Howdy, Stranger!

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





Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan

1137138140142143184

Comments

  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    In my region Honda is offering %2.9 financing..
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    The current 0% for 72 months campaing that ends on the 5th is different from previous campaigns.

    Ford uses a tiered approval system. Previously, only peeps approved in tiers 0 and 1 and in rare cases up to tier 3 qualified for the 0%.

    In this campaign, Ford is offering 0% out to tier 5 customers! This is very very big news, previously the only option open to these customers was "subprime" lending at up to the highest rates allowed by law.

    the "If approved, you qualify" tag is just a clumsy way of saying something that isn't so easy to explain.

    I am a little pissed, that I took the 1.9% offered in the beginning of August. VS. the 0%, i'm paying about $800 extra over the 60 months. :(

    Mark.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    Toyota is a company that makes money by selling cars. Toyotas are rarely considered the "best in class" in terms of performance or handling or any other criteria used to say what is better than an other. (possible exception is Sienna)

    Toyota just managed to build up this reputation for quality.

    Ford has time from time built the absolute best in any individual class. The trouble is they build bombs from time to time as well.

    Visit www.autos.com

    Mark.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    "Ford has time from time built the absolute best in any individual class"

    In the last 20 years those occurrences have been rare. In the car segment anyway.

    The Camry has been regarded as among the best in its class for some time now. I'm not here to tout Toyotas, I never owned one and I don't plan to do so in the near future. But it's more than Toyotas' reputation for qualtiy that brings people into their showrooms. Most of their vehicles are rated near the top in their respective segments.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    My dealership is currently sold out of 06 AND 07 Fusions. We have 6 or so 07 Milans in stock.

    We tried not to order to many Job #1 07 Fusions because of the changes that come with Job 2. Now maybe we wish we did.

    Mark.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    Just out of curiosity I looked up TSBs for the 2006 Fusion since it's been out almost a year now.

    I only found 4:

    1 for a code that may not clear at high altitude
    1 for a special tool required to remove the crankshaft pulley bolt
    1 describing ignition diagnostics
    1 for alternate spare keys

    Not bad for a brand new vehicle. This backs up the lack of problems being reported. Kudos to Ford for finally putting their money where their mouth is regarding quality being job 1.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    By contrast:

    The 2007 Camry already has 8 - one of which is a safety recall for airbag replacement.
    The 2006 Camry had 9 - 4 appeared to be defects.
    The 2006 Accord had 9 - 3 appeared to be defects
    The 2006 Sonata had 30 - at least 6 appeared to be defects
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Now post this on the Midsize sedan board and watch the Honda/Toyota fans heads spin! ;)

    Took my Fusion in for an oil change today at the Ford dealership. They had a special for $20.00, so I took it there. Speaking with the service guy, he never sees a Fusion except for oil changes.. :shades: Looking at the internet traffic. The Fusion/Milan are proving to be very reliable and well built vehicles. Think you'll hear about it in the media! He.. NO!! :mad:
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    Took my Fusion in for an oil change today at the Ford dealership. They had a special for $20.00, so I took it there. Speaking with the service guy, he never sees a Fusion except for oil changes.. Looking at the internet traffic. The Fusion/Milan are proving to be very reliable and well built vehicles. Think you'll hear about it in the media! He.. NO!!

    You don't hear about the VERY POOR urban mpg on the Milan, now 13.5 mpg/NYC, in the media either. You do hear Ford deceptively advertising 32 mpg on the Milan. No wonder Ford is losing market share! :sick:
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    Not bad for a brand new vehicle. This backs up the lack of problems being reported. Kudos to Ford for finally putting their money where their mouth is regarding quality being job 1.

    How about seeing how many Fusions were SOLD against the TSBs to make a statiscally VALID comparison?
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    By contrast:

    The 2007 Camry already has 8 - one of which is a safety recall for airbag replacement.
    The 2006 Camry had 9 - 4 appeared to be defects.
    The 2006 Accord had 9 - 3 appeared to be defects
    The 2006 Sonata had 30 - at least 6 appeared to be defects


    Where are finding this erroneous data???

    According to the NHSTA-ODI, "The data does not contain all the service bulletins generated by a manufacturer."

    Surely if we compare the # of 2006 Fusion/Milan cars SOLD vs. 2006 cars above one will uncover that the % of Fusion NHTA-ODI reported safety related defect TSBs is high for a new car and in reality there are 11 TSBs, while the Hyundai Sonata has 6, Honda Accord 0.

    Per NHSTA-ODI, the 2006 Accord has 8, not 9 defect TSBs, btw. :D
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    Report Date : September 12, 2006 at 05:25 AM
    SEARCH TYPE : VEHICLE
    YEAR : 2006
    Make : FORD
    Model : FUSION

    Results : 7 | All records displayed
    Make : FORD Model : FUSION Year : 2006
    Manufacturer : FORD MOTOR COMPANY

    Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
    ODI ID Number : 10149123 Number of Deaths: 0
    Date of Failure: November 29, 2005
    VIN : 3FAHP08126R...
    Component: EXTERIOR LIGHTING:BRAKE LIGHTS
    Summary:
    DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE THIRD BRAKE LAMP WHICH IS LOCATED BEHIND THE REAR SEAT BLOCKS HIS VIEW. AT NIGHT YOU CANNOT SEE THE HEADLIGHTS OF OTHER CARS THAT ARE CLOSE. THE CONTACT FEELS THE LAMP SHOULD BE RELOCATED IN THE TRUNK DECK OR ABOVE THE REAR WINDOW. UPDATED 2/13/2006 - THE CONSUMER HAD ONE MINOR ACCIDENT. HE BACKED INTO A POST THAT WAS ONLY ABOUT 3-4' HIGH. THE POST COULD NOT BE SEEN BECAUSE OF THE VEHICLE'S HIGH BACK DESIGN AND THE HIGH MOUNT BRAKE LIGHT BLOCKING HIS VIEW. *NM

    Check to Request Research. Submit below.

    Make : FORD Model : FUSION Year : 2006
    Manufacturer : FORD MOTOR COMPANY
    Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
    ODI ID Number : 10150032 Number of Deaths: 0
    Date of Failure: January 26, 2006
    VIN : 3FAHP08156R...
    Component: TIRES:TREAD/BELT
    Summary:
    A MICHELIN HXMXM4 225-50-17 INSTALLED ON MY FORD FUSION 2006 JUST LOST ALL THE TREAD AREA AFTER JUST SOME 1500 MILES ON IT. I CALLED FORD AND MICHELIN AND I GOT NO ANSWER. SINCE THE TIRES ARE MADE IN THE USA AND FORD IS A US BRAND, I WOULD LIKE TO FILE THIS COMPLAINT. I HAVE PLENTY OF PICTURES I MIGHT SEND TO YOU IN CASE YOU NEED THEM. I HAVE CALLED MICHELIN, BECAUSE THIS IS A BRAND NEW TIRE, SO THERE IS NO TIRES ON ANY DEALER, AND ALSO, TO ASK THEM TO HONOR THE WARRANTY BUT IT SEEMS THAT NO ONE WANTS TO HELP OUT AND THEY SAY IT MUST BE MY FAULT AND NOT MICHELIN´S FAULT SINCE THEIR TIRE HAVE NEVER EVER HAD SUCH TYPE OF PROBLEM. THANK YOU. *JB

    Check to Request Research. Submit below.

    Make : FORD Model : FUSION Year : 2006
    Manufacturer : FORD MOTOR COMPANY
    Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
    ODI ID Number : 10150224 Number of Deaths: 0
    Date of Failure: January 16, 2006
    VIN : 3FAFP07166R...
    Component: VISIBILITY:REARVIEW MIRRORS/DEVICES:EXTERIOR
    Summary:
    DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE EXTERIOR MIRROR ON THE VEHICLE DOES NOT ALLOW YOU TO SEE THE BACK OF THE VEHICLE. NO MATTER HOW THE MIRRORS ARE TURNED THE BACK OF THE VEHICLE CANNOT BE SEEN. THE DEALER AND THE MANUFACTURER HAVE BEEN ALERTED. UPDATED 3/9/2006 - *NM

    Check to Request Research. Submit below.

    Make : FORD Model : FUSION Year : 2006
    Manufacturer : FORD MOTOR COMPANY
    Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
    ODI ID Number : 10150439 Number of Deaths: 0
    Date of Failure: February 16, 2006
    VIN : 3FAFP07166R...
    Component: VISIBILITY:REARVIEW MIRRORS/DEVICES:EXTERIOR
    Summary:
    DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE EXTERIOR MIRRORS ON THE VEHICLE DO NOT ALLOW VISION OF THE REAR END, NO MATTER HOW THE MIRRORS ARE POSITIONED. THE DEALERSHIP SUGGESTED MOTION SENSORS BE INSTALLED AND THE MANUFACTURER STATED THIS IS HOW THE VEHICLE WAS MANUFACTURED AND NO REPAIRS WERE AVAILABLE. UPDATED 03/09/06

    Check to Request Research. Submit below.

    Make : FORD Model : FUSION Year : 2006
    Manufacturer : FORD MOTOR COMPANY
    Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
    ODI ID Number : 10158349 Number of Deaths: 0
    Date of Failure: May 26, 2006
    VIN : 3FAHP081X6R...
    Component: VISIBILITY:WINDSHIELD
    Summary:
    MY WINDSHIELD HAD SERIOUS DISTORTIONS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE GLASS. VARYING DEGRESS OF MAGNIFICATION CAUSED EYE STRAIN AND HEADACHES. IT WAS DANGEROUS DRIVING THE VEHICLE IN THIS CONDITION AND NOT A PLEASANT EXPERIENCE. MY DEALERSHIP REPLACED THE WINDSHIELD ONLY TO HAVE THE NEW ONE BE EVEN WORSE. THE NEW WINDSHIELD IS SO BAD IT'S AS THOUGH I'M LOOKING THROUGH A WET WINDSHIELD THAT HAS NOT BEEN WIPED. THE DEALERSHIP HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THE REPLACEMENT IS BAD AND THAT IT MIGHT BE INDICATIVE OF A LARGER PROBLEM. THEY PLAN ON CONTACTING FORD. I'VE HAD THE CAR FOR ONLY ONE WEEK AT THE TIME OF TYPING THIS. *NM

    Check to Request Research. Submit below.

    Make : FORD Model : FUSION Year : 2006
    Manufacturer : FORD MOTOR COMPANY
    Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
    ODI ID Number : 10160601 Number of Deaths: 0
    Date of Failure: June 22, 2006
    VIN : 3FAFP07176R...
    Component: TIRES
    Summary:
    DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING THE TIRES SUDDENLY BECAME FLAT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THERE WERE NO POTHOLES OR FOREIGN OBJECTS THAT MAY HAVE PUNCTURED THE TIRES. THE DEALER RECENTLY CHECKED THE TIRE PRESSURE TWO WEEKS AGO AND THERE WAS NO NEED FOR EVEN A ROTATION OF THE TIRES. THERE WAS ALSO NO VIBRATION WHILE DRIVING PRIOR TO THIS INCIDENT. THE TIRES WERE OBSERVED PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT AND THERE WERE NO SIGNS OF FAILURE OR BUDGING. THE CONTACT EXPRESSED BEING NERVOUS BECAUSE OF THE TWO TIRES GOING FLAT AT THE SAME TIME WITH NO APPARENT WARNING. THE DEALER STATED BOTH RIMS WERE BENT. UPDATED 08/22/06. *JB

    Check to Request Research. Submit below.

    Make : FORD Model : FUSION Year : 2006
    Manufacturer : FORD MOTOR COMPANY
    Crash : No Fire : No Number of Injuries: 0
    ODI ID Number : 10164404 Number of Deaths: 0
    Date of Failure: August 2, 2006
    VIN : 3FAHP08Z36R...
    Component: VISIBILITY:WINDSHIELD
    Summary:
    LOW VISIBILITY OUT OF THE REAR WINDSHIELD CAN POSE A DANGER WHEN BACKING UP IN PARKING LOTS OR OUT OF DRIVEWAYS SINCE SOMETIMES THE ROAD CANNOT BE SEEN AND DISTANCE TO OTHER VEHICLES CANNOT BE ESTIMATED. NO BACKUP WARNING SYSTEM WAS AVAILABLE AS AN ADD-ON LIKE THE FORD EXPLORER AND OTHER FORD MODELS. THIS SHOULD BE A STANDARD FEATURE IN ALL MODELS OF THE VEHICLE AS IT WOULD PROVIDE SAFETY IN BACKING OF THE VEHICLE IF NOT AT LEAST AN OPTION TO ADD TO THE PURCHASE. *JB

    Check to Request Research. Submit below.
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    Just out of curiosity I looked up TSBs for the 2006 Fusion since it's been out almost a year now.

    I only found 4:


    I'm curious too and found 11, 2006 Honda Accord ZERO. What were you saying about a new vehicle???

    11 TSBs are available for the 2006 FORD FUSION

    Search result summary

    Type Count
    Service Bulletin 11

    The following 11 TSBs are available for the 2006 FORD FUSION:

    Subscriber? Use the Advanced Search form to access all of your account features.

    TSB Description Issue Date
    06-10-10 AUDIO / NAVIGATION SERVICE AND ORDERING PROCEDURES 2006-05-29
    06-10-6 HEATER HIGH BLOWER SPEED - COLD AIR ON INITIAL START UP - REVISED 2006-05-29
    06-9-1 HEATER HIGH BLOWER SPEED - COLD AIR ON INITIAL START UP 2006-05-15
    06-8-11 CAMSHAFT TICK NOISE - 3.0L 4V ENGINE ONLY WITH EXHAUST CAMSHAFT DRIVEN WATER PUMPS 2006-05-01
    06-4-2 DISCHARGED BATTERY - CHARGING SERVICE TIPS - REVISED 2006-03-06
    05-26-20 COLD START TIP-IN HESITATION - 2.3L WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION 2005-12-31
    05-25-1 SQUEAKING NOISE FROM WHEEL COVERS - REVISED 2005-12-26
    05-22-5 IGNITION DIAGNOSTICS 2005-11-14
    05-18-7 WIRING - SOLDERING AND CRIMPING REPAIRS - SERVICE TIPS - REVISED 2005-09-19
    05-9-18 DISCHARGED BATTERY - CHARGING SERVICE TIPS 2005-05-16
    05-9-3 INTERIOR PLASTIC TRIM - PAINT-TO-MATCH AND REPAIR - INTERIOR SPRAY PAINT AND ADHESION PROMOTER USAGE INSTRUCTIONS 2005-05-16

    Search did not return any matching bulletins for a 2006 HONDA ACCORD.
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    Just out of curiosity I looked up TSBs for the 2006 Fusion since it's been out almost a year now.

    I only found 4:

    1 for a code that may not clear at high altitude
    1 for a special tool required to remove the crankshaft pulley bolt
    1 describing ignition diagnostics
    1 for alternate spare keys

    Not bad for a brand new vehicle. This backs up the lack of problems being reported. Kudos to Ford for finally putting their money where their mouth is regarding quality being job 1.


    Not bad? Not good either! Looks like you're confusing NHSTA-ODI problems reported with actual mfr issued TSBs. Save the kudos for 2007 models, the 2006 Ford Fusion has 11 TSBs. If Ford ever sells a significant voluume of Fusion/Milan, the reported NHSTA-ODI defects will go up.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    First TSBs are NOT necessarily a description of a problem.

    Several of the TSB are general in nature as to how to work on certain aspects of the Fusion.

    There is a TSB regarding vibration from the door panels caused by bass from the speakrs. I will have this one taken care of at my next oil change.

    I'm glad the complaints to NHSTA were posted because that most of them are related to buyer's remorse.

    YES rear visiblity is low compared to some cars. If you don't like it, don't buy a Fusion. Don't blame Ford if you backed into a pool! Don't blame Ford if you curb your car and BEND your RIMS!

    I remember when my Grandmother was alive, she would complain about pain in her arm when the weather changed. She broke her arm as a teenager trying to crank start a Model A. That damn old Ford she use to say.

    Could you imagine if some of the idiots who drive today had to deal with crank starts?

    Mark.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    Reverse sensing is available AFTERMARKET for any vehicle. Installation is around $300.00.

    If you are having problems backing I suggest you contact an auto accessories store near you.

    I hope the idiot that made that complaint is reading this.

    Next people are going to complain about RED being to bright and it hurts their eyes when they are getting into a vehicle on a sunny day.

    I think I'll post a complaint about a Honda Accord. Its clearly safety related as the Honda Accord poses a threat to my economic security since all the profits go back to JAPAN!

    Mark.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Hilarious...

    THE CONTACT STATED THE EXTERIOR MIRROR ON THE VEHICLE DOES NOT ALLOW YOU TO SEE THE BACK OF THE VEHICLE. NO MATTER HOW THE MIRRORS ARE TURNED THE BACK OF THE VEHICLE CANNOT BE SEEN. THE DEALER AND THE MANUFACTURER HAVE BEEN ALERTED.

    What does this mean...the back of the vehicle??? Side mirrors will let you see the side, not the back, of any vehicle. (Though it is safer to have them set so you do not see your vehicle, without leaning your head to the side.)

    Even better is the one where the tires suddenly went flat and apparently the rims spontaneously had become bent.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    I used the NHTSA website for the TSB info for all 4 vehicles - you can't use data from different sources. A defect is a defect regardless of how many copies of a vehicle are sold or how many times the problem is reported. We're not counting total number of defects - just the number of specific problems that were common enough to warrant a TSB.

    This does not mean the Fusion is perfect or that the other vehicles are bad - just that the lack of defect type TSBs AND THE LACK OF USER REPORTED PROBLEMS confirms that the Fusion is one of Ford's best built vehicles and is at least as good as the imports, if not better.

    Those 'safety complaints' are hilarious and none of them show any fault with the vehicle. The only safety problem in those vehicles is the nut behind the wheel.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel a Certified Edmunds Poster.Posts: 11,805
    You do hear Ford deceptively advertising 32 mpg on the Milan.

    Because Ford isn't deceptively advertising 32 MPG. According to the EPA a 4 banger with an auto will get 32 MPG highway. According to the law they have to advertise EPA estiments.

    Also I would expect NYC driving to result in very poor mileage in any car since you tend to spend a lot of time stopped in traffic where your mileage is zero on any car.

    The sign said "No shoes, no shirt, no service", it didn't say anything about no pants.

  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,565
    I never pay much attention to peoples claims about their "real world" mpg in the city, as there are just too many variables. Any significant amount of idling at a stop light or creeping in heavy traffic can very greatly affect overall mileage.

    For example, suppose you had a car that you drove in a situation where you were stopped most of the time, and you drove 5 miles and got only 5 miles per gallon. Additionally, you then got on a freeway and got 30 MPG for another five miles. What was your average mileage? An amazingly low 8.57 MPG! (10 total miles driven divided by 1.167 gallons used)
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    Also I would expect NYC driving to result in very poor mileage in any car since you tend to spend a lot of time stopped in traffic where your mileage is zero on any car.


    I'm comparing the 2006 Milan to its euthanasia-ed siblings 1996, 1999 & 2003 Sables, none of which got that low mpg all under the same conditions.

    Comparatively speaking, the Milan is a gas guzzling pig. :lemon:
  • You don't hear about the VERY POOR urban mpg on the Milan, now 13.5 mpg/NYC, in the media either. You do hear Ford deceptively advertising 32 mpg on the Milan. No wonder Ford is losing market share!

    Oh really? The Milan is rated 23 city/31 hwy with the 4-cyl, and with either the automatic or manual, 31-32 MPG isn't very difficult to attain, considering the Mazda 6 uses the same engine and tranny, and 32 MPG is pretty common among those owners.

    I'll guess you have the V6 (rated 21 city/29 hwy, btw). Between that, and NYC driving which is worse than ANY mileage test out there, your mileage won't be stellar by any means. The V6 also improves with mileage as well. My V6 in the Mazda 6 is the same engine, and while fuel economy wasn't good initially, after 35K miles, I get (or even beat) the EPA mileage all the time.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel a Certified Edmunds Poster.Posts: 11,805
    I'm comparing the 2006 Milan to its euthanasia-ed siblings 1996, 1999 & 2003 Sables, none of which got that low mpg all under the same conditions.

    Do you have a source for this or am I just to take your word for it?

    The sign said "No shoes, no shirt, no service", it didn't say anything about no pants.

  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    I'll guess you have the V6 (rated 21 city/29 hwy, btw). Between that, and NYC driving which is worse than ANY mileage test out there, your mileage won't be stellar by any means. The V6 also improves with mileage as well. My V6 in the Mazda 6 is the same engine, and while fuel economy wasn't good initially, after 35K miles, I get (or even beat) the EPA mileage all the time.

    As stated in previous msg, I'm comparing the 2006 Milan V6 to the Sable, the car it supposedly replaces. The EPA range on the 2003 Sable and 2006 Milan is city 17-23. If 17 is the EPA low end for city mpg, then the 2006 Milan V6 :lemon: is way below while the 1996, 1999 & 2003 Sables which have all performed within range.

    I have to wait 35K miles for mpg improvement? That is a joke!
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    I never pay much attention to peoples claims about their "real world" mpg in the city, as there are just too many variables.

    Ditto. At one time I could have said my wife was getting about 10 mpg driving our '97 windstar to work in a location with no traffic to speak of. Now this leaves out the fact that she was driving about 1.5 miles each way and it was winter ;) .

    I think the CR test probably approximates the worst case city mileage that anyone is likely to experience...but even that was 12 mpg for a 1997 Windstar.

    BTW, CR got 14 mpg in their "city" test of the V6 Fusion. For comparison, they got 15 mpg for the Taurus Jan 2004 and 14 mpg in 2000.
  • I'm comparing the 2006 Milan to its euthanasia-ed siblings 1996, 1999 & 2003 Sables, none of which got that low mpg all under the same conditions.

    You're also comparing it to lighter, less-powerful cars.
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    I do have the stickers from all of the Sables I've owned. As for mpg complaints, would have posted here long ago if I had such poor urban mpg as I now have from the 2006 Milan V6 :lemon:
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel a Certified Edmunds Poster.Posts: 11,805
    So in short I am to just take your word for it. Maybe its your driving habits. Maybe you miscalculated, there are just so many variables that makes one person complaining about poor mileage just about meaningless. I see others giving much higher city driving numbers, much closer to the EPA estiments.

    The sign said "No shoes, no shirt, no service", it didn't say anything about no pants.

  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    I'm comparing the 2006 Milan to its euthanasia-ed siblings 1996, 1999 & 2003 Sables, none of which got that low mpg all under the same conditions.

    You're also comparing it to lighter, less-powerful cars.


    Where are you getting your "facts"???

    Lighter? The 2003 Sable curb weight is
    GS: 3338 lbs Vulcan
    3313 lbs Duratec

    LS: 3501 lbs Vulcan
    3484 lbs Duratec.

    2006 Milan is:
    3117 lbs I-4 manual
    3303 lbs V6 automatic

    Thus, the 2006 Milan V6 is 200 lbs lighter than 2003 Sable LS....

    Powerful?
    Both 2003 Sable LS and 2006 Milan V6 have 3.0L 24 valve Duratec engines.

    Sable LS horsepower: 200@5650 rpm, torque; 200@4400 rpm
    Milan V6 horsepower: 221@6250 rpm, torque: 205@4800 rpm

    Looks like a 10% hp increase in Milan, neglible torque increase. Any other gauges of power???

    Certainly you aren't going to justify the 2006 Milan V6 :lemon: very poor urban mpg based on your interpretation of facts?

    The fact is the 2006 Milan V6 :lemon: gets very poor urban NYC mpg vs. 2003 Sable LS though it is 200 lbs lighter and maybe 10% more powerful, if the numbers above suggest more power.

    Gee, hope I don't have 4 fat passengers, then I may have negative mpg! :D
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,565
    My 2000 Taurus is about the same weight as a V-6 Fusion/Milan and it is also equipped with the Duratech V-6, though it is a non variable valve timing version and with a 4 speed automatic vs 6 on the Fusion/Milan

    This Taurus gets 19-22 mpg in my daily suburban comute, which is a mostly a fairly low speed 11 mile commute one way, but not very conjested most of the time.

    My strictly highway mileage varies between 27-30, once again depending on speed, climate, AC on or off, wind conditions, etc, but it always has equalled or beaten the EPA highway rating, which if I recall, was 26 or 27 mpg.

    I cannot imagine that a V-6 Fusion or Milan driven on the same commute cycle as my Duratech Taurus, would be a whole lot different, while I might expect it's highway mileage to be better mostly due to the wide range maximum gearing I expect is available in the 6 speed automatic.
Sign In or Register to comment.