- The 2013 Ford Flex, which debuts next week at the 2011 L.A. Auto Show, gets a rounder look to "modernize the design."
- The 2013 Ford Flex goes on sale in the spring.
- A new appearance package on Flex Limited and SEL models includes a two-tone roof.
DEARBORN, Michigan — The 2013 Ford Flex, which debuts next week at the 2011 Los Angeles Auto Show, gets a rounder look to "modernize the design," said the Dearborn automaker. The 2013 Ford Flex goes on sale in the spring.
When asked by Inside Line on Tuesday if the Flex's redesign was done in response to customer complaints, Ford said no. On November 1, Ford reported that 2011 year-to-date sales of the Flex were down 21.9 percent versus 2010. Ford sold 23,012 Flexes through October 31 versus 29,458 during the same period in 2010.
"It was about modernizing the design," said Angie Kozleski, a Ford spokeswoman. "It's a fresher new appearance. We rounded out the boxy edges."
The Ford blue oval has also been stripped from the front and replaced by the Flex name in boxy letters. The Flex also gets standard dual exhaust. A new appearance package on Flex Limited and SEL models includes a two-tone roof, as well as 20-inch machined aluminum wheels with painted pockets, leather seats and unique door trim panels. Three new colors have been added for the 2013 model year: Ruby Red, Deep Impact Blue and Kodiak Brown.
The Flex is equipped with a base 3.5-liter V6 engine that Ford says is "projected to deliver 1 mpg better fuel economy on the highway and in city driving, with 20 more horsepower." The upgraded engine delivers 285 hp.
The EPA says the 2012 Ford Flex FWD model returns 17 mpg in city driving and 24 mpg on the highway.
Pricing has not been announced on the 2013 Flex, but Kozleski said it will "remain competitive." The base 2012 Ford Flex SE FWD starts at $29,290, including an $825 destination charge.
Inside Line says: Ford softens the Flex's polarizing design for the 2013 model year.
Add A Comment »
sayitlikeitis says:
01:02 PM, 12/02/2011
Did I hear someone say EDSEL ???
sayitlikeitis says:
08:28 AM, 11/21/2011
Still looks like a hearse with barn doors!
300zxguy says:
04:37 PM, 11/16/2011
I don't get the purpose of the exterior update. If anything, the old face was better, but on an overall design that has proven polalizing, I don't see how this isn't different enough to bump sales, so why bother with the expense? It isn't like the designers were constrained by having to put the new corporate face on it, is this they best they could come up with? BTW, I like the Flex, I'm not in the market for that kind of car, but would definitely take a look at it if I was. I just don't understand this change for change sake.
wackford says:
06:45 AM, 11/16/2011
It's still a minivan, as far as I am concerned. Albeit, one of the more interesting ones.
ambushbug says:
05:56 PM, 11/15/2011
It's not for everyone, that's probably why the also make the Explorer. I like it, I would like more with better fuel economy, but you can't have everything.
tbone85 says:
10:41 AM, 11/10/2011
I guess openeyes1 you have no idea what I think. I share your passion to get off of Middle Eastern oil, but I don't share your delusion that these large vehicles are going anywhere anytime soon. There is a desire/need for many families and some businesses to have them. It's no accident that they all weigh so much, they are built to carry 6-8 passengers in comfort and safety. In fact, the Audis, BMWs, MBs, VWs, in these category weigh the same or more than the U.S. or Asian offerings. If the Euros have this thing licked, then why are their products in the U.S. not even the class leaders here? Or is that the air of so-called European Superiority that I smell?
Not all kids fit in car seats. Once in junior high and high school they require as much space as an adult. You can rail until the cows come home, but size and safety features are a major force in the weight of these vehicles. Families are not going to accept any lesser degree of safety in this type of a family vehicle. I suppose they could use more aluminum, carbon fiber, hybrid systems, diesel, etc., but those also add cost. No one has proven that the mass consumer market values the configuration that you favor.
These vehicles are all compromises. Most exist because many people find minivans unattractive. The most responsive vehicle in this class, and one of the lighter ones is the Mazda CX-9. I enjoyed driving it. When I brought the family and a couple of friends out it became apparent there simply wasn't enough space for our use. What's more, the CX-9 had some of the worst mileage in the segment.
17/24 is a big step up from what we experienced even a decade ago. It will get a little better over time, but no one is changing the laws of physics or consumer expectations overnight. You don't like large vehicles, and you think a bunch of ranting and raving will change things. Great, we get it. But I'm not getting rid of my kids, driving 2 vehicles for one trip, or eliminating family get togethers just so you feel better over your morning cup of joe. I'm all for reducing consumption, but we are not going to get off of oil just by raising fuel efficiency. That will only happen when we replace our fuel source. In the mean time, many of us are going to make the best buying decisions possible based on the vehicles that actually exist.
openeyes1 says:
09:20 PM, 11/09/2011
@tbone85; "These cars carry many children and they need max safety equipment which adds to the weight"
Yes I can see it, five children in giant cars seats that weigh 250lbs each, I'm sure that happens often in America. Strange that in Europe that they can sell comfortable vehicles that are safe and can seat 6 or more adults. These same vehicles don't have to blot out the sun or the views of car drivers on the road, and they get great fuel mileage.
I guess tbone85 you want us to continue to be enslaved to Middle-Eastern oil, and the enormous costs that come with it.
tbone85 says:
08:39 PM, 11/09/2011
You can wish for fairy dust all you want. There remains a significant market for cars that can carry 6 or more people. It would be irresponsible for Ford to not participate in this market segment. These cars carry many children and they need max safety equipment which adds to the weight. You don't like it, oh well. Other people want or need these vehicles.
openeyes1 says:
02:19 PM, 11/09/2011
"...The EPA says the 2012 Ford Flex FWD model returns 17 mpg in city driving and 24 mpg on the highway...".
Sounds like this Gas Hog needs to go on a major diet, shedding some 500lbs, and a becoming smaller in size. Considering that the lousy MPG figures are for FWD, one can only imagine on how bad they will be in AWD.
Ford, wake up and smell the coffee, fat cars are out for 2012!
easym1 says:
01:04 PM, 11/09/2011
Still an ugly one!