 6 people. Additionally, I think there are many that can drive these vehicles better than drivers of other cars.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 12:08 pm

Quote, originally posted by michaelgt Â»Yes, I am lucky to get 12 mpg highway with this thing. However, I have never been successful in stringing multiple Vibes together (train-like) to pull my 31ft travel trailer and seat 6 people. Additionally, I think there are many that can drive these vehicles better than drivers of other cars. Begin Sarcasm>>No, NEVER!!! Drivers of teeny tiny little microcars that get one billion MPG are ALWAYS better drivers and are the only people who deserve to be happy in life. How dare you buy a large vehicle that you don't really need. You could have drove those 6 people to and from your destination in 2 separate Toyota Priuses and hired a hybrid-electric NASA shuttle transporter crawler to move your trailer for you. You Earth-hating resource waster you!End Sarcasm>>

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:55 pm

ha ha!http://cartalk.com/content/fea....html

Kari · Post by **Kari** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:50 pm

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»...and who exactly are WE to decide for everyone else how big THEIR vehicle needs to be??? >>Okay then...why might they need a vehicle that big? Why wouldn't an Expedition do? LOLAnd, BTW...you can drive 7 passengers (8 people including the driver) around in a Trailblazer or Envoy EXT or XL. Feeds the need for a "large SUV" without it being too large for a conventional parking space, and plenty of passenger space.

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:35 am

Perhaps we should all just ditch our tiny little tin can Vibes and purchase one of these eh? http://www.slate.com/Features/...2.asp*sigh*

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:02 am

Put me on the waiting list!Too bad this that site was created by the infamously one-sided Slate.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 8:24 am

Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»Okay then...why might they need a vehicle that big? This is ducking the issue once again. The question was---who are we to decide how big someone else's car needs to be? You're still trying to make the decision for other in an attempt to make them comply with your standards by force. I've got Gorbie holding here on the other line waiting for your OK to reassmble that Central Planning Committee. Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»Why wouldn't an Expedition do? LOLMaybe this is funny to you, but I see no humor in it at all. Ok, let's look at this logically. I believe the Excursion was built to accomodate 9 people (driver + passengers). The Expedition was designed for 7. If you need to transport a sizable group of people, the extra space and seating capacity will be needed. I had a friend in high school who was one of 7 children in his family. If the family was to go somewhere, they needed space for 9 people. The Expedition wouldn't do. Also, as was brought up earlier, some people have heavy hauling needs. The Expedition would not be able to handle this, either.I like how you make is seem that the Expedition is acceptable to you. Now that the Excursion has been discontinued, how acceptable is it now? Will you lead your vehicular Central Planning crusade against this vehicle now, too?Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»And, BTW...you can drive 7 passengers (8 people including the driver) around in a TrailblazerNot true. It's 7 people total. Well, really 6 1/2. It's set up for 2-3-2 seating, with the middle seat having a smaller than usual middle seating postion in the bench seat. I couldn't fit comfortably in that postion with 2 other adults in the row, if I could fit at all in that position. If I can't fit there, then it isn't really a seat. Put 7 adults in that thing and drive them on a 500 mile trip and see how happy they are when you get there. You'd be piled on top of each other with no room to move for hours---I sure as hell wouldn't want to do it unless I was seated in one of the front seats. I think that same trip with an Excursion would produce much happier and comfortable adult passengers. Unless they were hypersensitive eco-hippies.See pic of Trailblazer EXT interior here, courtesy of Chevy's website:http://www.chevrolet.com/i/gal...2.jpgQuote, originally posted by Kari Â»or Envoy EXT or XL.There is no Envoy EXT, according to GMC's website. And the Envoy is, buy the website's own advertisements, a mid-sized SUV. The Envoy XL will fit 7 people total also, but then there's no room for cargo because the rear seat is in the cargo area. I guess everyone has to go on vacation with no luggage then. Overall, these alternatives make sense for a commuter carpool, but do NOT fill the needs that vehicles like the Excursion or Suburban fill. They are not direct product substitutes. And the Envoy XL comes standard with a 4.2L inline six cylinder engine, hardly going to provide enough power to haul 7 adults, their luggage, and tow the 7,000 lb trailer that it's rated to tow safely on vacation on a highway. That is just plain unrealistic. Oh, but there's an available 5.3L V8 available? Please don't even go there. We have one of those in our newest crew truck at work and that thing is a total dog. It can hardly pull an IR air compressor trailer uphill around here. That motor is being so strained on a regular basis that I really don't see it lasting very long. On the other hand, we have several other crew trucks that have the Chevy 454 (7.4L) or Ford 460 (7.5L) that are between 10-15 years old and are approaching 200,000 miles on them. They have the same heavy utility bodies on them, are used for the same duty, and haul the same tools. These newer, smaller Vortec engines are providing adequate horsepower, but fall short in torque. The extra displacement of the older engines made a noticable difference. The only remaining alternative is the current mix of diesel engines offered in new pickup trucks. These engines are hit-or-miss for quality, generally speaking, and they don't provide the HP for safe highway operation in a commercial truck. They do, however, have enough torque to pull a house off it's foundation. Also, diesel fuel is only available at a fraction of gas stations around here. You have to drive miles out of your way to get fuel.Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»Feeds the need for a "large SUV"No it doesn't, as I've already explained. You can't just replace a "large SUV" with a "mid-sized SUV" and expect all to be equivalent.Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»without it being too large for a conventional parking spaceAn Excursion will fit happily in a conventional parking space (around here anyway, local requirements for parking stalls will vary by locality), provided that the driver is willing to put forth the effort to do so.Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»and plenty of passenger space.I've already addressed this too, and in fairness, my final verdict on this criteria is that it is subjective. It will depend on how many people you need to transport and for what purpose they are being transported.To sum up my thoughts, I have to say that the alternative vehicles that you suggest aren't adequate substitutes for the roles that the Excursion/Suburban were meant to fill. However, if you were to assert that some Excursion/Suburban drivers use their vehicles for purposes that they weren't meant for (i.e. the daily commuter vehicle for one person), then I would agree with you. Yes, I would say that the vehicle was being misused in that case, and I'll even go so far to say that those persons are foolish. But there is no law against being foolish and you really can't stop people from acting that way. Perhaps we shouldn't even try. At some point in their lives, people like Thomas Edison, Albert Einstien, and Galileo were thought foolish too, just to name a few.

Sputnik · Post by **Sputnik** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 8:43 am

Why is this thread starting to look like the Political Asylum?? *ahem - references to Gorbie...* Lets all play nice here...

futseal04 · Post by **futseal04** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:21 am

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â» And the Envoy XL comes standard with a 4.2L inline six cylinder engine, hardly going to provide enough power to haul 7 adults, their luggage, and tow the 7,000 lb trailer that it's rated to tow safely on vacation on a highway. That is just plain unrealistic. Oh, but there's an available 5.3L V8 available? Please don't even go there. We have one of those in our newest crew truck at work and that thing is a total dog. It can hardly pull an IR air compressor trailer uphill around here. That motor is being so strained on a regular basis that I really don't see it lasting very long. On the other hand, we have several other crew trucks that have the Chevy 454 (7.4L) or Ford 460 (7.5L) that are between 10-15 years old and are approaching 200,000 miles on them. They have the same heavy utility bodies on them, are used for the same duty, and haul the same tools. These newer, smaller Vortec engines are providing adequate horsepower, but fall short in torque. The extra displacement of the older engines made a noticable difference. The only remaining alternative is the current mix of diesel engines offered in new pickup trucks. These engines are hit-or-miss for quality, generally speaking, and they don't provide the HP for safe highway operation in a commercial truck. They do, however, have enough torque to pull a house off it's foundation. Also, diesel fuel is only available at a fraction of gas stations around here. You have to drive miles out of your way to get fuel.I have to ask....which Vortecs have you been driving?First, lets look at the evolution of the common 1/4 ton Chevy motor.After the quadrajunk years, Chevy put their TBI setup on the 262 V6 (4.3), the 305 and 350. Output for the 350 was 210Hp and 300 lb/ft.In 1992 the 4.3HO was introduced in the Sonoma GT (a Syclone knockoff). It raised the output from 160/225 to 195/250. (Notice how these aren't that far from the TBI 350).THe main difference was the fuel delivery. It used CPi, or central port injection, and was the first Vortec engine. It also had revised heads.1996 marked the debut of the Vortec V8's. The 305 went to 230/285, and the 350 to 255/330. The 4.3 also got a bump, to 200/260.In 1999, the LS1 based small-blocks made their debut. The 5.3 (327 for all intents and purposes) bowed with 275/315. HP was higher, but torque was off, but only by 15 from the older Vortec. The main difference is that torque peaked at 4000RPM, rather than the older 2800. Off the line grunt is a little less, but the new truck took off where the old one left off. THe newest 5.3's are rated at 285/325.....and the 6.0 is rated at 300/360 (in its lowest output state....the Escalade has 345/380). My father-in-law has a wrecker service, and has a couple of trucks with the new Vortecs. He says that they are worlds better than the old ones....and as for reliability, there was the piston slap issue early on, but has been resolved recently.As for diesels, my in-laws daily driver is a GMC 3/4 ton with the Duramax diesel and the Allison 5sp auto. All I can say is.....nice ride. The Duramax will pull 100 gallons of gas in the bed, a 25' boat, 5 people, and enough beer to sink the boat without even getting bogged down. It doesn't even notice anything less than 10,000 pounds. As for quality, he has seen many with over 200k and still going strong.The Envoy XL is kinda a dog with the 4.2. However, drive a regular one with it, and you will be a believer. THe XL is about 500 lbs heavier than the regular Envoy. In fact, check the dimensions.....it is longer than a Tahoe. The 327 is a great motor for that car.As for big blocks....all i can say is 495cu in, 340HP and 450 lb/ft of torque. I know nothing short of a crate Rat motor is going to touch that.Where am I going with all of this? Vortecs are great engines, and now that the 5.3 is available in FWD trim (in the new GP GXP seen here:http://www.caranddriver.com/ar...=8973)I have an engine swap option when I graduate. Also, 99% of all people in a humongous SUV could do just as well in a Vibe.

Kari · Post by **Kari** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 1:54 pm

I was not trying to make anyone's car decisions for them. You chose to take it that way. Yes, there are reasons why someone might need a vehicle that large. If someone actually needs it, then more power to them. I just have a feeling 99% of them are probably being used to haul Johnny and Suzie to soccer practice, when something not quite so gargantuan would get the job done just as easily. Therefore, I feel it a fair assumption that the majority likely does not "need" it...they just "want" it.I am aware there is no Envoy EXT. That's the Trailblazer model, and I just wanted to give both, and gave them in their respective orders. Both are the same vehicle with different badging and different model designations.Have you been in one of those two vehicles or sat in the rearmost seat? It's actually quite comfortable and much more roomy than one might think.I believe an Excursion is too long for a conventional parking space, according to what I read when the vehicle first came out. One of the Ford trucks that I see quite regularly here is also too long and sticks about 2-3 feet out the end of the space, making it sometimes difficult to maneuver around in tight parking lots.The Suburban isn't as large as the Excursion, as far as I know. The Expedition seems closer to the Suburban and the Explorer more like the Trailblazer, with the Escape as the small SUV.The exterior size of the Excursion was one of its biggest original selling points and something that a huge deal was made of when it first came out, and IMHO, it's just excessive.That opinion has nothing whatsoever to do with my political beliefs.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:38 pm

First off, thanks for the technical info. But I don't think that we're really on the same page here with the use of the trucks.Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»I have to ask....which Vortecs have you been driving?I have a correction to make to an earlier statement. The truck to which I was referring doesn't have the 5.3L Vortec, it is the 6.0L Vortec. Everything else still applies.It is a 2003 GMC 3500 regular cab truck. It was sent to an aftermarket truck body supplier/installer (Reading, if I remember correctly) to have a full utility body put on it. Within that aftermarket body is a 100 gallon fuel tank that our mechanics installed. The body is quite big as the truck now stands about 10-11 feet high. Our company owner has recently informed me that he's looking to replace another crew truck, but will not be getting another GMC/Chevy to do it. He's now looking for an F-450. I suspect that this is largely due to the problems we've had towing with the GMC 3500. This is despite the good discount that we get on the GM vehicles through a business partnership that our company maintains.I also used to regularly drive a 1994 GMC 3500 that was modified into a 3 Ton dump truck. That truck generally runs great, but the transmission (5 sp manual) keeps giving us problems. It has the 454 with a Vortec intake. That truck and a 1997 with the same engine have been developing the same problem. The rotor pops up, rotates, then falls back into position knocking the timing out of whack and the thing hardly runs. This has happened twice in the '97 and once in the '94. The '97 is a high-mileage pickup that is used by one of our estimators for their job and is equipped with a plow and salt spreader for the winter. We've owned it since it was new.We have one diesel pickup, a 1991 F-350 Super Duty. It has the inline 6 that was made by International. It sucks. Big time. It continues to run, rather well in fact, despite our wishes that it would die. Lots of torque, no HP. Slower than molasses in January and doesn't like to climb hills.Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»First, lets look at the evolution of the common 1/4 ton Chevy motor.That's all very interesting and everything, but as you can see, a 1/4 ton truck really has no place in our company. Our lightest duty truck is probably the parts runner/service truck that our mechanics use for service calls and running for parts. It a 1991 F-350 with the 460 and a 4 speed manual. It is either set up as a 3/4 ton or a 1 ton, I can't remember (we have 22 trucks currently so it is tough to keep all the numbers straight), but man, does that thing RUN. We have a 1992 F-350 (460 w/4 speed automatic) that ran all messed up and was such a dog until last winter. Our mechanics tore the motor all apart and found out that some of the cam lobes were badly worn. After a tune up, new cam, and carb rebuild, the thing smokes the duallies! I think it currently has about 180,000 miles on the original motor and tranny. It also has a large utility body on it.Yeah, the new Vortecs probably do pretty well in passenger vehicles and light trucks, but what is being offered today cannot match the older motors for medium to heavy duty trucks for commercial use. Now this makes me laugh. You say this:Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»As for diesels, my in-laws daily driver is a GMC 3/4 ton with the Duramax diesel and the Allison 5sp auto. All I can say is.....nice ride. The Duramax will pull 100 gallons of gas in the bed, a 25' boat, 5 people, and enough beer to sink the boat without even getting bogged down.Then you go and say something like this:Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»Also, 99% of all people in a humongous SUV could do just as well in a Vibe.Now we all know that the large SUV's are based off of the larger trucks. So do you harass your inlaws about using an "unnecessary vehicle" as their daily driver? I'm going to have to assume that your inlaws don't have to tow around "100 gallons of gas in the bed, a 25' boat, 5 people, and enough beer to sink the boat" every day for their daily commute. If they do, please tell me what exactly it is that they do for a living because I want to do it too. And while we're at it, how come nobody ever bothers all the union guys who travel to work every day in a full size pickup, by themselves, with absolutely nothing or next to nothing in the bed? Why are they always given a pass on driving a big gas guzzler unnecessarily?Oh, almost forgot:Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»As for big blocks....all i can say is 495cu in, 340HP and 450 lb/ft of torque. I know nothing short of a crate Rat motor is going to touch that.I know that you can build a 350 small block to be able to match that, and probably for less money too.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:14 pm

Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»I was not trying to make anyone's car decisions for them. You chose to take it that way.Well, when you advocate dropping a particular model just because you don't like it, or this is done on a mass scale (as has been done with the Excursion and is ongoing with the Hummer H2), then you are effectively making people's car decisions for them. I'm not going to go into that any further because someone's got the site's "five" breathing down my neck now. I suppose that it is now against GenVibe law to mention historical figures. Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»I just have a feeling 99% of them are probably being used to haul Johnny and Suzie to soccer practice, when something not quite so gargantuan would get the job done just as easily. Therefore, I feel it a fair assumption that the majority likely does not "need" it...they just "want" it.I have a feeling that the figure is signifacantly less than that, but is still high enough to portray this type of image. So you have a point. But I still say who cares? It's their car, right? They pay for it, pay the luxury tax on it, the gas guzzler tax on it, and have to pay at the pump each time they fill it up. So who are we to tell someone else what they can or can't drive for whatever reason they want to? Isn't it a violation of their rights to make them drive something other than what they just "want" to? How would we all feel if some special interest group just came along one day who hated the Vibe for whatever reason and pressured GM to drop the vehicle just because they didn't like the reasons why we drove it? I see this as a case of "do unto others as you'd like to have done to you". I know I wouldn't like it, so I don't do it to others.Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»Have you been in one of those two vehicles or sat in the rearmost seat? It's actually quite comfortable and much more roomy than one might think.No, actually I haven't. If I make it to the International Auto Show downtown this year, I will make it a point to do so. Keep in mind that "roomy" is relative. I'm 5'11", 245 lbs, and somewhat broad in the shoulders (I wear a 46 long suit coat). What is roomy to a smaller woman will probably not be roomy to me. I consider a 1966 Cadillac Series 75 Fleetwood to be roomy. A few years ago I tried to sit in the driver's seat of a Mazda Miata and could not fit despite my best efforts to force myself to fit.As for the Suburban, I used it as a point of reference because it can be configured to also fit 9 people--or at least it used to.Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»The exterior size of the Excursion was one of its biggest original selling points and something that a huge deal was made of when it first came out, and IMHO, it's just excessive.That opinion has nothing whatsoever to do with my political beliefs.I completely believe you. However, it is my heartfelt belief that the size of the Excursion is not the main gripe of it's detractors here. It is just a side complaint. The big issue is the vehicle's poor fuel economy--and I strongly believe that that issue is tightly woven with political beliefs. There is no other reason for anyone to really care what the MPG rating of someone else's vehicle is. If the Excursion were only available as some hybrid model that got 85 MPG, I doubt that hardly anyone would complain about it's size.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:21 pm

Quote, originally posted by Sputnik Â»Why is this thread starting to look like the Political Asylum?? *ahem - references to Gorbie...* Lets all play nice here... *ahem* Oh, Iam soooo sorry that I got out of my little cage and happened to wonder into another part of this site that it has become quite apparant that I am not welcome in. My sincerest apologies to all. I guess I shall now return to my dark little cave since I'm not allowed in here. Please, don't mind my knuckle marks on the ground as I return to my cage in the cave.*ahem, ahem, ahem* Please also don't mind my clearing my throat, I think I'm getting pneumonia from being in my cold, dark, damp cave for so long.

jonathonbarton · Post by **jonathonbarton** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:22 pm

Welp, I skipped the last 4 messages because they looked like No Win Situation Argumentative Crap.SO, on the lighter side, I seem to recall seeing 'internal documents' regarding Ford and Jeep vehicles a couple years ago...FORDThey started with the Explorer. Seats 5. An Explorer is just one guy.Then they added the Expedition. Seats 7. A small party of people.Then they added the Excursion. Seats 9. A larger party of people.The document that I say proposed an EVEN LARGER vehicle.. Seating 11 comfortably.The Exodus. Jeep?They were to follow on to the Liberty with the other two French Revolution Values.Liberte - already in production.The Egalite - it's *exactly* like every other SUV on the road in every respect.and...the Fraternite - Seats 27, a pony-keg rack on the roof, and only runs on Friday and Saturday nights.

Kari · Post by **Kari** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:23 pm

All I did was make a comment that they didn't need it, which, as you agreed, most of them don't. There was absolutely no intention to insinuate that I or anyone else on this board is going to form a special interest group to try to get them off the road or even thinks such things should be done. I don't think such things should be done. I personally think the vehicle is unnecessarily large, but I'm not about to tell someone else they can't drive it. I just made the comment that they didn't need it. And wished it good riddance because maybe now less people will be out there in their Excursions taking their half out of the middle.

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:28 pm

Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»I was not trying to make anyone's car decisions for them. You chose to take it that way.That's how I see it, Kari... There is a difference between making a decision for someone vs. giving advice on reasonable alternatives if that person really doesn't need what they are about to buy...Quote Â»Yes, there are reasons why someone might need a vehicle that large. If someone actually needs it, then more power to them. I just have a feeling 99% of them are probably being used to haul Johnny and Suzie to soccer practice, when something not quite so gargantuan would get the job done just as easily. Therefore, I feel it a fair assumption that the majority likely does not "need" it...they just "want" it.Absolutely. I have, on rare occasions, spotted an Excursion or two that were actually beat all the heck... Those guys used them! They probably spend their days on a farm, construction site, whatever - and NOT the mall! My hat's off to that 1% who have a legitimate need and purpose for such a vehicle. Now, here's what I'm wondering... Does this couple really need to own a behemoth SUV? Let's say, a mid 30's couple, living in some ritzy suburban neighborhood with Do they really need one? No - a midsize sedan, wagon, etc would probably do anything they would use the SUV for. But they want one, since it's apparently a status symbol in this day and age - spending $60K on an excessive vehicle that you don't need which destroys the environment makes you "cool" and stuff... And, I got a chuckle out of your "eco-hippie" statement there, Stang. I'm truly sorry if those of "my type" offend anyone... I guess I'm a bad person for being environmentally sensitive and living a minimalist lifestyle eh? At least that's the way I end up feeling most of the time, due to this society I live in which loves all things excessive... My most sincere apologies on behalf of myself and all others like me; for we're just trying to keep this planet capable of sustaining life for your future generations. I'm only one person and probably the things I do won't amount to squat, but I still try... I guess I'm in the wrong for thinking about humanity as a whole, instead of just thinking about myself. I'll know better next time. That's ok though, keep on laughing - because you won't be able to for that much longer. Soon enough, you'll find those of my kind will be getting the last laugh, I guarantee it...I'll have a smile on my face when I'm gassing up my Prius and a SUV owner beside me is crying about how gas hit five bucks a gallon... Boo hoo, they can't afford to gas up their beloved 10 MPG gettin' Ford Valdez that they don't use and didn't need in the first place. And it isn't a mater of if it happens, but more a matter of when it happens, and that day is probably coming sooner than anyone realizes. I will feel bad when that day comes for those who actually need and use a large vehicle, I am well aware of how only certain vehicles will do a particular job for someone.. But for those who don't need it, they've done it to themselves.And when that day comes, don't blame the environmentalists... Try pointing the finger where it belongs - at your "friends" in the oil industry. Just my $0.02 Canadian!

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:41 pm

>There is a difference between want and need. My point was, and always has been, that even if we don't like the size, or MPG, or whatever about a given vehicle, we have no right to tell people what they can drive whether they want to drive it or they actually need to drive it.Just admit that the thing drives you absolutely bonkers purely because it gets poor gas mileage and you can't stand it. You dance a tight circle around that admission and practically carry a sign advertising it when you make comments like this:Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»And wished it good riddance because maybe now less people will be out there in their Excursions taking their half out of the middle. So just come out and say it. At least it would be an honest admission.Things like this make me want to go out and buy 2 of them. I'd have one modified to be right hand drive so I could put down both driver's windows, sit on the window ledge with one arm and one leg in each Excursion, and drive BOTH of them to work and school every day--ALL BY MYSELF!!! There! I'm being honest. lol.

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:45 pm

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»Things like this make me want to go out and buy 2 of them.Things like that make me want to go down to the Toyota dealer tomorrow and put some cash down on a Prius.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:31 pm

Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»And, I got a chuckle out of your "eco-hippie" statement there, Stang. Well I'm glad you could laugh at it, it's not meant as an insult. I've been using that term in my personal life for over 10 years now and I've used it several times around here before. Joatmon likes that term too. I think he used it in his personal profile as his real name for a while, but now it's Ned Flanders---another term I threw at him in a fit of rage one day, lol. Good thing for me that he's been a pretty good soul at tolerating me all this time.Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»I'm truly sorry if those of "my type" offend anyone... I guess I'm a bad person for being environmentally sensitive and living a minimalist lifestyle eh? No, not at all! In a way, I admire you for being able to do it. I really don't care about what lifestyle others choose to live--more power to you. I just get hyper when others try to push their way of living on me. You may find this hard to believe, but I actually try to be environmentally friendly as much as I can. I spend the extra money to buy those new low energy consuming flurescent light bulbs for my house, I only turn on lights in the room that I'm in, I have my thermostat set right this minute at 58 degrees (mostly because I can't afford the gas bill), I recycle paper and metals whenever I can, I even recycle my used motor oil. I don't even have timers on my lights at home--if I'm out in the evening all the lights are out. My refrigerator is set at the setting that uses the least energy possible but still keeps foods at a safe temperature. I avoid making multiple short trips for things that I can make one trip for to save gas. I even drive a Vibe . Perhaps that will help clear up some misconceptions that you have about me. I've said many times before that I'm probably the most misunderstood person on this site, so I forgive you.Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»My most sincere apologies on behalf of myself and all others like me; for we're just trying to keep this planet capable of sustaining life for your future generations.Oh no, no, no. Those are our future generations. What is being done today by everyone will affect everyone's descendants, not just mine. So please, don't do anything solely on my behalf, my family has survived so much that I won't even begin to get into on our own already, we'll be just fine in the future.Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»I'm only one person and probably the things I do won't amount to squat, but I still try... I guess I'm in the wrong for thinking about humanity as a whole, instead of just thinking about myself. I'll know better next time. Now I know that you know me better than that. I know you've read my posts in other parts of this site--namely my little cave--and you should know better by now.Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»I'll have a smile on my face when I'm gassing up my Prius and a SUV owner beside me is crying about how gas hit five bucks a gallon... Boo hoo, they can't afford to gas up their beloved 10 MPG gettin' Ford Valdez that they don't use and didn't need in the first place. Well I think you have this one all wrong. Not only does that convey a malicious attitude, but it's not very likely either. The majority of those people who can shell out $60K for an Excursion can afford to pay $5 per gallon... and more. It is you and I who will be boo hooing over $5 per gallon gas. They'll be smiling at us because they can look down their long noses at us and continue to think of us as garbage because paying $5 a gallon for gas puts a significant hurting on our wallet while they can afford to repeatedly fill their Excursion and light a few $100 bills on fire in front of us to boot.Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»And when that day comes, don't blame the environmentalists... Try pointing the finger where it belongs - at your "friends" in the oil industry. A big misunderstanding again. I have no friends in the oil industry, I assure you of that. I've been suggesting for years that oil companies invest in some alternative and acceptable way of powering transportation. Believe me, there are few things I'd love to see more than the economic downfall of all the oil barons in the Middle East. I'd love for Americans to globally market an alternative fuel technology that saves people money, is friendlier to the environment, and makes all the oil in the Middle East virtually worthless. I'd like even more to keep that technology as domestic only for about a decade first, as payback for the rest of the world throwing stones at us in our recent times of suffering. I really think that American companies could make a lot more money off of producing and marketing such technology than off of oil.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:37 pm

Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»Things like that make me want to go down to the Toyota dealer tomorrow and put some cash down on a Prius. Hey, I wouldn't mind owning a new Prius. The new ones look nice and are actually pretty neat. Someone a few streets over from me has one and I like it. It would probably be a pretty good commuter vehicle for me. I'd like to see some performance numbers on it before I'd buy one though. The drawbacks are that the additional cost actually doesn't outweigh the fuel savings and around here the dealers can't keep them on the lot so you have to order one and wait 6 months for it. Plus, most dealers have attached a premium to the already high price tag because they're selling well right now. I refuse to pay premiums on cars, I only buy them with discounts.

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 8:29 pm

The reason I said above "your" future generations was because I'm committed to never reproducing... So I probably won't have future generations. lol! Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»I'd like to see some performance numbers on it before I'd buy one though. Toyota quotes 0 to 60 in.... uhh... In reality it probably isn't *that* much slower than my base/auto Vibe. And the electric motors are torquey when they're running... The dude I carpool with is always making cracks at me because I keep saying I want one... "You'll never get it above 40!" Here we were the other morning, cruising about 60, and this Prius flys past us... "They don't do over 40 huh?" lol

futseal04 · Post by **futseal04** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:35 pm

Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»First off, thanks for the technical info. But I don't think that we're really on the same page here with the use of the trucks.I have a correction to make to an earlier statement. The truck to which I was referring doesn't have the 5.3L Vortec, it is the 6.0L Vortec. Everything else still applies.It is a 2003 GMC 3500 regular cab truck. It was sent to an aftermarket truck body supplier/installer (Reading, if I remember correctly) to have a full utility body put on it. Within that aftermarket body is a 100 gallon fuel tank that our mechanics installed. The body is quite big as the truck now stands about 10-11 feet high. Our company owner has recently informed me that he's looking to replace another crew truck, but will not be getting another GMC/Chevy to do it. He's now looking for an F-450. I suspect that this is largely due to the problems we've had towing with the GMC 3500. This is despite the good discount that we get on the GM vehicles through a business partnership that our company maintains.If you get a F450, then the only motor options are the Powerstroke and the V10, which is really comparing apples to oranges.Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»Now we all know that the large SUV's are based off of the larger trucks. So do you harass your inlaws about using an "unnecessary vehicle" as their daily driver? I'm going to have to assume that your inlaws don't have to tow around "100 gallons of gas in the bed, a 25' boat, 5 people, and enough beer to sink the boat" every day for their daily commute. If they do, please tell me what exactly it is that they do for a living because I want to do it too. They own a service station, which means they have to tow things on a regular basis. Their Duramax tows everything from John Deere tractors (real ones...not lawn mowers), to several cars on a flatbed, to their boats. So they have one not as a luxury, but because they actually USE it. It goes off roading with us during deer season....in fact, we used it to pull my brother-in-laws truck up a rocky hill that he got stuck on.I am not opposed to people having large SUV's and trucks if they actually need them. But when I see a soccer mom with one kid in the car talking on a cell phone careening down the highway, it irritates me, especially when I am on the motorcycle.Quote, originally posted by Stang2Vibe Â»I know that you can build a 350 small block to be able to match that, and probably for less money too.I know......there are 383's out there that get that kind of power. However, from the factory, or a factory crate motor, that is about all you are going to get.Oops...I almost forgot about the Chevy 572 crate motor. Try that one out in a tow vehicle.....12498827 ZZ572/720R Deluxe Crate EngineThe Deluxe version of the ZZ572/720R starts with the Base ZZ572/720R engine and adds the new tall deck single plane intake manifold and 1090 CFM King Demon carburetor delivers enough air and fuel to make 720 hp and 685 lb-ft of torque. The Deluxe 572 also includes the dip stick, dip stick tube, water pump and Distributor.Technical Notes: ZZ 572/720R Deluxe Technical InformationHorsepower 720 @ 6250 RPMTorque 685 Ft. Lbs. @ 4500 RPMMax. Recommended RPM 6750 RPM

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:58 pm

Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»I am not opposed to people having large SUV's and trucks if they actually need them. But when I see a soccer mom with one kid in the car talking on a cell phone careening down the highway, it irritates me, especially when I am on the motorcycle.*ding ding ding!* That's exactly what I've been trying to say. And for me, being out there on a motorcycle would scare the crap out of me - I can imagine how those people would kinda get to you just a little bit...

futseal04 · Post by **futseal04** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:12 pm

Actually, soccer moms in SUV's aren't the worst. THe worst I have ever seen are minivan moms with NASCAR stickers on them. I guess they actually think they are Dale Jr in their Caravan.........

Kari · Post by **Kari** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:40 pm

Please don't try to tell me what I think or why I don't like things. I don't like the Excursion because I feel its size is excessive. If they want to pay $50 to fill it up with gas, that's their perrogative, but it is not my main beef with the vehicle. As I said in my initial post, way back in the day, about a week ago, my beef is with the people who buy them and can't drive them because they're just so large.End of story.

ColonelPanic · Post by **ColonelPanic** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 11:24 pm

Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»Actually, soccer moms in SUV's aren't the worst. THe worst I have ever seen are minivan moms with NASCAR stickers on them. I guess they actually think they are Dale Jr in their Caravan.........I'm not TAILGATING, I'm DRAFTING! heh

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 11:49 am

Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»Toyota quotes 0 to 60 in.... uhh... In reality it probably isn't *that* much slower than my base/auto Vibe. And the electric motors are torquey when they're running... I've read that. The torque from the electric motors sounded really impressive, although I have no way to mentally reference the torque measurement that they gave to ft/lbs like we're all used to with conventional internal combustion engines.Quote, originally posted by ColonelPanic Â»The dude I carpool with is always making cracks at me because I keep saying I want one... "You'll never get it above 40!" Here we were the other morning, cruising about 60, and this Prius flys past us... "They don't do over 40 huh?" lolLol. Maybe that one was modded? lol.

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 12:06 pm

Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»I am not opposed to people having large SUV's and trucks if they actually need them. But when I see a soccer mom with one kid in the car talking on a cell phone careening down the highway, it irritates me, especially when I am on the motorcycle.Well that is completely understandable. But in all honesty, a 60 MPH highway collision between a Prius and a motorcycle will still produce the same net result as a motorcycle collision with an Excursion. I understand about people who cannot drive/control a large vehicle. My g/f's sister has an Audi A4 that is "too big" for their mom to drive comfortably. She can't even park it straight in their driveway. So she putts around happily in her little Civic. My g/f can't even handle a mid-sized vehicle. She says that an Accord is way too big. They're just all used to tiny little disposable cars and have irrational fears about anything even slightly larger. Good Lord, I think they'd drop over from a heart attack if they even thought about driving something like an Excursion! I like big vehicles and generally prefer them to small ones. I also hate having other people drive my vehicle because most people don't take the time or effort to care for a car like I do. So to keep my g/f, my family, or her family from driving my car, I either have to buy something so big that none of them will even think about driving it, or as is the case with my Vibe, buy a car with a manual transmission because that is another thing that they all have major irrational fears about. Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»I know......there are 383's out there that get that kind of power. However, from the factory, or a factory crate motor, that is about all you are going to get.Agreed. Unfortunately, that seems to be the case.Quote, originally posted by futseal04 Â»Oops...I almost forgot about the Chevy 572 crate motor. Try that one out in a tow vehicle.....You know, it's funny that you mention that because about 2 weeks ago I was on the GMpartsdirect website and saw that motor. Wow, that's a BIG motor! Now if only I could figure out a way to convert my Vibe to RWD...

Stang2Vibe · Post by **Stang2Vibe** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 12:17 pm

Quote, originally posted by Kari Â»Please don't try to tell me what I think or why I don't like things...End of story.Yes your highness. Have you any more commands for this poor, lowly, unenlightened POS peon?For the record, I don't recall anyone here EVER doing the things that you accuse me of to you. I am of the opinion that you don't need to be so hypersensitive and melodramatic about things, but what the hell do I know? I'm just expected to march along to everyone else's orders around here and like it I guess.

millster · Post by **millster** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:18 pm

I think it's time we go ahead and put this one to sleep. Locked