Spy Photos: 2013 Ford Flex Facelift

I was just at the NYC auto show and it was the first time I'd actually sat in the new Explorer. I like it, but was surprised at how much less perceivable space there was compared to the Flex. I'd go for the Flex on that alone, unless I need the higher ride height of the Explorer for soft-roading. The Flex is just a much more efficient use of space.

How many Flex are sold a year?

If Ford would just invest in the Ranger once every 5 years what they spend on the redundant, low volume Flex, I predict Ranger would sell 100K plus every year.
Ford has repeatedly stated there is no market for the Ranger no justification to invest in compact trucks since the volume is too low, yet Ranger sells 50,000 plus units per year despite minimal changes since 1993. Flex can't even break 40K units per year.

@moparbad:

Ford is sticking to the spots where they can make the most money. Despite not selling loads of Flexes, Ford sells a great percentage of loaded Flexes. Loaded vehicles tend to provide lots of profit when compared to standard ones. Most Rangers I see are pretty much no frills affairs (i.e. not much profit). The F-150 has a higher profit margin so why not push people in that direction.

It's not necessarily about how many vehicles you can sell. It's about how much you can make on each sale. Just look at luxury brands.

Ford has posted specs of the 2012 Flex and it's still got the "old" 3.5L making 262 HP vs. the Explorer new 3.5L (VVT)) that makes 280, and gets better mileage to boot. I like Flex a lot but having the better engine in the very similar Explorer makes it more difficult to consider Flex. Would not surprise me if Ford eliminated Flex or perhaps repositioned it as more of a SportsWagon than a crossover. Tigthen the dampers a bit, slightly more agressive tires, optional AWD and the 280 hp V6 would reposition Flex to the Volvo wagon devotees who have nowhere but the expensive A4 Avant to go.

The Ranger may sell because it has $3500 in cash on the hood (or $1000 plus 0% financing), deducted from a much lower price than the Flex which currently has $2000 *or* 0% financing. If Ford were wrong about the market for compact pickups I think their competitors would be happy to fill the demand, but none of them show much interest either. The Flex may not sell a lot, but it has brought conquest buyers who are willing to buy high-spec models; it will be up for complete redesign after the Explorer's first-year-or-so sales figures are available and they can decide whether it can stay, change, or go. Toyota continues to sell the Highlander, Venza and Sienna at the same time.

Sorry, but the Flex will never be a competitor to an A4 Avant. I should know, I had both in my garage for almost a year! :) (S4 Avant, but same thing.) Totally different vehicles, both good at different things. The Flex can never be a SportsWagon, unless your definition is very different than mine.

Flex is the anti-minivan for guys who need to drive a minivan. The amount of space in one of these babies just can't be beat by any wagon or other box-like vehicle (not including SUVs) in the market. If you're looking for a sportwagon, look somewhere else. If you're a dad who just wants to drive around town with the family in tow, and still have a lil more dignity as a man, then this is THE ride.

felonious

Not sure comparing a base Avant with an S4 is apples to apples, and I wasn't even stating the Flex would be an A4 Avant competitor, but a replacement for the Volvo-type wagon. No doubt the Flex's additional 600 lbs. will lead to a less nimble and tossable feel, however both have FWD biased layouts with a pronounced front weight bias, the Audi enjoying standard Quattro the Ford an optional and less sophisticated AWD layout. The Audi enjoys an advantage in interior materials quality however the Flex, as you know, is cavernous inside compared to the Audi. I am sure that if Ford wanted to create a better handling Flex they could but probably believe the market would not support it. From the miniscule amount of Avant's, as well as BMW and M-B wagons sold, they are probably right. I would however be a ready customer for a more engaging and driver oriented Flex as I find the current "crossover" products to be too SUV oriented for my liking.

I'm predicting updated engine, brakes, and the new sync system that's goes into the Focus and Explorer.

The Flex managed to sell 1,927 units in April, down 50% from last year. Even the ancient Crown Vic outsold the Flex by more than 3:1 last month. The Explorer outsold it about 7:1. A redesign of the Flex is not necessary. Just give it the Bin Laden treatment - shoot it and bury it @ sea.

@dagmar3: ...or put sliding doors on the damn thing already to a) put some clear distance between it and the Explorer; b) make it a more obvious cross-shop choice for minivan intenders and; c) fix the one thing that may well be holding it back in sales.

Also, I bet this thing will have the 4-cylinder EcoBoost for a base engine.

I like those wheels. They should produce a murdered-out version and include those wheels.

I remember J Mays talking about how he and Freeman Thomas lobbied hard against sliding doors on the original Flex, presumably due to cost and weight savings (they claimed that freed up more money for improved interior materials). Still, if this is their "ultimate people mover" then I think making it a better people mover than anything else in their lineup makes sense. I'm not sure sliders are necessarily the right idea, but I've thought for a while (apologies for repeating this) that a 3 person 3rd row seat (like Acadia, etc) would be a great differentiator in their lineup. Giving the Flex 8 passenger capability would set it apart from the rest of the Ford lineup, save the Expedition which I doubt many Flex buyers are cross shopping anyway. It would also make it stack up better against the 8 passenger competition like the GM Lambdas and Honda Pilot. I realize that relatively few people think they need 8 seats versus 7, but all things being equal it could tip the scales with buyers who are on the fence between the Flex and something else.

It's unfortunate the Flex hasn't really caught on; it's really one of their best vehicles. I love the styling but I think that's been the downfall sales wise. The Explorer looks good but is a much more mainstream looking vehicle which surely accounts for a good part of it's sales advantage over the Flex.

I wish they could put sliding doors in the Flex, but only if they can make the doors and door handles look the same and completely hide the slide rails. Would be a much more practical vehicle. The rear seats are also much more adult and teen sized than the Lambda triplets.

Crying shame they sell so few of these, most people I've checked with (that are searching for an SUV or a van) think it's ugly. I disagree with them, but I'm also not the one that is on the market for a big car. I'd buy a two-tone Ecoboost one with a fridge in a hot second if I had the money though :-)

I'm waiting for it to be freshened up, and it desperately needs better fuel economy. Granted it's a hauler but it doesn't have to be such a pig. The "eco" boost option is less efficient. What's "eco" about it? Sport, turbo - got it - pass. Put either an updated V6, a truly Eco 4, or best yet a small diesel.

I really like the styling of it, but parting with $40k in the land of $4-5 gas cools the enthusiasm.

Funeral Home owners across the country will be thrilled, that they now have an upgraded replacement for all their dated Caddies and Lincoln's!

People seem to forget a very important viewpoint. The Flex is for driving city streets where the Explorer is for people driving county and state routes where its not going to be perfect level roads and lots of twists and turns. Two different vehicles for two different types of main driving.

A shoebox with sectional rollup doors is what the Flex really looks like. Or maybe a funeral coach.

Take a look at the new lineup of vans ( Sienna, Odyssey, Quest etc.) You not only get modern style but you also get practicality, Up to 150 cu. ft. cargo space (Sienna), nearly double what the flex has. Plus better gas mileage.
It's always the people who are so hung up on "image" that lack any common sense.
Wake up people.

I guess if you like the funeral coach with rollup doors look the Flex may be fine for some. I just find that too many image conscious people lack the common sense to look around and realize the practicality of vans.
Take a look at the new Sienna, Odyssey, Quest etc. vans and you not only get modern style but also up to 150 cu.ft. cargo space (Flex has only 83 cu. ft.) plus better gas mileage and great ride and handling.
Wake up people!

@moparbad; I agree with you a 100% on the issue of the Ford Ranger, Ford has wasted their money on a number of butt ugly gas guzzlers instead of redesigning the Ranger, and adding a line of new fuel efficient engines. Ford doesn't get it with Ranger's sales numbers, you're not going to sell a lot of small trucks in 2011, that have a nearly twenty year old design with a 6 cylinder engine that offers no better gas mileage than that in a full size F150. It's amazing that Ford sold as many Rangers that they did in the last five years, given that Ford spent nearly zippo on any new improvements on it.

Ford's new Flex is still a box on wheels, that soccer mom's and dad's will feel safe in as they drive other drivers off the road, so it probably will sell well.

Aint necessary for Flex to be a high volume seller. It is a platform mate to several other vehicles, so prorated development costs are low. More important than volume are the facts it brings in lots of "looksy" traffic, it sells with lots of high profit options, and it scores well on most automotive and consumer reviews.

why bother disguising it?
it's not like anyone cares about Flex facelift....