Andrew Frankel
We've made some changes
to The Sunday Times

However desperate its troubles may be in its native America, in Europe Ford seems unable to put a foot wrong. The Mondeo, S-Max, Galaxy and Focus are the most capable cars in their classes, and if the forthcoming Fiesta is even half as good as it looks, life is going to get a whole lot tougher for the marque’s European opposition.
So it will come as a relief to Ford’s rivals to learn that it can put a foot wrong. In fact it can on occasion shoot a hole right through its foot, and I know this because I’ve just driven the brand’s new Kuga “soft-roader”.
For a company that’s usually so self-assured, Ford seems to lack confidence whenever it attempts to build a 4x4. Its two most recent efforts were the Explorer - an American import that told us all we needed to know about why nobody any longer buys Ford cars over the Pond - and the Maverick, which besides being poor, wasn’t even a proper Ford, rather a rebadged Nissan. The Kuga, though, is all Ford, and all European Ford at that. And it’s based on the excellent Focus, so by rights it should offer an outstanding drive.
But it doesn’t. It looks reasonably good as you approach it - the designers have done a fine job in giving the Kuga real presence while retaining the trademark Ford look. And if you think its appearance is a little too “bling”, take a close look at the likes of the Honda CR-V and Land Rover Freelander, and you’ll appreciate how Ford is merely responding to customer requirements.
Drive the Kuga and I’ll wager you won’t get far past the end of your own street before doubts start to surface. At the moment there’s only one engine available - a 2 litre diesel producing just 136bhp – and while that may be sufficient for a Focus hatchback, it is barely adequate in the weighty Kuga.
Although it is based on the Focus, its extra bulk and height, and the four-wheel-drive transmission add considerably to its overall weight. At 1,613kg it weighs fully 222kg more than a Focus with the same engine – approximately the same weight as a family of four. So don’t expect it to be fast, and don’t anticipate great frugality: while in a Focus this engine can better 51mpg, in the Kuga that’s less than 45mpg. Consequently, its greater emission levels place it two road-tax bands higher than the Focus, so you end up paying an extra £50 per year for a tax disc, and in excess of £700 more for company car tax (if you pay tax at 40%).
Maybe I’m being unkind, for despite sharing its platform, the Kuga doesn’t rival the Focus, and instead tackles head-on the aforementioned Honda CR-V and Freelander, plus the many similar SUVs that have exploded onto the market in the past few years. Compared directly with any of these cars, the Kuga fares rather better: it has the lowest emissions in its class and better than average performance, and as for the driving experience I’d be surprised if the Kuga didn’t prove to be one of the best.
Maybe that’s academic, though, for this type of vehicle is for people who couldn’t care less whether their car is any good, as long as it cuts the right dash. To this end they will happily spend thousands extra to buy a car that is demonstrably inferior to the one upon which it’s based, justifying it with the assertion that four-wheel drive makes it a safer mode of family transport . . . even though that can’t be proved. I’d actually argue the opposite: that four-wheel drive encourages people to drive in too cavalier a manner in adverse road conditions, lulled by a false sense of security.
Fairly recently I drove almost all the contenders in the so-called “soft-roader” class - one after the other for two days straight - and in the process I discovered I didn’t particularly care for any of them. At the time the Kuga hadn’t been released, but it’s hard to believe its presence would have altered my conclusion that this is the most underachieving class of car presently on sale.
As an SUV, then, the Kuga is quite good, but by any other standards, it’s not nearly good enough.
Vital statistics
Model Ford Kuga 2.0 TDCi Titanium
Engine type 1997cc, four cylinders, turbodiesel
Power / Torque 136bhp @ 4000rpm / 236 lb ft @ 2000rpm
Transmission Six-speed manual
Fuel / CO2 44.1mpg (combined cycle) / 169g/km
Performance 0-62mph: 10.7sec / Top speed: 112mph
Road tax E (£165 for 12 months)
Price £22,495
Verdict Maybe the best in its class, but that’s not saying much
Rating 
Date of release Now
The opposition
Model Land Rover Freelander 2 Td4 SE £28,805 For Stylish inside and out, surprisingly good off-road Against Expensive compared with rivals, strange steering
Model Honda CR-V 2.2i CTDi £25,090 For A quite car-like SUV to drive, smooth engine Against Looks rather strange, quite costly, fiddly controls
I recently purchased the new Ford KUGA and i personally think it is by far the best looking of all SUV's, And having Owned a 2006 Focus ST, i can honestly say the handling on the Kuga is awsome. With next to no roll in the corners and excellent fuel economy , What mor can you want,? is bloody brill!
james, launceston, cornwall
The Kuga looks like a slightly larger version of Nissan's Qashqai - Ford's advertising campaign claims the Kuga to be uniquely styled! If you dont need 4x4 then save yourself 10k and get a Qashqai. Looks just as good. Is just as practical, cheaper to buy, tax insure & fuel!
Alan, Barnsley, UK
Instead of a small SUV like a Kuga, why not buy a Focus and spend some of the cash that you've saved on some winter tyres?
Ian, England, UK
I don't believe this reviewer has even driven the Kuga. With good ride height, excellent handling and frugal motor I cannot wait to take delivery of mine. My outgoing car is a 1.6 litre petrol Focus which never gave me better than 35 mpg.
Simon Lightbown, Blackburn,
Andrew says that he has tested many of the new soft-roaders recently. Where can we see the results of his survey ?
Sean Quinn, Belfast, N. Ireland
This article is a great example of a reviewer not understanding the product they are being paid to write about!
Comparing a Focus with a Kuga is like comparing the Times and the Sun because it is owned by the same person!
f0ul, deeside,