Your mom has made the right choice for the right reasons. She needs that SUV. She probably did some research on what she needed and made an inteligent choice. If you buy one because I said you shouldn't you are making a choice, right or wrong, for the wrong reasons.

Too many people are buying SUVs because they are trendy. These are the lemmings I have a problem with. The 4x4 poseurs web site talks down SUVs, but they actually accept the fact that many people need SUVs. They have a page dedicated to helping you make the right choice. Look at what you use your vehical for and decide if it's right for you. Otherwise, you fall into the catagory of "can't think for yourself." Glad I could help you to decide what you want. I just hope I didn't goad you into making the wrong choice. If so, the joke's on you.

Not having a need for a full sized van, I didn't look into the stats on the Econoline vans. They, too are built on a F150 frame... unless you want a 3/4 or 1 ton van. It takes very little searching to find that a E150 with a 5.4L V-8 has a towing capacity of 6800 pounds. Interestingly enough, this is about 1000 pounds less than a similar Expedition with a trailoring package. I grant that my alteration may have been premature. Being designed for utility (better designed for it than an SUV) the vans have more cargo space and the same engines available. The reason for the reduced towing capacity is probably because of the increased cargo capacity. They didn't say. I couldn't find the appropriate cargo specs for the SUV. The van is the choice for the equipment vehical for contractors. The SUV is more likely to be a crew transport.

20MPG in a V8? I'm very impressed! Is that the 4.6 or the 5.4? Is that what is says on the sticker or what your mom has calculated.

Do you compare an SUV the size of a Expedition to a van the size of a Windstar? I suppose you would also compare a F150 pickup to a Ranger? Have you compared the Expedition to the Econoline? The specs say the E-150 Van has more head room, leg room, shoulder room, and hip room than the Expedition with all seats installed. I guess they lied.

Windstar did not replace Aerostar. They coexisted. Windstar is in competition with the Chrysler line of minivans (as is the Chevy Lumina). Aerostar, on a Ranger chassis, was in competition with Astro. I wonder why Ford gave up on it. Ford has historically made better vehicals than Chevy. (Try not to take that as a troll.) I wonder why their midsized van failed. You certainly see plenty of new Astros on the road. As the only remaining midsized van, Astro is literally in a class by itself.

Who CAN afford that many vehicals. The Econoline will tow what most people need to tow. (Most people don't live on farms. The ones I know who do have multiple vehichals.) The seats come COMPLETELY out to allow you to haul huge amounts of stuff. They have the same engine, so the gas mileages won't vary that much. But since we are talking about afford, The Econoline Starts at $23K and the Expedition starts at $30K. If you NEED an SUV, you WILL pay extra.

As for growing smaller, when do you stop calling it an SUV and start calling it a car with an attitude. My wife's protege (which you probably compare to a Ford Crown Victoria) has more room than some of these "SUVs". Subaru is already calling their little wagon an SUW. Make it a little bigger and boxier and you call the Forrester an SUV. What the heck is an Aztec (Pontiac)? Is it an SUV or a wagon? I think it's one of the ugliest cars in history, even uglier than the AMC Pacer. But that's just my opinion.