Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
i still dont agree with making everything standard...forcing me to buy something i dont want.
~alpha
So does great handling and strong brakes. At least the former will apply to the Fusion, especially when AWD is online, which I'm sure can't be said for the Sonata.
If the Fusion handles anything like my Mazda6s, which it should, you won't need stability control. Trust me.
Not offering these features is a bad move, Ford and GM wonder why people don't buy their cars and they keep losing market share but they don't offer the features that people want. Where is the AUX input into the stereo so I can hook up my MP3 player easy, where is the factory sat radio, heated seats with CLOTH SEATS, you offer it in the Focus, why not the Fusion and Five Hundred, some people hate leather, a real multifunction display in the IC, Bluetooth and on. Ford and GM cater to old customers the problem is that you don't get new people into your showroom. The company would do better to offer $1000 worth of equipment on their car than slap a $1000 rebate on the hood. Teens and 20 something’s your going after in this car would love an AUX port for their MP3 Player and Bluetooth for their cell phones, they see rebates as the question “why do they have to give me money to buy the car?” Now getting something Free when you buy the car, that is great! Dell / Focus deal, or even no charge options.
AWD and ESC are two totally different things, AWD costs at least 1500 to add per unit, you can add stability control for less than a third of that. Maybe Ford will get on the ball in 2 years, but by that time it will be to late, be the first with it and you can market it, be the last with it and you look slow, Ford is no longer an innovator they follow, they are reactive not proactive. What they need to do is fire about 1000 Worthless MBA bean counters and hire about 1000 Engineers, then they would have better products. That is where the other companies kill the US manufactures they are engineering run companies not MBA run companies. The only thing most MBA's know how to run is a business into the ground while padding their pockets as they walk away. Ford hit a home run with the AWD on the Five Hundred, much higher take rates then though. This is why you should have launched the Fusion with that option, something the competition doesn’t offer!
Now I really do like the Fusion it think it will be a good car for Ford, the problem is that they could have spent $1000 more per unit and had a car that was world class. That is what they need now, a truly world class product. I think the Fusion will do well, but not as well as it could have. The Mercury and Zepher also lack features that are needed that would have made them home runs also. Mercury should have had HID std just like the Montego, and the Zepher should have had rain sensing windshield wipers, park assist, adaptive hid headlamps, power folding mirrors, keyless entry and start, Heated Steering wheel, at least as options.
BTW...a hyundai with SC, ABS, SAB, etc., is all fine and good, but none of it matters when your car is in the shop 3 out of 10 days.
Hyundai is making the smart move by offering safety as standard equipment, and at a low price. No need to worry about how much stability control, ABS, traction control, side curtain airbags, etc. add to the bottom line because they are INCLUDED in the bottom line.
Ford needs to get with the program. If the new Sonata is as good in real life as it is on paper (and there is no reason to doubt this at all), then Ford has a big problem.
Sigh...yet another reflexive attack on Hyundai based on past history. My 2002 Elantra has been more reliable than my previous cars, which have included a VW GTI, a Chevrolet Blazer and a Ford Escort. I hate it when people resort to "yeah, but..." responses as a last ditch effort to make a point.
You enter a corner to fast and the car starts plowing forward your trying to power out of it, the car can brake one wheel to help you pull you through the turn. You swerve suddenly and the back end is going to fish tail out, awd won't help that either, stability control will. After having the both systems on my last car I made certain that my new car had them, as well as any car I ever tell anyone to by, a quick demonstration always sells what they systems can do, it is far better than any driver out there. Now it is not going to defy the laws of physics but it can make the best use of the traction available and it will be there before you even know you need it.
The facts speak for themselves an average of 32% reductions in car accidents in vehicles that have the system, and up to 50% reduction in certain accidents. Also you can get Stability Control on a Mazda 6 outside the United States/Canada, it is actually std on most models, it is also std on the new 6 mazdaspeed version.
people have been saying this for years...first with VW...hmmm.
next with honda and toyota...ford is still in business, and very profitable.
since hyundai came to the US market in the 80's, people have been saying this, and yet, they still have to give a 100k mile warranty before anyone will even give them a second look.
Hyundai January 2005 sales - up 10% compared to a year ago.
Hmmm...
~alpha
2) Ford continues to lose market share, while Honda and Toyota consistently gain! Unlike you, I can provide documentation for my assertions:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=30&article_id=- 9243
"Prudential estimated that by the end of 2007, Toyota's North American market share will go to 13.6 percent from 12.2 percent in 2004, and Honda's share should approach 10 percent, up from 8.2 percent last year. The report did not project future market share for Nissan.
Prudential predicts GM's market share will fall to 26.6 percent in 2007, from 27.3 percent last year, while Ford slips to 16.9 percent from 18.3 percent and Chrysler dips to 12.7 percent from 13 percent in 2004."
3) The 100K mile warranty was introduced to build people's confidence in the brand. Indeed, in recent CR and JD Power ratings, Hyundai has shown substantial improvements in quality.
Please understand that I'm not trying to bash Ford, its just that some assertions are clearly baseless.
~alpha
http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2004/pr102804.htm
Additionally, in the February issue of Car and Driver, editor in chief Csaba Csere calls electronic stability control the 'Greatest Safety Advance' since the seatbelt.
~alpha
The Focus was able to offer it because it was already available in the Euro Focus.
I'm all for making it standard (for my own personal needs) but many other people rather not deal with it, paying the added cost, and the possibility of future failure which would raise long term ownership costs.
Yes, Hyundai could make it standard, that's great... they don't have $3-4K in advertising costs, or $2K in legacy costs (UAW, pensions, retirement, health care), Per unit as most domestic manufacturer's have.
If I owned a Hyundai (or Kia for that matter), I too would want that, and another 20 airbags all over the cabin, and no less than 10 religious icons on the dashboard and probably painted in yellow to make sure I'm totally protected.
I actually would prefer AWD over an Anti-Skid system, mainly because of it's added traction is beneificial in other circumstances (snow, ice, curvy roads), whereas Anti-Skid kicks in just when you've made a big boo-boo and corrects it, within reason.
The Fusion will offer a few things the competition doesn't. From my experience, the perfect vehicle (that suits my needs) has not yet been built. They all lack a bit of something, that I wish they had. All depends upon what you find more beneficial. I think the best Anti-Skid system out there, is the one found parked in a garage.
Seriously, I wonder....
As an example....
ford needs to price it right, and keep away from the bad publicity. this car has a lot of potential, and i don't see any reason it won't be a hit.
Course if Ford wants to keep me for vehicle number 2 in a row, they best be offering stability control by then....
What? Stability control also aids in keeping a vehicle on course in snow, ice, and curvy roads, so I'm not sure what your point is. AWD will help you get unstuck, whereas stability control wont...
~alpha
That seems like an insanely huge advertising budget. Maybe they would do better with less advertising and using the savings to lower the price of the cars? Perhaps a lower price would sell more cars than all the advertising does.
Have to disagree with AWD over stability control. AWD only helps the idiots drive too fast in the snow and ice. They think just because they can go straight ahead with no problems, that they have control of the vehicle, but they don't. This is not at all beneficial, they'd be better off without it because then they would have a realistic idea of how little control they actually have...before they go off the road or hit someone else.
Not having stability control available would be a pretty big negative for me. I realize that is not reflective of the typical buyer, though.
I wonder how long it will be before the lawsuits come on this...not that I am a fan of our lawsuit happy aspect of our society. The auto manufacturers could add this great safety feature to every car, but to save a couple hundred bucks per unit they do not do it. Even if such a suit went nowhere, I would think the negative publicity would offset at least 10% of the massive advertising budgets.
That's my point, with AWD... you can drive out of snow/ice, in a condition where maybe just one out of 4 wheels has traction like jumping a curb and have 2 wheels airborn (I did that already). Stability Control won't let you even accelerate if there's no traction (like ice/snow) on the drive wheels (whichever they might be on that specific vehicle).
Cost? On the Five Hundred/Montego, it's $1700. Very little additional weight or complexity, though. But on the Five Hundred/Montego, it does come only with the CVT, whose durability is yet to be proven.
When using the 6 speed automatic as a segment exclusive, I'm talking about the Midsize sedan segment. I believe Jetta is classified as compact (currently-subcompact according to EPA).
Fun to drive, definately. Zephyr just as fun, but a bit softer on suspension settings, more soundproofing as well.
It only helps on snow and ice to an extent. If you slide into a curb or some other obstruction at a reasonable clip, all bets are off.
People need to understand that having stability control is not a license to drive like a maniac. It won't save your butt in all situations and conditions.
That being said, it should be an option. I don't want it but someone like my leadfoot wife should have it.
that has been proven false by all the rebates over the last few years. advertising promotes value, and THAT is what sells cars...not price.
now all they have to do is stop using ad money to give away $6000 rebates.
yet to be proven??? audi has over 400k units on the roads right now. honda has been using it since 1999, toyota since 2000, heavy trucks have been using them for years, and nissan's murano has a CVT standard.
CVT already has proven to have a FAR lower failure ratio than conventional automatics.
if you want ABS, SCS, SAB, then fine. put it on your order sheet. dont want to order? tough pattooties! ;-)
And the class leaders have ABS/SAC/SAB standard (think: Accord) its a competitive disadvantage not to offer the same safety-type equipment.
~alpha
next question??
~alpha
geez! i cant win with this guy!
;-)
Very true indeed. We used to have a loaded '96 Civic EX and it cost my wife a little over $18k to purchase back in 1996. Now that Honda has added a bunch of "standard" equipment to their vehicles a comparable Civic today costs well over $20k.
For that kind of scratch I can buy a much better handling Mazda3 with all the goodies including a navigation system. I'd also know that I didn't have to spend money on something I didn't want. I've been driving for 16 years now and the only time stability control would have saved me is when I wrapped my dad's '87 Taurus around a large chain link fence post one month after getting my license. I learned a big lesson that day.
Again, keep it an option. However I do agree with making it standard on SUVs as Ford is doing right now. I also believe the vast majority of lives claimed to be saved by stability control are due to SUV rollover prevention. The system Ford is using was developed by Volvo for the XC90 and prevents skids as well as rolls. Like someone said before, cars just don't need these systems as much.
If your taking curves too fast then you're just asking for trouble, much like I was in the incident above, and shouldn't be driving. Get yourself to a closed track to test the limits of your vehicle. Seriously, what else is stability control good for when applied to a car other than keeping some moron who's driving too fast on the road? If there's snow, ice, or rain then YOU have to adjust to the road conditions.
~alpha
Hmm, I think I'd rather have the rebate.
So "advertising" includes money spent on rebates...that would explain the $3-4K figure. I think I would call rebates a price cut, not advertising.
Yeah, but he was comparing it to a civic...why would you bring the fusion into this discussion...oh, right its the fusion/milan board :-).
I'm doing my part.
12,800 miles on mine so far....
OK. I went to Honda's site and built a COMPARABLY EQUIPPED Civic EX (not the SE mind you) with MTX. After adding 95% of the Honda "accessories" needed to compare it with a Mazda3 my sticker came out to $20,575. That does not include dealer installation fees for all of those fine "accessories" either. It also does not include 17" rims, leather seats, a 4yr/48,000 mi warranty, etc.
The fact of the matter is, some people like the a la carte process Ford offers while the other camp likes the reasonably equipped at a reasonable price process of Honda. Obviously I belong to the former while you belong to the latter. Honda does package it's vehicles well, but they absolutely kill you with installation fees and dealer markup if you want something else added on.
ABS was a dealer add on on that '96 Civic. The dealer wanted $800+ to install it. Get the point?
At least Ford offers it from the factory and doesn't kill you on the price. Although the price is kind of high for ABS on the Fusion right now. Since it's not final they better seriously consider lowering it or making it part of the safety package.
IMO, ford would have still set a sales record for f-series even without rebates.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
"Very true indeed. We used to have a loaded '96 Civic EX and it cost my wife a little over $18k to purchase back in 1996. Now that Honda has added a bunch of "standard" equipment to their vehicles a comparable Civic today costs well over $20k.
For that kind of scratch I can buy a much better handling Mazda3 with all the goodies including a navigation system."
This led me to believe that the comparison point you were making about price was against your former Civic. Did your former Civic have 95% of the available accesories?
~alpha
Sorry, I did mislead you. I thought I typed "comparably equipped" in the original message. I also compared loaded models to show how much easier it is to load up a Ford or Mazda compared to a Honda. Sometimes I'm too lazy to go back and read the original. This time was no exception.
FWIW, a Mazda3 comparably equipped to a Civic EX will cost you $17,797. That includes 16" wheels and a 6-disc CD changer (in-dash). Two things that will cost you over $1000 in the Civic.
John,
I didn't want to start a 3 vs. Civic debate here. I was using those two vehicles as a real world example of how a la carte optioning, and not making every "safety" option standard can be a positive thing as in the case of the Fusion. Since no real world examples of the Fusion have rolled off of the assembly line I couldn't use it. We don't know exactly how it's going to be packaged yet.
Or can describe the rpm range 0-60 mph normal vs wide open. I'm assuming the CVT stays in a small rpm range around the peak torque?
Anyone know what the rpm peak torque with 3.0 Duratec CVT vs. the 6 speed tranmission?
Does this Duratec have variable valve timing?
TNX
Paul