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.
Options

Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan

16263656768111

Comments

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Or maybe they test the models as they come from the factory, as a standard practice, and give the manufacturer the option of testing the optional configuration that includes side bags. If a car can be had w/o side bags, I can see why the IIHS would want to test it so that people know what they are getting. Likewise, I can understand why they would make the manufacturer pay for additional tests if the manufacturer chooses not to include side bags as standard equipment.
  • scootertrashscootertrash Member Posts: 698
    And your theory as to why Ford would intentionally supply a car without side airbags for a side crash test is.....????
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    My conjecture as to why Ford didn't exercise their option to provide a car with side bags really doesn't matter--I can't look inside the heads of Ford's executives to see what they were thinking. I think it is darn peculiar, though. I hope it wasn't because they wanted to save $20k.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    It is probably a bit more than $20K, if the manufacturer has to actually pay for the test, not only test car, but the possible publicity effect (gains vs. losses) would justify that expense.

    I would speculate that they either simply "forgot" (in big beaurocracy it is possible to slip their minds about something like this), or were out of touch with the consumer sentiment. This approach (ignoring side impact tests) would have work just a few years ago, as almost nobody offered them standard. Perhaps their heads were still in 1999? Detroit has been consistently very good in putting import fighters from 5-8 years ago ;) , so that would be consistent.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • calhoncalhon Member Posts: 87
    "If a car can be had w/o side bags, I can see why the IIHS would want to test it so that people know what they are getting."

    The IIHS side impact test is designed such that cars w/o side airbags are guaranteed an overall score of "Poor". We know the result beforehand, so there is almost no need for such tests. From the consumer's point of view it would be better if the IIHS tested only vehicles with the optional side airbags installed.

    The IIHS' policy of testing without side airbags is mainly political. The sensational bad publicity from the inevitable "Poor" score promotes the IIHS' agenda of 'forcing' manufacturers to make the airbags standard.

    I am very much in favor of side airbags, but I'm also in favor of consumer choice and democracy. We should either let individual consumers decide for themselves or, we should reach consensus that they should be standard through public debate. I do not like the IIHS trying to make an end run around this debate, especially since they have their own vested interests.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    What this is all an argument about is whether side air bags should be standard or optional.

    Personally, I believe that in a free market, the consumer should be given a choice and not required to purchase optional equipment that is not important to them.

    Mark.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    And job of IIHS is to convince them that the money spent on side airbags is better spent than say on leather. It's still our choice to believe it or not, as IIHS motivation may or may not be "pure". Speaking of which, I have always been against the buckle up law, which would not preclude me from buckling up myself. I just want it to be my decision not Reperesentative Brown's so in case of a fatal crash BECAUSE of seatbelts (rare but real possibility) I bear responsibility for it, not Mr. Brown (you get Mr. Brown is not a real person - just in case).

    With safety equipment, I have always been interested in whatever I can afford, so side airbags being standard works for me, as (economies of scale and marketplace pressures) it would make them much cheaper to obtain.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    No consumer is forced to buy optional equipment.

    Consider all of the equipment on a car that consumers are forced to buy: airbags (at least two in the front), seat belts, energy-absorbing steering columns, emission-control equipment (lots of that), safety glass, head restraints, OCS system, and a lot more. Like it or not, this is not a "free" market, but a heavily regulated market. I would not be surprised to see side airbags mandated in the not-too-distant future. The technololgy is now cheap enough so that they are included as standard equipment even in some cars costing around $10,000.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    The IIHS side impact test is designed such that cars w/o side airbags are guaranteed an overall score of "Poor". We know the result beforehand, so there is almost no need for such tests. From the consumer's point of view it would be better if the IIHS tested only vehicles with the optional side airbags installed.

    I think you may be underestimating the stupidity of the average consumer. If they tested only with the optional side air bags, many people would only see Fusion = good side impact test. They would miss the part about this only being the case if you pay for the side air bags.
  • calhoncalhon Member Posts: 87
    And you think headlines like this don't create a similar, perhaps even greater problem?

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11688696/from/RSS/

    It's a matter of making it clear that all cars w/o side airbags fare poorly, which the above report never does.
  • scootertrashscootertrash Member Posts: 698
    The IIHS wants cars without the bags to fail and the press wants scary headlines.

    Ford already knew all of that when they decided to make the bags optional.

    I wonder if they're happy with their decision.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    It's a matter of making it clear that all cars w/o side airbags fare poorly, which the above report never does.

    Apparently that point was not clear to Ford's executives before the Fusion's tests were conducted. It is probably clear to them now.
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    You can't do a survey using only CR subscribers and not expect it to be biased.

    I remember a few years ago when the previous year Mustang V8 wasn't listed in CR's reliability survey because of too few samples, yet it listed the Audi A6 4.2 Turbo! That goes to show who their readers are...
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    There are plenty of facts in their articles.

    And a bunch of subjective factors with silly names such as "gotta have", "wow", etc, that the authors use to skew the facts in whichever direction they want.
  • rl81rl81 Member Posts: 53
    I too believe in free choice when it comes to the color of the car, leather, sound system, and so on. But when it comes to safety, I don't believe in free choice. I believe it's the duty of the car companies to put the safest cars on the road.

    It's in everyone's best interest if every car would have a certain standard of safety equipment (front and side airbags, ABS, ESP, etc.). And I want it for my benefit. If I am to crash into someone (not that I plan on it), I would want them to suffer the least injuries possible. If there's a dangeous situation, I don't want someone to crash into me if it's somehow avoidable.

    Like it or not, but the average driver sucks! Anything that increases safety (actiely or passively) works for me. Free choice is good, but the average buyer wants to try and save some money in the wrong places. And if this has a negative impact on me, then I would like to aviod this.
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    While I think that diesels would be a good idea across the line, emission standards are getting tougher for diesels in the US.

    In Europe, there are separate emission limits for gas and Diesel engines, whereas in the US it's the same for both. Europe is also about 3 to 5 years behind in emissions limits relatively to the US. The much touted Euro 4 which came about in 05 imposes limits similar to those used in the US since 97.

    Europe is paying for this mistake with its health, having to resort to shutting the car circulation down in some cities because of high levels of Diesel soot, a carcinogen.
  • rl81rl81 Member Posts: 53
    Have you ever been in Europe? Do you think this wouldn't have happened if there weren't that many diesel cars? Maybe cities without that many cars are more enjoyable? Just a thought...
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    Yes, about once every 18 months. Milan, Berlin, etc, shut down car circulation on some days this winter because of high concentration of particulate matter in the atmosphere. I happen to read Italian and British periodicals, do you?
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    "I remember a few years ago when the previous year Mustang V8 wasn't listed in CR's reliability survey because of too few samples, yet it listed the Audi A6 4.2 Turbo! That goes to show who their readers are..."

    That is that supposed to mean what? It's a great practical magazine that takes no advertising money. I've used it for reviews on many items including cars. I have also used the following sources to research cars and read up on them:

    Consumer Guide
    Motor Trend
    Car and Driver
    Automobile
    Road and Track
    Edmunds.Com
    Kelly Blue Book.Com
    MSN Autos.Com
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    That is that supposed to mean what?

    That its readers are far from representing the car-buying population. Therefore have little statistical value.

    Come on, Mustang V8 are as common as flies, yet they couldn't find many readers who own one? How many Audi A6 4.2 Turbo were sold in the US that year?

    I wish I remembered which year it was, for it was the year in which I didn't renew my subscription.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    While it's true that all vehicles do poorly in the Side impact tests if they arent't equipped with SAB/CAB, the bigger problem is that the frontal test is mediocre and still puts it at the bottom of the list of all midszied cars.

    As the IIHS spokesman said to the effect all cars get at Good rating in frontal impacts. What happened to the Fusion? Obviously they know how to do it, the 500/Monterrey are tops in their class. Again what happened to the Fusion/Milan? Why skimp?
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    Think Mazda6 - it also got not so great rating in crash test. Fusion is "stretched" Mazda6, which probably means less rigidity, i.e. even worse.

    As I said befor, Mazda6 is a great riding platform, now they go back to drawing board and try to fix its crashworthiness while preserving the driving chracteristics.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 20,723
    how would you feel if you drove a vehicle where they went off for no reason? this does happen. some people don't want to be the early adaptors.
    2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    Consumer Reports is not an autmotive publication per se. Of course it has statistical value. The cars that they have enough data on get ratings. All magazines have a dominant Demographic group. I'm pretty sure Consumer Reports isn't on many 18-25 year old males coffe table.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    There was a crime committed here against the Fusion. There were three really, two misdemeanors and a felony. It was a business crime. The Fusion/Milan initially has been getting very good press and reviews as it tries to blot ot the image of the Taurus in it's dotage.

    Sleek, muscular, modern - with a Taurus-era V6? Why not the state-of-the-art V6 right from jump street? Ok I hear it's 'next year'. Misdemeanor but it suffers badly in comparison to the Camry.

    Most American midsized buyers are 4c buyers; CamCords, Sonata's, Altima's not to mention Civics and Corollas. Why has the Fusion not emphasized the 4c in order to try to pry some of these buyers away from HonYota, etc. OK Misdemeanor.

    But Ford knows the American buying public is concerned about safety, maybe right behind reliability and styling and before performance and price. How could they ever allow a vehicle to go to the IIHS which wasnt as good as the 500/Monterrey. Even if they do retest with SC/AB how do they get rid of the smell of being at the bottom of the list in frontal tests? Oh it doesnt matter they'll buy anything, they're Ford buyers. That's a felony.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    Really well put, Spyder.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    the test are in no way similar. The NHTSA admits that their tests are outdated and need to be changed. Every other testing agency in the modern world do it the IIHS way. The US Govt is subject to let's say 'client pressure' just as the IIHS is subject to client pressure from the insurance companies to increase the level of safety in each vehicle.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I was a product manager for a huge steel company, in which position I sold $Millions of steel to Ford. If someone 'forgot' to supply a 2nd vehicle for testing, one with the optional airbags, then that Product Mgr, his dept and his boss and his boss' boss all should be expected to resign or be fired.

    It really is that simple. In a huge company with a product as important as your basic midsized vehicle every single nitpicking detail is sweated until it screams. 'Forgetting' is unlikely. Miscalculation is more likely, and it backfired. Everyone involved should expect to be executed ( in a business sense ).
  • mtnman1mtnman1 Member Posts: 431
    Did you ever think that maybe one reason for so many older people buying Lincolns is the price. Not too many young people can afford a Lincoln. Granted the Town Car is an old fogey mobile, but the Navigator is not. At $60,000 just about the only people that can truly afford it are successful, usually older people. I think the Zephyr will help because it is more affordable around $30K. And the new crossover that is replacing the Aviator will also help. I don't think Lincoln should really totally change their strategy of appealing to older, well heeled people. After all the largest segment of the population is the Baby Boom generation. In reality they have much more disposable income than the under 40 crowd that are raising kids and saving for college and retirement someday.
    2012 Highlander Limited AWD V6 and 2015 Ford Fusion Hybrid SE
  • jbranchjbranch Member Posts: 1
    I have followed with great interest the discussion on the IIHS frontal and side impact test results for the Fusion and Milan. Why has no one brought up the IIHS Rear crash protection/head restraint ratings? Have you noticed how the Fusion/Milan compared to the Camry, Accords, and TSXs? They performed better than the Accord and TSX (overall-poor.)and had the same overall rating as a Camry (Marginal) Wish the results were better. I had put off purchase of a Milan, but now will do so with SAB. Just remember to put things in perspective.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    Come on, Mustang V8 are as common as flies, yet they couldn't find many readers who own one? How many Audi A6 4.2 Turbo were sold in the US that year?

    To add to that, USA Today ran an article about that exact issue with CR's data. Their example was the Pontiac Grand Am. Roughly 250,000 of them were sold that year, 2002 or 2003 IIRC, and CR did not receive the minimum number of surveys from subscribers who own them to rate it that year.

    Give me some demographics and sample sizes CR so I know where those little red and black circles really came from. ;)
  • bitusabitusa Member Posts: 60
    I'd also like to add that if you look at the rating of an all-new vehicle from a domestic manufacturer and the rating of an all-new vehicle from an import company (especially japan), the reliability rating is more often than not, higher on the import, even though there are no reliability records for that particular vehicle. I believe I have read a review on a domestic vehicle that said something like, based on the reliability of other products from this manufacturer, we assume the reliability will be similar. Many times the reliability has nothing to do with the manufacturer and everything to do with the factory the vehicle is built and possibly changes in the way a vehicle is manufactured. That is a very unfair assumption on CRs part and why I don't trust their reviews.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The Grand Am and G6 are rated for reliability by CR for all of the years that CR is reporting right now, '98-'05.

    The reason CR doesn't report on a car unless it has a big enough sample size is so the data is statistically valid.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    CR will predict reliability for an all-new model only if the predition is positive and they are really sure about it, based on history. Otherwise they will say "New". For example, CR predicts that the '07 Camry will be reliable. I don't think that is a big leap, considering the long track record of reliability of the Camry and Toyotas in general. But for the HHR, they say "New", rather than extrapolating reliability info from the Cobalt (with which the HHR shares its platform) because the reliability record of the Cobalt is not very good. They also say "New" on the Fusion and Milan, and on the Sonata.
  • bitusabitusa Member Posts: 60
    So, even though the Sonata is not all-new, it still says "New" even though it has several years worth of reliability records from older models?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The '06 Sonata is an all-new design.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    The Grand Am and G6 are rated for reliability by CR for all of the years that CR is reporting right now, '98-'05.

    That's all fine and dandy but the year that article was written they did NOT rate the Grand Am. Correct me if I'm wrong here buty they probably have since received enough surveys for that year from subscribers therefore it can be rated now. However it was never rated in it's first year as a first year car. Pretty amazing for a vehicle that sold so well IMO.

    Either that or they are predicting the reliability.
  • scootertrashscootertrash Member Posts: 698
    Trivia: Monterey has the distinction of being the slowest selling widely available vehicle in the US: A recent month had less than 300 units sold nationwide.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    It would take a large investment to update the Monterrey to compete with the market leaders (feature wise) and Ford has chosen instead to put that money into crossovers which is a new and growing segment.
  • bitusabitusa Member Posts: 60
    Totally agree with you. The only way, IMHO, that Ford will stay in the minivan business is if they import the Galaxy van they producing overseas. Which would be very competitive with the current market leaders.

    The Ford Fairlane looks to be the replacement for their minivans. Not sure if that's the right decision. We'll just have to wait and see.
  • bitusabitusa Member Posts: 60
    Lincoln Mercury dealers sent this vehicle to the graveyard before they even had enough to market them. They didn't stock many and didn't advertise them. It really is a better vehicle than sales show.
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    Ford has chosen instead to put that money into crossovers which is a new and growing segment.

    Funny that last year crossovers dipped 4% while trucks remained steady and sedans grew their market share...
  • bitusabitusa Member Posts: 60
    "...last year crossovers dipped 4%"

    I thought I read somewhere that crossovers increased last year, almost catching SUV's, while SUVs declined. The article also said that this year, it is predicted that COVs will outsell SUVs.

    Is your comment specific to Ford, or the industry as a whole? If it's specific to Ford, I believe you are correct. The only vehicles Ford considers COVs are the Escape and Freestyle. F-Series sold over 900,000 units, so it remained strong and car share was up for the first time in like 10 years.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Funny that last year crossovers dipped 4% while trucks remained steady and sedans grew their market share

    References? Data?
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    I can swear that I saw a Montego and then a Milan on the road with those awful "look at me I'm 75" landau roofs. I can't beleive Ford lets this go on. After all their commercials with Jill Wagner and they let that happen? Disgusting. Way to get those younger buyers!
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    I've seen this on lots of cars. Anything can be done aftermarket.... the awful landau may have not even been done at a Ford dealer. Its really scary, though... I've seen ACCORDS and PASSATS with landau roofs, it makes me want to cry...
  • bitusabitusa Member Posts: 60
    My grandfather used to only buy cars with those roofs. He said it made the car look more "youthful".
  • yzassandy82yzassandy82 Member Posts: 16
    "Ford has chosen instead to put that money into crossovers which is a new and growing segment.

    Funny that last year crossovers dipped 4% while trucks remained steady and sedans grew their market share..."


    This would make sense as the only crossovers they had in 05 were the Escape and Freestyle (which was not advertised at all). This year will be different as they have the Edge (out later this year), and the Fairlane out next year.

    Now onto the Fusion....

    I am happy to report that I just added an 06 Fusion SEL I4 with A/T to my household. I traded in my 05 Focus ZX3 SE and picked up the Fusion last Friday. While I will admit that I will miss the Focus, as it's the second Focus I've owned (the previous being an 04 ZX5 Premium with 2.3), the Fusion is downright amazing. The handling is spot on, and the 2.3 is quite peppy. It's pretty obvious that the tranny was geared toward sporry driving as it revs almost near redline before upshifting to 2nd gear. In terms of mileage it hardly dissapoints with 26.5 mpgs in mixed LA freeway driving in it's first week. Also, we were sure to get the side airbags and ABS to be on the safer side of things.

    The only compaint I have, which is hardly a complaint really, is the high rear decklid which takes some getting used to. But mush the pedal, and take some turns while listening to an MP3 and you realize just how well Ford did in designing this car. Everyone comments on it and stares as I pass. In fact, most think it costs a lot more than I paid. Which by the way, was $20449.00, plus tax, title, etc. A great deal it was!

    I test drove the Accord, 6, and previous gen Camry, but for the money I felt great with Fusion. While I am the first to admit that I am a Ford fan, owning an 05 Freestyle as well along with four other Fords in the past 6 years, I can say without bias that the Fusion is a key player in the midsize segment. Granted it isn't going to overtake the Accord or Camry in sales anytime soon, it does prove (as did the debut of the Lincoln LS) that Ford can produce an exciting car in a segment it has previously forsaken. With improvements to come down the line, including a cleaner V6 engine, hybrid system, AWD and navigation, it will continue to increase sales. Who knows how much closer they will close the gap on the japanese when the next model year comes around. In fact, Ford may just eliminate that gap altogether.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    Changing cars every year... Man, I wish I had that kind of money... Or maybe Bill Ford sends you a check for $4K off a car every year, I dunno. Everybody has their circumstances.

    Out of curiousity, what kind of depreciation you saw on those Focuses?

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    And just how the heck do you expect Ford to stop it? Remember the dealers are INDEPENDENT businesses. If Ford said it would stop selling cars to any dealer that did it the dealers would have them in court so fast their heads would spin - and they'd win. The best they could do is "encourage" the dealers not to do it like Jim Rogers did with the LS back in 1999/2000.

    Blame the dealers, not Ford.
Sign In or Register to comment.