Good morning! I don’t know what the weather is like where you are, but if it’s anything like where I am, we got a little bit of snow. And by a little bit, I mean damn near a foot. Fortunately, I don’t have to go anywhere in it, so I can just stay inside and look at it being all pretty and stuff. But it does remind me of all the years I spent having to drive through this crap, so today I thought we’d look at a couple of cars that represent different philosophies of how to get around in the winter.
Yesterday’s competitors were both a little bit embarrassing, but apparently the overwhelming majority of you feel that tacky add-ons are less of a sin than wrapping a car in bright pink vinyl. The old Mercedes won in a landslide. Some of you even suggested leaving it as-is and leaning into the purveyor-of-illicit-substances look, just to mess with people. I think in certain neighborhoods, that could be a lot of fun, actually.
Me, I couldn’t leave it looking how it is, but I’m definitely on team Mercedes here. I just have no interest in an automatic Eclipse, no matter what color it is. The old SL would take some work, but you’d have something at least remotely desirable and interesting when you’re done.
Now, when it comes to winter vehicles, there are a couple of different schools of thought. One is to get the biggest, nastiest 4×4 you can find, because of course that’s what should work best, right? The other, and the one I typically subscribed to during my years in the Midwest, is to find something front-wheel-drive and low on power, preferably with an automatic transmission, and just make sure it has decent tires on it. Which method is better? Well, I’m going to leave that up to you, after we look at an example of each.
2000 Ford Excursion Limited – $4,300
Engine/drivetrain: 6.8-liter overhead cam V10, four-speed automatic, 4WD
Location: Anoka, MN
Odometer reading: 351,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well, needs a few things
Around the turn of the century, SUVs were big. And I don’t just mean the sales numbers; the trucks themselves had grown to truly ridiculous proportions. Chevy’s Suburban had been the biggest SUV on the road for decades, but in 2000, Ford one-upped it with the Canyonero – I mean, Excursion – based on its Super Duty truck chassis.
A big truck needs a big engine, and the Excursion did not disappoint – Ford’s 5.4 liter V8, the optional big engine for the F150, was the smallest engine available. This one adds two cylinders and a bunch of displacement, with a 6.8 liter ten-cylinder monster under its tall hood. It evaporates a gallon of unleaded once about every ten miles, but it’s got enough power and torque to move this big monster at a frightening clip. There’s enough, there’s wretched excess, and then there’s the V10 Ford Excursion. This one runs and drives fine, but it could use front brakes; the rotors are a little bit warped. Also, fair warning: some owner in its past removed the muffler and installed a straight pipe. All the better to scare pedestrians with, I guess.
It’s the fancy Limited model, so it has power everything and leather all over inside. I get the feeling that the front seats are less than pristine under those covers, but that’s to be expected on a family hauler with 350,000 miles on the clock. The photos in the ad show it full of stuff, which I guess means it’s still in daily use. Hopefully they clean it out before the sale, including that mysterious cinder block in front. Let me know why you think that’s there in the comments – wrong answers only.
It’s a Minnesota vehicle, so it’s no stranger to snow – or road salt. The rocker panels are shot, but the seller says the frame is solid, and the one photo of the underside seems to corroborate this. It’s a decent twenty-footer, at least.
2005 Ford Focus ZXW SE – $1,600
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter dual overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Odometer reading: 293,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Back when I lived in California, I massively overpaid for a 2005 Ford Focus. It was a really good little car, but the bad deal soured me on it. I remember thinking that, even though it was not worth the price I paid, it was going to make someone a good cheap beater someday. The intervening twenty years have proved me right; cheap Focuses with a bazillion miles on them have served a lot of used-car buyers well. This one is well past its prime, but it looks like it has one or two more winters in it.
The Focus started out with either Ford’s ancient CVH four-cylinder, or the raucous twin-cam Zetec, but in 2005, the standard engine was a Duratec 20, Ford’s version of the Mazda MZR, which is well-known for racking up the miles. This one powers the front wheels through a four-speed automatic. We don’t get any info on its condition or history, but considering that it’s closing in on 300,000 miles, it must have been well maintained.
It’s the mid-level SE trim, which means it has power windows and locks, cruise control, air conditioning, all that good stuff. At this age and mileage, it’s anyone’s guess how much of it still works; the seller sings the praises of the heater, but that’s all they say. The interior does look surprisingly good. I would not have guessed a Focus interior would hold up this well, frankly.
As clean as the inside is, the outside definitely shows its age. It’s rusty, beat-up, and shedding paint. But it’s also only sixteen hundred bucks. Use it and abuse it with abandon, and send it on its merry way when it gets too crusty.
Travel any Interstate in the Midwest during a snowstorm, and you’ll see a bunch of cars in the ditch. Overconfidence and too much speed land a lot of drivers in hot water – or rather, deep snow. Too often, the cars you see marooned are 4WD SUVs; they’re great at getting out of snowy parking lots, but they’re not invincible on slippery roads. And honestly, I always did better with a simple little FWD clunker. But today, the choice is yours: will it be the big tall 4×4, or the dirt-cheap rustbucket?
(Image credits: sellers)
Since I can’t imagine ever winding up in a situation where that horrorshow with a freaking straight pipe would be required, obviously, the Focus.
And not just because I managed to survive Atlanta’s Snowpocalypse in a much newer Focus (with all-seasons and traction control), wherein slow and steady somehow managed to get me home.
(In about as much time, I’d calculated, as it would take me to drive from ATL to the Canadian border. But a bottle of water and a can of peanuts wound up being sufficient human fuel.)
The straight pipe is required for killing underground vermin.
They did an article on the Autopian about it recently.
Conceptually, I’ve never understood the concept of a “winter beater”.
If there’s a time I want a car that’s reliable and comfy, it’s winter.
I don’t want to work on any car when it’s freezing or there’s a foot of snow in the driveway. Like, at all. Junk-mobiles will fail me at the exact moment I want to work on them the least. These both rate highly on the junk-mobile scale.
For winter, I want a decently maintained and reasonably newish vehicle that’s not going to break down on me.
I guess the Excursion. Mostly because I don’t drive much during winter so fuel economy isn’t much a concern, I can ignore warped rotors for a bit, it’ll probably mostly work reliably, and it has a seat-heater. Also, I’ll probably recoup my money when I sell it. The Focus looks like misery in rusty form and will be worth less than the change in the cupholder when the trans pops (and it’s not far from that at nearly 300,000 miles).
The cinder block is a jack-stand, obviously. (Disclaimer: Don’t ever use cinder blocks as jack-stands)
The cinder block holds the 4×4 selector in gear
Cinder block is an approved Stanley cup holder
For the rare and sought-after 64 oz size.
The Ford Valdez is not a commuting vehicle, regardless of the season.
I worked with someone who regularly commuted (I don’t think every day, but frequently) in an Excursion from Williamsburg to Virginia Beach, which was about fifty miles each way. Five kids answered the “why an Excursion” (presumably his wife had a minivan, or a conversion box truck), but there was really no cost differential or quality-of-life difference that would explain a commute that was punishing even then and included the state’s worst traffic choke point south of Fredericksburg. And while Williamsburg is the snowiest part of my MSA, it usually only gets a couple inches a year or so.
I voted Excusion here not because it’s the better winter beater (the Focus is) but because it’s the better deal for the dinero. Despite the rust on the rockers it probably has much more life left in it. I sure wouldn’t want to daily it but having a big truck around is handy every once in a while.
Plus, I’ve always wanted to own a V10 and this seems like the cheapest way to get one, even if it isn’t an exciting V10.
The only problem with the Focus is that 4 new winter tires would triple the car’s value.
Given its condition, a full tank of gas probably doubles its value.
I imagine by some definitions the Focus would be considered totaled if the tank gets to less than 1/4 full.
It would be totalled as soon as the air freshener loses it’s scent.
Excursion because I don’t need a daily beater and the V10 is interesting at least. Its funny though, in a world full of the modern Tahoe/Suburban/etc this bus doesn’t feel nearly as big and outrageous as it once did.
“well, the little trash bucket I got from wal-mart used to slide around in there…”
Anyway, there will likely be some towing in my future, so the Excursion…as stupid as it is…would be my choice, but I agree with most sentiments regarding how may people think they’re invincible in the snow when they drive something like this. Like my driver’s ed teacher said so many years ago, “four wheel drive in winter doesn’t mean four wheel stop”. Pretty good thing to remember.
All my vehicles have a working brake at each wheel, which I consider four wheel stop. YMMV I guess
Excursion. Because I can.
I’ll take the Focus because unless you’re sitting at a trailhead a long walk from town, the biggest problem in ice and snow isn’t getting moving, it’s stopping.
If I had $4300 to spend on a Focus or similar, I could find something better than the Excursion, but given this particular set of vehicles, the price difference is less important than the condition difference. Big boy for me.
Focus, ALWAYS the Focus!
My answer depends on how I would use this vehicle. I am of the opinion that 4wd/AWD is the most overrated feature available in a car (Carplay is a close second, though). I drove a lowered Civic for 10 years when I lived in Minnesota and Wisconsin. I bought a set of snow tires and it was fine. I only got stuck when I tried to drive through 11 inches of unplowed snow. I actually got stuck more often when I drove a Wrangler, mostly because the Jeep caused me to abandon common sense (4wd and high ground clearance can’t fix stupid). So if I am buying a winter beater, I’d go with the Focus and search Craigslist for some used snow tires.
The Excursion actually seems like a good purchase, though. I agree with those who say daily driving a huge vehicle like this is wasteful. However, this particular Excursion is cheap enough I could justify buying it for occasional use. A cheap, huge truck is a great second vehicle to use when necessary.
The AWD obsession is definitely correlated with the aftermath of 9/11, when our society went to maximum fear of seemingly everything, and the idea that things can never be too safe became a fixture in our psyches.
I knew people who regularly drove into some of the worst lake effect bands in Upstate NY with FWD on all-seasons. Never got stuck. Including once when the snow was coming up over the hood.
For me, it really depends on the specific all season tires. The stock set of tires on the Civic were adequate, but I had a different set of all season tires that were useless with even an inch of snow.
The snow tires made the car damn near unstoppable. They also got noticeably better traction when the roads were clean but very cold (i.e. below zero temperatures). Snow tires aren’t 100% necessary for most drivers, but they are nice.
Yes, the OEM Firestones I had on a Civic a while back were awful. Spinning in one inch of snow. Rear end sliding around somehow. Replaced them, and it was the car with the snow coming up over the hood.
I ordered a set of Blizzaks from Tire Rack for my ’16 Honda Fit. Darn near rivals a Saab 900 for ripping thru the white–like parting the sea (not really, but it sounds good).
Focus.
Because roads are plowed.
That depends greatly on where you live.
Alright, then, Focus and money leftover for a used Snowmobile.
Because if I can’t safely get to places in a Focus, then I likely can’t get there safely in an Excursion. So I might as well take get a proper snow vehicle.
That’s amusing, but not really accurate.
6 inches of snow on a road or driveway stands a good chance of stranding a compact car. A big truck with big tires and 4wd is going to get through a lot deeper snow.
For someone living in a suburban neighborhood, it’s moot. Someone out in the country who can’t always wait hours for the plow is going to be more mobile and safer in the truck.
The transmission tunnel rusted out and every time I slam on the brakes the center console slides forward and changes the radio station. I really, really hate classic rock so I installed this heavy object to prevent this. It’s my Classic Rock Blocker Cinder Block.
I was gonna go with “alternate drink holders because 40 oz malt beverage bottles don’t fit in the standard ones”, but Mark said wrong answers only…
Oh, it is for sure a cup holder for big gulps and such, but yeah, wrong answers only. I say it’s to throw at somebody in case of road rage.
Excursion.
Sometimes it’s best to be outrageous.
With the optional dual 8″ concrete tankard holder.
Focus. Not even close, especially considering the price differential. If $4500 is the budget I’d be looking for a less rusty example with a manual though.
I’m thrilled not to own either of these, but driving a Focus that nasty can only crush the soul, whereas the Excursion can crush any damn thing it wants to. Plus it comes with a handy cinder block stepstool for entry.
Yeah, I’m not dealing with 10mpg today. I’ll take the white beater and drive it till it dies
Focus for me. I’ve owned one for 10 years and they’re fantastic cars, but in this case, it’s b/c the Excursion won’t fit the garage of my building. Literally…it’s too tall to make it to the lower parking levels without ripping out the overhead pipes/the roof rails.
It’s too long to fit in my house’s garage!
The Excursion was stupid when new, and even stupider now.
The Focus will do perfectly.
Edit: the cinder block is a redneck keg-holder. Oh, wrong answers only? Then I don’t know.
I used to dislike the Excursion, but now I think they’re a fascinating case study.
Ford will tell you the extended Expedition/Navigator is their replacement for it, and you’ve got the similar-seeming Suburban, Yukon, Escalade, etc.–but the critical difference is that these vehicles are generally good for carrying a lot of people or towing something really heavy, but not both.
Being based on the F-250 chassis, the Excursion was actually capable of both simultaneously. Hence, the fact that they still hold value 20 years later, and tons of the ones that do show up for sale have moon mileage.
Absolutely wasteful as a commuter car, yeah. I concede that. And for the purpose of this decision, the Focus is the far more economical option. But I’m far more sympathetic to the Excursion than I used to be.
(As a side note, the Expedition and Excursion should’ve had their names swapped. I think of an excursion as something brief, and an expedition as long and arduous.)
It’s a really good point. I think the Excursion (lol re the name swap, you’re so right) just came along at the wrong time and became the victim of a (self-inflicted to be sure) PR nightmare.
If the Excursion had existed for a decade or so prior, and had been sold largely to people who needed that kind of capacity/towing ability, it would enjoy a reputation more like the Suburban.
But b/c it came out during the bigger is better SUVs just b/c awesome badass era, it’s forever linked to stories of people trying to fit them in suburban garages, commuting to the office at terrible mileage, etc., things it was never meant for.
Only the diesel Excursions are still worth money. The gas versions are almost worthless. The V10 in this article is overpriced given the miles and likely rust.
How are Suburban 2500 values compared to Excursions and 1500 Suburbans?
I agree with the name swapping tho
I went with the Excursion, only because I have already owned a Focus and lived in the Minnesota/Wisconsin area and have too good of an idea of how bad that Focus’s rust really is. The Excursion is certainly going to be rough, especially given the sort of folks who Anoka (it was the redneck part of the Twin Cities until they started building fancier neighborhoods out there 15-20 years ago). I’ve also owned an F250 with that V10, albeit with only 280,000 miles, so I know how to work on most of the Excursion.
I’ll never again own a vehicle that gets less than 15mpg. Let alone 10mpg.
That said, if you absolutely need something that can haul and tow that much, Car Wizard did a good video on why he chose a Dodge V10 instead of a Cummins. It came down to how high the demand is for Diesels and that for the money you’re better off with the gas model even though it uses more fuel.
If it isn’t your only vehicle, and you really only use it when hauling something, the V10 is a great choice. Based on my experience with a 2000 F250 V10, that 10mpg is in all circumstances. Empty: 10mpg. Fully loaded bed (3900lbs in my truck’s case): 10mpg. Towing (an enclosed trailer with 5800lbs inside): 10mpg.
cinder block is for those biggie cups, it’s a cup holder. It will also hold your travel mug of coffee too.
Sorry, I failed the assignment…wrong answer only.. It’s obviously the emergency brake. Pull it out and put it behind a wheel when on a hill.