Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Mercury Milan vs Toyota Camry



  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    What everone misses is that Toyota is LIVING off of its marketing success.

  • savethelandsavetheland Posts: 671
    When driving yesterday I made sudden turn on crossroad - it was scary. I thought it will turn over.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Scroll back.. someone paid 5,000 more for a like optioned Camry vs Milan.. OUCH@

    How can you say the Milan is "built cheaply" in Mexico? It it because its assembled in Mexico? Engineering shortcuts? Where? Panel gaps? What?? You really need to get a Premier Milan, park it next to a like optioned Camry. Go in with an open mind (at least try). The quality/fit/finish of the Milan is on par with the Camry.
  • walterquintwalterquint Posts: 89
    I meant built "inexpensively", I didn't mean to imply the Milan is "cheap" (as in low quality).

    A major car mag tested the Fusion against all the Asian competitors. It noted the Fusion had larger panel gaps and other (minor) engineering shortcuts. But the mag did not say the build quality was poor; I am not saying that either.

    The era of Camry dominance is clearly over.
  • stlpike07stlpike07 Posts: 218
    Will you, and others, stop talking about the "Fusion Test." It was paid for by Ford and they screened participants.

    Toyota or Honda could do the same thing. If someone is very impressionable due to a commercial, versus actuallty test driving cars and doing other research, I don't really care.

    In all honesty, I believe Ford paid for these tests to convince Fusion owners that they made the right decision over purchasing a Camry. The commercial/ad is for their own sake and for the sake of Fusion owners.

    I have talked to a few Fusion owners who hate their cars but are trapped in a lease. Does that mean anything though?
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,621
    Sounds to me like you're the one trying to justify your 2007 Camry.
  • Karen@EdmundsKaren@Edmunds Posts: 5,028
    No one is forced to read anything they do not wish to here. If you do not care for the discussion and/or the comments, we have a multitude of topics to choose from where the conversation may be more to your liking. Also, if you don't care for the comments of a particular member, simply scroll by their posts. :shades:

    Karen-Edmunds Community Manager

  • stlpike07stlpike07 Posts: 218
    Sounds to me like I test drove 8 cars and picked the Camry......

    A test that is not authentic carries no merit. Thats what I'm saying.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,621
    Unless you were there and have personal knowledge of some bias on the tester's part you can't say that.

    Isn't it just a tiny bit possible that the normal average everyday car buyer prefers the Fusion as opposed to automotive journalists who have all sorts of hidden personal and professional biases?
  • savethelandsavetheland Posts: 671
    I do not know how you can compare Milan with Camry. Even in my old Sable I feel safer than in Camry.

    Milan/Fusion and Camry/Avalon are different kind of vehicles. One is for younger crowd who prefer spirited and sporty ride. And later is for older tired crowd who prefer soft and quiet ride.

    May be better to compare Milan with Accord and Camry with Sonata? I saw spy pictures of new Accord. Nothing exceptional – typical Accord – no revolution. But real life impressions may be different. My prediction though - it will be continuation of boring design approach, my guess - Honda does not want to alienate core constituency since they make purchase decisions based not on design but on reliability mainly.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Looks like Milan/Fusion envy?? :blush:
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    well like by its owners then why is the ranking by actual owners at 8.7? and the Milan at 9.6? The Camry also has 10x the reviewers!! :surprise:
  • stlpike07stlpike07 Posts: 218
    "Envy"......thats funny. I am not trying to be mean to anyone or put anyone down.

    All I am saying is that the Fusion "test" carries no validity. In my opinion, a "smart" car buyer will not base their decision on a commercial. I believe Ford needs to do more to impress people than a commercial. Thats all I'm saying.

    It is funny that the Fusion was the V6 AWD model.....versus the 4-cylinder Camry and Accord. They should have tested the V6 SE Camry and the V6 Accord. Maybe the "results" would have been different.
  • stlpike07stlpike07 Posts: 218

    You realize anyone can make a profile on here and "rank" the cars.

    You could create 100 profiles and rank the same car if you wanted to.......People should do a lot of research and personal investigation before they buy a car.....thats smart.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,621
    People should do a lot of research and personal investigation before they buy a car

    They are, and a lot of them are choosing Fusions and Milans over Camrys and Accords. Why is that so hard to understand? Sales figures don't lie.
  • walterquintwalterquint Posts: 89
    On my prior post, I was not referring to that "Fusion Test" marketing campaign. I was referring to a conventional, full-scale comparison test done by a major car mag. I only draw conclusions from instrumented testing procedures.

    That "Fusion Test" has some minor merit, but it's merely a marketing ploy. GM did a similar "test" for the Achieva in the 1990s--those buyers chose the Olds over Honda/Toyota too. Now, the Achieva is littering junkyards (including mine).

    IMO, many are choosing the Fusion/Milan over the Camry because of its features, looks and price. It's consistently $2500 less than Camry/Accord. That does not make the Milan a better car, or even an equal one. As I noted, Ford likely took some minor engineering shortcuts to reach that lower price.

    In 2004, I bought an Alero. It saved me $3k over a Mazda6 and $5k over a Camry. The symphony of squeaks/rattles in my Alero keeps me company on long trips. I wonder if Fusion/Milan owners will be similarly annoyed, over time ??
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,621
    The problem is tests done by the automotive media are not necessarily reflective of the general car buying public. Just look at all the cars that the media hates but that the public continues to buy. There are buyers who prefer the styling of the Sonata over all the other cars. It's all subjective.

    There should be no argument that the Fusion handles better than the Camry. So does the Accord. Most people wouldn't notice that unless you put them on a test track and specifically asked them. Or put all 3 cars side by side and let folks rank their styling. Again - something you wouldn't normally do outside of this type of test.

    Automotive writers are like film critics - they're evaluating vehicles entirely differently than an average buyer would evaluate them.

    How, then, is Ford supposed to get this type of real world test without paying for it? Would C&D or MT or Edmunds go out and pay for this type of test? Of course not. The reason they outsourced it to C&D and R&T was to ensure that it was a fair test.

    The only thing this test points out is that the Fusion is competitive and should be considered. This gets people in the showroom that would have otherwise written off the Fusion and once they actually see it and drive it they end up buying one.

    Of course it's advertising but to say it's biased or not valid is just sour grapes.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    "It is funny that the Fusion was the V6 AWD model.....versus the 4-cylinder Camry and Accord. They should have tested the V6 SE Camry and the V6 Accord. Maybe the "results" would have been different. "

    This statement shows that you did not read the entire article. The Camry/Accord were V6's. So is the Camry/Accord offerning stability control and the Fusion not an issue?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    They should have tested the V6 SE Camry and the V6 Accord. Maybe the "results" would have been different

    Eh, not quite. The Ford commercial at least used V6 models of all cars. Should they have used the best handling variant of all of them (Camry SE)? Yeah, since the one of the only three criteria the commercial measured was handling.
  • stlpike07stlpike07 Posts: 218
    In one of the first articles I read about the test, the author said the camry was a 4-cylinder. That stuck out right away to me......Maybe the newer tests used the V6.

    Also, using an "all-wheel drive" car against two without awd.........I really don't care what the results were. All I was saying is that the "advertisement" was a ploy/marketing scheme and that people should do research themselves. Some people are too impressionable and will be unhappy once they realize they made the wrong decision, no matter which vehicle they purchase...thats all.
This discussion has been closed.