Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan

1…5960626465…111

Comments

  • golfnut5golfnut5 Member Posts: 202
    Why can't Ford or any of the domestics for that matter build an engine like that in my Acura TL. A 3.2 V 6 with awesome power, sounds like a great engine should sound, gets great gas mileage and for the tree huggers out there is an ultra low emissions engine. I am embarrassed for the domestics. :sick:
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    If your concerned about emmissions, the majority of Ford engines beat current requirements, and have many years prior to asian manufacturer's. Explorer V6 for example has better emmissions than an Accord Hybrid is one of numerous examples. Same with Focus (in comparison to compact), so on and so fourth in all segments specially trucks. It wasn't till last year that even Toyota started matching Fords emmission ratings on trucks.

    So it's really the other way around.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The Fusion/Milan have the "distinction" of earning the poorest scores of any current moderately-priced midsized car in the IIHS crash tests:

    Frontal: Acceptable
    Side: Poor
    Rear: Marginal

    The tests were w/o side bags. Ford has asked for a re-test with the side bags.

    I was beginning to warm up to the Milan. Now, it will be a cold day in (you know) before I get a Milan.

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=30
  • ray_sray_s Member Posts: 3
    according to cnn

    Crash test ratings for the Fusion and six other midsize sedans were released today by the Institute. Other cars for which results were released today were the Hyundai Sonata, Pontiac G6, Acura TSX, BMW 3-series, Infiniti G35, and Lexus IS.

    "The Fusion is a disappointment because it's a brand new design," said Adrian Lund, president of the Institute, in an announcement. "Ford has done a good job with some other recent models, but the Fusion is at the back of the pack among midsize sedans for overall safety performance."
    ....
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I had just assumed that any newly designed car would pretty much ace these crash tests. Its not as if the crash test is a surprise. What a lousy job Ford has done with regard to this. They got it pretty much right on the 500, why the failure with the Fusion?

    The detailed frontal tests were actually "good" except for right leg/foot. They should have designed the car to avoid this, however.

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=631

    The side test will improve when they re-do it with side air bags...but they should have designed it to be strong enough to get a "good" rating on the safety cage, imo.

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=621
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    "but they should have designed it to be strong enough to get a "good" rating on the safety cage, imo. "

    Thats not really a fair expectation, no car without side airbags in this size catagory received better than a P for side impact.

    I think something wierd definately happened because the Mazda6 was rated G overall.

    Mark
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    The Ford 500 did very well even without side air bags.
    If side air bags are needed for safety, then they should have been standard.

    Looks like they were ranked in order and the Fusion was the worst possible of those tested.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    You are getting crash tests confused. The Five Hundred has NOT been tested by the IIHS without side airbags.

    ~alpha
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Actually, the original quote was referencing the Safety Cage/Structure rating. The 04 Galant, though rated Poor overall, received a "Good" rating for structure. The "Good" rating for structure is pretty tough, though, and even BMW didnt achieve that with the 3 series.

    ~alpha
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Maybe you are right and acceptable is okay on the side safety cage rating. It is likely the overall side rating will be "good" when they test with side air bags.

    But VW seems to have figured out how to design their cars to get a "good" on that safety cage sub rating. Now that Volvo has lost their leadership on safety, maybe Ford should look into hiring someone from VW to help them figure that out :) .

    In some ways Ford has gone backward on safety. The 2000-2006 Taurus (and even the 1996 model) did better in the frontal crash test than the Fusion.
  • buckwheatbuckwheat Member Posts: 396
    http://tinyurl.com/ooynw

    http://tinyurl.com/qlxbe
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I just received the latest issue of Consumer Reports. I happen to read the brief write up on the Fusion, and at the end they state "an AWD turbo edition in the works" or something to that affect. If this were to be true, I wonder if it will be the engine and drive train of the Mazdaspeed6 and possibly call it the SVT Fusion? Any thoughts??
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    There won't be a SVT version for at least 2 years (and there are rumors that SVT is dead in the water anyway). AWD is a 2007 feature for sure, with a hybrid expected in 2008. There is no mention of a turbo model - that's most likely limited to the Mazdaspeed6.

    Ford can do a 3.5L AWD version of the Fusion with up to 270 hp without forced induction. I'd expect that instead of a turbo 4 cylinder. However, it's not clear when (or if) that would happen.
  • exalteddragon1exalteddragon1 Member Posts: 729
    That is exactly what they ahve to do! Direct Injection, VCT and 270 hp = sales!!!!!!

    AWD would be nice too for people who deal with lots of snow. They need to add stability control ASAP!
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    You might be right, but, there is already so much Mazda6 influence in the Fusion already so you might see the Mazdaspeed6 engine. Not much of it is actually Ford engineering. You open the hood and it is IDENTICAL! The 2.3L is Mazda, platform is Mazda, and when you look in the interior, the basic dash layout is Mazda, and where controls and switches are placed, are just like the Mazda6. Really, only the tranny, suspension and V6 are Ford supplied, as well as Ford's own interior and exterior styling.
  • green2gogreen2go Member Posts: 14
    What's weird is that Ford didn't fork over the $ to get the Fusion tested with side air bags. It will probably do fine with those. I got them for my Fusion -- I don't know why anyone wouldn't. The Fusion is a make-or-break car for Ford, one they've said is competitive with the best (which I believe), but now it got a very public dressing-down on its safety ratings.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    What's weird is that Ford didn't fork over the $ to get the Fusion tested with side air bags.

    That's because the IIHS buys cars from dealers. Ford didn't supply the vehicle. Makes me wonder if dealers aren't stocking vehicles with side airbags.

    IIHS FAQ's
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    When I bought my son's Focus a year ago I had to order one because NONE of the cars on ANY dealer lot within a several hundred mile radius of Atlanta had ABS, Traction Control or Side Airbags. Part of the problem is the Focus is the lowest cost vehicle on the lot so they keep the sticker prices down.

    My Fusion was ordered for stock and it had side airbags (and every other option) so I'm sure they're available on the higher end models but probably not on the lower trim levels.

    I don't understand why they don't test the car with all the safety options if they're available. They shouldn't have to be standard and there's no reason to make the mfr pay for another test. Doing a safety test without all available safety equipment seems silly.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    I don't understand why they don't test the car with all the safety options if they're available. They shouldn't have to be standard and there's no reason to make the mfr pay for another test. Doing a safety test without all available safety equipment seems silly.

    Offering a vehicle that will not score well on crash tests without optional equipment seems silly.

    Perhaps IIHS buys vehicles without optional safety gear thinking that the manufacturer must be pretty confident that the vehicle will score well without the safety gear.

    Also what if the IIHS did test the side airbag equipped model first and it passed with flying colors. That's worth a lot of marketing to the manufacturer but most folks would never see the tiny print in the ad stating the optional equipment required to achieve those results.

    I'm a Ford shareholder and I'm disappointed that the vehicle expected to do well in the most competitive market segment didn't do well in a test that all makers prepare for.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Note: When side airbags are optional, the Institute tests without the option and will conduct a second test with the optional airbags if a manufacturer requests it and reimburses the Institute for the cost of the vehicle.

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/default.aspx

    What a foolish decision that was by Ford. Along with whatever they did that resulted in frontal rating of "acceptable".

    The oddest thing about this is the last photo at:

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=631

    Described as:

    Postcrash photo indicating the added "ramp" intended to reduce loading on the right leg and foot in frontal offset crashes.

    What is that about :confuse:
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Note: When side airbags are optional, the Institute tests without the option and will conduct a second test with the optional airbags if a manufacturer requests it and reimburses the Institute for the cost of the vehicle.

    Since the IIHS buys from dealerships, it looks like they buy the worst case scenario and then allows the manafacturer to pay for a second test with the safety gear.

    IIRC, Subaru earned a low grade with the latest Legacy and paid to retest after they made some changes.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Thanks for the tip. I did not know that about the Legacy. Looks like changes were implemented with the 2006 model...

    The Subaru Legacy was redesigned for the 2005 model year. Beginning with 2006 models, changes were made to the side structure, front seats, and front seat-mounted torso airbags to improve occupant protection in side impact crashes.

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=602

    Legacy was only marginal in side test even with air bags before the changes were made:

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=259

    Hopefully, Ford will also make the changes necessary to improve their rating.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Believe it or not there are a lot of people who don't want to pay for the extra safety equipment and having it optional makes the car more attractive to them. It also keeps the base price lower. It seems to me making it optional works for both the safety conscious and the cost conscious. But the insurance companies don't want it to be optional so they punish the car companies.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    What's odd about it? It's described in the text. It was added to avoid the right leg injuries in the test but it apparently didn't work.

    They'll fix it and retest it. In the meantime I guess I'll just have to avoid driving head on into a fixed object at an offset angle at 40 mph. :sick:
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Member Posts: 792
    The odd part about the frontal offset result is that Ford surely must have conducted the same test, and have known the result well before the IIHS test was done. They added the plastic ramp under the carpet (I wonder if that makes foot placement uncomfortable?), but apparently needed to go further. Did they think that the poor result would not make news?

    As for the test with the side and curtain air bags, it is very difficult to believe that they were too cheap to give the IIHS the price of a Fusion so that one with those could be tested. Again they must have know the result, and apparently though that the poor result would not be publicized.

    While many other vehicles do poorly on the side crash test without the side and curtain air bags, the message people who do not follow cars as closely as most of here will receive is "the Fusion and Milan are unsafe." Ford pays the individuals and departments responsible for this PR disaster, and in the case of the poor rightleg result, engineering disaster, millions of dollars per year, and this is what they get?

    Now, too late to undo the damage, they announce that the 2007 Fusion and Milan will have the side and curtain air bags standard.
  • exalteddragon1exalteddragon1 Member Posts: 729
    This will be a Fusion selling point. We will see what happens with sales.
  • navigator89navigator89 Member Posts: 1,080
    Fusion crash test video
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    Disappointing.
    I saw a similar video on one of the morning shows on TV today, so it's getting publicity.
    This is a PR disaster for Ford. Very few newly designed cars do this poorly.
    I guess you should wait for crash test results before buying and not assume every new vehicle will do well.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    What's odd about it? It's described in the text. It was added to avoid the right leg injuries in the test but it apparently didn't work.

    What I thought is odd is I can't imagine how this ramp was supposed to protect the leg/foot from injury. It just seems very strange...at least to me.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    As for the test with the side and curtain air bags, it is very difficult to believe that they were too cheap to give the IIHS the price of a Fusion so that one with those could be tested.

    Ford wasn't cheap about not providing a Fusion with the airbags. The IIHS buys the initial test vehicle from a dealership. They buy them without the airbags if offered - they look for the worst case scenario.

    The manufacturer then can supply a fully safety equipped vehicle for retesting if they are not happy with the initial test.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    The manufacturer then can supply a fully safety equipped vehicle for retesting if they are not happy with the initial test.

    I think they can pay for the extra test with airbags upfront and get it done at the same time. The IIHS news release implies this, where it says:

    Manufacturers who want a second test with side airbags have to reimburse the Institute for the cost of the vehicle. Initially, Ford didn't request a second test of the Fusion with optional side airbags.

    "Usually when an automaker doesn't ask for the optional test, we presume it means the side airbags wouldn't help much to improve the car's rating," explains Lund. "But now Ford has requested a second test, so the Fusion with side airbags may earn a better rating than poor.
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Member Posts: 792
    Yes, I know that IIHS buys the initial test vehicle, and that they buy them without side bags if the side bags are not an option. Ford also knows that. Thus, Ford WAS too cheap to either supply IIHS with the money to also buy one with the side bags, or to supply IIHS with a car with the side bags.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Yes, I know that IIHS buys the initial test vehicle, and that they buy them without side bags if the side bags are not an option. Ford also knows that. Thus, Ford WAS too cheap to either supply IIHS with the money to also buy one with the side bags, or to supply IIHS with a car with the side bags.

    The way I read the IIHS statement that they when buy the initial car, it's out of their pocket. The manufacturer isn't sponsoring the test, it's the consortium of insurance companies that are affiliated with the "Insurance Institute for Highway Safety". They're independent of the auto maker.

    The manufacturer can then ask for a retest on their dime if they are not satisfied with the results.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    Thus, Ford WAS too cheap to either supply IIHS with the money to also buy one with the side bags, or to supply IIHS with a car with the side bags.

    The ONLY thing Ford did wrong was to make the side airbags optional, not standard. It's the IIHS's decision as to what car to get, since THEY initially buy the car off the showroom floor. They'll buy the non-airbag-equipped model first, test it, then if Ford wants them to retest with airbags, Ford will cover the cost of the second test car.

    Ford wasn't too cheap for anything. They maybe should've made side airbags standard, but doing that would take the car off some people's shopping list. Wrong or not, some don't like side airbags.

    I'm just curious to see how it tests with them...
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    IN a few months, they will come standard with SABs, along some other major toys as well.
  • atlvibeatlvibe Member Posts: 109
    I have yet see large numbers of Ford Fusion on the road. Has Ford kept them away from the rental fleets?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    No, they are in rental fleets (including Hertz's).
  • todd11todd11 Member Posts: 23
    Ant, Will this effect the base price?
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Not really because the options/packages will be shifted to compensate for it, and not offering huge discounts is another way which won't hurt the bottom line on offering it standard. 2 other safety devices will be implemented as well.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Are you saying that Ford will add what is now a $600 option to the Fusion without raising the car's base price? That is a great deal for buyers... well, for buyers as of this fall. Not good for buyers before September, though.

    What are the other two safety features that will be added? Is ABS one of them?
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    I'll take a stab at it. ANT14 says SABs will be made standard along with two other safety features. I'm guessing Side air curtains and ABS as well. IIRC Ford has not installed AdvanceTrac in any cars so I doubt that stability control is one of them. It would be a first in a Ford car if they do add it.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Uh, not exactly. The Focus once offered stability control, though there were few takers. As long ago as five years ago, even. . .
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The Lincoln LS has had stability control since it debuted in 1999. Unless by Ford you meant Ford the brand and not Ford the company.
  • msuradmsurad Member Posts: 7
    I think it is worth noting that the current models of the Fusion's top competitors (Honda Accord and Toyota Camry) also received a Poor side impact rating by the IIHS when not equipped with the side air bags.

    I don't remember seeing this publicized by the news media as much as the Fusion's Poor result has been lately (If it was shown by any of the national media outlets at all.) I could be wrong, but it seems a little like another case of "Ford bashing" by the media.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The main thing being highlighted by the IIHS is the Acceptable rating on frontal impact, which is extremely rare even in new small car designs these days.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    I don't have a problem with the Side Air bags being optional for those people who want to pay for them.

    The problem though is then dealers have to order the car with that option to really give people choice.

    As the previous poster noted, if you want the side airbags and ABS in a Focus, you most likely have to order one.

    Last year Ford really screwed up by haveing a commodities restriction on side airbags in the 500 because to many people WHERE ordering them.

    As someone who sells Fords, customers are pretty much 50-50 for side airbags. But, the people that want the airbags insist on them. Its not like a moonroof or an up graded radio where you can get a customer to consider the car without that equipment.

    The side impact test is more recently getting a lot more play and people are much more aware of desire for side airbags now than even 2 or 3 years ago.

    ABS is totally unimportant to most Ford buyers that I encounter who are interested in the few Ford models that DO NOT have it standard.

    The real player is the the dealer who orders the cars and if Ford has data suggesting that side airbags are desired by a certain percentage of people then Ford needs to get that DATA to the dealers and make side airbags available.

    Mark
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Not really because the options/packages will be shifted to compensate for it

    I assume this means some other things that are now standard will instead be optional?

    To me the side impact test is really not likely to be a problem, I would have paid for side airbags anyway and I assume the car will do well in the test with them. But, what are they going to do about the frontal test result?

    Saying that it "meets all Federal safety standards", which was a statement from Ford in one of the news articles that someone linked, is not going to cut it.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    The Focus once offered stability control, though there were few takers.

    Thanks for the correction. I completely forgot about that and I even shopped the Focus while it still had stability control and now remember not being able to find a single copy on any local lot that was equipped with it.

    The Fusion would still be the first Ford car to have stability control standard if they do it though. We just leased an '06 Explorer with AdvanceTrac with RSC standard (they started that last year actually) so it is starting to filter out at Ford. I still don't see a need for it in cars but it was a must in the truck.
  • ontopontop Member Posts: 279
    The automatic shifter in the Fusion has got to be at the bottom of it's class. Non-gated. Only a Drive or Low option. That's it. And looks like Ford shifters from 20 years ago (maybe it is). And this is Ford's return of serve from the Toyota/Honda juggernaut?
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Gee - I move mine from P to R to D every day and it seems to work just fine. I don't understand the gate issue - why is that necessary? Just seems like it makes it harder to shift back and forth.

    The reason for only having a L option is the shifter was originally designed to be used with the CVT transmission (as was the one in the 500) as that was supposed to be the only automatic transmission option. They ditched the CVT but didn't change the shifter. They'll eventually change it but to be honest it works just fine as is. The only people complaining about it are the people who don't own one.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles