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
What about the future of Ford Inc??
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
In other cars, the ability to get the rpms up fast has ALWAYS been a bonus. Suddenly, in the Ford, it's a problem?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
This is what I'm talking about... better engines. Now if they can just put the Mazda 2.3L I4 to good use.
I think that for this size of a car, with all the amenities that it has, the power should be on par with the rest of the package. The 3.0L seems out of place.
Why does Maxima come with a 265 HP 3.5L, and Toyota Avalon comes with 3.5 268 HP, and Acura TL comes with 260 HP and G35 is almost 300 HP? Why can’t Ford do it?
And common already, why some of you keep insisting that 3.0L is enough? Why it is ok for the Explorer to have more power and you welcome that, and for 500 it is ok to be underpowered – you either have double standards or you are just not willing to admit that Ford still has a long way to go to catch up with the [non-permissible content removed] in the performance category.
In comparison, I've seen 7.5-8.5 seconds for the 3.5 in the Charger/Magnum/300. I think the 2.7 has been relegated to the base 300, and even there might get phased out. But I think 0-60 on it was around 10.5-11 seconds. I think the Impala with the 3.5 does 0-60 in around 8.5 seconds, and with the 3.9 does it in around 7.8. And cars like the Accord and Altima with the V-6/automatic tend to come in around the 7-7.5 second mark, and the Camry with the 3.3 is close to that as well.
So overall, the 500 doesn't sound like too much of a slug. Unless the 0-60 times I dug up were fudged or something?
A car the size of the 500 can probably use more torque than the current Duratec is capable of.
Basing the performance of a car on the highest HP number is like reading the table of content of a book and saying you read the book.
Take for instance the Freestyle "menial" 203 HP compared to the Chrysler Pacificas 230 HP (or whatever it is) engine.
The numbers say that the Pacifica blows the Freestyle out of the water when in fact the Freestyle gets 0-60 numbers in the mid 8's and the Pacifica is up around 10 seconds.
I suppose your reply will be "well the Freestyle's engine had to rev more than the Pacifica's engine". I got news for you, when making a 0-60 mph run, NO car holds back on it's revs....they get pushed to their limits when making those 0-60 runs.
It so happens that the Freetsyle performs admirably (8.6 seconds) for the size vehicle it is.
As for Nissans Maxima...I recall their 3.5 when it first came out only could muster up 225 HP and it has only gone up to 265 HP after 3 years.
That article on the Ford 3.5 said it is designed to put out over 300 HP with tweaking.....impressive if you ask me.
When all is said and done...the area under the HP and torque curve tells the story.
Acura got about 290 hp out of a SOHC 3.5L. The Ford is a DOHC, so I don't see why 300 hp would be problematic. I don't think the problem has been Ford not being able to engineer it. They simply waited an awful long time to give the project a green light.
I don't know the right wording for it. It's not that they're transmissions with heavy internals that sap alot of power, but they do tend to upshift too early, stumble between the gears, etc. It's like they're "dumping" the power somewhere along the line in order to keep from shredding themselves.
Anyway, in looking around, I've actually found some 0-60 times for the Pacifica as quick as 7.5 seconds, but I have a feeling that should be taken with a grain of salt. Chrysler also tried offering a stripper version with the old OHV 3.8 and 210 hp, and I found a 0-60 time of 8.10 seconds, which I really have trouble believing!
The same source, http://www.pricegrabber.com, is showing the Freestyle at 0-60 in 7.9 seconds (2wd) or 8.1-8.7 seconds (awd) models.
As always though, take these stats with a grain of salt. BTW, the Pacifica is around 500-600 lb heavier than a Freestyle, so that should work against it. Still, given the engines these vehicles have to work with (the 3.0 is no spring chicken, while the 3.5 is actually a conversion from the old 3.3/3.8 Chrysler OHV V-6) and the weight they have to lug around, they're not bad.
Ultimately though, the GM 3.4 wasn't very reliable, and was expensive to fix, so it was dropped around 1996 or so, once they finally got the 3.8 massaged up to 200 hp. The Mopar 3.5 was tweaked and improved over the years, getting up to 255 hp in certain editions of the 300M. I think the 3.5 would be capable of more, but Chrysler was just afraid to because of the transmissions they were using. Now with the Benz 5-speed they could probably improve the 3.5 more, but with the Hemi out, there's really no need to.
In contrast, the Maxima was putting out 160 hp, from a 3.0 in 1991, although they had that up to a very respectable 190 hp by 1994. That must've been a pretty quick car, in that relatively light body.
I don't think Ford was doing much with V-6 engines back then, with the exception of the Taurus SHO, which was very fast, but also very limited-production.
Indeed, the SHO 3.0 liter was sweet, but expensive since Yamaha was used to help build. 220hp from a 3.0L v6 was basically unheard of w/o SC or turbo in '88 or '89 (can't remember). The Maxima of those years with the 190hp 3.0 were nearly as quick as the SHO Taurus when equipt with a 5 speed. Both were good for sub 7 sec 0-60 times. I remember reading many head to head comparisons.
Ford did have the SC 3.8 in the Thunderbird SC. Not very reliable or refined but it did have 210hp with nearly 300 ft-lbs of torque in the late '80s
The OHV went in the Tempo/Topaz, while the Fairmont, Pinto, and Mustang had the SOHC. I believe the OHV also went in the Ranger and Bronco-II, although it was punched out to 2.5 liters a bit later. I think the 2.5 that they use in the Ranger now is a totally different engine, though.
Honda, Toyota, and Nissan earn a whole lot of sales and profits with their 2.4 and 2.5 liter engines. In fact, Mazda is already doing okay with the 2.3L in the Mazda6. But Ford (and Chevy) can't seem to design a good car around an I4.
Let's not forget that while Nissan's 3.5 is not only one of the Best V6's ever built - it is one of the most reliable as well. So go ahead and tell me whether you would prefer a 260 HP V6 with a very broad Torque range or a miser 3.0, that feels like a Mazda's 2.3L I-4? which has no low end torque.
And Ford had a 3.0 Duratec Doch that made 200HP since 1996 till today - that is almost 10 years and NO improvement - No wander I stopped buying Fords since my last one in 1995.
You have just proved that FORD is behind the game by at least 4 years. The “new” Nissan 3.5L VQ engine is rated at 300 HP (DOCH) and 450 HP (Turbo), while Ford has Just now in the end of 2005 released "plans for a new" 3.5 V6 in SOME of it's models - They did not mention if they are even planning to drop the 3.5L into the 500 or the Fusion.
Ford is still behind the [non-permissible content removed]. And while Ford is coming up with the “all new 3.5L V6”, the [non-permissible content removed] are cooking something new, like the new 2.3L Turbo by Mazda, or the new 3.5 L V6 by Toyota that is also rated at 300HP.
And yes, the maxima and Altima are much quicker than a 500.
And if Maxima had AWD, it would be a much better option than an AWD 500 with a crappy CVT.
Why can't Ford figure out that modern cars require more than just OK handling and performance? GM and Ford are both behind the ball here. Chrysler is the only one that figured out the right recipe - drop a Hemi into a 300c - and it becomes a best selling full size sedan. Hell, I'd take a 300C over a 500 or the Impala SS, just for its’ awesome looks. However I refuse to submit to the Pop culture and I hate the bling-bling , so no Escalade, Navigator or 300c for me.
Inital quality on the Fusion?
Went for a test drive in a Fusion the other night from my dealer's inventory. The power seat was not working correctly. The front part of the seat didn't go up but the back part of it did.
Hope this was an exception.
Mark
I would have to disagree with this statement as it applies to the Ford Focus...my fiancee has a 2005 sedan, and it is a nice car for the money. The handling and braking are quite good, and the car is comfortable. The engine is peppy and economical, and so far she has one problem with it (a blown fuse for the accessory plug) over 18,000 miles. The main drawback is road noise at highway speeds.
Overall, the car is still pretty impressive, considering that it debuted for the 2000 model year. Ford needs to get the revamped version to market, as the 2006 Civic has once again raised the bar in this class.
But Ford is better off than GM, which finally brought out a Cavalier replacement...only to find that it just matches the five-year-old Focus (at least, in every road test I've read).
The Nissan 3.5 is a sweet engine. I'm just saying don't knock the new 3.5 by Ford until it at least has a year or two under it's belt.
And Ford had a 3.0 Duratec Doch that made 200HP since 1996 till today - that is almost 10 years and NO improvement - No wander I stopped buying Fords since my last one in 1995.
I agree with you. Ford dropped the ball overthe past 10 years....I would even say 15 years. As soon as the Explorer got popular in 1991 and the SUV craze started, Ford turned it's nose to any serious car development.
HUGE mistake and they're paying for it now. But at least there is some light at the end of the tunnel (or is that a train?)
:-)
New Mustang looks good. Fusion looks promising. The new 3.5 should be adaptable to many platforms and performance ranges. I like how they designed it with the future in mind...that's a first and it could be one of the reasons why it took so long to get to market.
It's GM who is really behind the 8 ball, as they are just ready to bring out their new truck and SUV line - just at the worst possible time! That's the M.O. of GM, pretty much every time. And their luck. GM could actually go down over this, and their other financial issues.
Ford is the SECOND manufacturer to offer a FULL Hybrid system. Honda only makes partial hybrids. Vaunted Nissan is just going to dump Toyota's system into its cars.
Where is the six speed automatic on the Fusions competition?
Only FORD could take a the 4.0 SOHC engine in the Explorer and Ranger and refine it to the point that for 2006, this engine emits LESS smog forming emissions than a HONDA ACCORD HYBRID!
The new Explorer takes safety to completely new levels. The worlds FIRST variable stroke steering column. The worlds FIRST Adaptive Airbag venting. The worlds FIRST air bag that can change size and shape. Adaptive multi-load-limiting seat beat retractors. A passenger classification system that can recognize FIVE different occupation states for the front passenger seat. The only safety canopy that provides "rollover" protection. The only stability control system that provides "rollover" prevention.
Just because some people define performance as a measure of HP output, and equate that to technical proficiency does not mean that it is the true measure of a companies products.
Conditioning. I have been told that Ford is aware of the issue - but they have never fixed it. Really, the Town Car is built for Livery service these days - not for the retail customer. So they lost one sale, and I've heard of many more because of this issue in the southern states.
My point is - I like Ford and think they are the best domestic auto company, and I like their cars and trucks. But sometimes, they can drop the ball. I'm not saying they have done that on the Fusion though. I'm just saying, they have done it sometimes - inexplicably - they have.
When a new car is engineered, all the various departments compete for space and resources for their particular responsbility. HVAC engineers are competing for space in the engine compartment, and in the dash, to put in their stuff, so that it works up to specs. It's much harder than it looks to the end user, who sets a button, and stuff magically happens. We don't realize the hours, days, weeks, months and years of design, redesign, committee meetings, testing, redesign and testing again, and final approval that goes into that little HVAC function - but that engineer has to compete with the Audio guy, the engine guys, the interior design guy, the hundreds of other functions, relays, switches, doo-dads and thingys that are under that dash. Evidently the HVAC engineer on the Panther cars, especially the Town Cars, couldn't get a large enough squirrel cage under there. OR, they could speed up the one they have, but it would draw too much current, and put out the alternator and electrical team, or become to noisy for the car. (the current systems is miserably noisy as it is). The quiet guys would outlaw too much fan noise.
So there are a ton of give & takes in designing a car, that we never really understand unless we look into the actual process. That's why it takes up to 4 years to design a new car from the wheels up. It's a lot more complex than it looks, and frankly, it's a miracle they work so well - if not at all.
NV
Ford is RELATIVELY innovative, as a domestic. They aren't Honda, but they aren't GM either. And they have a wide assortment of product that gives them the OPPORTUNITY to make a sale to ANY consumer, even better than GM, considering F-series and E-series, plus Excursions and now a Hybrid.
But the problems are numerous, including selling the deal, not the car, poor quality (twice a week I had to make service appts. for a NEW CAR I just sold because it had significant problems on the THE TEST DRIVE!), recalls (Ford Focus setting records in 2000-2001), wrong car at the wrong time (Ford Contour), long product cycles, and relying on old engines in a new technology age to save money (Duratec). :mad:
What is up with the Ranger?
Hasn't the Civic been redesigned TWICE since the Focus came out in 1999?
Lincoln and Mercury have gotten the Saturn traetment for Ford to point of irrelevancy. Is Lincoln even a name anymore?
Knocking off a GenII Prius Hybrid engine, getting 23MPG, when a 270HP RX400 gets 27MPG, pulling 0-60 in 9-9.5, and charging $30k will not beat a path to your lot, fellas!
Ford F-150 is a nice truck, but the truck gained 500lbs., and has the same tired Triton engine it had 5 years ago. Nissan surpassed it on their first try, and Toyota /GM will bury it next year with new trucks. GM and Chrysler were already in front.
The 500 is no Passat on the outside, no Avalon on the inside, and is short 50HP. That's huge! Why buy it? Unless it's $5k less than anything else? It's a cut-rate buy at this point.
Expedition doesn't ride half a good as it did before the redesign. The dash reeks of cost-cutting, and it gained even more weight that F-150. As the Mags aptly state, overweight, undersprung, underpowered is no way to go through life.
Comparing Mustang sales to Chrysler 300 is dumb! One is $22-27k. One is $30k+. One has been on the market for 40 years, one 2.
Mustang and F-150 are not gonna lose share in their class. the rest of the lineup is the problem.
I just see a company that rested on it's laurels too long, now is playing catchup.
This new 3.5 is a step in the right direction, not a warmed over OHV like GM, but it just gets them back to Square One. How do they get customers BACK into Fords after poor quality and mediocrity drove them out?
DrFill
what really surprises me even more is that we could easily out-do the Hondas and Toyotas if we tried, but I also believe that there is a UAW factor that will never let it happen, because too many of their remaining members would be fired on the spot...IMO
1980 Mercury Capri (with a 71 Mustang engine in it)
1987 Mustang
1988 Bronco II
1994 Ranger
1997 Explorer
and now a 2005 Freestyle
yes, I guess I am a bit biased aren't I? :-)
But I do also own a 2002 RSX to keep me honest.
I think I have a right to say whether Ford dropped the ball or not don't you?
:-)
But I wasn't really talking about econo cars. I know I didn't specify, but I was thinking about family cars like the Fusion, Accord, Camry, and Malibu. 60% of Accord sales are I4 engines. I don't know the percentages for or Altimas, but I know they've got to be pretty high. Meanwhile, Detroit's only answer is to make a V6 standard.
The reason some of us knock the Fusion's V6 is not because we compare it to the Camcords IMO.
I think that all of us would like to see a Fusion with 250 HP to Kill the Camcords, because it looks great and it rides great, all it needs is a great engine to finish the deal. Why build a sporty sedan that looks fast and handles great and give it a sub par engine??? If I had a choice between a V6 Camcord or a V6 Fusion (provided it had a 3.5)
I would choose fusion, even though I don't buy Fords any more. So this shows that one way to reel customers back in, is to provide ABOVE AVERAGE cars and SUV's. Not average!
I can't even get my wife to test drive it, because it is a Ford - imagine how many people are out there with her point of view. I sincerely hope that Ford realizes that the only way to catch up is to spring forward beyond the competition.
Let me provide you with example:
Nissan Altima: When the new redesigned Altima came out, it was bigger, sportier and had a sweet 3.5 V6, that everyone loved! It took the Camcords by surprise and brought Nissan back to the market. If Nissan dropped a 3.0 225 HP into the V6 Altima, it would have been another Dud for them, but they played their cards right and won back a formidable market share.
Ford needs to do the same with the Five Hundred and the Fusion. Ford needs to lead and not follow
I agree with the bring something beyond average statement, but not the recommendations
I believe Ford did well with fusion..
first ford's aim was not at wooing over CamCord buyers.. He wanted to keep Ford buyers that are looking for midsize.. people upgrading from Focus, Mustand SUV. Truck.. or looking for a second car.
Also the problem with the car market in compact and midsize market is (as I mentioned previously) that cometition to Hoyota needs to be BETTER AND CHEAPER... you cannot do that without counting in loss.. the closes t to that yo ucan get is by being:
EQUALLY AS GOOD AND CHEAPER
or
OR BETTER AND EQAULLY EXPENSIVE
past has shown the latter doesn't work, because the blue oval up fron makes people simply look for a deal.. Ford in a trap here and I think fusion is a good response. If they make the new 3.5 a THIRD ENGINE OPTION they will have the winner... because they cannot simply compete with the 2.3 I4 and a 3.5 V6.. the average bottom line V6 buyer will not want to pay that much for a Ford... despite its superiority over most competition.
OFF TOPIC A LITTLE BIT:
anyways.. I believe ford is moving forward well.
I also believe there are some tough decisions Toyota and Honda will have to make in the near future, because they are slowly showing similar mistakes domestics made in 80-90's that allowed Japanese to take over...
Now it will be Koreans taking over together with Daim.Chr., Japanese and GM losing and Ford, and Europeans holding on.
I believe the next turn Ford and europeans climibing up in about 5-10 years.
Igor
So, maybe a few people would have passed because they wanted all the HP (and torque steer) they could get, but probably most would have been just fine with the 3.0.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
You know, I understand that emotion. I feel the same way about most GM products these days.....
Ford and Chevy cannot accomplish the same trick with only a lackluster V6. No limelight for marketing purposes, and no crowd pleaser for the sales floor.
Well, look at GM, they have perfected the average car concept. And now they are headed towards Ch. 11 like a ton of bricks. If Ford wants to lure the buyers back in, it needs to produce Above average cars - that means - better than Toyota, Honda or Nissan. If Ford makes a car that is just as good as the [non-permissible content removed], no one of the loyal Toyota or Honda or Nissan customers will go for it, because we are all creatures of habit and if we like what works, we will not change it for something new that is not proven yet.
Now look at the Chrysler 300C. It came out from a company that is known for horrible quality and reliability, but because it is such a HOT car with a great 340 HP hemi and a great style it was a huge success. Chrysler sold them at MSRP for 2 years and had a huge demand. Now look at Ford.
Did they bring the winning combination to the show room?
The answer is a big NO.
I don't see people raving about the Fusion or the 500.
all they say is : it's nice for a Ford.
NOT GOOD ENOUGH to make a statement. Not good enough to claim the market from the [non-permissible content removed].
Fusion had to have at least 250 HP 3.5L + AWD, and to be priced the way it is – only then it would have captured the market from Hoyondas of the world. Average people want more power, better ride and more panache and they don’t want to pay for it – that is the hard truth of the sedan market. I don’t know any guy between 20 and 50 that doesn’t want a hot car. But we all have to compromise, with room, ride, reliability (perceived), looks and price. Now if Ford builds a car that we wouldn’t have to compromise with – it would be a winner.
All I want is a sedan that handles well, looks good, has good room and is decently priced.
If I could have a Fusion with AWD and a 3.5L 250 HP – I would be very happy with it, especially if it was around 25 K (nicely equipped).
the [non-permissible content removed].
Once the new Toyota Camry comes out with more room, options and better ride, it will be once again #1.
Sad, very Sad.
Fusion had to have at least 250 HP 3.5L + AWD, and to be priced the way it is – only then it would have captured the market from Hoyondas of the world.
LOL, and AWD?
:-)
what color is the sky in your world? show me an AWD Accord/Camry
would you like it to make your afternoon tea for you also?
LOL
Average people want more power, better ride and more panache and they don’t want to pay for it – that is the hard truth of the sedan market.
wrong, average people want a car that gets the job done. The driving fanatics want power, performance and panache.
I don’t know any guy between 20 and 50 that doesn’t want a hot car. But we all have to compromise, with room, ride, reliability (perceived), looks and price. Now if Ford builds a car that we wouldn’t have to compromise with – it would be a winner.
All I want is a sedan that handles well, looks good, has good room and is decently priced.
Camrys and Accord handle well? Look good?
decent price?....as soon as you start adding options to "give it panache", the price goes way up.
Wecome to 1990 (as far as pricing goes for that equipment)
oh, wait...they didn't make 3.5 liter v6's that could generate 250 HP....nor did they have AWD for cars
In other words, your expectations are in a dream world.
Hit it where they ain't. They do it with the F-series. You can get anything but a milkshake machine in an F-series, but the domestic family sedan is down on features, power, and refinement.
How about learning from Toyota's success. The '92 Camry changed everything. Power, Lexus-like refinement, room, elegant styling.
Why did the '92 Camry work? It was OVER-engineered! Ask any Toyota engineer or beancounter and they will tell you that car's R&D budget was overblown, than overblown again. VERY expensive car for a family sedan. More than Toyota ever spent to develop a car platform.
But they made the right car at the right time. The interior room of Taurus, but with far more style than an Accord. And more power and features than either.
Toyota decided to take over the family sedan market.
Honda has invested in the new Civic.
What is Ford doing with the Focus?
The 500 has been easily surpassed by Avalon, 300 and Passat.
Freestar?
Ford has to make a stand somewhere. And make a vehicle that is not only better than the competition this year, unlike the Fusion, which maybe competitive until Camry is redesigned next year, but will be top-notch for the next 4-5 years.
DrFill
This is a common misconception. Ford did not knock off the GenII Prius Hybrid engine, nor did they buy technology off of Toyota. They developed their own engine but Toyota beat them to the punch with patents. Due to the similarities in the designs (how many ways are there to invent the wheel?), and in order to avoid a patent lawsuit, they bought technology licenses from Toyota. Bashers of domestics often "transform" this into "the Escape has a Toyota engine", but it's just not true.
Gee, every reviewer I've read has liked the Fusion better than the Camcords/Sonata, except for a couple who liked the Accord better. What reviews are you reading?
The price for a F-150 tops out at $40,000. THAT's why they can offer all of the extras. The Fusion tops out at $22,000...big difference there.
Why did the '92 Camry work? It was OVER-engineered! Ask any Toyota engineer or beancounter and they will tell you that car's R&D budget was overblown, than overblown again. VERY expensive car for a family sedan. More than Toyota ever spent to develop a car platform.
Kinda like what Ford did with the Freestyle. Add an over engineered transmission (CVT) and a Volvo AWD platform to a body that is best in it's class in frontal /side and rollover crash testing. And then sell it at a price that people could afford it.
NOW, they back out of it because the CVT is too costly to manufacture and it's too late for them to raise the price of the Freestyle.
What do they do? tell their salesmen to push people torwards their bread and butter Explorers and hide the Freestyles on the lots so people don't see them....then make plans to move the Freetsyle over to Mercury so they can raise the price to a profit making number.
Is Ford serious about selling cars and competing with GM ?
PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles
The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
Oh, I think the new Mustang and F150 show that Ford knows how to build a good vehicle. I think what you mean to write is that Ford needs to make a stand in the markets where they aren't already dominant.
But I completely agree with you on the Fusion. It does look good today. I was just reading that it has increased showroom traffic. But Ford is going to have to keep it competitive for 5 years and not let it become a flash-in-the-pan.
They just might succeed too if the Big 3...not so much Chrysler (300) doesn't get off their duffs and do SOMETHING!
Honda has invested in the new Civic.
Good idea.....good car
What is Ford doing with the Focus?
It's at the point IMO where it's almost too little too late.
The 500 has been easily surpassed by Avalon, 300 and Passat
There is NO excuse for that.
Freestar?
IMO not enough promotion and too similar a name to Freestar. I did a "unofficial survey" of about 50 people.
80% either never heard of it or thought it was a minivan.
IMO not enough promotion and too similar a name to Freestar. I did a "unofficial survey" of about 50 people.
80% either never heard of it or thought it was a minivan.
Freestar is a minivan.
:-)
Is this another case of a decent vehicle neglected for years and another once respected name sent to the grave?
UNLESS - it's nice looking. I think Nissan and Mazda have both proven that in the past couple of years.....
Geez, I hope not! I'm not sure it's been wholly neglected so far, it's been improved subtly over each model year. It could use a facelift maybe, but Ford tends to design their SUV fleet with DNA that resemble each other, so I don't know how much they'll facelift it anyway. I think it would be a huge mistake to rename it - but not as large a tactical error as first, allowing the Taurus to go from the car that changed the industry worldwide - to a sad little rental car with questionable value and quality - and then to bury the name in favor of, "Fusion"????? I've been a Ford guy for years and years, and I owned several of the early Tauri, and never have I been more impressed with a car than I was the day I drove my first 86 Taurus LX, and knew right then, I HAD to have one of those. The last Taurus I have owned was an 05 - and while a comfortable little cruiser, it was so NON groundbreaking, it really saddened me. The Taurus, had it been kept up was a brand with tremendous equity in it through about 99, when it was decontented and cheapened to the point of pain. The 96 was a styling disaster, but the car had lofty goals for that redesign - it was designed to beat the Camry. It didn't quite get there, but it was the attempt that I admired. I just couldn't stand the Ovid styling everywhere I looked. Especially inside.
Anyway, Bill, if you're listening, regardless of what Marketing says the Focus groups say - This new Fusion should have been a Taurus. I could give a rip if the Sable lived on, you can rename that one Milan, or Milania, or whatever the hell you want to. The Bull should have lived on.