 | |
Ford Fusion targets import champions
Ford Vehicles Discussions About Ford Cars (alt.autos.ford)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#21
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Fusion targets imports, for less less money -
03-06-2007
, 09:49 AM
|
"C. E. White" <cewhite3 (AT) removemindspring (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45ed639e$1 (AT) kcnews01 (DOT) .. "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:x32Hh.1759$3i.1726 (AT) trnddc01 (DOT) .. Which transmission did the 4 cyl have? Mike is saying that people are buying 4-cyl Camries instead of V6 Fusions. I think the acceleration for this is about 8.5 sec to go from 0 to 60 mph. The Consumer Reports 4 cylinder Camry had an automatic (9.6 sec 0-60). The Car and Drive 4 cylinder Fusion was a manual (8.1 sec 0-60). Consumer Reports tested a 4 cylinder automatic Milan (0-60 9.5 sec) and a V-6 automatic Fusion AWD (0-60 8.0 sec). Here is a shocker - CR gave the 4 cylinder Camry an "average" rating for reliability and as a new or used car. The V-6 Camry got an above average rating as both a new and used car. The Fusion got a much better than average rating as a new or used car. Too bad most Camry buyers will never know they are buying a car that even CR is rating second best compared to a Fusion. I think Mike is right if he is claiming that the majority of Camrys sold include the 4 cylinder engine. I've read that 85% of Camry are sold with a four cylinder engine. Ford is expecting closer to a 50/50 mix (at least according to the ordering guide). It looks like Ford expects less than 10% of Fusion will have the manual transmission. Ed Camries are also sold with mostly manual transmissions. This gives them a better overall performance for some, when they balance fuel economy and power, because the power actually getting to the wheels is similar for both the 4-cyl Camry and the V6 Fusion, as seen by similar acceleration numbers. Of course, they can get similar performance with a 4-cyl standard transmission, Fusion too. Do you know on what basis the Camry was rated lower than the Fusion? Jeff |
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
Camries are also sold with mostly manual transmissions. This gives them a better overall performance for some, when they balance fuel economy and power, because the power actually getting to the wheels is similar for both the 4-cyl Camry and the V6 Fusion, as seen by similar acceleration numbers. Of course, they can get similar performance with a 4-cyl standard transmission, Fusion too. |
manual transmissions." I looked at the Southeast Camry inventory. Out
of 8,015 Camry available in the Southeast, only 2,513 are manual
transmission models.
Quote:
|
Do you know on what basis the Camry was rated lower than the Fusion? |
even understand why three different Camry Models got different levels
of prediction. The Camry Hybrid was rated much better than average
(like the Fusion). The Camry V-6 was rated better than average. The
Camry four cylinder was rated average. Now why did they break out
three Camry models, but treat all Fusions the same (all much better
than average), especially when they complained that the engine in the
4 cylinder Fusion was "noisy" when accelerating hard, and the Camry
four cylinder was "relatively refined."
For the four cylinder Camry the "Engine Minor" and "Electrical System"
areas got a worse than average rating. The "Climate System" and "Power
Equipment" areas got an average rating. The "Audio System" was better
than average. All other areas were much better than average. The New
Car Prediction was "Average"
For the Six Cylinder Camry the "Transmission" area got a better than
average rating. All other areas were rated much better than average.
The New Car Prediction was "Better Than Average."
For the Camry Hybrid the "Body Integrity" area was listed as above
average. The New Car Prediction was "Much Better Than Average."
Now it seems to me with the possible exception of the engine and
transmission areas, all of these Camry Models share much the same
equipment. So I would think unless there was a particular problem in
one of these areas, all models should get the same rating.
For the Fusion there were no difference noted for the 4 cylinder and
V-6 models. All areas were much better than average except for "Body
Integrity" which got a better than average rating. The overall New Car
Prediction was "Much Better Than Average."
Ed
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
As far as fuel economy, here are the CR averages - vehicle / overall / city / highway / 150 mile trip Camry 4 / 24 / 16 / 36 / 29 Camry V6 / 23 / 16 / 36 / 29 (seems unbelievable compared to the 4) |
36.
Quote:
|
Fusion 4 / 23 / 15 / 32 / 27 Fusion V-6 AWD / 20 / 14 / 29 / 25 |
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
Ed White wrote: As far as fuel economy, here are the CR averages - vehicle / overall / city / highway / 150 mile trip Camry 4 / 24 / 16 / 36 / 29 Camry V6 / 23 / 16 / 36 / 29 (seems unbelievable compared to the 4) The Mar. 2006 issue shows the highway MPG for the Camry V6 as 32, not 36. |
not 36. Sorry. The other numbers are correct, if unbelievable
Did you mean the March 2007 issue?
Quote:
|
Fusion 4 / 23 / 15 / 32 / 27 Fusion V-6 AWD / 20 / 14 / 29 / 25 |
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
What is it with Ford front grilles anyways? Fusion, Edge, many more, they all have those fake chrome grilles that add nothing to the car's look (it looks like cheap bling-bling you would see on a Pimped Civic) Chrome is good, when it's tasteful. But it seems they overdesigned those parts... Just wondering... |
Toyota Trucks have similar grilles. Are theirs "tasteful?
Ed
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
That persons opinion aside, the Fusion will standout greatly, however, when one asks the preverbal question, "How much is my monthly payment?" Particularly when the buyer chooses the V6 with the six speed tranny. |
traditional Ford owners' question, "You want HOW much to keep it
running?!?!"
Quote:
|
Camry and Accord may sell more fours and standard shift cars, but Fusion buyers are choosing the V6 six speed in higher percentages, over their far more expensive V6s Eight out of ten Camrys sold in the US are only fours, the reverse is more likely true of the Fusion. The fact remains one can drive home a V6 Fusion for less than a four cylinder Camry, as CR pointed out  mike iwhtcimtlfmwmaomopw (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:1173078358.396408.50820 (AT) h3g2000cwc (DOT) googlegroups.com... http://www.caranddriver.com/shortroa...fusion-se.html 2007 Ford Fusion SE - Short Take Road Tests 1 | 2 The handsome four-cylinder, five-speed manual Fusion targets the import champions, but does it stack up? BY JARED GALL, January 2007 In our February issue, we ran a comparison test of mid-size sedans from which the Fusion was absent. All those cars were new-for-2007 models from our 10Best hoopla, where the Accord beat them all to take the trophy (again). We put together the comparo to see where the also- rans would filter in below the Honda, and if the Accord would remain on top when all the cars were sampled with four-cylinder engines and automatics (the most-sold combination). Since a V-6 Fusion had already lost to the Accord in a previous comparo, it stayed home for this one as well. But the comparo was a timely reason to get our hands on a four-cylinder Fusion, so we took it. You can't talk Fusions without talking style: This is the best looking Ford sedan in years. A rakish, high beltline with simple, clean sides and subtle fender flares is topped by an angular greenhouse. Edges in the sheetmetal are creased, but softer than a Cadillac. The outer corners of the headlights creep up into the hood, as though being pulled back by the wind rushing over them, and the oversized taillamps get clear lenses that wrap around into the car's flanks. The look is clean and understated, with bright detail work to bring out the luxury look, like the sparse jewelry of a tuxedo. We like it. Inside, the SE we tested was more Lee Dungarees and Jerzees t-shirt. Nothing wrong with that in a $20,525 car. For $395, our Fusion was upgraded with the Appearance Package, which includes 17-inch wheels and spices up the plain black cloth seats with inserts dappled with sporty-looking red stitching. It looks sporty and feels comfortable. The dash, center stack, and steering wheel audio and cruise controls are intuitively laid out, but unremarkable in their appearance. The same could be said of the Fusion driving experience. Everything is just fine, but unremarkable. The steering wheel asks reasonable effort and provides decent feedback, but is a little too light and a touch numb. The clutch pedal is smooth, but also a tad uncommunicative and travel is as long as some of our commutes. The shifter isn't bad, but it isn't good enough to elevate it above what can be found in any competing car; and whoever decided it should be topped with a softball- sized knob must be a recent transfer from Ford's commercial truck division. Although the performance figures we recorded-0-to-60-mph in 8.1 seconds, the quarter-mile in 16.4 at 85 mph-would have put the Fusion solidly mid-pack in the comparo, but those cars were all saddled with automatics and were thus a little bit off race pace; and the Ford's 160-hp 2.3-liter adds little joy to acceleration. On the skidpad, the Fusion managed a comparo-besting 0.83 g, but it gives up a lot of the refinement found in the Camry to achieve it. Ford's Fusion is a strong contender in the steady mid-size segment. It looks great from the outside, good on the inside, and its performance is on par with the competition. Ford loyalists will be happy with this car. But aside from its looks, the Fusion offers no standout qualities that will bring Camry and Accord drivers into Ford showrooms. |
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
#27
| |||
| |||
|
|
It will also stand out greatly in a couple of years when one asks the traditional Ford owners' question, "You want HOW much to keep it running?!?!" |
owned the answer will be - just gas. If it is anything last the last
POS Toyota I owned, you'd need to take out a second mortgage.
Ed.
#28
| |||
| |||
|
|
"dh" <dh (AT) stargate (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45f0ae2d$0$16304$88260bb3 (AT) free (DOT) teranews.com... It will also stand out greatly in a couple of years when one asks the traditional Ford owners' question, "You want HOW much to keep it running?!?!" If it is anything like the last 25 years worth of Fords my Family has owned the answer will be - just gas. If it is anything last the last POS Toyota I owned, you'd need to take out a second mortgage. Ed. |
car when you want one, not when you need one.
And you can spend thousands less for a used Toyota that you can still trust.
That's my case. I had to get rid of that Ford, it could not be trusted to
complete a vacation. I didn't buy a new car beause I wanted one, I bought
one because the Ford told me I needed one.
In spite of the warranty coverage, it was still the most expensive car I've
ever owned, on a per-mile or per-month basis. The depreciation and
incidental expenses were killers.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
#29
| |||
| |||
|
|
"C. E. White" <cewhite3 (AT) removemindspring (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45f14f80$1 (AT) kcnews01 (DOT) .. "dh" <dh (AT) stargate (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45f0ae2d$0$16304$88260bb3 (AT) free (DOT) teranews.com... It will also stand out greatly in a couple of years when one asks the traditional Ford owners' question, "You want HOW much to keep it running?!?!" If it is anything like the last 25 years worth of Fords my Family has owned the answer will be - just gas. If it is anything last the last POS Toyota I owned, you'd need to take out a second mortgage. Ed. You wish. You know what so many have said, with a Toyota, you'll buy a new car when you want one, not when you need one. And you can spend thousands less for a used Toyota that you can still trust. That's my case. I had to get rid of that Ford, it could not be trusted to complete a vacation. I didn't buy a new car beause I wanted one, I bought one because the Ford told me I needed one. In spite of the warranty coverage, it was still the most expensive car I've ever owned, on a per-mile or per-month basis. The depreciation and incidental expenses were killers. |
Toyotas are good cars. You're going to get a bad one every now and then.
Jeff
#30
| |||
| |||
|
|
So true. Depreciation is a killer w/ Ford. Service & parts cost is a killer w/ Toyota & Honda(even simple parts like brake pads/discs, wiper motor, etc., & especially collision parts). If you're going to keep a car a long time, or are buying used, Ford/Chevy is the way to go(just don't forget to get rid of the DexCool in the Chevy). If you keep a new car only 3-4 years, buy a Toyota & trade it in. |
driving 20,000 mi, sell the car for the same as or more than you bought it
for. I know one guys who does this. He buys a lot of Tauri and Sables. He
drives about 30k mi per year for work.
Jeff
Quote:
|
Rob |
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.