Howdy, Stranger!

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

Midsize Sedans 2.0



  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,906
    nycarguy: That Prelude must be fun to drive! Now that's a rare car. It's almost a collector car, I'd say, at least at this point....
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,030
    Anybody considering a 2013 Fusion other than me?

    I really wanted the 1.6L ecoboost auto start/stop engine but with Intelligent Access and push button start but alas the 1.6L is only offered in the SE and IA is only on the Titanium which only offers the 2.0. Even the hybrid doesn't get push button start which I don't understand. So it will be a 2.0 Titanium for me fully loaded. Or maybe a MKZ but I'm not sure I can justify the added cost.

    The 1.6L ecoboost with auto start/stop gets 26 city/37 highway on regular fuel. The hybrid gets 47/44. And the plug in hybrid version should be out in a few months.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,389
    In reality, the ONLY reason to buy a car with a manual transmission is because you truly LOVE the connection it gives you with the car. Years ago when most autos were 3 & 4 speeds, then a similarly equipped car with a stick would be faster & get better mileage. We've all got significant others & traffic issues to deal with.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2011 Pilot EX-L 4WD, 2015 Infiniti G37x Q40 AWD

  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,940
    Hi AKirby!
    I like the styling of the new Fusion.
    No dealer near me has one in stock,
    but I may drive a Titanium before choosing...
    Wish they offered a V6...
    - Ray
    Say a truck load of 2013 Accords this AM -
    lok to me as good as they did in pictures & vids...
    [ And a V6 option is offered.]
    2016 BMW 340i
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,030
    Hey Ray - long time no type.

    The 2013s haven't started shipping yet - should be any day now. The 2.0L Ecoboost should be very close to the same performance as the current 3.5L - maybe even a bit better.

    The MKZ will get the 3.7L V6 if you just have to have the extra power.

    At least you can still get the manual with the 1.6L EB. But not the 2.0L EB or the 3.7L in the MKZ.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,909
    edited September 2012
    But even in 6th with the manual you'd be running at maybe 2400 rpm.

    Not if Honda designed the Accord's 6MT for fuel efficiency. For example, on a Mazda3 Skyactiv 6MT I tested, it was turning at only ~2000 rpm @ 65 mph in 6th. And it's a smaller, lower-power engine than the Accord has, so I expect the Accord would do better... if 6th is truly an overdrive on the Accord.

    If the Accord's MT really does rev that high, then yeah, no way I'd go with that, would have to get the CVT. That's the problem I have with the new Impreza--MT is way too noisy/high revving compared to the CVT. But it's only a 5MT.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,389
    My Prelude is LOADS of fun to drive. It was featured here on inside line's Readers Rides segment a few months back. I bought it brand new as a leftover on 4/27/02. It was my daily driver for the 1st 9 years of its life. I only drive it on beautiful, sunny, days & it still brings a smile to my face. Current mileage is over 147,000.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2011 Pilot EX-L 4WD, 2015 Infiniti G37x Q40 AWD

  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,906
    nycarguy: I didn't even know about the Readers Rides section. Thanks. Found your page. That is a very nice 'lude!

    One of my first Honda memories is from 1979. I was a freshman in hs, and a senior I knew with some money had a Prelude of that year and we went for a ride. Wow. Tiny, but the precision of the engineering floored me. At that moment I realized that Hondas could be something special...
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,906
    backy: From what I've read the 6MT on the new 2013 Accord is not geared for super efficiency. In other words, I think it is closer to 2400 rpm at 60 than 2000, but I'm not completely sure. I think they wanted it so that if you're in 6th and floor it something happens, even if you really should be in 5th or 4th or even 3rd to accelerate.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,389
    Thanks for your kind words about my Prelude. It truly is a very special car;)

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2011 Pilot EX-L 4WD, 2015 Infiniti G37x Q40 AWD

  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,504
    Thanks Ben....
    I lifted the info on pillar size out of a couple of different articles in C/D and M/T but I don't have the actual quotes. I think going back and forth about structural stiffness, high strength steel, aluminum, and magnesium is gonna bore everyone too tears, so I will bow to your post on safety standard particulars. :)

    I just feel less confident on my lane changes in the Optima than I think any other car I have ever owned, and it affects my overall driving enjoyment.

    Maybe I should look into and aftermarket camera system. Anything is better than crashing!!!

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,504
    2013 Fusion is gonna be HOT. There has not been much TV press on it so Ford can sell the remaining outgoing model. I would like the 2.0 Eco Boost (Turbo) 240HP model.

    I already love the nod to Aston Martin with the grill design(even though Ford sold it's interest in Aston a couple years ago). I can't wait to start seeing them on the road.

    I wonder how smooth the start/stop system on the 1.6 is in heavy traffic. Will it be smooth enough?

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,030
    Why not just adjust your mirrors properly and then you won't have a blindspot.
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,906
    edited September 2012
    I know what you mean. I feel the same way about passing in my Mazda5, which is one of the main reasons I'm thinking of trading it in on a new Accord. I carefully use my mirrors in the Mazda5, and my neck is on a swivel looking around like you said. I do it and it works, but my driving enjoyment is definitely a lot lower in the Mazda5 in that situation than in our Accord. And otherwise, like with your Optima, it's a fun car to drive and I like it. But since I'm someone who likes driving most of the time, I really want both of our cars to be in that camp of fun to drive pretty much all the time....
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,504
    Maybe I should bolt on those giant mirrors from an old F350 dually.

    My car will look like dumbo... but then I can finally adjust out that blind spot.....or take

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • I have seen on many sites that the 2.0L Ecoboost will require premium gas. Is this car really going to require premium gas and only make 237hp? I know torque matters more and that engine does look like its has a good torque band, but this car should get 250hp at-least with premium.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,940
    According to Ford - it is rated for both Premium
    and Regular gasoline:

    240 @ 5,500 (premium fuel) 231@5,500 (regular fuel)
    [ NO difference in peak TQ ]
    2016 BMW 340i
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,504
    edited September 2012
    I just went to the Ford site and took a good look.

    Really, really nice looking car, good spec's, nice interior. Great selection of power-train's as well, although I think there may be one too many, made necessary by the EPA.

    Why would I want the 1.6? On roads around here I would be on the turbo a lot, and a mid-size Fusion, not to mention the Escape, is a LOT of car to get moving with such a small engine.

    Can anyone tell me why all three are offered in the states? Wouldn't it be better to just offer the 2.5 and the 2.0T and not have a third engine to worry about?
    Maybe it would be better to offer the 1.6T and the 2.0T and ditch the 2.5?

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,030
    Because the 1.6L has optional start/stop capability and it yields significantly better EPA ratings (26/37) than the 2.0L (22/33). I'm guessing on those numbers but they're close.

    The 2.5L is a boat anchor and is basically just there for fleet sales and to take some of the volume pressure off the new EB engines.

    In Europe the new Mondeo (same as the 2013 Fusion) gets the 1.0L EB so that makes the 1.6L sporty by comparison.

    If they offered the 1.6L auto start/stop in Titanium trim I'd probably be ordering one.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,504

    Yes, I remember the old GM 2.5 pig "iron duke" workhorse from the 80's.

    Boat Anchor. Hahaha. Oh, BTW I adopted your mirror settings. Will let you know how that goes. Made sense to me.

    Back on topic. Yes, I am aware that in Europe a 1.6 is considered a nice size 4 cyl. 1.4 liters are common as well, and I am aware of the 1.4 turbo in Chevy's Cruse. (138hp).

    I have to mention that my 2.4 GDI puts out 25 more horses and 11 more lb ft than Ford's 2.5, is rated at 35mpg (I observe 24 real life mixed) and sounds great doing it. I test drove the outgoing Fusion model prior to purchasing my Kia. The 2.5 was rough over 3500.

    With the A/C on (at 99 to 103 degrees for a month solid) my Optima was still really sluggish off the line. This is why I asked about the 1.6 in the Fusion. It just seems needlessly expensive and complex that for only a 3 hp gain.

    I know that you know your stuff Kirby. Just a counter point.


    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,030
    It's not about power. The 1.6 gets 26/37 whereas your Optima only gets 24-35. 2 mpg is a lot when you're looking at CAFE compliance.
  • I'll tell you why
    1. hwy + 1.6 = 37mpg
    2. 1.6 is the one I will buy because it is the only one with a mt. though, if the 2.0 came with mt I would buy it.
    1.6 + mt = more fun then 2.0 + auto.
    Wish they had a diesel engine choice w/ mt.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,504
    Yes. I understand the CAFE compliance reason for this engine, and the availability of a MT with the engine.

    So, you guys wanna have fun while saving gas? Well, if your foot is in the turbo a lot in order to have fun then your MPG is not going to be 37....ever.

    In the kind of traffic we have around here it would not be fun to drive most of the time, and you will still have to mash the throttle to:

    1) activate start/stop to keep lag minimal off the line
    2) to accelerate and keep up with traffic.
    3)merge onto highway at 65/70 speeds.
    4) you will have to stay in higher gears to keep the turbo on point, and once you slip down to 2000 RPM you end up with 3500lb driven by a 1.6.

    Look, I LOVE THE FUSION....I just don't think the 1.6 makes sense in the real world here in America, land of Nascar LOL.

    Also, my Optima get 24/35mpg. I am very pleased with that on a 200hp 2.4 GDI and a 6 speed auto with sport-tronic shift mode. I don't have to worry about turbo complexity and later on repairs associated with a force-fed engine having to survive at very high tolerances of heat.

    I am gonna stop there. I want to go drive one with the 1.6 Eco-tech. I am really curious how it will perform, and I do NOT want to make things up. I would still have the 2.0 Ecotech 6spd auto. That's why I have a similar drivetrain on my Optima.

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • Was looking at 13 Fusion and what a pig with the 2.5-3600 lbs! The turbos I'm sure are fun to drive but require premium and I don't trust a turbo past 100k! Direct injection in the new rigs is noisy and requires a very high pressure fuel system and CVTs are sloppy and belt driven! I'm lookin for an SE camry because of engine drivetrain precison/simplicity and the looks are growing on me-wind tunnel car! Like the 10 air bags and reliabilyt/resale track record too! Looks aren't worth a hole lot to me-I'm a practical Engineer! I don't like the direction these sky high MPG standards are taking manufacturers-reliability and repair will be sky high too I'm afraid!
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,030
    Ford's ecoboost engines do not require premium and they test all their engines to 150K in extreme conditions. The turbos will not fail at 100K. It's not the 1980s any more.

    The auto start/stop starts the engine when you lift off the brake - not when you touch the throttle so there is no lag.

    Maybe you guys should actually wait and drive one before bashing it to death.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,721
    I don't mind a manual in any kind of traffic. I used to routinely drive a manual (SVT Contour in stop and go Chicago traffic and it never bothered me), but I just thoroughly enjoy driving a manual and miss it as I haven't owned a manual trans vehicle in a while.

    A test drive would definitely be in order to determine how good the 1.6/manual combo is.

    I know many of the same claims were made about the ecoboost f150 and after I test drove one I was more than impressed. I'm willing to bet the 1.6 will have some boost and torque available under 2krpm, but frankly few engines have much power under 2k rpm. My wife's 3.5 v6 powered Taurus doesn't have much power under 2k rpm either, basically enough to maintain highway speeds in 6th gear.

    To bad Ford isn't offering the 2.0 turbo with a manual. I still wish they'd offer a v6.
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,906
    I would tend to agree that Ford's ecoboost engines are thoroughly tested and durable.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    probably more thoroughly than their transmissions if history reveals anything
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,504
    edited September 2012
    In the Escape it it going to be a bit under-powered. In the Fusion it will be adequate and I am sure it will return good fuel economy to some. Note I didn't say "all".

    Lets put it this way.

    Would you buy this car with this 1.6 engine but without the turbocharger?

    Do you plan on driving it just like your old car and plan to get 30 MPG city?

    There is no way I would have this motor in my car. It would be under-powered and overworked. The engine will have to work so hard that after 5 years it will have problems.

    The mid size cars that I see on the road around me here in the Mid-Atlantic are mostly 1.8/ 2.0 to 2.5 non turbo's on entry level cars.

    On the upper Mid-size sedan market are 2.0T to 3.7 L V6 engines. The V8 is dead in this once V8 dominated market. I think we are going the right way towards protecting the environment around us, but can't we have a WEE-bit little more fun while doing it!!

    Insufferable Knowitall

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

Sign In or Register to comment.