2015 Ford Everest - Page 4

1TUFFUTE · 17-11-2014, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

I think buying the last of the territory's would be a better buy for most people. Honestly it looks like a Toyota....actually I think the current Kluger probably looks better!

Look up a kluger again

the Everest sits high like a real offroad vehicle. Or at least appears to with its stance. Only thing that softens it is the plasticky looking front valance thingy.(as mentioned a bulbar would fix that tho)
But yeah the terry would be a good option. My brother is doing Exactly what you mentioned......looked at this but they're looking at Terri's instead.(klugers and prados fell of the list ages ago because of how bland they are,amoung other things mentioned here)

Nikked · 17-11-2014, 06:45 PM

whinge whinge...if the territory got and update it would have looked basically the same. Just be happy that we still have Australians designing and engineering vehicles for us.

JPFS1 · 17-11-2014, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

whinge whinge...if the territory got and update it would have looked basically the same. Just be happy that we still have Australians designing and engineering vehicles for us.

for the world!

/slight correction

Vormund · 18-11-2014, 01:58 PM

Anyone else think it's a pity they are not keeping the Territory name?

They could make it "Territory Edge" and "Territory Everest" Apparently the Territory name still has good brand recognition.

Holden have Captiva 5 and Captiva 7, Toyota have Landcruiser Prado, Landcruiser 70 and Landcruiser 200....

Edit: Stupid having a badge saying it has a 6 Speed auto....might as well have a badge listing that it has suspension.

Tbm1121 · 18-11-2014, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vormund

Anyone else think it's a pity they are not keeping the Territory name?

They could make it "Territory Edge" and "Territory Everest" Apparently the Territory name still has good brand recognition.

Holden have Captiva 5 and Captiva 7, Toyota have Landcruiser Prado, Landcruiser 70 and Landcruiser 200....

I have been led to believe the opposite, that they are keeping the name and will be rebadging something that is imported. But I'm not certain.

Itsme · 18-11-2014, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vormund

Anyone else think it's a pity they are not keeping the Territory name?

They could make it "Territory Edge" and "Territory Everest" Apparently the Territory name still has good brand recognition.

Holden have Captiva 5 and Captiva 7, Toyota have Landcruiser Prado, Landcruiser 70 and Landcruiser 200....

Edit: Stupid having a badge saying it has a 6 Speed auto....might as well have a badge listing that it has suspension.

Why have the name territory when it is nothing like the territory.

simon varley · 18-11-2014, 03:00 PM

Everest is a recognized name in the rest of its (much larger) markets.

Nikked · 18-11-2014, 06:44 PM

Drove a Colorado 7 today...the Everest's enemy...fare to say that the Colorado looses out here...sluggish, noisy engine, horrible suspension and the god awful interior.

Still want to say the Everest interior is "old and ugly"

usernametaken · 18-11-2014, 06:48 PM

^^ Prob best to compare to the new Colorado which is being launched tomorrow

http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2014...-looming-47525

let's compare apples with apples, shall we?

**Fordman1** · 18-11-2014, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

Drove a Colorado 7 today...the Everest's enemy...fare to say that the Colorado looses out here...sluggish, noisy engine, horrible suspension and the god awful interior.

Still want to say the Everest interior is "old and ugly"

image

image

God that Colorado interior is awful ....

Dr Smith · 18-11-2014, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben73

People are complaining about how the Everest looks. But I would like to point most in this thread are comparing it to this 'thing'

image

Everest looks pretty good to me. Especially that front end, quite tough looking

Yes looks are subjective however is it really that hard to make something look good? If you bought one of these it's purely on reputation because it sure as hell wouldn't have been on exterior looks, lol.

**Fordman1** · 18-11-2014, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by usernametaken

^^ Prob best to compare to the new Colorado which is being launched tomorrow

http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2014...-looming-47525

let's compare apples with apples, shall we?

Yep, and that Colorado will still get smashed on quality and performance by T6.

wranger · 18-11-2014, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by usernametaken

^^ Prob best to compare to the new Colorado which is being launched tomorrow

http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2014...-looming-47525

let's compare apples with apples, shall we?

The "New" Colorado had a development budget of $2B compared to the Ranger which was less than half that. You'd hope that with the awful driving dynamics and the rattly tractor motor they could have at least gotten the interior right the first time...

xr8territory · 18-11-2014, 09:01 PM

A mate of mine test drove Colorado and Ranger back to back last weekend. I was just a rear passenger and obviously have a bias towards Ford, but the ride in the Colorado was really terrible. If you have any love for your children or friends, never buy the Holden. There was zero comfort and the riding over bumps gave my middle aged back jolts that was actually very painful. Very Agricultural.

WHYME · 18-11-2014, 09:08 PM

*Please delete, wrong topic*

FPV GTHO · 18-11-2014, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wranger

The "New" Colorado had a development budget of $2B compared to the Ranger which was less than half that. You'd hope that with the awful driving dynamics and the rattly tractor motor they could have at least gotten the interior right the first time...

Ford spent 1.2B on T6 Ranger. Considerably less than GM did on Colorado, but not less than half.

Nikked · 18-11-2014, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wranger

The "New" Colorado had a development budget of $2B compared to the Ranger which was less than half that. You'd hope that with the awful driving dynamics and the rattly tractor motor they could have at least gotten the interior right the first time...

What did they spend the $2 billion on? A XF ute is more dynamic and comfortable.

And the "new" Colorado due for release is a minor revision...not an all new product.

wranger · 18-11-2014, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Ford spent 1.2B on T6 Ranger. Considerably less than GM did on Colorado, but not less than half.

Ah I'd read 800m. I stand corrected.

usernametaken · 18-11-2014, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

Yep, and that Colorado will still get smashed on quality and performance by T6.

So you've driven the Everest and the Colorado both before being released?

Impressive.

timeout · 18-11-2014, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wranger

The "New" Colorado had a development budget of $2B compared to the Ranger which was less than half that. You'd hope that with the awful driving dynamics and the rattly tractor motor they could have at least gotten the interior right the first time...

What the hell do they have to show for 2bill. Hopefully that's amortized over the whole generation and not up front.

GREGL · 18-11-2014, 10:44 PM

2 Billion is what they tell the govt, The actual cost was 100 grand they had to pay massey Ferguson for copyright on the 35.

1TUFFUTE · 18-11-2014, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Ford spent 1.2B on T6 Ranger. Considerably less than GM did on Colorado, but not less than half.

800mill is ALOT of money. That should at least have the car being guaranteed to be better in most departments......not struggling to even be compared to a car that cost 800mill less.
Of course it's far more complex then that but hey....numbers that high still tell stories!

Tbm1121 · 18-11-2014, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

800mill is ALOT of money. That should at least have the car being guaranteed to be better in most departments......not struggling to even be compared to a car that cost 800mill less.
Of course it's far more complex then that but hey....numbers that high still tell stories!

Ford had a lot of prior leanings from there vast experience with the f trucks. No need to learn things you've been doing successfully for years, just replicate and improve them on the new job

XR Martin · 19-11-2014, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

800mill is ALOT of money. That should at least have the car being guaranteed to be better in most departments......not struggling to even be compared to a car that cost 800mill less.
Of course it's far more complex then that but hey....numbers that high still tell stories!

Budget for the EF Falcon was just over $200million, 3rd gen Taurus was something like $2billion.

**Fordman1** · 19-11-2014, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by usernametaken

So you've driven the Everest and the Colorado both before being released?

Impressive.

Everest is a generation ahead of the current Colorado and the 'New' Colorado is a minor MCA for GM.

Dr Smith · 19-11-2014, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by usernametaken

^^ Prob best to compare to the new Colorado which is being launched tomorrow

http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2014...-looming-47525

let's compare apples with apples, shall we?

I'd suggest a Colorado buyer not compare after the Everest comes out...the worst feeling in the world when you realise you should have waited a bit, lol.