Is the Ford Territory AWD a dud off road?

[motorsportnerd]

Ok, this may annoy some of our more dedicated Ford fans. However, in today's Sydney Morning Herald Drive section, there is a comparison between the Ford Territory AWD, Holden Adventra, Toyota Klugar, Toyota Landcruiser and Mitsubishi Pajero.
The comparison left the Drive journos wondering if Ford (and Holden) had failed to produce a 4WD capable of handling any sort of off road work. While the comparison noted that on smooth surfaces, "the Territory verges on brilliant - agile, quiet, smooth, comfortable and inspiring confidence.", but they went on to note that "it seems built for a quieter life than the unforgiving area of Australia after which it was named". Over any sort of rough surface the Territory was handicapped whenever its ground clearance was challenged. The said that, "thankfully, the Territory had a Ford accessory sumpguard but this didn't prevent a wire coming loose from a rear-wheel sensor, disabling the traction control and anti-lock brakes, which are crucial to the vehicle's all wheel drive system. A stray stone dislodge the sensor...the incident highlighted to the testers the risk in relying on electronics to conquer rough conditions." The Drive testers suggested that if you want to head to the outback in either the Territory or the Adventra, then you should go with more capable vehicles.
The editorial in the same issue of Drive noted that "we happily acknowledge that most customers will rarely venture of the beaten track. Indeed, Ford expects half of all Territory sales to be of the tarmac-only two wheel drive version....but after our exhaustive 11-day jaunt through the centre of Australia, we wondered if Territory was a suitable name for this vehicle. We also wondered if its inability to handle Aussie dirt roads was the reason behind hosting the media launch in New Zealand, for the Territory is more at home in the city than the country, let alone the Northern Territory."
Off the three soft roaders in the comparison, the Adventra was rated last, with criticisms of its low stance, huge thirst and long rear overhang which is prone to damage. It was also criticised for a reliance on using electronics to control its AWD system.
The Territory was rated second, with criticisms of its poor ground clearance and off road ability.
The Kluger, was perhaps surprisingly, rated 1st of the soft roaders. "Quiet, comfortable, refined and efficient, the Kluger was also reliable when the going got tough, but more crucially, had the ground clearance to ensure it could travel safely on rough roads without being nursed along. And, unlike the Aussies which rely on fragile electronics, it has the mechanical hardware to conquer the rough stuff."
It shouldn't surprise to see the Kluger rated well. The Landcruiser was rated best of the two heavy duty off roaders for off road work.
The comparison showed the following: if you want a city/highway vehicle which carry loads and tow a boat, or want the best looking of the five - buy a Territory. But the RWD version will probably be adequate for these needs. If you want a heavy duty 4WD and aren't planning any city driving, buy a Landcruiser. If you want a heavy duty 4WD and need to occasionally drive in the city buy a Pajero. But if you want a compromise best of both worlds, good in the city and on the highway, able to tow a boat, family and load of gear, and go on rougher stuff, then the Kluger is the vehicle to buy. And buy a Commodore wagon instead of an Adventra if you want a Holden...
Now, any comments on these results?

[fpv_gtho]

Well its rumoured Ford will offer a higher riding suspension package for the Territory, so i suppose that could keep some people happier, but i have to wonder what these testers actually subjected the Territory to. As said, the car was never built for rough offroad work, and even for other cars following this philosophy, theres always someone out there that when they test them, will try take them further than a Landcruiser, and critisize it because its unable to. Im not exactly saying ths is the case here, but it seems they cant help but criticise a vehicle's offroad capability when it will spend 95% of the time on the bitumen.

$500 million hasnt made the Territory perfect, thats for sure. It needs more ride height for those people going to buy it who will be more active, and probably can do with a turbo diesel engine for those who are less willing to pay alot for fuel. As for their comments suggesting its name should be changed based on its capabilities, how about changing the Adventra's name whilst their at it, as it doesnt seem to be any more capable than the Territory

[Falcon500]

Well this doesnt really come as suprise to me....both of these cars are too heavily based off cars to be incredably hardy......they will improve with time...but that said these cars essentially being soft roaders you cant really compare them to aland cruiser...its like getting a corgi to guard your house when a Doberman would be more adiquite....

[motorsportnerd]

I think the Landcruiser was along only to provide a reference point. Of interest was Drive placing the soft-roader Toyota Kluger ahead of the Territory.
The article does really beg the question as to why the AWD version is needed. The RWD version will do everything that the typical Territory customer will need.

[Falcon500]

Bragging rights? more favrable resale?...who knows...why would anyone need an adventra when an ss wagon would do what msot of them want? on the upside it gives them botth good entrants tot he ARC with the setups they have...modified obviously...

[motorsportnerd]

A Territory or Adventra in the ARC? How about a Kluger or an Outback? Afraid I find that idea a bit hard to swallow. Both would be way to heavy for a start...
And I can't think of any reason why anyone would buy an Adventra over a Commodore wagon.. (if they want a Holden that is).

[Falcon500]

There are classes...lookwha brocky done for the jackaroo you can strip them and beef them up personally i cant wait for FPRs Focus and Fiesta rally cars
Adventras are kewl but really kinda useless....bragging rights? lol

[SlickHolden]

Seen a territory today going to the footy had to look twice to see if it really was it, Looks a little like the exsplorer front on

[Falcon500]

They actually do quite a bit...upon closer inspection they look diffrent....i think they look a little better but there isnt much in it...

[motorsportnerd]

Originally Posted by Falcon500

There are classes...lookwha brocky done for the jackaroo you can strip them and beef them up personally i cant wait for FPRs Focus and Fiesta rally cars
Adventras are kewl but really kinda useless....bragging rights? lol

I agree, bring on the Focus and Fiesta in the ARC.

[Falcon500]

Originally Posted by motorsportnerd

I agree, bring on the Focus and Fiesta in the ARC.

Yeah and thopefully the road going versions that they said would come with them...wonder whosoem drivers would be...unlike tarmac events i cant really prattle off anynames who would be good pilots that arnt already taken....

[fpv_gtho]

theres already the Fiesta ST and RS in the pipeline in the UK, as well as the rumours of an FPV Turbo Focus instead of the Focus RS, so theres a couple of cars that could be used. If FPV did make an ARC team, at least Prodrive would hae some data to work from with their Subaru WRC team

[SlickHolden]

Is it the focus and fiesta that look alike ?

[fpv_gtho]

possibly, its them 2 that have the same style rear tailights, but the Fiesta has squarer headlights compared to the Focus's triangular headlights

[Falcon500]

Originally Posted by SlickHolden

Is it the focus and fiesta that look alike ?

Pretty much...just ones smaller looks are one thing but mechanicals are a very diffrent story...the fiesta doesnt have the 6 speed manual nor the 2 liter engine etc etc...