The gauges are not impressive at all but Lincoln seems determined to go retro with its interiors. Hopefully the MKX will be much more modern inside.
 
As for the handling, its not supposed to handle- its a 3 ton truck made for highway cruising high above traffic. I dont think people looking at this or any large SUV are really expecting to carve corners at high speeds. Its just not the purpose of this type of vehicle.
 
Expensive luxury SUVs are not a great value, period. Forget about body on frame or "Simply sticking extra seats and chrome on a truck platform ", it doesnt matter. V8 powered body on frame import SUVs get mileage comparable to the Navigator so lets not act like "Smart" consumers are saving tons of gas buy buying X5s, Q7s and FX45s. Sure those vehicles have better handling, but they are much smaller (except Q7) and still suck gas like they have a fuel line leak. I dont really call that a huge advance over the old school luxo SUVs that are so often made fun of by the press. The suggestion often seems to be that "stupid" people who are interested in "bling" buy Escalades and Navigators since they are more interested in showing off than getting a "smart" luxury SUV. I dont consider a $60k-$70K midsize V8 SUV that gets 14mpg and has minimal room behind its 2nd row for cargo to be any less pointless than a chromed up expedition with a Lincoln badge.
 
Also, contrary to popular belief amongst auto writers (who continue to overuse "bling" when talking of models they dont like) there are tons of well off, coventionally employed white people who buy large SUVs. Believe it or not there arent that many rappers and athletes out there, even if MTV Cribs makes it seem like they are a dime a dozen. Cadillac couldnt keep the Escalade production line running if they only sold them to rappers and other "bling chasers".

70s/80s gauges aside(good gosh those look cheaper everytime I see them), I just hate how they ruined the look of the navigator with that new grille. It was refined before, now it's just overbearing and ugly.

The guages look horrible! Lincoln may want to go retro, but there is an elegant way of going retro (Rolls-Royce, Bentley guages) and this is not it!
 
Body-on-frame vehicles have their advantages (towing heavy items, potential off-road ability and ability to withstand rough treatment) so I wouldn't necessarily say Lincoln should get rid of that. These vehicles are not meant to handle well, so I think it's unfair to expect them to.
But I believe there are more elegant body-on-frame vehicles Lincoln could learn from, like the Escalade, Lexus/Toyota Land Cruiser and the GMC Denali vehicles.
 
Great point, 1487. I often see "soccer moms" drive Escalades. I'm yet to see a celeb drive one, except on TV. (There are no celebs in West Texas.....except Bobby Knight!)

Just to clarify -- here are my issues with the Navigator:
 
1. Drives/handles like a truck. "Yeah, well, it IS a truck Karl." I know, and the GM Lambdas or Mercedes-Benz GL offer just as much or more useable passenger/cargo space and DON'T handle like trucks -- because they aren't. "Yes, but what about the need to go off road/tow?" People who buy these vehicles don't do that. Well, maybe five or 10 or 25 percent MIGHT, but regardless, the majority of the people who buy these behemoths spend the majority of time just commuting and/or carrying people around in them. The aforementioned GMs/M-B perform those duties with better steering, betting handling, better ride quality and better mileage (the advantage might be slight, but it's there). Of course that's a slippery slope, because most minivans do those duties even better than the Lambdas/M-B and FAR better than these things, but now I'm just talkin' crazy, I know.
 
2. The excessive BLING (yes, I said BLING, dId you catch that? BLING-BLING-BLING-BLING) adds cost and expense while further sucking down the MPG figures. I guess there are people out there who still think this sort of excessive BLING-BLING-BLING is cool. I think those people need to step into the 21st century. Both the styling statement and the cost and the damage to functionality (i.e. mileage) is pretty stupid in today's world (a world where gas costs $3.50 a gallon). Of coruse I'm a libertarian, so like every life choice I want people to ultimately be able to buy whatever they want -- just as I demand the right to make fun of them for their choice.
 
Or to summarize, there are several vehicles out there now that perform the functional jobs of these vehicle far better (and more efficiently), which leaves only their BLING-BLING-BLING-BLING-BLING-BLING factor as their defining trait. If that's the defining trait you're after, you're about 10 years out of date.

1487, you stole my thunder.
 
Karl,
If you think that the excessive chrome and retro style are tacky and don't fit your tastes, that's fine. In fact I agree. But you lost me when you had to bring out the "rap star ready" take. Maybe I'm just confused and all the suburban moms and pops who can afford this want to be rap stars and just did't tell me. As an African American I take exception to such comments. Also, If you watch MTV cribs or most rap videos, escalades and navigators are old news. You'd be more likely to see 7 series bimmers, amg benzes, lambos, ferraris, rolls royces and bentleys, all with their fair share of "bling". I've never read a review of any of these cars with such things said.

Funny how the only people I hear using "bling" are 40+ journalists and people on TV. Check with your kids, the term is pretty old now. The song that popularized the term came out 6 or 7 years ago.
 
Chrome may be tacky to some (apparently not to Honda who has it all over the new Accord) but it doesn't add much weight to a vehicle. I assure you, a de-chromed Navigator would still get 13mpg in mixed driving. If you dont like chrome trim, that is fine but lets not get ridiculous and suggest that chrome is what is weighing down the navigator. Besides, large unibody SUVs without chrome barely beat the navigator. One of the print mags has a long term GL that is averaging 14.5mpg thus far. Not really earth shattering.
 
I think anyone familiar with the history of American cars (and obviously Karl knows much more about this than me due to age) knows that chrome has been a part of american styling for a while. I think its a little silly to suggest that chrome is only being used to satisfy "bling" seekers who have materialized in the last 10 years. Chrome and shiny surfaces are nothing new on expensive vehicles and I dont see it going anywhere anytime soon. If anything, I think imports are using more chrome than they used to while american cars are using less.
 
The current Nav isnt pretty, but not because of the use of chrome. The old one was actually a good looking truck. Not that I see the point of owning one, or an X5, X3, FX, ML for that matter.

I can definitely see the advantage of a full-sizer when it comes to towing (my parents tow a 6000 lb+ boat with one) and in really dicey winter conditions - when you also need the interior space. Although I still think a GL450 is far superior in the ride/handling/everything department, and it can still tow 7500 lbs.
 
I'd be hard-pressed to believe that anyone who buys a Nav, Escalade, or Escalanche is not aware of the layers of chromed plastic bling. People don't pay substantial premiums over Tahoes and Expeditions (which are usually offered with about 95% of the same equipment) without reasons such as styling and image.
 
And yes, that gauge cluster is horrendous.

I typically find that derrogatory references to "bling" and rappers are only made when discussin American vehicles, usually SUVs. I don't watch Cribs much but I know enough to know that these stars (many of whom are not rappers) also drive BMWs, Lambos, MBs, Ferraris, RRs and Bentleys. Same applies to videos, in fact before SUVs became popular most rap videos showed European cars being piloted. As Clace stated, you never read any mention of rappers or athletes when reviewing those vehicles. Celebs like vehicles that are typically easy to customize, expensive and big (unless talking sports cars). SUVs are the perfect platform for them to express how much money they have through customization and it just so happens that some of the better looking large SUVs are made by GM and Ford.

I dont know about the expedtion, but the Tahoe lacks quite a few things found on the Escalade. More power, extra gears, different interior, HIDs, better sound system, larger nav screen, better gauges, larger wheels, automatic high beams, wood steering wheel, etc. I wouldnt say these things are worth $20k+ but the two vehicles are as different as the Camry and ES350.

"Maybe I'm just confused and all the suburban moms and pops who can afford this want to be rap stars and just did't tell me. As an African American I take exception to such comments>"
 
Are rappers all African American? Seems like a slightly self-centered assumption. Isn't there some guy out there named Einem?

All I know is that in Texas, the Suburban was popular before the SUV craze ever took off. In the 1980's up to 30% of all Suburbans were sold right here in the Lone Star State.
 
Even before the Explorer was born the Suburban was known as the "Texas Cadillac". They were popular during the last gas shortages and sky high gas prices and demand for them (while it may decrease) will not go away.
 
As for the raging debate about the rappers. Please, spare me the "isn't really the rappers" arguments. I have seen it here in Dallas, I have seen it in New York, and I have seen it in LA. Rap songs about "rollen in the Slade" are not an aberation of the white man's fears. You can't popularize a genre, market the hell out of it and then "CHOOSE" when to cry foul when the comparision is "old news."
 
I am sure the rappers have many choices and preferences in autos that span the spectrum of the "elite." But the references to Bling, Rap Stars, Professional Athletes and the like are of their own making, and arguments that it no longer applies are greatly exaggerated.
 
The world of the rapper and professional athlete are worlds of EXCESS. They parade around in the EXCESS. They Market, EXCESS, because they make their money based on the yearning for EXCESS. They are not alone in these pursuits. They are merely being as American as apple pie. But don't cry foul when they get poked fun of a little bit.
 
Oh and Talk to the Hand, because the Ears aren't Listening.

Navigator V8 - 300hp
 
Escalade V8 - 400hp
 
I mean has the Nav's v8 even been changed since the 1999 model year? Do they even care that their main competition now has 100+ more horsepower?

Brett,
H. Rap Brown begs to differ. That should be Cherry pie.

Rap star=normally black
Does anyone really want to belabor the fact that the overwhelming majority of rappers are black?

Only you.

The big problem with the Navigator is the >$50,000 price for a truck. Poor fuel economy falls behind depriciation in marginal cost to own a luxury SUV relative to a minivan people moving appliance.
 
Assuming the owner drives 15,000 miles a year and pays $3.00 a gallon for gasoline , the marginal cost of 13mpg over 20mpg is $1,211.54 per year. ($3.069 per gallon post Katrina is the highest price I've ever paid, paid $2.739 per gallon last tank.)
 
13mpg (1/13) * 3 * 15000 = 3461.54
20mpg (1/20) * 3 * 15000 = 2250.00
 
When comparing more fuel efficient vehicles, the marginal cost savings for better fuel economy drop further. I wouldn't be surprised if someone calculated that it's impossible to save money by trading in a used SUV (vs. continuing to drive it) to buy a new comparable function vehicle with better fuel economy.

Karl
 
As I said, I agree that a chromed out expedition doesn't sound like it's fun to drive, nor do I think that this Navigator looks good. I agree with your points about the vehicle, it's driving dynamics, exorbitant price, abyssmal fuel economy, everything. But "bling" and "rap star ready" really don't have a place in an objective review about a vehicle.

I think this is an unwarranted attack on Karl - here are links to two MUCH more widely circulated publications that use the word "bling" in conjunction with the Escalade, Navigator, and Range Rover, for example.
 
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/luxury/suv_truck/112_0605_fullsize_suv_comparison/
 
http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/10890/2007-cadillac-escalade.html

The point of a redesign is to make a vehicle better, to improve it in as many ways possible taking as many cues from competitors as possible. That's pretty obvious. With that being said, I feel the Navigator is one of the few exceptions when a redesigned vehicle ends up looking worse than the model it replaces. I had the chance to look at one in person around six months ago at a mall. It was on some equally ugly chrome rims, and I was very disappointed with what I saw. The waterfall grill that dominated the previous Navigator is gone, and the new one looks like a bird cage. The classy taillight and headlight design is also gone replaced by some new crap. At least they could have given the powertrain a nice boost but they left it unchanged since it rolled out 10 years ago. The interior too is a step backward and the gauges look like they were plucked from a 1987 Town Car. I take issue with the ones on the top, they look the worst by far.
 
My user name is navigator89 two years ago when I registered the Navigator was one of my favorite vehicles, not just SUVs. Now it sucks. It ranked 5th out of a comparison with 4 other SUVs, Q7, GL450, Escalade, QX56. The competition for the Navigator has increased with the introduction of the new X5, Q7, GL450, Escalade and the upcoming LX570. All seem poised to eat the Navigator alive.
 
And I think when it comes to King of Bling, nothing beats the Escalade. It's way flashier, and it's now my pick in the segment.
 
On a side notee - Karl which do you prefer the new Navigator or the QX56?

My pick is the Range Rover! :) It has more "presence" or "snob appeal", and much, much better off-road ability than the competition. The Escalade is my second choice.
 
I'm sure the QX56 is a good vehicle but it's plain ugly! Anytime I see it I feel the guy who did the styling should be fired!
 
Karl, you're right. From your article there's no doubt that the Navigator needs to be updated. I'm not so sure giving up on the truck platform is the answer, though/

1487,
 
I understand being an FLM salesman requires you to justify their shortcomings and focus on their strengths, but give us all a break. To say the Navigator doesn't handle well because it's not supposed to is a slap in the face to your customers. It implies that if we want the size and power of a large SUV, and a little added luxury, we just have to live with a chromed-up F-150 with an enclosed rear end.
 
Your explanation may have sufficed in 1999, but times change quickly in the automotive world, and OTHER engineers and designers have responded with more refined offerings. That, I think, was part of Karl's point. When is Ford going to step up to the plate?

"On a side notee - Karl which do you prefer the new Navigator or the QX56?"
 
Yeesh. That's tough as I'm not a huge fan of either. I'd probably go QX simply because I prefer its styling to the new Navigator (and for the record, I don't really like the QX's styling...) and I know the steering isn't as slow and lifeless as this Navigator's. Plus I think it's a bit quicker -- not suprising given this SUV's horsepower/weight ratio.
 
It's too bad because the Navigator essentially started this trend. It predated the Escalade and the Caddy may not have happened at all but Cadillac dealers were screaming for it after the Navigator hit and Lincoln dealers saw a mad dash to buy them. GM even rushed the first Escalade to market on the final year of that generation Suburban (side note -- avoid that first year Escalade at ALL COSTS).
 
The current 'Slade is obviously light years ahead of that first one. If you have to go big, chrome-covered, truck-based SUV at all, that's the one to get. Personally I'd get a Mercedes-Benz GL if money was no object. If it was, I'd get an Acadia. And if third-row/cargo space wasn't a prime concern I'd probably go SRX.
 
Of course, I'm confident in my manliness and don't ever tow or go off-roading, so I'd by either a CX-9 or Odyssey over all of them and call it a day.

I am currently leasing an 05 Escalade ESV Platinum, in October my lease will be up, so I have started looking for a new vehicle. I have absolutely loved my Escalade, and eventhough it is thirsty, I hate the idea of parting with it.
 
Anyways, I have looked very closely at the 07 Escalade and have recently test drove an 07 Navigator. Wow, what a difference the Escalade is in terms of superiority. It drives better, more powerful, gets better gas mileage than the Navi and has 100 more ponies. The design of the Slade is more fluid and beautiful and the interior is downright gorgeous compared to the Navi. Sure there were a few features I liked better on the Navi, one being the power fold 3rd row (hopefully GM will fix that in the mid life refresh of the GMT900) and I liked that the second row had a big center console in the Navi. However, those things are meaningless to me in the long term so out of the two I will most definately pick the Escalade.
 
However, while I was looking at the Escalades the SRX caught my fancy. WOW! What a car! Not only does it have a beautiful, spacious interior, it looks great and drives like a dream. So like Karl said, that would be my pick if cargo wasn't a concern for me (which it is...shame). I don't understand why the SRX isn't more popular, it could be the best GM vehicle around. Check it out if you haven't, you will really be surprised

I guess it's just my perception but the SRX always seems like it's gasping for air when one drives by. It seems like too much vehicle for its drivetrain - yet the R350 doesn't strike me this way.
 
If I can say it again (sorry), I am a long time FOMOCO fan and a former customer. I think for the most part their entire portfolio is at minimum, dated and sub par. This is frustrating as I am still interested in the company, would like to see it do well and would like to return as a customer at some point. The Nav has suffered the same fate as a good share / majority of their products....left to wither on the vine while the fast paced and ultra competitive industry pulls away to what appears to be an almost insurmountable lead. It seems only the threat of extinction is going to be enough to rattle the cage enough to spark a serious attempt at a turnaround. Once loyal guys like me throwing in the towel on what amounts to carrying this company is not how you compete. No more giving it business it doesn't deserve – putting up with sub par products with nagging problems and heavy depreciation. Wake up Ford!
 
It wasn't that long ago when the Lincoln line, while not perfect, was decent, had a degree of understated elegance and class while the Caddys seemed to be more "bling" oriented - bling that was slathered on to cars that weren't good. I remember a friend of mine and I standing on the floor of the NYAS and looking at the two displays and literally laughing at the cheesy collection of weak front drive OldsmoCaddys when right next door Ford was showing one of each of their Lincolns in black on a very classy display. Fast forward a few years and what a difference, the Lincoln display is a total joke with poor and dated products with gobs of obnoxious chrome and retarded throw back dashes/instruments and gussied up parts/switches borrowed out of every other Ford - we don't need to spend 50K for a gauge cluster out of a Monarch. This depressing scene while Caddy has car after car on display that are now contenders and show that they are serious about making the name mean something once again. They still have some stragglers but these things take time and it is clear that they now mean business - I get the feeling that they get it and are in it to win it. BTW – My take on the halo discussion (for what its worth)…..I don't think that Caddy needs the Sixteen but I do think they need a bonafide flagship, something like the 7, S, A8 or LS - maybe not on that level (at least not yet) but something really substantial to put out in front of the brand name.
 
The once respectable Navigator is no more.......shame on Ford's CLUELESS leadership.

Rick,
Amen.

If any of you get Smart Money magazine, check this out- I just got my August issue and on the back cover is an ad for the Escalade. It shows a close-up of former NFL running back Tiki Barber in the driver's seat, and a big lens flare blinging on the 'C' in "Cadillac", which is written huge across the page. The bling lines up with the base of the massive chrome mirror, also prominent in the shot. lol how ironic, good call, brett!

1487 an FLM salesman? LOL, that's a good one! He's the Arch Defender of the GM Faith! I can't keep up with the forum entitled "GM is on the Offensive" because of his long-winded arguments with his putative antagonists, the "import lovers" who are "ridiculous," "misinformed," "biased," and "can't be serious," to use his favorite terms.
 
He also likes to go mano-a-mano with Karl!
 
BTW, those Navi gauges look atrocious, like something out of an 80's Bronco or F-150!

Another contrast between Lincoln and Cadillac in my eyes is how GM set a goal/objective of lowering the average age of their customers and is achieving it ....... same can't be said for Lincoln. In fact, if Lincoln has any objectives, we haven't heard much about them. When GM stated this goal it seemed like a tall order to me but a few years and product intros later they are doing it. It is actually cool to drive a Caddy again, somewhere other than a retirement community. The same can not be said of Lincoln. There is a buzz about Cadillacs again across a much wider demographic. The progression of one model (among others) illustrates this - Catera, 1st gen CTS and now the hype and anticipation over the new CTS. Then maybe the 4th gen that builds on this new one may really knock it out of the park.

"Are rappers all African American? Seems like a slightly self-centered assumption. Isn't there some guy out there named Einem?"
 
Don't be ridiculous, 99% of rappers are black and this is apparent to anyone (so I thought) who isn't blind. "rap ready" was clearly meant to suggest a bloated, obsolete vehicle like the Navigator appeals to a certain demographic who favors "bling bling" over functionality and efficiency.

"I am sure the rappers have many choices and preferences in autos that span the spectrum of the "elite." But the references to Bling, Rap Stars, Professional Athletes and the like are of their own making, and arguments that it no longer applies are greatly exaggerated. "
 
You are missing the point, as usual. Once again you are attacking a viewpoint no one has presented. No one has suggested that rappers and wannabe rappers do not like Esclades and other gas guzzling SUVs. The point was that people like to pretend the only reason the Navigator and Escalade exist is because of rappers and those who look like them. THis is complete BS and the truth of the matter is these large chromed up vehicles appeal to young black males AND older middle class men (mostly) of various races. It's amazing that media types ignore this and continue to make silly comments with outdated slang like "bling bling" when there are a broad spectrum of people like these vehicles.
 
The other point was that rappers and other young wealthy people addicted to excess love FOREIGN cars and yet there arent any negative references to that when discussing these vehicles. Somehow EVERY review of the Escalade has a reference to its popularity amongst rappers and other members of the "bling" loving crowd. Of course its no coincidence that the very vehicles and the companies that make them are also very much disliked by the majority of the automotive press so it all makes sense. To most auto reviewers there is nothing more wasteful and ridiculous than a large, pricey, inefficient SUV (for some reason SL55s and R8s dont offend them) and it's convenient that the vehicles they despise are favored by nouveau rich rappers and athletes who presumably make car buying decisions based on how much "bling" is in the grille and little else.

"I think this is an unwarranted attack on Karl - here are links to two MUCH more widely circulated publications that use the word "bling" in conjunction with the Escalade, Navigator, and Range Rover, for example. "
 
Three wrongs make a right? That's news to me. The whole "bling" line of commentary is played out regardless of who is responsible for it. Whatever is said here can be applied to auto writers everywhere.
 
BTW, anyone with a thin skin shouldn't be blogging on a major automotive website. This is not "attacking", it's feedback. I'm sure most editors at C&D and MT don't blog because they dont want feedback. One look at the smart ass responses C&D gives to critical letters shows you they are thin skinned and incapable of accepting any correction or criticism. If Karl has a blog, I hope that he is more willing to accept dissenting commentary then his counterparts and the "soon to be obsolete" print mags that he constantly rags on. Print mag writers obviosuly live in a bubble that is very disconnected from reality but Karl has the ability to actually find out what readers are thinking.

"I understand being an FLM salesman requires you to justify their shortcomings and focus on their strengths, but give us all a break. To say the Navigator doesn't handle well because it's not supposed to is a slap in the face to your customers. It implies that if we want the size and power of a large SUV, and a little added luxury, we just have to live with a chromed-up F-150 with an enclosed rear end.
  
Your explanation may have sufficed in 1999, but times change quickly in the automotive world, and OTHER engineers and designers have responded with more refined offerings. That, I think, was part of Karl's point. When is Ford going to step up to the plate?"
 
Never been a car salesman and never plan to be one. I usually find car salesmen don't know much about cars.
 
I think the Navigator is horrendous looking in case you were wondering. If you honeslty think the Navigator is the only large SUV barge left on the road you have been misinformed. Perhaps you should check out the newly refreshed Armada, QX56 and the soon to come out LX570. They are all large SUVS with poor mileage, high curb weights and less than nimble handling. The Q7 and GL are somewhat better but are still at the core large gas guzzling SUVs with less than stellar handling.

"1487 an FLM salesman? LOL, that's a good one! He's the Arch Defender of the GM Faith! I can't keep up with the forum entitled "GM is on the Offensive" because of his long-winded arguments with his putative antagonists, the "import lovers" who are "ridiculous," "misinformed," "biased," and "can't be serious," to use his favorite terms. "
 
If my posting keeps you out of that forum I'll redouble my efforts and post some more. POinting out the truth and being an "Arch Defender' ((wth is that anyway?) are not one in the same. Unfortunately for you I typically find that one's allegiance to imports is inversely proportional to one's knowlege about cars or the auto industry. Of course, if you never talk to people who have different perspectives and a better grasp of the facts you probably won't realize you are somewhat off base.

While the bling-bling-bling-bling-bling :) Escalade slaughters the Navigator in hp, and torque, and weighs about 400lbs less, the Lincoln beats the Caddy in the actual truck stuff.
 
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison;jsessionid=FlNJZyPX2JJ- - - jTz1Ll65l25yywvwy6C1RtvVC7hptX2LlKXTVRWQ2!-93930988?styleid=100672735&styleid=10- - - 0782237&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=features
 
The Lincoln has a higher payload capacity and tows 1000 lbs more. ALL with Independent suspension for a better ride and packaging, something that 10 years later the Escalade still doesn't offer.
 
Frankly, I find both of them ungainly behemoths. The Caddy hides its weight a tad better with its wider track but both are just ridiculously huge. I'm surprised color choices don't consist of "Battleship Gray" and "Schoolbus Yellow", because it only seems fitting...

1487 -- you boggle my mind.
 
I make one lame fart joke in the forums and get a "nasty-gram" from Edmunds, but you continue with your insults and put-downs and are still around, to wit:
 
"Unfortunately for you I typically find that one's allegiance to imports is inversely proportional to one's knowlege about cars or the auto industry. Of course, if you never talk to people who have different perspectives and a better grasp of the facts you probably won't realize you are somewhat off base."
 
I happen to be a senior staffer of a major automotive-related research organization (not Consumer Reports), so your statement about me having no auto industry knowledge is, as usual, OFF BASE.
 
In Robert Farrago's website, The Truth About Cars, flamers/trolls get 2 strikes and they're out -- for good! I wish that the Edmunds hosts would be more diligent; seems to me like the recent newbies let too much slide. I think it's time -- long past time -- to retire the "GM is on the Offensive" forum -- it's devolved into personal sniping between the GM defenders and the so-called "import lovers."
 
Now I must get back to work...you obviously have more time on your hands than I do.

I had to chime in on this one even though I really don't have time.
 
Firstly, the previous version of the Navigator was a good looking truck. It had electroluminescent gauges and a nice looking interior/exterior. I guess Ford wanted a more aggresive looking truck to better compete with the bolder Escalade. They did a terrible job with this redesign and that grille is easily the ugliest I've seen in recent memory. What's interesting is that the Expedition is pretty much flawless and easily the best looking body on frame truck on the market. If you've seen one with the monochromatic paint scheme you'll probably agree.
 
Now onto the Bling Bling. When BG wrote the song '99, he was referring to anything shiny or chromed ie "Lorenzos with Yokohama tires" on a various mix of cars as well as jewellry. Most of the cars in the video and in Cash Money's fleet were exotic sports cars with large chromed wheels along with a few SUVs. The term got played out and he didn't mean for it to be used as a condescending stereotype to catergorize flashy exuberance in a certain demographic. I'm sure he would've trademarked the term had he known what would happen.
 
I'm sick and tired of the tired unproven misconception that body-on-frame trucks guzzle SO much more gas than their unibody rivals. To make a unibody frame durable enough for quasi offroad or heavy duty action, they are infusing huge amounts weight and material back into what was once a lightweight foundation. Manufacturers are essentially installing frame rails inside a unibody structure. GM Lambdas have done this and so have a few others. Check the mileage on that Q7 V8, Touareg, X5, R class, ML class, etc. Most get barely 1 or 2 mpg better than a Tahoe V8. Mass is mass, regardless of body construction so lets stop pretending that BOF are noticably worse than their rivals in this area.
 
Let us not forget that since we consumers believe we're too good for compromises, we now have dumb cars like the Cayenne and Range Rover Sport which weigh 5000+lbs and are supposed to handle like sports cars on 40 series tires with a LOW RANGE TRANSFER CASE. If that's not stupid what is? These types of vehicles are far more ludicrous than ANY large body on frame vehicle. If you need cargo capacity and want handling get a 535i Wagon.
 
For all of the dynamic disadvantages of body-on-frame vehicles, they still perform their primary function better than any unibody vehicle ever could- they tow. If you need to do that, then you'll catch no flak from me. Also, some people actually like a comfortable ride.

"'Unfortunately for you I typically find that one's allegiance to imports is inversely proportional to one's knowlege about cars or the auto industry. Of course, if you never talk to people who have different perspectives and a better grasp of the facts you probably won't realize you are somewhat off base.'
   
I happen to be a senior staffer of a major automotive-related research organization (not Consumer Reports), so your statement about me having no auto industry knowledge is, as usual, OFF BASE."
  
1487, correct me if I'm wrong but the statement he quoted from you was not directed at "senior staffers of major automotive-related research organiztions" but to those who swear by imports and will hear nothing else. I know of whom you speak as through the years on these forums, those who fit that description have been notoriously light on facts

Chavis 10, 1487...
Preach on!

1487 - I didn't mean that three wrongs make a right, I meant simply that Karl is not unique or original in the usage of the term "bling" (which I'm still not sure why thats wrong), and if criticisms are to be made, they should be levied against more than simply this blog.

55 grand, in this segment I'd have to go with the Mercedes GL450...

"Unfortunately for you I typically find that one's allegiance to imports is inversely proportional to one's knowlege about cars or the auto industry. Of course, if you never talk to people who have different perspectives and a better grasp of the facts you probably won't realize you are somewhat off base."
 
Stupid, without foundation, and preaching to hear oneself talk.
 
Within the next year imports will constitute more than 50% of the market in the US. But I assume you want to blame the consumer, or say "all they want are appliances for autos." Typical stupidity that sprouted from the small minds of Detroit for generations as their market share shrank and their bonus' evaporated.
 
I have found that one's defense of the Ignorance of GM, Ford and Chrysler is directly proportional of those that have their heads in the sand and their fists up their .....
 
I have no allegence to any make or model, but to suggest that the domestic makes (in general) are equal to the offerings of the major imports is foolish, screaming into the wind, synonomus with idiots that swore that small cars were a flash in the pan.

Anyone read the new Iacocca book?

Speaking of the GL and towing capacities and tying back to the recent dicussion of good car ads......how about the GL ad from a few months ago. The one that features the GL towing a gigantic trailer or trailers out of a hanger piled high with all kinds of recreational toys including big stuff like a camper and sailboat. While what looks like 3 or 4 interns look on and capture the moment on a home video camera - laughing the whole time - like one of them had posed the question "I wonder if it will........".
 
I thought it was pretty funny and clever to boot.

I agree that the GL is the segment leader at the moment - decent towing, superior dynamics, nice power and interior, it would probably get my $$ if I were shopping in that klasse of vehicle. Now if I could just get my parents out of their plasti-chrome mobile!

"I happen to be a senior staffer of a major automotive-related research organization (not Consumer Reports), so your statement about me having no auto industry knowledge is, as usual, OFF BASE.
  
In Robert Farrago's website, The Truth About Cars, flamers/trolls get 2 strikes and they're out -- for good! I wish that the Edmunds hosts would be more diligent; seems to me like the recent newbies let too much slide. I think it's time -- long past time -- to retire the "GM is on the Offensive" forum -- it's devolved into personal sniping between the GM defenders and the so-called "import lovers." "
 
If you read and believe in the Truth About Cars that says a lot about your sensibilities and perspective on vehicles. They are known to be amongst the most biased auto writers out there. I am a little surprised that you are so biased since you work for an auto research firm but to each his own. Speaking of trolls, I think those in glass houses shouldnt throw stones. I'm pretty sure that a troll is a person who patrols a message board to disrupt, announce his dislike of the subject matter of the forum and keep things off topic........aka you in the GM forum.
 
"Stupid, without foundation, and preaching to hear oneself talk.
  
Within the next year imports will constitute more than 50% of the market in the US. But I assume you want to blame the consumer, or say "all they want are appliances for autos." Typical stupidity that sprouted from the small minds of Detroit for generations as their market share shrank and their bonus' evaporated.
  
I have found that one's defense of the Ignorance of GM, Ford and Chrysler is directly proportional of those that have their heads in the sand and their fists up their .....
  
I have no allegence to any make or model, but to suggest that the domestic makes (in general) are equal to the offerings of the major imports is foolish, screaming into the wind, synonomus with idiots that swore that small cars were a flash in the pan."
 
Actually, there is plenty of foundation for what I am talking about> One only has to look at the lack of objective statements used by those who constantly praise imports and bash domestics. Typically you will find lots of unsubstantiated statements, few facts, lots of double standards being applied and a lack of acknowledgement of commonalities between import and domestic companies. Just observe and then get back to me.
 
AS for marketshare losses, here's a hint: when the number of competitors and products in a market place increase, the markershare of the early leaders of that industry is going to decrease. Just ask Sears and Kmart. One only has to look at the European market to see how fragmented the American market will be in the future. Think about it, GM used to have 50% of the market in the 60s or 70s. Toyota today with all its smarts and its flawless product lineup only has 16% of the market which is still less than Toyota's share in spite of the fact that Toyota is making billions in profit and has a more fuel efficient lineup. Toyota can be perfect and will never get to the share GM (or Ford) had back in the day because it is impossible in today's world with so many major manufacturer's competing with credible product.
 
By the way, I have never defended any bad decsions made by any of the Big 3 last time I checked. I am merely stating the realities of the automotive world. That reality is that there are large gas guzzling SUVs being made by everyone but it just so happens that Detroit made the most successful models and thus they get all the flak for their continued existence. Meanwhile the press (and people like you) will praise the Q7, ML, Toureg, etc. as they get 14 miles to the gallon. Also, why are you responding to comments I made about import fanboys if you aren't one? Just curious.
 
No one in this topic mentioned anything about domestics in general being equal to imports so I guess you are venting about past conversations on here. I will sa

Not a FLM salesman, 1487? Sorry, my memory is failing me. Allow me to rephrase my point.
 
Your comment that the Navigator is supposed to handle poorly SOUNDS like something a FLM salesman would say. It's excuse-making for an outdated design.
 
I don't recall writing that the Navigator is the only land barge still on the road. I am well aware of the Armada/QX56 and the LandCruiser/LX. And I KNOW they all have relatively high curb weights and "less than nimble handling." But Karl accused the Navigator of having "slow steering" and "wallowy handling." He compared it to the 1970 Dodge Challenger to highlight the fact that it feels "old school," in a bad way. It's sort of like saying, sure, I know it's a big vehicle, but this is REALLY bad.
 
You can do your own looking, but the average review says the above vehicles, particularly the QX56, handle quite well for their size. You've conceded the point on the Q7 and the GL450. So again, my point is that that the Navigator is lagging behind the competition, NOT in the fact that it merely offers a land barge for sale, but that it offers an OUTDATED land barge for sale.
 
Wasn't that the fundamental point of this blog post?

The GL is a fine vehicle but its lacking in the hp and looks dept. If you want an SUV that can function as a minivan its a good choice. It does however lack the visual impact of the Escalade and like the SRX the GL kind of resembles a big wagon as opposed to SUV. Many people dont like that wagon look. The interior is also kind of underwhelming for a truck that can cost $80k.

"Your comment that the Navigator is supposed to handle poorly SOUNDS like something a FLM salesman would say. It's excuse-making for an outdated design. "
 
My comment wasnt an excuse for the navigator's design, I really dont even care about the vehicle. MY point was that people looking for this class of vehicle are not expecting a canyon carver by any means. Sure the unibody SUVs are better, but they are still large and heavy and far behind sedans in handling. Anyone buying a Navi (or any of them) is buying it to tow, cruise the interstates, cruise the city streets, carry lots of stuff, ride high above the other cars on the road, etc. They are not buying this class of vehicle to take on ramps at 60mph or run through slalom cones. I would imagine most 3 ton SUVs feel somewhat like a 1970 Challenger compared to modern cars. People in the market for heavy trucks would be foolish to expect BMW type steering, sharp handling response and minimal body roll.
 
The Navigator may be built on an outdated concept (if BOF does indeed fade away) but I dont know that its an outdated vehicle. It has a 6 speed, a DOHC V8 engine, IRS and most of the latest luxury features you would expect to find on this type of SUV. If in fact the concept of a large V8 luxury SUV is what makes it outdated than it has plenty of company.

I believe you may be thinking of the R-class, silly minivan looking thing. The GL is a full frame, 7 passenger SUV aimed directly at the Navigator and Escalade. It's basically an ML with a third row. It's lighter and quicker than either the Lincoln or the Caddy, gets a couple of ticks better mileage and being a Benz, you get the German luxury and technology (seven speed Auto) and the cachet. The interior is top notch, especially in lighter colors and can be had in diesel form for that extra oomph.
 
Pricing is the same as the domestics at 55 grand.
 
http://www.mbusa.com/models/main.do?modelCode=GL450

I guess it's just my perception but the SRX always seems like it's gasping for air when one drives by. It seems like too much vehicle for its drivetrain - yet the R350 doesn't strike me this way.
 
I had said this last night.......looks like I'm not the only one who thinks this.
 
This from today's long term SRX entry -
 
"My only gripe is with the Cad's engine. The 3.6-liter V6 makes 255-hp but it feels taxed by the SUV's mass--and our SRX is the lighter two-wheel drive version."
 
The ones that are a couple of years old always sound like they're laboring when they pass by.
 
anythingbut,
 
 I think the GL is a unibody vehicle. I believe you're right that it's basically a stretched ML which I think is also a unibody. I also see it like you do.....the GL is aimed squarely at the full sized domestics and does a pretty good job of it - even money....I take the Benz with a diesel.

210delray, ewilfong,
there is an easy solution.
I no longer bother to read his mindless prattle.
Don't waste your time.

Oh yeah, you're right, it is a unibody, I just read over the stats on the site... The GL320 is definitely the best choice, that's what I'd buy too.
 
The SRX came out of the gate with a few big flaws. It had no problem in the performance areas but the mileage is aweful, the third row seat is useless and towing capacity is the same as a Honda CRV at 1000 lbs. Even in Northstar form...
 
Biggest gripe I had was cured in 2007 which was the interior, what a cheap place to spend time in. Ironically, I'd say the 2007 SRX is now thee nicest interior in the Caddy fleet. Even nicer than the bling bling Escalade IMO. Still tight inside, but materials are much improved in most places. Exterior is just too tall and narrow to be spacious...
 
Problem is, GM missed their opportunity with the SRX. Those flaws existed right out of the gate. Any improvements won't see significant changes in those first impressions. They need to go back to the drawing board and get it right the next time around...

Agreed, and today's long term entry regarding the SRX echos your comments on the new interior. They found the highway mileage acceptable at 21 or 22 (I think). Seems like a lot of people don't really care for the R class....but I do, and even money between these two, MB gets my money again.

I really liked the driving dynamics of the first SRX but hated the interior - the plastics and asthetics were a notable step below what I deemed acceptable in the class. The RX350 felt much more expensive inside but had comparably lousy handling and steering feel. This was my same issue with the CTS - drives great but oh, that awful interior! Both have seen marked improvements, but anythingbutgm is right in that it is tough to correct those first impressions. The BMW X3 has struggled with this - the lesser quality interior and a harsh ride have taken a model refresh to correct.
 
The GL even shares the ML's front sheetmetal and front doors. The more elegant/reserved styling appeals to me over what I consider to be garish overstyling on the Escalade, Navigator and QX56 (to a slightly lesser extent). I agree with what another poster said - the Navi actually used to be a very nice looking truck.

Per the comments that the GL does not have as nice of an interior and is low on power, here is an excerpt from C&D, Oct 2006:
 
"When you unroll north of 60 large, presentation counts. This Benz is a snappy dresser. Instead of acres of vinyl padding on the dash and doors, stitched leather is standard equipment here, facing all passenger positions. Pure luxury, this touch, and applied with the sort of craftsmanship you’d expect from the finest Italian leather boutique."
 
Having been in one, I can agree with these assertions - it's beautiful.
 
The Benz won the test, 2nd place was the Q7 4.2, 3rd the QX56, 4th the Caddy Escalade, and 5th the Lincoln Navigator.
 
As for power, the GL eeked out the best acceleration (6.6 secs to 60) and scored the best fuel economy of the group by a significant margin - 18 mpg average versus the next best Q7 at 16 mpg. Per C&D, the Benz's base price was also $1600 less than the Escalade's, but I'm not sure if the equipment levels are comparable.
 
Their opening sentence about the GL: "In the final ranking, nothing came close to the GL450. It drives like a tall and muscular car, solidly built and serious about quality."

Jay,
 
Thanks for sharing the quotes - this is similar to the impression I got from looking through the windows only. I was surprised / confused by the statements above indicating it was cheap and not well done. I imagine the new small one is going to be nice too (don't remember the disignation). I think it's going to compete well with the X3 - looks pretty sharp.

mnorm1 -- thanks for the tip. I will ignore 1487's "mindless prattle," as Editor Karl himself has admitted to doing. My wife gave me the same advice earlier this evening after I've complained one too many times about his endless rants.
 
His last remark about me is typical -- when he's confronted by his own hypocrisy, he lashes out with the same insults: "ridiculous," "biased," "misinformed," "can't be serious," and now "troll." That last is hilarious when applied to me in the GM forum where I rarely make ANY comment, certainly not inflammatory ones.
 
Meanwhile, one of the GM fanboys is always hanging around in the Toyota boards looking to pick up some "dirt' to toss out in the GM forum. Isn't this the classic definition of a troll?
 
Re: Robert Farrago -- I didn't know reading an alleged "biased" blog (there's that word again) makes the READER biased. I didn't say I agree with Farrago, but his site provides some hearty laughs (unlike "Mr. Serious" in his rants), AND I like his NO FLAMERS/TROLLS hard-line policy. The result is the commentary by the "fans" is very insightful, NOT like the pointless bickering on the Edmunds GM forum.
 
Funny that 1487 parses every sentence in the very "biased" (according to him) Consumer Reports. Likewise he scrutinizes every word in Car and Driver, another "anti-GM" rag. So does reading those mags make HIM biased?
 
Well, I've just put my money where my mouth is and "removed tracking" for the GM forum; can't keep up anyway.
 
Over and out....

"I believe you may be thinking of the R-class, silly minivan looking thing. The GL is a full frame, 7 passenger SUV aimed directly at the Navigator and Escalade. It's basically an ML with a third row."
 
No I am talking about the GL. Many have noted the GL has better use of space than the Escalade and is better as an all around family vehicle. That is fine, but people spending this much on an SUV can afford to have a minivan on the side if they want. They want power and style in a $60k SUV and the GL comes up short in those departments. As for pricing, you need to add up all the options- it can approach $80k which is several thousand more than the Escalade.
 
"I no longer bother to read his mindless prattle.
Don't waste your time."
 
Mindless? That is a stretch. What I'm saying makes perfect sense to anyone capably of comprehending basic logic. Nice cop out though.

"mnorm1 -- thanks for the tip. I will ignore 1487's "mindless prattle," as Editor Karl himself has admitted to doing. My wife gave me the same advice earlier this evening after I've complained one too many times about his endless rants"
 
Karl reads my posts, if you doubt it you havent been paying attention.
 
"His last remark about me is typical -- when he's confronted by his own hypocrisy, he lashes out with the same insults: "ridiculous," "biased," "misinformed," "can't be serious," and now "troll.""
 
You have pointed out no hyprocrisy that I can remember. Care to elaborate? I doubt it.
 
"Meanwhile, one of the GM fanboys is always hanging around in the Toyota boards looking to pick up some "dirt' to toss out in the GM forum. Isn't this the classic definition of a troll? "
 
Never post in any Toyota boards, dont care about Toyota products at all. What is the point in trying to associate me with behavior I have never engaged in? Desperation. Why not try and provide some intelligible counter arguments instead?
 
"The result is the commentary by the "fans" is very insightful, NOT like the pointless bickering on the Edmunds GM forum. "
 
Actually there is quite a bit of of intelligent discourse on that forum. No one else is complaining and surprisingly no one misses your commentary. Since you dont like whats going on there, continue to bless us with your absence.
 
"Funny that 1487 parses every sentence in the very "biased" (according to him) Consumer Reports. Likewise he scrutinizes every word in Car and Driver, another "anti-GM" rag. So does reading those mags make HIM biased? "
 
That last question makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I read C&D because I like cars, not because I agree with everything they print. Anyone who reads C&D knows they have favorites and routinely pan the products made by certain manufacturers over and over. GM isn't their only target, just one of their favorites. C&D isnt fond of Toyota's, Chryslers (except LH cars), Saabs (well that's GM), Volvos etc. They love virtually everything made by Audi, Suburu, BMW, Mazda and Honda. I assure you, this aint no secret.

as for the GL, I am well aware that it won a C&D comparison. C&D clocked the Escalade at 6.2 or 6.3 secs when they first tested it which is faster than the GL's acceleration in the comparo. Regardless of what they said, each person should check the interiors for themselves. The GL basically has a clone of the ML interior and several reviews have commented that the ML's interior is a huge improvement, but not earth shattering considering it's price. I find the Escalades interior to be more unique and appropriate for a $70k truck. as for style, I think most can agree the GL is pretty conservatively styled compared to the Escalade. Some older conservative people may like that better, but the Escalade's popularity seems to suggest that Caddy did a better job of attracting the average luxo SUV buyer.

To use your expression, "this ship has sailed." And I didn't say YOU were the wolf in the Toyota threads.
 
Good day, sir! SMILE!

1487
 
"dont care about Toyota products at all."
 
Na, he's not biased.

rick8365, the new smaller Benz ute is supposedly going to be tagged as MLK. I'd be willing to bet we'll see similar engine choices to the C-class, so MLK300 and MLK350, maybe even a hy-po MLK__-AMG. I am also alooking forward to this model, it looked great in the conceptuals and should be a pretty solid entry.

Perhaps Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would have been against "bling?" I'm only 26 years old (not a 40+ year-old journalist or a person on TV). According to 1487, I don't use this word. :shrug:

Thanks, anythingbut - I think you're right and now I think I remember reading that it is based on the C Class platform. The actual photos (maybe just spy) that I have seen here and elsewhere look really good - similar lines to the M and G which IMO isn't a bad thing.

"Na, he's not biased."
 
Exactly. I said I dont like TOyota products, but I never suggested Toyota doesnt make excellent products. That is a key distinction between me and you (and others here) so dont get it confused. It's actually a pretty simple concept to understand. You not only could care less about anything from Detroit, you argue that everything they make is clearly inferior to anything Asian or German without regard to facts that prove otherwise. Now THAT is biased my friend.

"You not only could care less about anything from Detroit, you argue that everything they make is clearly inferior to anything Asian or German without regard to facts that prove otherwise."
 
That is not true. Just more exaggeration from the master of exaggeration. Just goes to show that you don't READ people's comments, or make any attempt to fully understand their perspective. Rather you review the comments made here in a pathetic attempt to respond with something inevitabily trite or de minimus.
 
Not everyone falls in the category of Detroit Lover or Hater. You SAY that you are not a GM defender, but you spend every waking moment protecting them from every slight real or imagined. Alot of my comments aren't even targeted at Detroit, but you find a way to make them offensive.
 
Oh and by the way. You don't have any FACTS that you have presented, just more editorial comment or personal perceptions. So please spare us the "objective" argument.

"Not everyone falls in the category of Detroit Lover or Hater. You SAY that you are not a GM defender, but you spend every waking moment protecting them from every slight real or imagined."
 
wrong again, I merely point out inconsistencies in opinions of vehicles. More often then not regular people (and journalists) use selective memory when criticizing certain attributes of vehicles they dont like. I merely point out that many of the same flaws that are often passed off as "Detroit Only" actually apply to lots of other vehicles. People like you have a problem with that and thus decide that anyone who doesn't go along with the status quo (aka what CR says or what C&D says) is a biased GM defender. You continue to respond with tons of accusations but rarely, if ever, do you actually point out where I am making unreasonable claims tilted in favor of GM. There is a good reason for that.
 
I do believe there are some people capable of evaluating vehicles on their merits as opposed to their brand, but there seem to be few of them here. I would love to believe that many import lovers are merely looking at the "facts" but history tells me otherwise. So what we end up with is people who believe "I simply praise everything import and deride everything domestic because the products give me no other choice". actually, you do have a choice if you chose to look closely enough.
 
"Oh and by the way. You don't have any FACTS that you have presented, just more editorial comment or personal perceptions. So please spare us the "objective" argument."
 
More lies, please read more carefully from now on. You may not like the facts or chose to ignore them, but that doesnt mean none were provided. What is clear is that you are long on opinions and short on what they are based on. I will explain my position (including some reference to verifiable facts) on anything discussed thus far, trust me.

"I merely point out inconsistencies in opinions of vehicles. More often then not regular people (and journalists) use selective memory when criticizing certain attributes of vehicles they dont like. I merely point out that many of the same flaws that are often passed off as "Detroit Only" actually apply to lots of other vehicles."
 
Actually your "analysis" more often than not, merely points out the convenient "flaws" of other vehicles that aren't made in Detroit.
 
Case in point is your statemenet that Honda uses "hard" plastics in their interiors. Well that is true. But more often than not the criticism of plastic quality in interiors and in American cars specifically is the hollowness or poor grain. It makes them cheap and prone to rattles after a few thousand miles. While Honda and Toyota also use plastic, their use has a more substantial feel. It isn't hollow. Therefore, you can drive for thousands of miles and not have any problem with rattles or the seams progressively getting worse.
 
In College I drove a First Generation Toyota Tacoma. After seven years I sold it. When I was preping it for sale I was amazed at how well it was put together. There was plastic, but it still looked like the day I bought it. By contrast my Mom has an 1997 F-150 (two years younger than my Tacoma) The plastics were falling off of it. The dash seams were busing open. The different "pods" of the dash were sagging and the door panels were pulling away from the window and frame. This is typical "Detroit" Chevy trucks at the time were the same way.
 
I have witnessed a "rebirth" in Detroit as of late for at least how their interiors are perceived. GM especially. But this is a relatively new, and not worthy of proclaiming them "PAR" with the best other makers whether they be European or Japanese.
 
So your "examples" at best are merely exceptions that prove the rule. That by an large Detroit is still behind the curve.

"I have witnessed a "rebirth" in Detroit as of late for at least how their interiors are perceived. GM especially. But this is a relatively new, and not worthy of proclaiming them "PAR" with the best other makers whether they be European or Japanese. "
 
Here is the thing about "on par", it only applies to what is available NOW. What you are saying is that improvements in Detroit interiors arent to be credited because they are relatively recent. That is complete BS, the long term track record isnt what is being discussed- the interiors available today are what is relevant. GM in particular is definitely producing interiors that are on NIssan/Toyota levels at this point. Now can whine about "Toyota has been making em this great for years" if you want to but it doesnt matter. All that means is that GM has made up ground on Toyota very quickly in the interior design dept. Toyota (and others) once had a palpable advantage and now it's virtually gone. You dont mention Nissan interiors so I guess you are admitting that until recently their interiors were as hollow and hard as anything made in Detroit.
 
As for interiors, the primary complaint about American interiors is that they use HARD platics. I dont know about all this hollow vs non hollow crap, but I do hard plastics when I see them. Your assertion that detroit hard plastics are cheaper than what Honda uses and prone to creaking and rattling is news to me. I assure you my cheap Detroit interior plastics are not rattling or squeaking after 5.5 years of service and I've seen nothing that supports your arguments about American car plastics coming apart at the seams due to being hollow. I know of a '98 Intrigue that has none of the issues you speak of except some issues around the passenger side airbag cover. After 9.5 years I think that is a reasonable problem to have. Other panels and seams are the same as they were when the car was bought. And the materials are as soft as any contemporary Accord or Camry.
 
Please note, a '97 F150 is 11 years old. Believe it or not, things can change in 11 years. The F150 was redesigned 4 years ago and I suspect the current interior is light years ahead of the previous model.

"Here is the thing about "on par", it only applies to what is available NOW."
 
How are you determining durability for a new model? We don't know and the market does not yet trust the new interiors when compared to the makers of autos for years with better interiors. If the interior of the Tahoe and Silverado hold up as good as they look, then great.
 
Ford interiors for years in the 1980's and 1990's had better "designs" compared with the GM. Their ergonomics were praised, but their materials and most importantly durability were severly lacking.
 
But right now if someone ask me which car to trust for their money over the long haul I will advise them of GM's progress but note that it is fairly untested.
 
Intrigue, step forward for GM in 1998 (but not groundbreaking and then left to die on the vine)
 
And I agree with you about Nissan, still don't like their materials or designs.
 
Oh and my reference to the F-150 was when she was selling it in 2003

"How are you determining durability for a new model? We don't know and the market does not yet trust the new interiors when compared to the makers of autos for years with better interiors. If the interior of the Tahoe and Silverado hold up as good as they look, then great. "
 
I dont even know that import interiors are all that durable over the long haul so I dont know where you get off speaking about that as if its gospel. Personally I know if little correlation between good material quality and durability but I do know the press and public expects to see good materials in current cars. GM is delivering on that in most of its current vehicle. These days keeping a car 10 years in increasingly rare so I dont know how many people are going to stay away from a GM purchase because they are unsure if GM products interiors will look ast good as Toyota interiors after a decade. Thats not even taking into account people who lease cars and arent concerned about long term interior durability. I had a used (low mileage) SUburu and long term material durability was merely OK. No better than the Intrigue and unlike the intrigue a part of the legacy actually did come apart.

Because of the used car market, I'd say that long-term reliability still matters. I wouldn't buy a car used if the interior (or exterior or powertrain) has a reputation for falling apart by the time the first owner is done with it.
Don't forget that dealers make more money off used cars, and also that about 60% or so of cars sold in the US are used!

"I dont even know that import interiors are all that durable over the long haul so I dont know where you get off speaking about that as if its gospel. "
 
Actually, I got those numbers and impressions from the long term durability rating by both JD Power ratings, and those of the used car ratings of consumer reports.
 
Also (I don't have the books with me right now) but I subscribe to two different used car purchasing manuels, which give short reviews of the different models with reasonable values to expect. The editors of these books evaluate long term durability and re-rate all the models considering typical repair history every year or every other year. They are invaluable because the typical resource for cars only gives reviews for when the car was new.
 
These books have been around for decades and I have read many of them. One of them goes back 10 model years the other one 7 or 8.