Another in a series of my reviews that appeared in the online version of African Americans On Wheels, a now defunct automotive magazine that was included as an insert in the Sunday newspapers of major cities.
It may look like I’m fawning over this Escort much more that it deserves, but I was genuinely impressed with it. Having driven the Corolla just a couple of months before, it was still pretty fresh in my mind and I really didn’t notice any discernible difference in quality. I’m sure that if I had to live with the Escort for a few years I would. However, I don’t recall any major quality issues with this generation. That also may be due to the fact the HUGE quality issues with the Contour, Taurus, Focus and Escape overshadowed it.
This was also the review where I learned that my editor didn’t like parentheses:
I prefer not to use parenthesis[sic] in stories. If the information is worth putting in the story, then put it in. Parenthesis slow down the flow, and Adam, your reviews do have a nice flow and rhythm to them. Jackie
Anyone who reads my work knows that I love parentheses, since I feel it’s the best way to state an aside inside the referring sentence. My favorite Stephen Wright joke: “If you can’t hear me, it’s because I’m in parentheses.”
The below review ran on July 28, 1998.
How does near Japanese quality and refinement at a substantially lower price strike you? I thought that would get your attention. The 1998 Ford Escort SE sedan proves that an American company can build a refined, high quality small car for a reasonable price. We will disclose, however, that it does use the platform and transmission of the previous generation Mazda Protege.
The Escort sedan was updated last year, turning the bland, angular little car into a smaller version of the Ford Taurus. On top of its slick, curvaceous styling, the Escort also received an all-new interior that includes the same space-age radio/climate control pod found in the Taurus. Under the hood, a larger and substantially more powerful engine resides and can finally move the Escort with the authority of its Toyota Corolla, Saturn SL and Dodge/Plymouth Neon competitors. It can also go 100,000 miles between tuneups.
Fortunately, “small” today doesn’t necessarily mean “striped down.” Our loaded example included power windows/locks/mirrors, four-speaker cassette stereo with six-CD changer, remote locking with trunk release and panic alarm, variable intermittent wipers, cruise control, tilt-steering wheel, aluminum wheels, and anti-lock brakes. For shift-it-yourselfers, a five-speed manual is standard, something that is becoming difficult to find in larger sedans. The shifter feels rubbery, but is easy to manipulate and, combined with the light clutch, allows the less-than-coordinated motorist to drive smoothly. A four-speed automatic is optional.
The ride, of course, is more active than in a larger car, but you get added maneuverability and sharper handling to compensate. Four average-sized people can ride comfortably in the Escort, and the split-folding rear seat expands the already roomy 12.8 cubic foot trunk.
A few complaints: the aluminum wheels look incredibly like wheel covers, an interior trunk release would have been nice, and Ford does not remove the attached rubber plug for the 12-volt outlet when the “smokers’ package” and its requisite cigarette lighting element is ordered. The plug just awkwardly hangs there.
Comparably equipped, the Escort SE comes in nearly $3,000 less than the Corolla LE while performing similarly. You can call it inexpensive, but don’t ever call it cheap.
For more information contact 1-800-392-FORD
SPECIFICATIONS
Type: 4-Door Sedan
Engine: 110-horsepower, 2.0 liter inline 4
Transmission: 5-Speed Manual
EPA Mileage: 28 city/38 highway
Tested Price: $15,215
Your reviews packed a lot of info into a small package. Good job; that is not easy.
Historically, Ford was a roller coaster – periods of great products followed by troughs of junk. In fact, one automotive writer pointed out back in the 90’s that Ford and Nissan were usually at the opposite extremes of the same roller coaster – when one was up, the other was down.
It seems now like both are in a rut.
I question the wisdom of Ford dropping cars other than the Mustang, when the Focus and Fusion at least seemed worthy of saving.
I should add that Nissan seems to be coming out of theirs a bit – the new Altima seems like a step up from the previous couple of generations, with AWD to boot.
Thanks Alan. I’m not necessarily sure I agree with the Ford/Nissan analysis, though. Maybe this is looking at it from a 30-year perspective, but both Nissan and Ford started the ’90s riding high. Even though the new Thunderbird seriously missed weight and price targets, the Taurus was still tremendously popular and the Explorer was a huge hit. Nissan had their trucks and the wildly popular B13 Sentra and the Maxima “4DSC” (4-Door Sports Car).
Come mid-decade, both companies replaced popular cars with duds (’95 Maxima and Sentra, ’96 Taurus) and ended the decade either bankrupt (Nissan) or fired (Nasser, though in 2001 – close enough).
To me, they seemed to ride in tandem. However, a year-by-year analysis might show what you described.
That bit about the T-Bird missing weight and price targets is an old wives tale. The engineers and designers did the best they could within the budget and parameters that they were given. If anything, Ford’s engineering and design budget was under-funded (no surprise there) and its expectations were over-estimated.
Compare the 89 XR-7 Cougar to the first gen Cougar. Dimensions and performance were very similar despite the XR-7 being forced induction V6 only in the first year.
If Ford wanted to bean-count, they could have lopped two rear doors off of the Crown Vic to get T-Bird, Grand Marquis to get Cougar, and Continental to get Mark VIII.
Yes, I would have chosen FWD Continental Coupe instead of Town Car. By 1989 the Town Car had no “sport-touring” credentials to pull off a coupe. The Continental was at least trying. Anyone looking for a Town Car coupe would have been happy with a fully-loaded Cougar based off the Marquis.
https://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showthread.php?45367-Ford-Thunderbird-(10th-gen)-1989-1997
In spite of the new Thunderbird’s merits, it was considered a failure by Ford’s top management. On January 17, 1989, Ford President Harold A. Poling, with Ford Chairman Don Petersen and Ford Executive Vice President Phil Benton looking on, lambasted the MN12 program’s staff in a meeting for badly missing the Thunderbird and Cougars’ weight and cost targets (250 lb (110 kg) heavier and $900 US$ more per car than planned). This criticism came as a surprise to the program staff who expected to be praised for the Thunderbird and Cougars’ technical achievements and positive reception. Anthony “Tony” S. Kuchta, manager of the MN12 program, was angered by Poling, not for his points about weight and cost overruns but rather that he directed his tirade at the program staff instead of at Kuchta who was responsible for all of the important decisions that determined the program’s direction. Ironically, many of the decisions that Kuchta made regarding the MN12’s development that resulted in the weight and cost overruns criticized by Poling were caused by the very things that set the MN12 cars apart from other cars in their class (such as rear-wheel drive and an independent rear suspension). Falling out of favor with Ford management after the Thunderbird and Cougars’ launch, Kuchta voluntarily retired early from Ford in May 1989.
That bit about the T-Bird missing weight and price targets is an old wives tale. The engineers and designers did the best they could within the budget and parameters that they were given. If anything, Ford’s engineering and design budget was under-funded (no surprise there) and its expectations were over-estimated.
What they missed on terribly was the development cost, which ran to absurdly high numbers, and build cost/profitability. The MN-12 program was publicly acknowledged by Ford execs to have been much too expensive to both develop and build, especially since they had to quickly lower average transaction prices on them, as they wouldn’t sell for much more than their predecessors. As such, the whole program was a major failure for Ford.
They were too ambitious in trying to build a more affordable BMW 6 Series, especially at a time when the coupe market was just starting its long morbid decline.
Ford had lots of major management challenges back then. The MN-12 was a reflection of that.
Well if they really wanted to save money they could have kept it on the Fox chassis and spent the money on bringing the SN-95 updates and the Cobra IRS online sooner.
Personally I’d would have loved if they would have done a 2dr Aero Panther. And yeah the money saved could have been used to bring out the Aero’s chassis initial improvements online sooner.
This was a very good car. I agree with you.
I owned one for 5 years and over 100,000 miles and bought it because of its Mazda heritage. Pleasant and highly reliable
I’ll have to take a look around next time I’m out since the Escort and Tracer that came before this I think are more common than these curvy Escorts.
Good writeup, I enjoy reading about these cars you test drive, and I had no idea those were aluminum wheels and not wheel covers.
Our neighbors still have one as a second car … it stayed in their family longer than their Corolla, though I think the Escort may have won out by virtue of being an automatic, which 2/3 of their family drivers seem to need or want.
These reviews are excellent. Concise and well written. And the passage of time has secured your sound judgment at the time. Amazing how so many prolific cars of the 90s have since completely vanished for over a decade or more now.
I’m glad you’re enjoying them! I was afraid that these reviews were so short that everyone would find them rather anti-KLEIN-actic. 🙂
Hey now! I like them too, and marvel at how much you pack in with that one pic and 350 words…
…and I envy your freedom to be so thorough that I feel like I’ve driven the car when I’m done.
Thank you so much, I do really appreciate that! You know that it’s not always easy to write, and especially in a manner that lets someone else get something out of it.
Given your reviews would be accompanied by a large title, subhead, pull quotes, pics, technical specs and ads, while being inserted in a thick weekend newspaper, succinct reviews would be appreciated by editors and readers. 🙂
Thank you for allowing them to be republished!
Believe it or not, these reviews were only published on the website. My editor felt that people didn’t want to read anything lengthy online so the reviews were limited to 350 words.
I have ridden in two of these and both shook like popcorn poppers. I was told both times it was a motor mount issue. Otherwise they seemed like decent little cars. They seem to be extinct on the ground at this point though.
I rented one that had 200 miles on the odometer. I was pleasantly surprised, the car was a good travel companion for me, and I was a little hesitant to give it back when I finished my trip. I saw the car around 4 years later after it’s rental career was over, and it was already looking rather sad. Kind of a shame, but common for a car in this part of the marketplace.
I wonder if anyone ever wrote “Caucasians on Wheels”?
They do – it just goes under a bunch of different names: Car & Driver, Road & Track, Motor Trend, Automobile. Did you ever take a really good look at their editorial staff? I’m talking 20 years ago – it’s a little more diverse now.
And there was the short lived “Crackers on Wheels” 🙂
Well its an Escort but not as we know it the new UK Escort made it to NZ at some point in time selling alongside the Japanese/Australian Ford Laser after missing a generation or two since the demise of the RWD MK2 model, but this US/Japanese derived version never came here, Ford confusing buyers since joining Mazda many years ago.
Another enjoyable review to read – and I agree that these Escorts were very good cars. I like Fords of this era — I owned a ’98 Contour and my wife and I still have a ’95 Thunderbird, both of which were/are very good cars. And I definitely could have lived with one of these Escorts.
(Incidentally, I agree with you about parentheses. I understand your editor’s point of view [and I’m pretty sure I’ve had editors/professors who’ve felt similarly] but I still think it’s a good way of getting a point across.)
I wasn’t too wild about the sedan restyle, but the Escort wagons were terrific. Two family members had them and loved them.
Nice review, again.
The American designed Escort of the ’80s and 90’s was junk. Not to mention these cars are absolute death traps at slow speeds! A guy I went to highschool with was killed in his ’88 Escort GT; got rear ended and seat back collapsed and broke his neck, at what cops said was estimated at 40 mph collision! It wasn’t until Ford realized that they couldn’t build a solid, safe, reliable small car on their own merits, that they had to bow to Mazda to provide a platform and mechanicals. The Mazda based Escorts were now extremely safe, well engineered, and drove with precision (and looked gorgeous too), and could last 200,000 miles without problems thanks to the Mazda mechanicals. The Japanese have always been masters in auto building and always will be.
The Mazda-based Escort arrived in 1990 as a 1991 model, and looked very much like the previous generation. The 1997-99 aero Escort was just a major restyle with no real change to the mechanicals (except for maybe a light bump in displacement for the engine). As proof, take a look at the wagon, which was identical from the A-pillar back.
In addition, the engine was the same Ford 1.9-liter (2.0-liter from 1997 on) that’s been under the hood since mid-1985.
I always thought this round-body sedan and ZX2 coupe was a big step backwards from the old squared-off sedan and (to me) just-right-looking hatchbacks. The wagon pointed to what might have been had they gone with a similar facelift to all the 1991-era bodies.
i think it will take a while for nissan to recover from their atrocious quality. ever since renault, nissan went downhill. worst car in my life was a rogue. the ford zetec engine was a jewel of a motor. in fact right now i’m contemplating putting one in my triumph spitfire bolted up to a T9 that i just aquired. and put twin webbers on a noditz stand alone ignition. see?…. now i wanna do it again.
I took my driver’s test in 2001 in my grandmother’s 1999 Ford Escort. I would have taken it in my Beetle but I hadn’t been able to get much practice with the clutch and was nervous I would stall and fail the test so I copped out and borrowed her automatic Escort for the day.
I remember it was a super base car, aside from the automatic. It had manual windows and locks and just an am/fm radio. No cassette player even as best I can recall. I remember her being happy that it didn’t have an ashtray. She was a smoker for 30 years but quit in the early 90’s and liked to rid any semblance of cigarettes from her sight.