2015 Order Guide: Update 4/2

[akirby]

I still say if the car is close enough to hit you then you can easily see it with or without DRLs - if you look.

[Waldo]

How does seeing a car hundreds of yards away help safety?

 

When I pull out to pass someone on a two-lane road I like to know I have a few hundred yards before I'm going to hit somebody.

 

But to answer the question, the 2015 Edge will have user-configurable DRLs as standard equipment. The 942 option is for fleets only and is the same thing Canadians get, DRLs always with no option to turn them off.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Waldo

[ls973800]

How does seeing a car hundreds of yards away help safety?

Really? You have never been in a situation where because of sun glare, mist, fog, rain, snow, etc you couldn't see a car hundreds of yards away? Or, I'll admit it, there have been times I may have glanced instead of really looked, when pulling out of an intersection, parking lot, ect. Or just not paying attention to my surroundings because of other distractions. If you have never experienced not seeing another car because you are such an expert driver, then KUDOS to you.

 

Not all cars have automatic headlights that would turn on in those situations, and not all cars have the safety feature of DRL's being installed, enabled, or even available. Yes, I definitely consider DRL's a safety feature!

 

A car traveling at 60 MPH moves 29.3 yards in one second. That's 293.0 yards in ten seconds. Or 146.5 yards in 5 seconds.

 

I don't know about anyone else, but I sure would like to have the advantage of those cars at least having DRL's, even if it's just to give me an advantage of seeing them sooner or better.

 

I don't see how anyone could think seeing a car hundreds of yards away sooner or easier would not be considered a safety feature. Oh well, I guess that's why we are all individuals and can think differently.

 

Me, I stick with my thoughts that it is a safety feature. Otherwise why are there even DRL's?

 

I also want to note that I added the DRL's that are sold by a fellow member on this forum because I believe they give an additional advantage of my being seen in certain conditions. Regardless of it being weather conditions, environmental conditions, driver inattention, etc.

Edited January 15, 2015 by ls973800

[akirby]

What happens if you pull out in front of a car that's 300 yards (10 seconds) away? Nothing.

 

NHTSA looked at hard statistics from other countries. They could find no statistically significant reduction in accidents by having mandatory DRLs. That's why they're not mandatory in the U.S.

 

Making auto headlamps that are also tied into the wipers mandatory would be a much better safety feature because it makes the entire vehicle visible in low visibility situations such as rain, fog or just darkness. And it makes the taillights visible, too.

 

Motorcycles are different - they're smaller and harder to see relative to larger cars and trucks.

 

But in normal light situations, this is how I see it. Obviously some people disagree and that's fine. I'm not saying you shouldn't have DRLs if you want them.

 

The only time DRLs are in play is if

 

You're pulling out into a cross street or turning left

An oncoming car is close enough so that they will hit you if you pull out or turn

You actually look for oncoming traffic before pulling out or turning.

The car is not visible without DRLs.

 

 

If the car is close enough to hit you I find it hard to believe you can't see it without DRLs. If it's hundreds of yards away there is no collision danger. If you never look then DRLs won't help.

[ls973800]

Pulling out in front of may result in nothing, but pulling out to pass when it is oncoming may result in something worse. As for the 2008 study you refer to, here is another look at some of the findings. Note the different vehicles which benefit from having DRL's

 

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/crash-avoidance-technologies/qanda#daytime-running-lights

 

Federal researchers, using data collected nationwide from 1995 to 2001, concluded that there was a 5 percent decline in daytime, two-vehicle, opposite-direction crashes. 3 However, a 2008 federal study concluded that DRLs reduce crash involvements of pickups, SUVs, and vans, but have no significant effect on crashes of passenger cars. 4

 

I would put the Edge in the SUV category rather than a passenger car category. Wonder how many more SUV, pickups, and vans are on the road now than in 2008. I would say more for sure.

Edited January 15, 2015 by ls973800

[Limited59]

How does seeing a car hundreds of yards away help safety?

Wow. Normally I tend to agree with your slant on things, however blunt. But this comment leaves me scratching my head.

 

How the heck can some additional vehicle illumination NOT help in all kinds of driving? Something that makes your vehicle more visible can ONLY aid safety. To think otherwise is, to my notion, absolutely foolish.

 

Since we've had mandatory DRLs here for many years, when I visit my sister in the Midwest it strikes me immediately how helpful they actually are in all sorts of driving situations. Especially these days with an aging population with questionable vision and the omnipresent distracted driver.

[akirby]

This could all be settled if we had accident data for vehicles with and without DRLs.

 

That study also said that the 5% difference with SUVs wasn't enough to be statistically significant - meaning it could have been caused by other factors.

 

And why would it not help cars? Cars would be much lower and harder to see without DRLs so you think they would benefit the most.

 

Show me statistics that say otherwise and I'll believe it. Until then common sense tells me that while it sounds good, in practice it just doesn't make a difference.

[Limited59]

Sorry, but I don't need study data to confirm what I've personally witnessed over the last couple of decades. IMHO all vehicles should have DRLs. Full stop.

 

I also think all vehicles should have auto headlamps. If I had a dollar for every vehicle (mostly foreign I might add) that is driving around at dusk with no tail lamps on, well, I'd be wealthier.

[WWWPerfA_ZN0W]

If I had a dollar for every vehicle (mostly foreign I might add) that is driving around at dusk with no tail lamps on, well, I'd be wealthier.

Simply conserving energy, that's all

[akirby]

Simply conserving energy, that's all

 

That's exactly true for BEVs like the Leaf. I see Leafs with no lights more often than any other vehicle for just that reason - conserving that precious 80 mile battery range.

[akirby]

Sorry, but I don't need study data to confirm what I've personally witnessed over the last couple of decades.

 

Without getting into a pissing match, I don't see how you could personally witness anything that confirms the effectiveness of DRLs. Just because you see a car with DRLs doesn't mean you would not have seen them without DRLs. And not seeing a car without DRLs doesn't mean you would have seen them with DRLs. Statistics are the only way to know for sure if you really care.

 

But I would never tell someone not to use DRLs if they want them. I suspect LEDs will make them a defacto standard on most vehicles anyway which will be much more stylish and not burn out the headlamps prematurely.

[Limited59]

^ yeah this is where I get off the bus. I suspect you are being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse, per usual. It baffles me how you couldn't get behind something that 'might' increase/benefit the general safety of the motoring public. Burned out bulbs < safety of family and friends in my books. But whatever.

[akirby]

I didn't say I was against them, nor am I being obtuse. Show me statistics that show a statistically valid benefit and I'll buy it. Right now the only statistics say they don't help.

[JimPA]

This could all be settled if we had accident data for vehicles with and without DRLs.

 

That study also said that the 5% difference with SUVs wasn't enough to be statistically significant - meaning it could have been caused by other factors.

 

Show me statistics that show a statistically valid benefit and I'll buy it. Right now the only statistics say they don't help.

 

Akirby, your statistics didn't indicate that DRL don't help, they show a 5% difference which you stated wasn't statistically significant. But if you have kids driving, you'll take all the 5% you can get.

 

My 2001 4Runner came with DRL and I added a dash switch so I can turn the DRLs off and on. When I drive, I turn off the DRL. When others drive my SUV, I turn on the DRL. I just like than motorcycles stand out with their DRL. If every motor vehicle has DRL, IMO that waters down the motorcycles DRLs.

 

 

[akirby]

That study also showed NO reduction in accidents for cars. How do you explain that?

[JimPA]

That study also showed NO reduction in accidents for cars. How do you explain that?

 

Akirby - You didn't link the study so I am just going by the information you posted and referencing parts of that. You said 5% in SUV so I looked no further. I can look at the study and offer my input. I'm more concerned about texting. Some kid slammed into me while I was stopped for a red light during a perfect day, great visibility. He said he was adjusting the radio but I didn't buy it. My 4Runner withstood the accident with minimal damage.

[akirby]

It was quoted earlier. Here is the report. Read it and come to your own conclusions. I'm not going to continue arguing about it.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov%2FPubs%2F811029.pdf&ei=W7O_VPX2J4OxyQS2j4GQDw&usg=AFQjCNE6xyYLr-dzq4M0N7WUsrTXo-FqaA

[blitz118]

With so much talk about DRLs. Does anyone want to see some 2015 Edge walk around videos? If so please see the below.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMyLmocDpIo

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz9-kNuWeyM

Edited January 21, 2015 by blitz118

[rmmick]

With so much talk about DRLs. Does anyone want to see some 2015 Edge walk around videos? If so please see the below.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMyLmocDpIo

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz9-kNuWeyM

Did anyone else notice in the Sport video, that when the camera panned the window sticker, it listed 22" polished aluminum wheels....they aren't even available on the Sport anymore, biggest option is 21" and they are painted....I would think that someone would have checked this aspect especially in downtown Detroit at this show. Even the tires when the camera is focused on them says 21"....just sayin.......personally I think there should be at least (2) available bigger wheel packages, maybe one "blacked out" and one traditional chrome or polished, it's not like they are giving these packages away....

[WWWPerfA_ZN0W]

Liberties taken at car shows Either they didn't update the sticker in time, or the decision was made later to pull them (after the show prep was complete)?

[akirby]

That order guide is old and could have been updated already. I'm sure they're planning to offer the 22s but there may have been a supply problem. Won't know until the official build and price arrives (or someone posts the final order guide).

[rmmick]

Liberties taken at car shows Either they didn't update the sticker in time, or the decision was made later to pull them (after the show prep was complete)?

If you can look close enough, on the bottom left hand corner of the sticker the last line of type lists a "tag" number as well as a name, mcaulfield.

This is what shows up on our management lease vehicles, my wife's "tag number" and her name. So this vehicle was built specifically for "caulfield". Now I don't know who "caulfield" is, but I think they are pretty high up in the Ford chain. If so, maybe they have his name affixed to "all" show vehicles to run or produce the unit. I couldn't see enough of the other window stickers to see if others were listed the same way. Down in the vehicle added options sections of the sticker, I did see the 21" tire and wheel package listed....almost like a step backwards that was as added cost, being shown right on the sticker.

 

Also, I know that they have in the past, used vehicles that were designated as "show cars only" as the the sticker does say "not for sale" and these vehicles get moved around the car show circuit from city to city. Years ago, I remember when Olds came out with the Cutlass convertible early '80's I think, with the "roll bar" across the car remember? I was in the car business at the time and I had a customer who was willing to pay ANYTHING for "that specific" car. I called the zone rep and made some inquiries. He said they would sell it to us/him but he would not be very happy with it......it had no engine! Sometimes though, I know that the actual "show vehicles" are made available to local dealers to put into their inventory.

 

I would be very interested to see if this is an actual Ford employee vehicle, "Caulfield" or not.

[Magnetic Edge]

If you can look close enough, on the bottom left hand corner of the sticker the last line of type lists a "tag" number as well as a name, mcaulfield.

This is what shows up on our management lease vehicles, my wife's "tag number" and her name. So this vehicle was built specifically for "caulfield". Now I don't know who "caulfield" is, but I think they are pretty high up in the Ford chain. If so, maybe they have his name affixed to "all" show vehicles to run or produce the unit. I couldn't see enough of the other window stickers to see if others were listed the same way. Down in the vehicle added options sections of the sticker, I did see the 21" tire and wheel package listed....almost like a step backwards that was as added cost, being shown right on the sticker.

 

Also, I know that they have in the past, used vehicles that were designated as "show cars only" as the the sticker does say "not for sale" and these vehicles get moved around the car show circuit from city to city. Years ago, I remember when Olds came out with the Cutlass convertible early '80's I think, with the "roll bar" across the car remember? I was in the car business at the time and I had a customer who was willing to pay ANYTHING for "that specific" car. I called the zone rep and made some inquiries. He said they would sell it to us/him but he would not be very happy with it......it had no engine! Sometimes though, I know that the actual "show vehicles" are made available to local dealers to put into their inventory.

 

I would be very interested to see if this is an actual Ford employee vehicle, "Caulfield" or not.

 

 

 

 

Caulfield works for DST, the company who orders and preps the Marketing vehicles for Ford.

Edited January 22, 2015 by Magnetic Edge

[Waldo]

It's pretty simple really, Ford builds 4 phases of pre-production vehicles at the plant. The first phase are the first ones, they are always test or marketing vehicles and they must always be destroyed and never resold. The second batch are still always test or marketing, but depending on the program, sometimes they might find themselves available for sale at auction later, however you would never want one of these, trust me! The third batch are mostly management lease vehicles and some test/marketing vehicles, but all are internal Ford customers. Only the fourth batch (officially Job1) are available to dealers.

Every car in the first 3 batches will have a tag number and a name, and no you don't have to be very high up, you just have to have the job of ordering test/marketing cars.

[Jeff Maynard]

I see the 2015 Edge Sport trim level in Equipment Group 401A when you click "see the details" it says panoramic vista roof IS INCLUDED. But later on in build mode there an $1595 option to add panoramic vista roof. If you only select equipment group 401A in summary at the end there no Panoramic vista roof.

So my question is the Panoramic vista roof included in the $3700 401A equipment group on Sport trim ?