Howdy, Stranger!

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





Midsize Sedans 2.0

1558559561563564739

Comments

  • I'm glad I ordered my new Fusion with the 2.0 EcoBoost engine!
  • sdcal2sdcal2 Posts: 12
    Oh my god!!! All of you that said I was over reacting to the stoppage of vehicles i certainly hope you are now eating dead rotting crow. Not only was there one hidden but now two known Recalls including one where they recommend you do not drive the vehicle and they will pay to have the car towed (yes towed not driven) to the nearest dealership but can offer no time frame of when the vehicle will be repaired. This means no repair parts have been shipped to dealers as my Oasis report 24 hours prior showed nothing about this latest screw up. 96,000 plus the 28,0000 equals Ford being complete idiots at launch t">ime!!!

    Management needs to be replaced!!!
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    The problem with both recalls were European parts and/or labor (headlamps and improperly installed and/or defective freeze plugs).

    Ford put a lot of trust in Europe with their new platforms and it's coming back to bite them.

    These are all temporary problems that won't reoccur once they're fixed but it's certainly giving Ford a black eye lately.
  • It's a shame that Ford has had so many issues with their recent launches. The new Focuses, Escapes, and Fusions sound like very nice vehicles, but I'm leery of purchasing any new Fords after hearing about some of the problems they've had. A few years ago Ford seemed to have really good reliability, but these recalls remind me of the Ford of 2001/2002.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    Moving to European platforms is saving a lot of money but is causing a lot of teething problems getting those platforms into North American factories. These aren't long term reliability problems - these are bad parts or bad assembly or both. Once fixed they won't reoccur but this has to be killing Mulally. Won't stop me from buying a new Fusion but I might wait an extra month or two.
  • 1: I want to buy a new car from an American manufacturer
    2: I only have $30,000 to spend on it
    3: In my opinion it's the only midsize sedan worth having that meets the above criteria
    4: I love the styling of the new model
    5: I want to be among the first to own one
    6: I've never owned a Job 1 car before and I think it'll be cool to own one
    7: I've never special ordered a new car before and I wanted to do so at least once in my lifetime
    8: I'm aware that production problems and delays are common for first year redesign cars
    9: I have no control over how long the waiting period for manufacture and delivery is
    10: I need a new car but I'm not in a big hurry to get one
  • I just bought car off of the lot. Ruby Red, Titanium, 2.0 liter. Navi, Driver Assist and Sunroof. I didn't really have to have sunroof but I didn't want to wait for the order and nothing else in the area available.

    Very happy with the car, drives great. Feels really good. Great acceleration compared to 2007 Civic. Had to have headlamps fixed prior to release from dealer. Got about 1500 off from MSRP, was happy with the deal.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,327
    Cool! Good for you! :shades: Congrats on your new car.

    I wanted a new car too. I needed to stop my '99 Grand Cherokee V8 from bleeding me dry with repair bills. I researched mid size sedans for 6 months before my selection.

    Every day I look at it and am damn proud and happy about it. If I had to do it again I would have bought one with a power passenger seat, and heated seats. I miss that feature from my Grand Cherokee.

    Please let us know everything about your Fusion as you get to know it! Stuff like handling, engine, features, looks, color, and hey...post a picture or two!

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    But most power passenger seats (not counting very high-end autos) have only 4 way or sometimes 6 way adjustability.. and the key adjustments missing are the two most important opnes in terms of operator ease, are the cushion tilt front and rear (with both being the 8 way).
    And the power fore and aft is a real waste on front passenger seats in most cars. If a child seat is installed it is usually behind the passenger seat and basically all cars will accommodate one when seat is in furthest rear position, and even if you do have to move it, fore and aft is one of the easiest moves there is..unless you are extremely large-sized or have age related or other type disabilities.

    I hear Ford has (also) been caught with 20% optimistic fuel economy results on their hybrid Fusions and Escapes. 20% is a huge number!
    That said, the owner here on this forum who recently has been informing us of his experiences with his new hybrid, seems to get quite acceptable fuel economy IMO, as I interpret his driving style and locale.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    Ford hasn't been "caught" by anybody. CR was disappointed in the results of their tests which doesn't prove anything. Ethanol, winter blend fuel, cold weather and optional tires will reduce hybrid mileage on any vehicle.

    Until the EPA runs their own tests it's nothing but speculation and publicity seeking by CR.
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,040
    I think the problem CR had was that they test cars the same and they had never had such a huge discrempancy from the EPA rating compared to their results on any cars they have ever tested. I think they were short about 20% on both the Fusion and the C-max. I do believe all the "qualifiers" you mentioned would affect all vehicles tested and not just Fords.

    And Ford issuing their "estimates" is not publicity seeking prior to the EPA testing? Good for the gander etc.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,327
    All I really want is a passenger height adjustment on my Optima. My kids can barely see out the window, and yes they are old enough and tall enough to ride up front.

    I only said power seat because I had it on my Jeep and liked it. The kids miss the Jeep because, and I quote "this car makes me feel like I am looking out of a tank dad". "I cant see anything".

    Rotten kids!!! LOL.

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    It's reason enough to take a closer look. But as far as seeking publicity - Ford is required by law to execute the EPA tests and report the results on the window sticker. This is not their own test - it's somebody else's test and it's required. So they have to put it on the sticker and the purpose of the test is to allow consumers to compare different vehicles. So of course Ford and every other mfr is going to use that number in their advertising.

    CR, on the other hand, takes the results of 2 vehicles that are barely broken in and runs them on their own private test which they refuse to provide details for and proclaims there is a problem.

    It's not what they're reporting - it's how they're reporting it.

    I would like to see Ford take those exact vehicles and run them through the actual EPA test cycle and report the results.

    Hybrids are much more sensitive to cold weather than non hybrids since the ICE has to run for heat. And I still believe the optional tires are costing 2-3 mpg right off the bat because they're wider and not LRR. The EPA tests are done with the standard wheels and tires by rule.
  • gogophers1gogophers1 Posts: 218
    edited December 2012
    I think the best cure for Ford desire is to already own one. Had I not purchased a new Focus two years ago, I'd be very interested in bringing home a new Fusion - an SE in Ginger Ale metallic with a manual transmission. But this idea of Ford quality being comparable to that of Honda or Toyota - forget about it.

    I loved my Focus when I first took it home, but the honeymoon was a short one. Not more than a couple months later, the problems began to mount. It's been in the service dept. 7 times now for a suspension issue that, after the replacement of numerous suspension and steering-related parts, they still haven't been able to figure out. That's right - suspension issues (on a car that isn't even 3 years old). What am I driving - a 35 year old Duster with a rusted out frame?

    The new Fusion may be one of the sharpest looking and handling mid-sizers out there, but at what price do you value your spare time? Before you sign on the dotted line, you need to ask yourself how much you enjoy running back and forth to the service department because getting "those little new car bugs" worked out of your Ford could become your avocation for the next few years.

    Headlight problems, engine fires, electrical system failures - does anyone really believe that something magical occurs after one design problem is fixed that will prevent other reliability and safety issues from popping up a year or two down the road? How about 5? How much of your time and money are you willing to wager?

    I wish Ford was building consistent, quality vehicles today, but it's just not the case. Look at the facts - it's not just bugs and useability issues with their infotainment systems that have landed them at the bottom of the heap in the latest reliability surveys.

    While the 2013 Accord may not have the style or swagger of the new Ford, at least if the Honda proves troublesome, a forced trade in won't present you with a giant financial black eye. Try trading in one of these 2013 Fords two years from now and you'll get a painful lesson (one I'm currently feeling) in resale values.
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,040
    Ford is required by law to execute the EPA tests and report the results on the window sticker. This is not their own test - it's somebody else's test and it's required.

    Well, duh. Most everyone knows this. I thought you said the EPA tests were not completed yet and the numbers that CR was looking at were just Fords preliminary numbers. Which is it? Are the numbers CR was using for comparison the actual EPA numbers or not?

    Again, you choose to downplay the CR tests as being suspect. They test cars all year long in the same exact manner in. Ford, Chevy, Toyota, Honda, etc etc. They have never had such a large discrepancy before. Do the CR test cars from Ford have the optional tires? I didn't read that anywhere.

    CR doesn't use the EPA test cycle but it does use the same test for all the cars they test and it's more of real world type of test. Most cars test a little lower than EPA from what I've seen but they are usually close. I guess all the other hybrids they have tested over the years did not have some kind of optional tires and were done on perfect weather days using neither A/C or heaters. Only Ford had the dumb luck of being tested with fat tires and cold weather. What are the chances? Problem is, I remember a first drive or something like that and I think it was Edmunds, where the C-max results were equally as poor as CR's and I believe that was done earlier this fall. Don't know about fat tires though. Maybe a huge headwind in their test. I'm sure there is some crazy reason though.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    I never said anything about the EPA tests not being completed (not recently at least). I was only addressing the statement that Ford was advertising the 47 mpg rating and should therefore be held more accountable for it for some reason.

    All hybrids get worse fuel mileage in winter and Fords engines do need a few thousand miles break-in. They do offer optional tires that are not low rolling resistance. Winter blend fuel and ethanol will yield lower mpg than the EPA ratings.

    Does the CR test indicate that a closer look is needed? Yes. Does it mean that the vehicles in question can't hit 47 mpg on the EPA test? Absolutely not. And the only way to find out is to retest one using the EPA test, not some marginally controlled super secret test by CR.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I seem to have read that CR drove each car for 2,000 miles. I don't see a publicity stunt here. Just because you do not agree with their findings, does not negate their results. Running E10 in winter does not account for 14mpg off the EPA estimate and I have no doubt the EPA has not tested either car themselves.

    My in-laws have a 2013 Escape 1.6L Turbo AWD and get 19-20 mpg combined and have 1,600 miles on it. If they were to post or write about their results, would that be considered a publicity stunt too?

    Unfortunately, there is an abundance of negative news around Ford's newer technology stemming from the EcoBoost F-150's, Escape's and some Fusions. Now add to the mix the C-Max and Fusion Hybrid.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I'm saying it's too early to raise a red flag the way CR raised a red flag.

    I hope Ford and the EPA retest these vehicles quickly and either confirm the EPA results or confirm there is a problem and fix it.
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,040
    edited December 2012
    not some marginally controlled super secret test by CR.

    If you knew what you were talking about you wouldn't have said the above. CR has explained exactly how they test for MPG. I've read it and it is very controlled and in two directions to account for any wind resistance. It's far from secret as they spell it out in their annual auto issue.

    So I take it from your reply that you really don't know if the cars CR tested had the optional tires or not. Only that Ford offers them. So does Toyota with the Prious BTW. So now it's that Fords engines need so much more break-in, much more than the other brand new cars from other manufactures that CR tests. Heck, even the Hyundai Hybrid wasn't as far off and they have admitted they screwed up. I don't know if CR uses uses winter blend fuel or if they keep a supply of summer blend on hand for testing but even if they don't, wouldn't other makes be subject to the same winter blend and ethanol if applicable? Wouldn't all the reasons you have given affected all tested cars the same? Are Fords that different?
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,327
    edited December 2012
    I hate to break it to you guys, but I just read that more Fusions have been recalled for a headlight lens hazing problem. It is caused by it's bulb's heat.

    Not a biggie by itself, but considering all the other recalls, Ford has to stop the bleeding due to delay after delay resulting in zero sales. I know Ford will end up on top of things, but can you imagine the pressure the production supervisors are under to get these cars right? Wow.

    A bit of levity at Ford's expense is all they need , but I just read that last March Ford sent out 300,000 memory stick's. They were sent to Ford owners to fix the My-Ford-Touch system. Download time? 1 hour. During the 1/2 of installation time you can't change anything in the car such as A/C and stereo.

    Ford suggested in a U tube video to install it "on a long trip when you will not need to use the stereo or climate controls". Ford went on to suggest "doing a crossword puzzle, read a book, or whatever you feel like doing".

    Perhaps smashing the dash with a sledgehammer?

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    Get a car and rerun the EPA test and see if they get 47 mpg. Any other testing or speculation is irrelevant. Too many variables.

    Yes, Ford engines require around 5K miles to yield maximum mpg. Winter blend fuel lowers mpg compared to the EPA test. Optional tires lower mpg if they are not LRR. Winter heat requirements lower mpg in hybrids.

    All those COULD explain CRs lower mileage. Maybe something changed with the driver or the course.

    I'm not saying there isn't a problem - there could be something that changed in production or a bad part of software. But the only way to know is to rerun the EPA test the same way it was run before. Anything else is apples to oranges.
  • Oh, joy. Is this a separate issue from the original headlight problems a couple months ago?
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,771
    In the same test (CR), they got well over 40 mpg highway on the new Altima 2.5 with CVT. Odd how a conventional and relatively powerful 4-banger can easily over-achieve the EPA ratings on CR's test, but the Ford hybrids cannot. Most cars in fact get over the EPA rating on CR's highway test. But they tend to under-achieve on the CR test compared to the EPA city rating, as CR's "city" test is pretty severe (read "more real world") from what I've read about it.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,423
    Most updates provided from any manufacturer, whether memory stick or CD, take that much time or longer. The data being entered are huge. Be glad that software can now be updated in this manner, improving the performance of the electronic controls, navigation and sound systems.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    Yes, it is odd and that's why it needs to be investigated further. But it's premature to declare it's a problem based on ONE non scientific test. It doesn't matter how "real world" the CR test is - it's not how the EPA test is conducted and there are far more variables.

    I'm sure Ford will retest and we'll know one way or the other. Sometimes things change during production that produce unintended consequences or parts get changed by the suppliers.

    Ford is having serious issues with its "global" vehicles designed and/or sourced from Europe. They absolutely need to get that addressed before the next product launch.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,771
    So, you are saying the only way to test fuel economy is the EPA's test? :surprise:

    The real world does have variables--sorry. And CR does document how they perform their test. It could even be considered "scientific"... but clearly not by you.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,741
    It is if you're comparing something to the EPA 47 mpg rating. CR does not document the details of the test like the EPA does. The EPA test limits variables as much as possible. The CR test - while arguably more representative of "real world" driving - does not control things like fuel mix, ambient temperature or even driving style. They use 5 different drivers in one test. So while it may be more scientific than surveying owners it is far from scientific.

    When were the other hybrid models tested? What was the ambient temperature? That alone could result in a 4-5 mpg difference.

    Re-run the EPA test and that will show if something is wrong with the vehicles or if it's just the way they're being driven.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,771
    It's not just CR that is finding the Ford hybrids aren't getting their EPA ratings in "real world" tests...

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/healey/2012/12/08/test-drive-ford-- c-max/1752359/

    In that test, 38.4 mpg (computer) vs. EPA rating of 47 mpg average.

    Ford better watch out, the class action suits will start popping out any day now. ;)
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    edited December 2012
    This is an old, old trick. Since the test is known, they alter the computer and transmission to get optimal results at exactly the test speeds. For instance, they make sure that the torque converter locks up at 1-2mph lower than the cruising speed. They make sure that the city portion of the test utilizes 100% electric power if it's a hybrid. And so on.

    Because rather than driving like a 90 year old person, if your car is going too slow or is underpowered, you don't deal with it. You hammer the gas and get where you want to go before you die of old age.

    A good example of this is driving behind a Prius driver who is playing "MPG-O-Matic" with the computers. And making everyone behind them want to do ugly things to them.

    In most automatics, the second you drop a gear and aren't in overdrive, you lose almost 25% of your MPG. You can try it by running a tank of fuel with overdrive locked out. It's also why manuals still get better MPG. They have a more forgiving gearing and typically can accelerate a bit in top gear without down-shifting.

    So real-world tests are more important than made-up nonsense to satisfy the EPA. Myself, I use the Euro ratings and convert to U.S. gallons.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,327
    edited December 2012
    Well, I don't know if I would feel comfortable driving my new car while doing a software update.....if there was a snag, could the car end up with error code 421? (no brakes). LOL.

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

Sign In or Register to comment.