The problem is the target market for these cars: it doesn't exist. Cross over SUVs were built to lure in suburban soccer moms who had to give up their big, gas guzzling SUVs due to gas prices. That market is made up of Gen X and late baby boomers.

And if you look at the top three on this list, you have two Toyotas and a Acura: all trademarks of a baby boomer consumer or early Gen X. No. 6-10 is are all brands you'd associate with a more Blue-Collar consumer. And I don't have to tell you that blue-collar workers with money to buy $25000+ cars are getting rare. And of No.6 through 10, very few can be had at all for under $25000 with the kind of equipment those consumers would want. Hence, they too have big rebates and incentives right now.

So number 4 and 5, our Ford Flex and Mazda CX-9, who are those cars for? Given that they are marketed as stylish and/or fun to drive, and have huge statements of practicality about them with their 7 seats and extra cargo space, its an easy guess to make that these cars are targeted at a younger group of buyers, Gen Y to be sure, who are just starting to have kids and need the room. Only, "need the room" is a subjective term, thats where the automakers went wrong. Gen Y is all about style, sure, but even more so they are about getting what they need how they need it. Talk to any Gen Y buyer who isn't white and suburban in their culture: they would all agree that at one time, families with small children got around in mid size sedans that cost less than a Crossover and get better fuel economy just fine. Those last two points are important as well: Gen Y see's that they don't need a Crossover to go to soccer practice, especially since in all likelihood there is a parking lot near the field they are going to.

And here is where the two car's really fall apart: Gen Y is having kids later than any generation before them. Most Gen Y members probably won't have kids until they are in their early thirties, and if you agree that Generation Y began in 1979 (although I mark it as 1981), then it won't be until next year that they hit the age of thirty. Even more so the bulk of Gen Y was born just before the end of the 1980s, from 85-90, so it won't be until 2015 that those customers are ripe for a family ride.

From a marketing perspective, the brands are right. Ford has been gaining ground with Gen Y ever since the Fusion launched (although its about ready for an update), Mazda has always been cool with Gen Y. But the market segment hasn't yet developed, if it ever will. Gen Y may be the first American Generation since the early 20th century that thought cities were cool. The eastern sea-board is piling up with Gen Y kids eager to experience an America with history and an ocean and everything that lacks suburbia.

Thats hardly someone you can sell an SUV to.

You're just pissed because Ford is on there - twice - and Honda isn't. Let them have their day, they don't get many despite some great products.

If Ford had great products for sale in the US, they wouldn't be where they are now...going bankrupt and losing ground every day in the States.

Sure, a few models in the EU do well, but that's because they're made to a higher standard and offer more engine choices (ie. Turbo Diesels that get 40mpg+).

@ Allen

Great write-up & very well thought out, especially your last paragraph about people moving FROM suburbia instead of TO suburbia.

@ Noya

You hit the nail on the head with your opening line. Couldn't agree with you more.

I don't see where the Flex fits into an SUV category. It certainly doesn't look or sit like one. Even the CX-7/9 can barely be squeezed into the SUV box. Nor do i consider it a Crossover. It's neither car nor SUV. It's a wagon.

Seems like Ford could also fill a niche by leaving out the 12 rows of seating and leave it in a cargo configuration. Looks like you could slide a refrigerator and 4x8 sheets of plywood in the thing. No problem getting my ice fishing gear in it either. I'd gladly take a Flex over a Freestyle or Taurus X (or whatever it'll be called next year).

The Caravan, Aerostar, Freestar, and Astro were all mini-vans that bolstered sales to businesses that needed a cargo vehicle without buying a full size van. Our Caravan opening had little problem loading up body parts for delivery to body shops. Only the occasional big hood wouldn't fit.

"You're just pissed because Ford is on there - twice - and Honda isn't."
Technically Ryan, you're wrong. Since the Acura is a hammered out Honda, they currently place #3 on the list. Not surprising that Nissan and Dodge didn't make the list though. Other than the Rogue, neither manufacturer have anything decent in the crossover/SUV neighborhood right now.

Concerning cars, i take anything Consumer Reports publishes with a grain of salt. Their vehicle reports feel to similar to the tests they perform for toaster ovens and dehumidifiers. Far more credible auto magazines exist for vehicle reviews.

P.S. Great post Allen !

I read the CR report on the Flex, one of the rare times I felt approval from their toaster oven ratings. As high as my blood pressure goes from taking all the salt grains after reading any american car report from CU, I was then shocked back to health to read their review of the Honda Pilot. Could it be that CU is learning how to *fairly* review cars or is it that Ford built a good crossover? Are they both too late?

I think that the fundamental problem facing Ford is that typical Ford purchasers don't want any Mazda bits in their cars and Mazda buyers don't want any Ford in their cars either.

Only problem with that Clint is that Ford's been using Mazda as a source since the 80's. It's not like this is a new development.

Um, I doubt Ford buyers know Mazda is in their blood. My mother recently stated, "They only make Crown Victorias as fleet vehicles now... what a shame."

I then told her to purchase a Grand Marquis. She had no idea they were pretty much the same car.

Some people are amazed when they hear Toyota/Lexus, etc.... it's ridiculous.

Clint, Mazda's most popular car is just a de-contented Ford Focus II (Mazda 3). We'll not go into the (Ford) Mazda 5 and CX9 which so critically acclaimed. And it's common knowledge the 3 is basically just a mixture of Gen I and Gen II Focus.. In fact, all of Mazda's biggest selling model are Ford's underneath. Evidently Madza buyer's don't give a rat's ass about what continent their car comes from -- they care about how good it is. Nationalism is stupid. Get with the program. It's about the cars silly.

"If Ford had great products for sale in the US, they wouldn't be where they are now...going bankrupt and losing ground every day in the States. "

Idiotic statement. It's not the fact that Ford doesn't make great products, but the products that were great like their trucks and SUV's ran dry. That's why they are in the spot that they are in now, because the Truck market in the US was Fords bread and butter.

@george

Mate wrong, wrong, wrong

Volvo is where ford gets there stuff from, Ford needs mazda and volvo otherwise they would be totally useless worldwide not just in the US.

The only good fords that are fully ford are Australian built ones. All the eero ones are good but only because they source parts from Mazda and Volvo.

Now to the article, Toyota highlander on top??? here they are considered crap, you either get a Landcruiser, Landcruiser Prado or a RAV4 v6 instead! Not to mention all the others available from other brands.