|
The Flex is a love/hate thing. I like them, my wife hates them.
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
skipdogg posted:The Flex is a love/hate thing. I like them, my wife hates them. I think they're hideous but I really like the Transit Connect. Tempted to buy one of the models with no rear seating and make it into a camper conversion for me and my wife.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
We took a thousand-mile road trip in August in a Toyota Sienna. It was myself driving, plus my wife, my parents and my two kids. So four adults and two children, and all of our luggage. It really wasn't bad at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:The Flex is a love/hate thing. I like them, my wife hates them. And this is why I have an Escape. It seems like the Flex really appeals more to men than women, for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
The only minivans I'd ever consider based on their looks are not sold in NA, wtf ? Ford S-max (although it is due for a refresh now and Opel Zafira Tourer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Our vehicle shares a platform with the Odyssey... and with the amount of soft/off-roading we do there's no way we could get by with a minivan and an S2000. And the only way the S2000 is leaving is if something similar but better comes along in its place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Elwood P. Dowd posted:And the only way the S2000 is leaving is if something similar but better comes along in its place. Cayman GTS? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Speaking from my own experiences, if my BMW was my only car, and i really cared about it not looking used, there would have been 2 months last winter in which i couldn't leave my house because the ruts in the ice in the only entrance/exit to my subdivision did this. That dealer plate card looks familiar
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Spatule posted:The only minivans I'd ever consider based on their looks are not sold in NA, wtf ? Those are definitely both hatchbacks and not minivans. If it doesn't have a sliding back door its not a minivan. I'm totally biased but the 2015 Sedona is very sharp looking and very nicely equipped inside
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:Cayman GTS? He said better. Minivans also own for highway travel, striking a superior middle ground between a luxury sedan and an SUV.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
eyebeem posted:I get that I'm bias because I own it, but I really do think that the Flex is the sharpest looking people mover in the US. It doesn't hurt that we get the appearance package as a free add-on in California. It has the benefit of not being fuckoff massive in height and actually drives pretty drat well. We also own a Fiat 500, so it's not like we are unaware of how a "Car" drives. I think these are super cool. It's pretty closely related to the Taurus, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
kill me now posted:Those are definitely both hatchbacks and not minivans. If it doesn't have a sliding back door its not a minivan. Strange way to define a minivan, you'd think height and sitting position would be better criteria than the choice of doors, size too. Your definition makes the smaller Ford Grand C-max a minivan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 09:29
|
|
|
Sliding doors you say?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
Hey now, he said back doors. Like this Nissan Stanza. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 11:31
|
|
|
angryhampster posted:I think these are super cool. The Taurus/Explorer/Flex all share the same platform (fords D4 platform). Fun fact my SHO is actually several inches longer than our Explorer which blew my mind the first time I tried to park it in the garage. But yeah the Explorer Sport and the SHO we have are basically the same car underneath.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
Spatule posted:Strange way to define a minivan, you'd think height and sitting position would be better criteria than the choice of doors, size too. It is, though? Minivans were originally mini-vans aka unibody car-based tall wagons with sliding doors and hatch (top-hinged) rears, which euros ended up calling 'people movers'. Sliding doors are a van feature but hatch rears are classically a station wagon/hatch thing not a van thing. Doors plus unibody and secondarily size are arguably the defining characteristics of a minivan. Most classic minivans have car-like ride-heights and seating position. The ur-minivan is probably the first-gen Dodge Caravan which was basically a K-car. Hell, the Grand C-Max is actually longer, wider, and taller than the SWB first-gen Caravan. OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Nov 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
The Ford Flex is actually a minivan, but idgaf about being seen in public in one. My parents have a 99 Villager and it's remarkably good for what it is. I'd love either a new Transit conversion van for a tow vehicle, but a twin timbo Flex is right up there as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Minivans have sliding doors. The Flex is not a minivan. I'd actually like ours even more if it WAS a minivan and had sliding doors. That would be the bees knees.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Spatule posted:Strange way to define a minivan, you'd think height and sitting position would be better criteria than the choice of doors, size too. No, crossovers are what you have with that height and seating position but no sliding rear doors. Those vehicles are crossovers or tall hatchbacks. I would say in order of importance the defining characteristics of a minivan are Primary characteristics Sliding rear doors (van feature) Unibody Low floor (compared to SUV/CUV's) Secondary characteristics Large Passenger capacity General size If its missing any of those its not a minivan No sliding doors - CUV Body on Frame - Van High cargo floor - honestly don't think this exists with sliding doors and a unibody
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:It is, though? Minivans were originally mini-vans aka unibody car-based tall wagons with sliding doors and hatch (top-hinged) rears, which euros ended up calling 'people movers'. Sliding doors are a van feature but hatch rears are classically a station wagon/hatch thing not a van thing. Doors plus unibody and secondarily size are arguably the defining characteristics of a minivan. Most classic minivans have car-like ride-heights and seating position. The ur-minivan is probably the first-gen Dodge Caravan which was basically a K-car. Hell, the Grand C-Max is actually longer, wider, and taller than the SWB first-gen Caravan. I dunno, there's a very strong case it was the Renault Espace, even if they never came to America. Same year as the Caravan, but with the one-box shape. But both owe an enormous debt to the Lancia Megagamma show car of 1978: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Megagamma
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
eyebeem posted:I get that I'm bias because I own it, but I really do think that the Flex is the sharpest looking people mover in the US. It doesn't hurt that we get the appearance package as a free add-on in California. It has the benefit of not being fuckoff massive in height and actually drives pretty drat well. We also own a Fiat 500, so it's not like we are unaware of how a "Car" drives. Stretched 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
PCOS Bill posted:Stretched Yeah, the Flex really is a (in my opinion) more properly proportioned, more refined xB.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
The xB looks like the redhead bastard child of the flex
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
eyebeem posted:I get that I'm bias because I own it, but I really do think that the Flex is the sharpest looking people mover in the US. It doesn't hurt that we get the appearance package as a free add-on in California. It has the benefit of not being fuckoff massive in height and actually drives pretty drat well. We also own a Fiat 500, so it's not like we are unaware of how a "Car" drives. I love the contrasting roofs on these; it's like a huge Mini.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Augmented Dickey posted:I love the contrasting roofs on these; it's like a huge Mini. The contrasting roof really pushes the refrigerator on wheels looks. I still like them though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:It is, though? Minivans were originally mini-vans aka unibody car-based tall wagons with sliding doors and hatch (top-hinged) rears, which euros ended up calling 'people movers'. Sliding doors are a van feature but hatch rears are classically a station wagon/hatch thing not a van thing. Doors plus unibody and secondarily size are arguably the defining characteristics of a minivan. Most classic minivans have car-like ride-heights and seating position. The ur-minivan is probably the first-gen Dodge Caravan which was basically a K-car. Hell, the Grand C-Max is actually longer, wider, and taller than the SWB first-gen Caravan. Minivans as in small commercial van based vehicles with a bunch of seats in the back predate car-based minivans by decades. Also non-US commercial vans have been available with top-hinged hatch back rear doors since way before the 80s. Chickenbisket posted:Hey now, he said back doors. That picture horrifies me - 80s Nissan were enough of a death trap with a full B pillar let alone without
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
It's really funny seeing people with kids twist themselves into pretzels trying to justify buying anything other than a minivan. BUT I MIGHT BUY A BOAT SOMEDAY
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
DEUCE SLUICE posted:It's really funny seeing people with kids twist themselves into pretzels trying to justify buying anything other than a minivan. You don't need a minivan just to cart a couple kids around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
I was reading an article about the Hellcat Charger today and somehow the Chevy SS crossed my mind - I couldn't remember how long its been around (it feels like forever, but obviously is pretty recent). No recent media coverage on it either since the MT option came along. I think Dodge's latest offerings are going to out the last nail in the SS's sales coffin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
dissss posted:Minivans as in small commercial van based vehicles with a bunch of seats in the back predate car-based minivans by decades. Also non-US commercial vans have been available with top-hinged hatch back rear doors since way before the 80s. Those aren't minivans as we talk about them and aim at a totally different consumer. Minivans aren't commercial vans, otherwise they'd just be called vans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:Those aren't minivans as we talk about them and aim at a totally different consumer. Minivans aren't commercial vans, otherwise they'd just be called vans. Don't agree at all - stuff like the Toyota Liteace was definitely a minivan by the definition I agree with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
PCOS Bill posted:You don't need a Or that pickup truck, or that ecoboost, or that GT model, or leather, or ______________________
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 10:07
|
|
|
PCOS Bill posted:You don't need a minivan just to cart a couple kids around. I would love to see what the most popular family cars in other developed countries are. Why do American babies need all this stuff travelling with them all the time?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 10:34
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:Those aren't minivans as we talk about them and aim at a totally different consumer. Minivans aren't commercial vans, otherwise they'd just be called vans. They are called "vans". The term minivan is a completely USA only term. In Asia, Aus, NZ market, unibody vans were made by Toyota, Nissan, Mazda etc and sold here either stripped out for commercial purposes, or with seats for passengers. Later on they made different bodies to differentiate passenger and commercial, but thats how they started in the Asian-Australian region. They filled the gap for both purposes between the 1970s (when commercial van types like transits and befords disappeared), until late 90s when euro brand commercial only vans re-appeared like renault, vito and new transit. For over a decade people were buying hi-ace, liteace, L300/starwagons, urvans, vanette, bongo/e1800/e2000/econovans, all with seats for family transport, or stripped out for trade and commercial use. Europe it started with the espace and they call them "people movers", Japan calls them MPVs. No one else ouside of the USA calls them minivans unless we're trying to relate to someone from the USA. E: My dad was a compulsive van buyer. Traded in his HT kingswood wagon in the 80s, and turned into van man, owning a few different ones as a family car. Fo3 fucked around with this message at 16:35 on Nov 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
blk posted:I would love to see what the most popular family cars in other developed countries are. Why do American babies need all this stuff travelling with them all the time? to keep them quiet for the love of god
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
blk posted:I would love to see what the most popular family cars in other developed countries are. Why do American babies need all this stuff travelling with them all the time? They don't, just most modern parents are morons that think their kid will somehow die if it doesn't have its entire nursery with it at all times. I get by just fine with my little Corolla, and my daughter absolutely loves going on car rides because she gets to look out the window and see new things, instead of having a little TV in front of her or a million toys surrounding her at all times like kids in a minivan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Terrible Robot posted:They don't, just most modern parents are morons that think their kid will somehow die if it doesn't have its entire nursery with it at all times. My kids like car rides, too. Are you better than me because you drive a cheaper car and don't have as many creature comforts? I'm not superior because I own a $1,200 stroller, but you're not superior because you don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
eyebeem posted:My kids like car rides, too. Are you better than me because you drive a cheaper car and don't have as many creature comforts? Sounds like maybe he hit a little close eh
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
eyebeem posted:My kids like car rides, too. Are you better than me because you drive a cheaper car and don't have as many creature comforts? Ahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
eyebeem posted:My kids like car rides, too. Are you better than me because you drive a cheaper car and don't have as many creature comforts? No I would be inclined to say that anyone who doesn't own a $1200 stroller is superior to anyone who does, at least in the area of financial responsibility.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 20:36
|
|
