Yesterday I outlined how Hyundai’s Venue may signal the start of a new crossover segment aimed at buyers looking for something other than a subcompact sedan or hatchback. In that piece, the Hyundai executive claimed that the Venue is the first of its kind. Is it though? The Ford EcoSport, which arrived in America early last year, is essentially the same size as the Hyundai. But it hasn’t been treated like a vehicle in a different segment than models like the Chevrolet Trax or Honda HR-V. Far from it. There is no consensus on the Ford EcoSport. Some reviews pilloried the crossover while others liked its overall package. What gives?
The most cynical take on the EcoSport is that it is a vehicle suited for developing nations and little else. There is merit to that argument, but it doesn’t take into account the recent influx of entry level mini crossovers that have arrived to essentially replace their subcompact sedan and hatchback counterparts. Nissan and Hyundai are clearly trying to sell products positioned underneath the subcompact crossover segment. It’s a new trend that is a little hard to fully grasp due to all the rapid changes that have occurred over the last several years. But think back to 2009. Subcompacts had yet to firmly enter the market, and compacts were still sparsely equipped vehicles aimed primarily towards price conscious shoppers. Americans couldn’t conceptualize those vehicles through a contemporary lens because they simply didn’t exist back then.
| Make/Model | Length (Inches) | Wheelbase (Inches) | Width (Inches) | Height (Inches) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ford EcoSport | 161.3 | 99.2 | 69.5 | 65.1 |
| Hyundai Kona | 164 | 102.4 | 69.5 | 65.1 |
| Jeep Renegade | 167 | 101.2 | 74.2 | 66.5 |
| Nissan Kicks | 169.1 | 103.1 | 69.3 | 62.4 |
| Kia Soul | 165.2 | 102.4 | 70.9 | 63 |
And that brings us back to the EcoSport. The Ford is currently the smallest crossover like vehicle available to Americans, and it will be until the Venue arrives at dealers this fall. Compared to its next largest competitors, the EcoSport is shorter in overall length and it also boasts a shorter wheelbase by at least several inches. That last detail is critical, because a shorter wheelbase will greatly impact how a particular vehicle handles road imperfections.
And the Ford’s ability to respond to potholes and other things is exactly what some critics felt was ultimately a demerit for the crossover. Car and Driver reviewed the EcoSport and felt that it came up short when compared to models like the Honda HR-V and Mazda CX-3. But those are significantly longer vehicles with more substantial wheelbases. Other publications have felt differently, which further complicates things. Consumer Reports purchased their own EcoSport last year and liked its overall handling:
“Handling is a high point for this subcompact SUV. With its quick steering and limited body roll, the EcoSport is much more engaging than most of its competitors. It handles more like a sporty car than a dull SUV. Yes, driving the EcoSport has been a pleasant surprise.”
You can spend about an hour or so reading up on reviews of the EcoSport from all the major print and digital publications and come to the conclusion that there is no consensus on the little crossover in regards to its handling or its size. Some feel the EcoSport is unrefined and choppy on all but the smoothest pavement while others think it offers a sophisticated and engaging drive. Certain reviewers feel the EcoSport is too small for its own good while other critics have found that its cargo capacity is greater than some of its larger competitors. The lack of consensus on the Ford really illustrates the idea that the EcoSport may simply belong to a different segment altogether.
Despite their bipolar impressions of the EcoSport, the automotive press did offer similar opinions about its pricing and the available safety features. Pretty much everyone agrees that the EcoSport is priced far too high for what it offers. Take for example our featured model, which is an SES, the most expensive trim in the EcoSport lineup. It’s MSRP is $28,270.
For about the same money you can get a Ford Escape SE AWD with partial leather seats and forward collision warning, which is not available on the EcoSport.
Of course that doesn’t take into account any sort of incentives, and a cursory search of EcoSport deals yield some pretty substantial discounts. This screenshot comes directly from Ford’s official site, meaning you could walk right into a Ford dealer today and get $5,000 off without even asking.
Another EcoSport flaw is the rear hatch. It opens horizontally, which makes sense for markets where a spare tire is necessary, but for everywhere else the opening becomes a liability in tight spaces. Plus, Ford dropped the rear mounted spare tire for all American models entirely, so you can’t get it even if you wanted to.
Yes, Ford’s smallest crossover is flawed. But that doesn’t mean it’s a dumpster fire on wheels. And I’m not suggesting that Ford predicted the genesis of a crossover segment below the subcompact category and introduced the EcoSport accordingly. In fact it’s quite the opposite. It was probably inevitable that someone was going to introduce a crossover that didn’t quite neatly fit into one segment. My conclusion is that the EcoSport makes a lot more sense now that the Hyundai Venue has been introduced. Criticisms like intrusive road and wind noise and driving dynamics that aren’t class competitive are less valid if the vehicle in question is in a different class. Would you admonish Toyota for not making the Corolla as quiet as the Accord or Altima? No, because there are substantial differences between the compact and midsize sedan segments.
It will be interesting to see how these fledgling crossover segments develop over the next several years. My guess is that the EcoSport will be viewed a bit differently in the future. And its successor will probably be similarly sized, allowing Ford to develop a true competitor to the likes of the Hyundai Kona and Nissan Rogue Sport. In any event, this probably won’t be the last time our preconceptions about crossovers are challenged.
Related Reading:
Future CC Outtake: 2018 Ford EcoSport – History Repeats Itself, At Least For The United States
Curbside Capsule: 2002-2012 Ford Fusion (Europe) Old Fusion by William Stopford
The fact that I cannot sit behind myself in the Ecosport is a big problem and I am only 6 FT tall. I can fit into the back of a Fiesta Hatchback and have enough leg room for short trips plus there is enough clearance for me not to bend my neck while sitting.
While I think the swing open tailgate is neat (my Caprice had one) I can see how in places like San Francisco it would be a problem. Even in Philadelphia when opening the swing up tailgate on my Minivan all I had to do was make sure to park in front of a sedan so there was less car to clear.
I do agree that having these cost more than an Escape is befuddling since I assume most folks would go with an Escape. Speaking of Escapes I see a number of the base model version around and wonder if the Ecosport even comes with steel wheels. I hardly ever seen privately owned Ecosports.
The EcoSport is based on the Fiesta, so I am surprised that you found the Fiesta to be roomier.
My biggest gripe with the EcoSport is with the engines used.
And being a smidge bigger than you, I think that the smallest crossover I am willing to go with is an Escape.
Surely the Ecosport is based on an obsolete model of the Fiesta, which was smaller than the current one.
Note he compares the top of the line EcoSport to the low mid range Escape trim. Cheapest to cheapest, the EcoSport is $3600 less. The fact that the top trim is more expensive than the base trim of the vehicle in the class is pretty common. Not everyone is looking for the largest vehicle they can get for their money and don’t care that they have to get the poverty spec to do it.
You ignore the Opel Mokka based Buick Encore and Chevy Trax, both of which fit this segment. The difference in them and the EcoSport are not that big, other than one can get 4WD on the GM versions.
The Buick version is selling quite well. It seems Americans do like small luxury, but only if packaged as CUVs, not cars.
I can’t talk about every single entry in the subcompact segment because that would take up too much time and not serve much of a purpose in the context of the article.
As to your comment about the difference between the EcoSport and the GM siblings, the Ford is seven inches shorter than them, which to me is significant. For comparison’s sake, the Kia Cadenza and Toyota Avalon are both three inches longer than their midsize sedan counterparts (Optima and Camry, respectively). If those four cars can be separated into two distinct segments, the EcoSport and Venue can most certainly be in their own class as well.
Isn’t the Ford just abnormally short though due to its Indian-market roots? I think if I were looking at these I would look at the Trax too, I don’t think the Trax is a class above the EcoSport just because it’s a bit longer. Adding 7 inches to the EcoSport is probably just what it needs to look a little less odd (to North American market eyes, that is).
All of them are the entry level offering for their manufacturers in the CUV-ish segment, inviting comparisons. The Cadenza isn’t really cross shopped or marketed against the Camry, nor is the Avalon vs the Optima (not routinely anyway).
Put another way the Trax certainly isn’t competitive against the next largest Ford entry, the Escape. Hey, maybe they should have called the EcoSport the Ford “Entry”, it starts with an E! Or maybe there’ll be an even smaller one soon…
Trax length is 6.3″ longer than EcoSport which would reverse if there was a version with a tailgate mounted spare over here as in other markets. Wait for the “Raptor” trim I guess.
Trax wheelbase though is only a bit over 1″ longer than the EcoSport so would/could have similar ride characteristics.
“The Cadenza isn’t really cross shopped or marketed against the Camry, nor is the Avalon vs the Optima (not routinely anyway). ”
That’s entirely my point. The sedan segments have matured to a point where the public knows that a Cadenza and Avalon are in a different class than their mid size counterparts, despite only being three inches longer. Because smaller compact crossovers are a newer configuration their size categories still have yet to fully standardize a size for each class. My point is that the EcoSport and Venue may be the start of a new segment slotted below the subcompacts crossovers.
But isn’t that the exact reasoning why the Ford trails no new ground? It’s priced directly into the small CUV segment. Avalon/Camry and Cadenza/Optima don’t typically have a shared price point unless you touch the extreme ends of both, and that’s how buyers end up seeing a hierarchy. The EcoSport is just a smaller short term compromise Ford charges similar $ for, relative to larger cars within “it’s class”. Bet you the next generation swells in size, no doubt. The real trailblazer is the still FWD only Kia Soul.
Sorry if I seemed to be critical, I was not intending that. Your thoughtful writing is appreciated. I only was pointing out the entry level vehicles from the competition as comparisons, as that is how I see it.
The EcoSport is the default entry level vehicle for Ford NA.
They decided it was more profitable than the Focus wagon/CUV from China, so they went with the Indian version already in production, much as they did with the Transit Connect when it first came out (using the Turkish built eurospec model).
GM did the same with the Opel unit becoming a Buick first, then getting a Chevy version for the NA market. I think they are having more success, as they are hitting the market, not creating a niche that may not otherwise exist.
No need to apologize. I didn’t take offense.
I’ve made a very similar comment before, so I won’t belabor the point, but I’ll respectfully disagree. I would call the EcoSport a dumpster fire- sitting in one for about 2 minutes confirmed it. Interior is easily 5 years behind and the seats are perhaps the least comfortable I’ve ever sat in. Plus not being able to open the rear hatch if you’re parallel parked.
About 2 hours after sitting in the EcoSport I was driving home in my new Escort.
What the heck, autocorrect… new Encore. I’m not in the Chinese market.
Although I’ve never owned a vehicle with larger than 16” wheels, with modern styling they look small on the EcoSport (and Fiat 500X) compared to say the 18” rims standard on the small GM crossovers. That “roller skate” look hurts the Ford, in my opinion. By contrast, my 1978 Fiesta looked good with 12” rims, and positively beefy with the 13” Capri wheels that I ran for a while. Oddly enough, I’d agree that the Enclave is selling quite well even our import-nameplate dominated part of the US. And local dealer license plate frames confirm that they are not tourist rentals. The EcoSport? Haven’t seen many.
The best clue to understanding the EcoSport is that it is made in India. Both it and the Hyundai Venue are both under 4 meters in length, which makes them eligible for a much lower excise tax rate in that country (when equipped with a small enough engine – 1.2 liters max for gas, 1.5 for diesel). This means they are the Indian market equivalent of Japanese-market Kei cars. Nothing else in this segment of the Indian marketplace is exported to North America, so they really are designed to compete in a different market segment than their North American competitors.
That makes perfect sense. Of course, I’m commenting on the EcoSport in the context of the American market, but that doesn’t mean international markets aren’t important. Thanks for this explanation.
Nobody seemed to like the Buick Encore when it came out either. Well, nobody except for actual buyers, that is… 🙂 I think it turned into a rare bright spot for GM and certainly for Buick.
The EcoSport just seems to look a little…off. Same as the Venue to some folks here. I took the time to check one out at CarMax a few months back and came away thinking it wasn’t nearly as horrible inside as reading some reviews would have you believe. It’s not my cup of tea and I think the price may be too high but maybe it’ll work.
I think the tailgate issue is overblown. It doesn’t seem to be a huge issue for the Wrangler, nor was it one for the first three generations of RAV4 or basically anything with a tire on the rear. If parking is super tight an upward opening hatch isn’t great either. Maybe we’ll see a return of the GM clamshell tailgate.
What I think the bigger issue may be is that people aren’t looking at many of these in this segment because they are small, they are looking at them because they are CHEAP (Buick is the outlier here, it’s a fair bit pricier). The Ford doesn’t seem all that cheap though, so perhaps that’s its issue and the Ford badge doesn’t carry the “luxe” connotation. (Or at least they were pushing the loaded versions at first).
I think the fact that it looks like a smaller version of the Escape hinders sales of it. A quick glance at a row of them at a dealer most likely would cause a lot of folks to think they are just another row of Escapes. I know it fooled me back in January when I was with my dad looking at cars to replace my folks aging 2003 Sable.
Now the Kona, looks nothing like any other car on the Hyundai lot. This will be the same thing with the Venue.
In the end most folks looking to buy a small Ford CUV will probably buy an Escape. That is what my folks did in Jan 2019.
I think the Honda HR-V suffers the same problem. Folks will probably leave with a CR-V after looking at the HR-V
The EcoSport could only be a North American-market segment pioneer purely by stumbling into it. Ford was caught out without an offering in a rapidly growing segment so they simply looked to their overseas operations and grabbed the EcoSport. At least Ford NA waited for the refresh — Ford’s European and Australian operations grabbed the pre-facelift model. It sells about half as well as the Renault Captur in Europe and it’s been more or less a flop in Australia because it was all too clearly a car for developing markets. We’ll see if the refresh turns things around in those markets.
I’ll bet if Ford didn’t have the EcoSport in its global line-up and they had to develop a homegrown Chevy Trax competitor, it would’ve matched it in dimensions.
That being said, the crossover market is so fluid. Subcompact crossovers seemed to pop out of nowhere. The Kona is ostensibly a Trax rival but they’re fitting the Venue in underneath so one wonders if the EcoSport replacement will continue being sub-Trax in size or if they fit something in between the EcoSport and the Escape and upcoming mini-Bronco.
Even if you don’t like crossovers, from an industry analysis point of view the rise of crossovers is fascinating.
I agree that the EcoSport wasn’t intending to create a new segment in the US, it was the expedient solution to having something in the emerging class as well as having something with a base price less than the Escape with the Focus gone and the Fiesta having one foot out the door.
I’ve read elsewhere that the replacement is being created with the US market in mind this time. So it will be interesting to see where they go with it in size. One thing I did read was that the side opening tail gate is going away.
Pop out of nowhere indeed; look to Europe for what likely will be the next “EcoSport”. It’s slated to be positioned above the current one, and of all things Ford is bringing back the name Puma for it:
The comment about crossovers being fascinating from an industry perspective made me pause, and think. Their genesis was car-platform-based, upright, AWD-able “utility” vehicles. Putting aside cars like the Matra Rancho or AMC Eagle, even the Aztec, think RAV4 and CRV. But in fact, as crossovers become more car-like, it makes me think that the PT Cruiser was the real pioneer in this segment. Only partially kidding … but maybe it was the Mitsubishi Expo LRV.
If I read this post correctly, there is no spare tire in this car, nor a place to store one. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I want a spare tire. Not that the EcoSport was on my list anyhow, but this fact alone makes it an automatic fail.
The unfortunate reality is that many cars don’t come with a spare and tools as standard equipment, though many have a place to put one if you spend extra for a temp spare. Others do not have a spot for it, and it is not just cars that come with run flat tires like it was in the early days of no-spare.
Can’t say I’m a big fan of it but I do have two vehicles in the driveway that didn’t come with a spare and only one of them really has a space to store one. I do keep thinking about getting one for the car that does have a spot for it but 10 months in I haven’t done it yet.
You want a spare? This is what you get in Oz.
My hate for crossovers that are Escape-sized or larger has mellowed in the past couple of years as they become more ubiquitous and I simply accept them as a reality of life in 2019. I do see their merits and “get it” from the perspective of a regular car buyer, even if I don’t personally like them and don’t see myself buying one.
These “sub-compact” crossovers on the other hand? Totally do not see the appeal. They have clown car proportions, look incredibly dorky, tippy, stubby, and generally give off a vibe that they were designed for a 13-year-old girl. It doesn’t seem like they have much useful space in the interiors, either. If you’re gonna make a non-sedan of this size, it seems like you should just go the Kia Soul route and make a low, boxy hipster kind of thing that has purposefully quirky looks and better space (the Venue falls under this category as well, and the old Scion Xb) instead of this gross shrunken Escape monstrosity. I can’t decided if the EcoSport is worse or the Trax/Encore, but they are both pretty hideous and don’t appear to have good space utilization.
I can understand why someone would choose an Escape over a mid-size or compact sedan, often times for the higher seating position and visibility alone. But these just scream “compromise” and give such a wannabe vibe, not to mention way overpriced at over $20k for a stripped base model.
The biggest problem with the EcoSport is that it’s already old. It’s also too truckish for its’ role, just like the original Escape and the Bronco II were come to think of it.
Ford should have rolled out the next-gen Fiesta instead, bringing in the raised-and-cladded Active model first as the volume model so it can be successfully repositioned as a “crossover”, then the ST and finally a base S and possibly SFE hatchbacks (there are no more Fiesta sedans anywhere in the world).
After driving a Trax and sitting in an EcoSport, I’ll take my 2010 CRV. The Trax felt and looked dime store cheap on the inside and was almost as loud as my 20 year old Saturn with similar driving dynamics. The Eco looks nicer but is kinda tiny. My question is the Buick version of the Trax worth the extra dough?
I drove a EcoSport media vehicle for a week last summer and agree with what many say about this little runt. It needs more work and the Escape, HR-V, CX-3 would be better vehicles for a little more money.
No wonder there are $ incentives to try and lure buyers.
I shopped the EcoSport, and ended up buying a Honda HR-V. A more pleasant car in my opinion.
I could barely get comfortable trying to sit in one of these at the NYIAS. The sit is very awkwardly place. Room in back was decent for my near six foot son but he definitely didnt like it back there as the seat was thin and hard.
This I believe is built in India and I have heard they are a nightmare to get parts for especially body panels.
Handed the keys one of these at the Avis counter to start a family vacation last fall. It felt small, cheap (even though the materials were of good quality) and underpowered. Once my daughter named it The Toadstool, the thing became somewhat endearing. Seemed like a decent car for a Gen-Zer…if Gen-Zers bought cars.
That’s outrageously expensive. I priced a Mazda CX-5 Sport AWD and it’s only $28000 with a roof rack and trailer hitch. The difference is that the Mazda is a size class up and one of the best in its class.