Comparsion review: eight compact SUVs (fourth place)

April 17, 10:38 PMDC Car ExaminerBrady Holt

Previous Next

1 comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the DC Car Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

The 2009 Ford Escape offers basic competence at a reasonable price, but it's not alone in its class in doing so. 

The Ford Escape doesn’t have the ride comfort of some of its newer competitors, nor the agility. It doesn’t have their interior quality or versatility either, or their overall refinement.  

But for an SUV that first appeared in 2001 (it was partially redesigned for 2008 and got new engines for 2009) it remains competitive as it offers a distinct flavor of basic competence. 

Ford is almost giving the sense that anything that’s less than perfect on the Escape was done so intentionally as part of its appeal. The stiff ride and lack of soft-touch plastics? Part of its appeal as a tough vehicle, Ford seems to be saying. More than most of its competitors, the Escape acts like a truck instead of a car.

It is a car, however. You get neither the off-road capability nor the low fuel economy of a truck with the Escape. But if you do like that flavor, blended with a comfortable interior, reasonable pricing, and general competence, the Escape is worth a look for you.

Climb in, and you get good visibility from a high seating position on roomy seats with unremarkable shape and padding. They’re comfortable, but in no way coddling. The rear is similar: it’s high from the floor and roomy, and it will fit three adults better than some of the other small SUVs in this comparison, but it’s a bit hard and flat.

The interior is constructed from slabs of hard plastic that either looks cheap or rugged, depending on your perspective. But nothing feels fragile or flimsy, like in the Jeep Patriot or Mitsubishi Outlander, and although some panel gaps are a bit large they’re all even and trim pieces line up correctly.

There’s no abundance of cargo space behind the rear seat however, though it should be sufficient for most. The rear seat tumbles forward in two pieces rather than dropping flat, but you must dig your fingers between the seat cushion and seatback to pull that forward before dropping the seatback down, which is more cumbersome than the alternative method several competitors employ. The rear windshield glass opens independently of the rest of the back hatch, useful for loading or accessing small items.

Part of the reason the Escape’s cargo area isn’t as voluminous as some of its competitors is that it’s a smaller vehicle. As other small SUVs have grown in their redesigns, the Escape remains more compact than all but the Patriot. Its relatively small footprint that gives up nothing in interior comfort and relatively little in cargo capacity is a plus for those who will be living and driving in tight spaces.

On the road, the Escape’s suspension provides good control on smooth pavement but doesn’t absorb road imperfections well. Some will call this a testament to its age; others will say a bouncier ride gives it more character. Ford softened the suspension in the 2008 update, but that did not significantly improve the vehicle’s ability to take bumps in stride, while it makes the car less nimble. The steering is overboosted and not especially responsive, but the Escape is far from ponderous, thanks in no small part to its tight dimensions.

The Escape’s standard 4-cylinder engine – updated for 2009 – is quieter than most of the others in this comparison, but what you do hear can sound harsh. There could also be less wind and road noise. The engine is acceptably powerful, but no more, despite its growth from a 2.3-liter in 2008 at a 2.5-liter now. The new 6-speed automatic shifts smoothly, and is likely responsible for a bump the Escape’s EPA fuel economy rating. At 19 miles per gallon in the city and 25 on the highway, it’s slightly behind most competitors, however.

Another area the Escape falls behind is its roof-strength rating from the IIHS. The Escape did very well in most crash tests, but was ranked worst among these eight for the ability of its roof pillars to withstand the sort of force they would face in a rollover accident. It doesn’t help that the Escape has earned just three out of five stars from NHTSA for rollover resistance, compared to the four stars earned by most small SUVs. Stability control, which works with the antilock brakes to help prevent skids, is standard, which should be somewhat reassuring. 

But aside from the potential safety issue, the Escape’s shortcomings do not prevent it from coming off as a thoroughly practical and perfectly serviceable small SUV. It’s comfortable for passengers inside and compact on the outside, and though it could be a bit quieter, a bit smoother-riding, a bit more powerful, a bit more agile, and a bit more fuel-efficient, those bits don’t add up to a huge detraction overall, especially to people who prefer the feel of a truck instead of a car while seeking to avoid a truck’s downsides.

That’s not to say that if you want a basic serviceable small SUV the Escape is necessarily your top choice. But despite its age, it’s certainly worth a look as one.