Why didn't they ask the participants which car had the best safety, smooth ride, interior, drivetrain, fuel economy, or which one was more comfortable, and had the best ergonomics?
Go out onto the street right now and ask ten people which of the three cars in that comparo has the best fuel economy or saftey and report back to us how may blank stares you get. Most people don't care about that. They were asked which car they liked before they drove them and which one they liked after they drove them. The Fusion won so get over it.
That test is every bit as scientific and useful as what CR, JD Power, MT, C&D, IIHS, NHTSA, etc publish. So if you believe in their crap then you should believe this result as well.
Go out onto the street right now and ask ten people which of the three cars in that comparo has the best fuel economy or saftey and report back to us how may blank stares you get. Most people don't care about that.
I'd agree if you'd change the words "most people" to "most enthusiasts." Ask a mom in her 30s, on a budget, two young children, which she cares about more in her family's car- fuel economy, safety, or sharp handling - my guess is that sharp handling would show up third on the list.
Ask me, a 19 year old single college student (although probably not the average one), and things are only slightly different. I wanted SAB, ABS, and a 30 MPG average, as well as a car that was fun-to-drive, and thoroughly modern looking inside.
Ford isn't marketing the Fusion to mothers in their 30's on a budget with two young children. There are already motoappliances (camcords) out there for that.
I'd agree if you'd change the words "most people" to "most enthusiasts." Ask a mom in her 30s, on a budget, two young children, which she cares about more in her family's car- fuel economy, safety, or sharp handling - my guess is that sharp handling would show up third on the list.
I actually should have stated it differently because, and you're right, most people would CARE about safety and fuel economy. I should have said most people don't KNOW about them. All ten people will be able to tell you which attributes they care about but most of them won't be able to tell you which one gets the best rating for each attribute.
Your edit (this post I'm replying to)makes a lot more sense in my eyes. At least with the advent of the internet, more people are becoming educated about the aspects of the vehicles in which they are interested. I know not even half of the shoppers probably do this, but its a start. An educated public usually means a better product at a better price, no matter what brand you purchase.
Exactly, I agree with you. Accord and Camry became kind of soccer mom cars, similar to minivan. What is so exiting about Camcord infirst place? No enthusiast or young hip guy would aspire to own one.
Accord and Camry became kind of soccer mom cars, similar to minivan. What is so exiting about Camcord infirst place? No enthusiast or young hip guy would aspire to own one.
I have been into cars since I could read, love tearing up a back-road, and am 19 (hip is probably relative, so I won't say that I'm "hip"). I love my 1996 Accord so much, that I really thought I'd like another. (When I graduated, my parents told me that since my scholarship paid for my tuition, they'd buy me a new car.)
I drove several options of cars that fit me (i'm 6'4"), got at least mid-20s MPG, had 4-doors (after having 4-doors, I'll likely never go back - I hate the thought having to deal with back seat riders in a coupe, and since I love to drive, my friends and I usually take my car). I also value a "hip" looking interior. That left me with a lot of 4-door midsize sedans.
The Fusion's interior left me anything but impressed as far as design went.
The Camry (late model 2006 is what was out at the time) was the most relentlessly boring vehicle to drive, and handled more akin to a Buick. Plus, the SE I liked still came with hubcaps, like on my old 96 LX Accord.
The Sonata was close, but still not in the league of Honda interior design and quality.
The Subaru was too expensive.
VW and Chrysler quality ruled them out, so I never even shopped them.
That left me with my Accord. By far the best interior execution (in Nov. 2005 standards) in my eyes, superb handling considering the ride (and I drive some AWFUL interstates, so I wanted the ride to at least be DECENT - better than a Mazda 6), plenty of power for my commute, and fun handling for the back road to the Warrior River I travel to on weekends occasionally.
Needless to say, savetheland, you are wrong in one respect. This young enthusiast aspired to own his 2006 Accord EX 4-cylinder, and couldn't be more thrilled with it after over a year of ownership. What's more, I get more compliments from friends on my car than I thought I would... A friend of mine with a 2004 Jetta was talking about my "sweet Honda" that we should take on our trip to Atlanta just two weeks ago.
Sure, I could drive an RX-8, but this college student wants to save up his cash for a down-payment on a house by graduation, and not spend his extra money on gas and insurance on a sports car. The Accord was the best compromise that met my needs.
If you have a problem with it, I'm sorry. I may not be hip, but I've met the other two criteria you listed, AND drive an Accord.
I am surprised how this survey as really ruffled the feathers of the Honda/Toyota crowd. This is good in my book. Fusion/Milan are contendors and this is what matters. I feel good about such debates over the Fusion/Milan. This shows me that the Fusion/Milan are worthy vehicles and do compete in this class, most of all can compete with the Accord/Camry. The fact is 600 people, everyday people chose the Fusion over the Camry/Accord. To honestly feel that no other carmaker will ever make a car as good as the Camry/Accord is very shortsighted..
To honestly feel that no other carmaker will ever make a car as good as the Camry/Accord is very shortsighted..
Understatement of the year (given we are early in the year).
This shows me that the Fusion/Milan are worthy vehicles and do compete in this class
I am the only one who gets to decide what's competitive for my dollar, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I certainly don't look for approval from others before buying. Ideas and suggestions, sure, but I don't need someone to tell me what car I like.
I mean I agree with you that unlike Camry Accord is a good car. It would be a great car if Honda made it to handle little bit better and suspension little bit firmer and overall give it more solid European feel.
Accord also became a victim of "Camrization" by Honda, what means that Honda made it mainstream mass market car with soft suspension, boring exterior and etc, owned by almost everyone who have no clue about cars and buy Accord only because it is considered to be reliable.
Fusion is just so cool and it is more exclusive, and Milan is even more exclusive. Ford did not try to copy Camry this time, like it did with last generation of Taurus and created a great car that people can enjoy.
No one said they "honestly feel that no other carmaker will ever make a car as good as the Camry/Accord" and yes, Fusion/Milan do compete in this class. You really don't need to keep trying to stir things up here.
I can reply you with same words: Where did you got you non-sense about Accord/Camry?
Wonderful diction BTW.
The heritage of the CamCord is well established. The Fusion's is a question mark. I think most people want a sure thing instead of a question mark for a MS sedan, which is why the CamCord outsells the F/M/Lincolnthing 8 to 1.
How many Accords and Camrys did they sell in their first year of existence? You don't build that kind of loyalty and customer base in one year. You also need at least 2 years before you start getting repeat buyers. 09 will be the real test when it should have the 3.5L V6, AWD, Hybrid, Sync and an upgraded interior. The cost cutting is over and the bean counters are no longer in charge, but you won't see the results of that until this fall at the earliest.
The cost cutting is over and the bean counters are no longer in charge, but you won't see the results of that until this fall at the earliest.
Its unfortunate that they will still be building the car in Mexico... at a time when both Toyota and Honda are increasingly building cars in the US and selling consumers on that. I suspect if you ask most people off the street where they'd like their cars to be built... almost all of them would chose US, Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea, even China... Mexico is the last place the average person off the street is going to pick. US content is on the window sticker as well as place of manufacture... people may not be able to figure out the detailed specs of a car, but they can easily read that.
And just as easily spot the 4 star vs. 5 star NHTSA crash ratings... and everyone has to start showing crash info before 2008...
In general when car shopping, I always pull up the NHTSA and IIHS crash ratings... the Fusion falls short. In a year, the new Accords will be out with ACE engineering and the NHTSA are saying even its 5-star frontal crash test is no longer sufficient and are working to revising their crash tests...
The Accord is still on the sporty end of the class, although not the sportiest.
It is definitely not exclusive, but frankly, I don't care if there's 1 million Accords sold per year; they obviously fit other people's compromises well too! Non-exclusivity hasn't kept people out of Tahoes, Silverados, Expeditions, F-150s, etc... and people buying those lay out a lot more than the amount I paid for my Accord.
The Fusion being less common is a bonus to a lot of people (you included, obviously), and I can certainly understand the reasoning behind it.
The CEO, who was hired away from aircraft maker Boeing Co. in September, said the biggest cost-cutting opportunity for Ford is to reduce the number of vehicle platforms it uses around the world and increase the number of shared parts.
Sure sounds like cost cutting to me, doesn't it (especially the shared parts, they're digging into their parts bins all over again)? :confuse:
What he's talking about is using the same platform for the Ford Focus in North America and Europe whereas today there are 2 totally separate platforms. Same for the Fusion/Mazda6 and Mondeo. Or sharing a RWD platform between North America and Australia. Which they should have been doing all along, but the CEOs in the past never forced it and each division was allowed to do their own thing. This means that a Fusion and Mondeo will share platforms, rooflines, doors and other parts but each market will have some unique parts (grilles, tail lights, etc.) that are tailored for that market.
But that doesn't mean that a Fusion and MKZ will share any sheetmetal - quite the opposite. Horbury has said that while Lincoln may still use some of the same platforms as Ford they will get 100% unique sheetmetal and different drivetrains. The upcoming MKS will be the first to follow that recipe. It will have a Lincoln only 3.7L V6 with close to 300 hp and unique sheetmetal, not just different front and rear clips.
The cost cutting that has occured in the past (like the cheap black square radio) or decontenting (manual seat back adjustments on power seats) is what's gone. Fields said they would offer more features and options to attract more buyers instead of cutting features and costs and trying to sell based on price. This is already evident to some degree with side airbags being standard on the Fusion and Milan and the Edge having Navigation and Vista Roof options that would have normally been reserved for the MKX. You won't see any substantial changes until the 08 and 09 models, but it will change. Mulally just recently took control of the capital spending which had previously been controlled by the board of directors. Which explains a lot.
And in case you don't believe me, look at the pictures of the new 08 Focus interior (and remember this is a cheaper car than the Fusion). This redesign was also done before the new regime took over. It also gets ambient LED lighting and the Sync option. And this is Ford's cheapest vehicle.
Overall, not bad at all, and better than the Fusion as far as the overall look is concerned. I worry about the ease-of-use of the stereo and climate controls for the first time driver (think rental-drivers, new-car buyers, not 16 year olds). I almost think mini-Volvo with that center stack. The gauges are awful though, they try WAY too hard to be "hip" looking.
Anyone else notice the archaic placement of the hazard-flashers-switch? Why oh WHY won't they give it an easy-to-find-quickly button on the dash?
You'll be seeing constant complains - it looks like an ergonomic nightmare of too many buttons, and the stereo control buttons and the stereo display are split with the vents in the middle. I suppose they expect everyone to love voice commands with Sync and never need to use those buttons again... but for those of us that prefer buttons, bad placement.
I suppose we can applaud them for trying though. I wonder which Volvo center stack designer got shuffled onto the Focus team.
I'm sure if it had a H in the steering wheel it would be the best interior ever built. I was only pointing out that Ford is/will be spending more money on interiors.
what do the best selling lexus E and R series have in common with the Camry? they all share the same platform. honda/acura, nissan/infinity, vw/audi do the same thing. it is nothing new. ford takes good mazda and volvo platforms, designs fords for them and that is a bad thing. :confuse:
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
This is supposed to impress someone? The old gauge cluster had to be better than this. The rings around the speedo and tach look like someone was in a hurry, and didn't take the time to center them correctly. The speedo ring is almost under the plastic piece, and the tach ring has a little space between. These are just small things to Ford, but something Honda would not let slide. Quality is not job one, in this instance.
"no other carmaker will ever make a car as good as the Camry/Accord"
Maybe some day another car maker will, but the Fusion is not the one. Every time Ford (or GM for that matter) comes out with a "new and improved" model, they claim "This is the car that will compete with the Camry and Accord. It hasn't happened yet, and 07/08 will not be the year either. Ford and GM seem to think a new (high priced) executive will turn the company around. Engineers design cars, through Research & Devolopement. Will Ford and GM ever realize this? It doesn't seem so. They are certainly not going to catch up with Toyota by buying technology from them. It will only give Toyota more money to do the research that Ford refuses to do.
I left Ford small cars after my '91 Escort was totalled in '97. It was a great car that went 180,000 miles with only a few mechanical problems after 120K miles, but the interior quality of the focus kept me out of small Fords ever since. I think the interiors of all of the Focus's (Foci?) have been terrible in design and quality. Not only can you see misalligned parts, but what's up with the huge flat area above the small-looking glove box. Seems like there's space there for another smaller glove box. And there usually aren't any cubbies for putting small things. I have a Honda Fit and previously an '01 Corolla, both of which are/were very solid cars with simply, yet high quality and solid interiors. Plus a lot of places to put things. It drives me crazy when there are places in cars where they could have put a small cubby for change, cell phones, pens, etc but they're too cheap to do so and you end up with vast areas of empty dash or center console area.
Did it not occur to you that they're set at an angle? Anybody can see that. Not to mention the fact that this is a PRE-PRODUCTION PROTOTYPE. Get over it.
Well, in that case, I don't think you should be bragging about how good something (interior) looks, when it looks like crap. And believe me, I'm already over it.
It's more about a phylosopy that Honda has, that makes them different from Ford. Honda has always believed it Research, and Good Engineering. Simply making the best cars they can make. Why does Ford think hiring some High Priced Executive will make their cars better. Is he going to design them himself? Does he have the technology Ford needs, to compete, in his briefcase? I really doubt it.
That is the way I see it. Your outlook may be different, and I am sure it is.
Hey man, can you get it - not everyone wants Camry/Accord. So other companies do not need to catch up with those "icons". Where did you get the idea that Camry and Accord are benchmarks?
Where did you get the idea that Camry and Accord are benchmarks?
Many of us have already figured it out. The sales numbers are the proof. If the Accords and Camrys sell for more, and still sell more, something has to add up here. The only question I have is, what is taking you so long to figure it out?
Well I cannot argue with that. I can only add that then Ford Explorer and Ford F150 are benchmarks too. And do not forget aged Corolla - it is also the benchmark.
It was to illustrate the point that Ford's new interiors have taken a step up in quality already and are getting away from the cheap radio and hvac controls. And that was done prior to Fields taking over. The point was you can expect the next Fusion interior to be leaps and bounds better than the current one, which isn't bad but does need improvements.
Why does Ford think hiring some High Priced Executive will make their cars better. Is he going to design them himself? Does he have the technology Ford needs, to compete, in his briefcase? I really doubt it.
You just don't get it. In the past Ford's designers were constrained by cost cutting mandates and cost targets which led to cheap components. The bean counters were in charge of product development. Fields took over last year and told them that wasn't working and they needed to start adding more features and better products. When they started cutting costs they didn't cutback on the product design and engineering side. And now Mulally has taken control of Capital spending away from the board. He now has the power to decide what gets built and what doesn't because he holds the purse strings.
When they started cutting costs they didn't cutback on the product design and engineering side.
They were not spending enough (on engineering)in the first place. If they were, the engineers were wasting it.
And now Mulally has taken control of Capital spending away from the board. He now has the power to decide what gets built and what doesn't because he holds the purse strings.
What he decides to build, or not build, makes no difference, if they don't have the "know how" to build them better. What they should do is offer some of the High Quality Engineers at Honda and Toyota some big $$$ to come and work for them. Because by the time they come up with the "know how" on their own, they will be out of business. Right now Ford wants to buy Hybrid technology from Toyota, when what they should do is buy the engineers who know how to build them.
Well, lets see what the new focus looks like to begin with when they hit the road (again off topic) but I hope it isnt that bad!
I know its a show car!
I like the interior of my fusion, the wheel controls make it easy to set the radio and temp (it is winter here, so easy to leave alone) and the stereo is awesome.
Where did you get the idea that Camry and Accord are benchmarks?
Ford is comparing the Fusion to the Accord and Camry. Why compare it to those and not say a Sonata or a Legacy? It suggests Ford believes that consumers think the Camry/Accord is the benchmark that the Fusion has to surpass.
I can only add that then Ford Explorer and Ford F150 are benchmarks too.
Chevy and Toyota are definitely targeting the F150 sales with their trucks. Ford is definitely a truck company no doubts about it - its the cars they still are struggling with. Demand for Explorer type SUVs are down given the prices of gas these days. Trucks still serve a useful purpose, but soccer moms have alternatives to the Explorers.
And do not forget aged Corolla - it is also the benchmark.
Isn't it amazing how Toyota can sell such numbers of the outdated Corolla? It speaks volumes about how Toyota dominates the car market.
Please do not misquote me. If you actually read the post, you know that I said "No one said they 'honestly feel that no other carmaker will ever make a car as good as the Camry/Accord'" and I was responding to that silly statement by another poster.
We are here to compare the attributes and features of the Fusion and the Accord. That does NOT mean we are here to denigrate the vehicle we don't have or don't like.
The negativity and the hostility in here are not helpful to anyone. The real purpose of this discussion, indeed, this entire message board, is to help people decide what vehicle would best fit their needs. Some of you are acting like the purpose is to prove to others that your vehicle is the best thing since sliced bread and everything else is awful.
Let's get out of junior high school, okay? And let's treat each other like intelligent adults instead of 12 year olds. We all deserve that.
Back to the IIHS crash test issue.. Here we go again.
A 4 star crash test rating in no way says "Death Trap" And for those consumers smart enough to look and read the difference between a 4 star and 5 star crash test rating will see this. Yes, I agree a 5 star would look better for Ford and Yes they should have thought of this. The Fusion is not an unsafe vehicle like you want so badly to portray..
"Where did you get the idea that Camry and Accord are benchmarks?
Many of us have already figured it out. The sales numbers are the proof. If the Accords and Camrys sell for more, and still sell more, something has to add up here. The only question I have is, what is taking you so long to figure it out? "
So what? McDonalds sells more burgers does that mean they are the best burger? NOPE!
Besides, I'm one consumer who has also figured out you don't need to spend the extra $$ for a perceived reliabitlity/quality advantage that Honda/Toyota use as a marketing ploy. I'm sure I won't be the last..
So what? McDonalds sells more burgers does that mean they are the best burger? NOPE!
Obviously people think the Big Mac is the best burger, for the price, or they would go to Burger King. I go there strictly for the fries, myself. Burger King's fries suck.
If safety is the #1 priority, then people should drive a Ford 500, which is safter then any of the vehicles mentioned here. It's well known that a 5 star rated vehicle of greater weight is safer agains a 5 star rated vehicle of lesser weight in crashes involving vehicles of different weight class. So the fact that folks are buying the Honda Accord means that safety isn't their number one priority because if it was, they wouldn't be buying this class of vehicle.
So before anyone goes off on someone else by saying that safety is their #1 priority, then they're already sacrificing some level of safety by going to this class of vehicle. And every time they drive over the speed limit their sacrificing some level of safety. And every time they drive in the snow, rain, or at night they're sacrificing some level of safety. And on and on and on.
Since there are so many factors affecting safety when driving a vehicle, going from a 5 to a 4 star rated vehicle may have less of an impact on preventing serious injury then just staying home one snowy day a year.
Just as crash test ratings are only one measure of safety, safety ratings are only one measure of a car's characteristics...you have cost, space, comfort, reliability, handling, etc..., many of which are subjective.
What I like about these forums are when people honestly point out their likes/dislikes about cars they currently own, so folk in the market to buy can read about other people's experiences to see if the things they like/dislike about a particular car are the same sort of things they value when buying a car.
No matter what anyone says here, there are no "good" or "bad" cars on the road today, but there are some with varying degrees of safety, quality, resale value, and other things that can be measured, as well as more subjective aspects which is where people's opinions can be helpful.
Anyway, enough of my sermon. Now I'll go back to cleaning the garage that I was putting off by typing here!
Of course this about opinions and I did not say otherwise. What it is not about is people grinding their figurative foot in others' figurative faces. That's what needs to stop. If you want to discuss this further, please email me. Meanwhile, you can give us the features and attributes of the Fusion that appeal to you without taunting those who have differing needs, thoughts and views.
bob - this particular discussion is about the merits of the Accord vs. the Fusion... I'm sure you would agree safety is a very important factor to most buyers. In this particular comparison, the Accord has better safety ratings than the Fusion. Just pointing out the facts.
I agree its good to have opinions and likes/dislikes. It is unfortunate that some feel the need to shove the Fusion down at everyone else as the best thing out there every chance they get... look back in the thread history and you can see what was the catalyst of the entire recent discussion on this particular topic. The constant Ford sermons need to stop, that's all.
Comments
Go out onto the street right now and ask ten people which of the three cars in that comparo has the best fuel economy or saftey and report back to us how may blank stares you get. Most people don't care about that. They were asked which car they liked before they drove them and which one they liked after they drove them. The Fusion won so get over it.
That test is every bit as scientific and useful as what CR, JD Power, MT, C&D, IIHS, NHTSA, etc publish. So if you believe in their crap then you should believe this result as well.
I'd agree if you'd change the words "most people" to "most enthusiasts." Ask a mom in her 30s, on a budget, two young children, which she cares about more in her family's car- fuel economy, safety, or sharp handling - my guess is that sharp handling would show up third on the list.
Ask me, a 19 year old single college student (although probably not the average one), and things are only slightly different. I wanted SAB, ABS, and a 30 MPG average, as well as a car that was fun-to-drive, and thoroughly modern looking inside.
I actually should have stated it differently because, and you're right, most people would CARE about safety and fuel economy. I should have said most people don't KNOW about them. All ten people will be able to tell you which attributes they care about but most of them won't be able to tell you which one gets the best rating for each attribute.
I'm not so sure you do...You say:
Accord and Camry became kind of soccer mom cars, similar to minivan. What is so exiting about Camcord infirst place? No enthusiast or young hip guy would aspire to own one.
I have been into cars since I could read, love tearing up a back-road, and am 19 (hip is probably relative, so I won't say that I'm "hip"). I love my 1996 Accord so much, that I really thought I'd like another. (When I graduated, my parents told me that since my scholarship paid for my tuition, they'd buy me a new car.)
I drove several options of cars that fit me (i'm 6'4"), got at least mid-20s MPG, had 4-doors (after having 4-doors, I'll likely never go back - I hate the thought having to deal with back seat riders in a coupe, and since I love to drive, my friends and I usually take my car). I also value a "hip" looking interior. That left me with a lot of 4-door midsize sedans.
The Fusion's interior left me anything but impressed as far as design went.
The Camry (late model 2006 is what was out at the time) was the most relentlessly boring vehicle to drive, and handled more akin to a Buick. Plus, the SE I liked still came with hubcaps, like on my old 96 LX Accord.
The Sonata was close, but still not in the league of Honda interior design and quality.
The Subaru was too expensive.
VW and Chrysler quality ruled them out, so I never even shopped them.
That left me with my Accord. By far the best interior execution (in Nov. 2005 standards) in my eyes, superb handling considering the ride (and I drive some AWFUL interstates, so I wanted the ride to at least be DECENT - better than a Mazda 6), plenty of power for my commute, and fun handling for the back road to the Warrior River I travel to on weekends occasionally.
Needless to say, savetheland, you are wrong in one respect. This young enthusiast aspired to own his 2006 Accord EX 4-cylinder, and couldn't be more thrilled with it after over a year of ownership. What's more, I get more compliments from friends on my car than I thought I would... A friend of mine with a 2004 Jetta was talking about my "sweet Honda" that we should take on our trip to Atlanta just two weeks ago.
Sure, I could drive an RX-8, but this college student wants to save up his cash for a down-payment on a house by graduation, and not spend his extra money on gas and insurance on a sports car. The Accord was the best compromise that met my needs.
If you have a problem with it, I'm sorry. I may not be hip, but I've met the other two criteria you listed, AND drive an Accord.
Understatement of the year (given we are early in the year).
This shows me that the Fusion/Milan are worthy vehicles and do compete in this class
I am the only one who gets to decide what's competitive for my dollar, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I certainly don't look for approval from others before buying. Ideas and suggestions, sure, but I don't need someone to tell me what car I like.
Accord also became a victim of "Camrization" by Honda, what means that Honda made it mainstream mass market car with soft suspension, boring exterior and etc, owned by almost everyone who have no clue about cars and buy Accord only because it is considered to be reliable.
Fusion is just so cool and it is more exclusive, and Milan is even more exclusive. Ford did not try to copy Camry this time, like it did with last generation of Taurus and created a great car that people can enjoy.
Wonderful diction BTW.
The heritage of the CamCord is well established. The Fusion's is a question mark. I think most people want a sure thing instead of a question mark for a MS sedan, which is why the CamCord outsells the F/M/Lincolnthing 8 to 1.
Its unfortunate that they will still be building the car in Mexico... at a time when both Toyota and Honda are increasingly building cars in the US and selling consumers on that. I suspect if you ask most people off the street where they'd like their cars to be built... almost all of them would chose US, Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea, even China... Mexico is the last place the average person off the street is going to pick. US content is on the window sticker as well as place of manufacture... people may not be able to figure out the detailed specs of a car, but they can easily read that.
And just as easily spot the 4 star vs. 5 star NHTSA crash ratings... and everyone has to start showing crash info before 2008...
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/09/nhtsa_window_stickers.html
In general when car shopping, I always pull up the NHTSA and IIHS crash ratings... the Fusion falls short. In a year, the new Accords will be out with ACE engineering and the NHTSA are saying even its 5-star frontal crash test is no longer sufficient and are working to revising their crash tests...
http://www.safercar.gov/NewCarAssessmentEnhancements-2007.pdf
Safety comes first... then we talk the finer points, like specs, audio systems, engines, etc.
It is definitely not exclusive, but frankly, I don't care if there's 1 million Accords sold per year; they obviously fit other people's compromises well too! Non-exclusivity hasn't kept people out of Tahoes, Silverados, Expeditions, F-150s, etc... and people buying those lay out a lot more than the amount I paid for my Accord.
The Fusion being less common is a bonus to a lot of people (you included, obviously), and I can certainly understand the reasoning behind it.
Not if you listen to Mulally...
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/12/news/companies/ford_costs.reut/index.htm?postver- sion=2007011212
The CEO, who was hired away from aircraft maker Boeing Co. in September, said the biggest cost-cutting opportunity for Ford is to reduce the number of vehicle platforms it uses around the world and increase the number of shared parts.
Sure sounds like cost cutting to me, doesn't it (especially the shared parts, they're digging into their parts bins all over again)? :confuse:
But that doesn't mean that a Fusion and MKZ will share any sheetmetal - quite the opposite. Horbury has said that while Lincoln may still use some of the same platforms as Ford they will get 100% unique sheetmetal and different drivetrains. The upcoming MKS will be the first to follow that recipe. It will have a Lincoln only 3.7L V6 with close to 300 hp and unique sheetmetal, not just different front and rear clips.
The cost cutting that has occured in the past (like the cheap black square radio) or decontenting (manual seat back adjustments on power seats) is what's gone. Fields said they would offer more features and options to attract more buyers instead of cutting features and costs and trying to sell based on price. This is already evident to some degree with side airbags being standard on the Fusion and Milan and the Edge having Navigation and Vista Roof options that would have normally been reserved for the MKX. You won't see any substantial changes until the 08 and 09 models, but it will change. Mulally just recently took control of the capital spending which had previously been controlled by the board of directors. Which explains a lot.
2008 Focus Interior
Anyone else notice the archaic placement of the hazard-flashers-switch? Why oh WHY won't they give it an easy-to-find-quickly button on the dash?
You'll be seeing constant complains - it looks like an ergonomic nightmare of too many buttons, and the stereo control buttons and the stereo display are split with the vents in the middle. I suppose they expect everyone to love voice commands with Sync and never need to use those buttons again... but for those of us that prefer buttons, bad placement.
I suppose we can applaud them for trying though. I wonder which Volvo center stack designer got shuffled onto the Focus team.
honda/acura, nissan/infinity, vw/audi do the same thing. it is nothing new.
ford takes good mazda and volvo platforms, designs fords for them and that is a bad thing. :confuse:
This is supposed to impress someone? The old gauge cluster had to be better than this. The rings around the speedo and tach look like someone was in a hurry, and didn't take the time to center them correctly. The speedo ring is almost under the plastic piece, and the tach ring has a little space between. These are just small things to Ford, but something Honda would not let slide. Quality is not job one, in this instance.
And thanks God! Two cars like Camry and Accord are more than enough. We want more exitement!
Maybe some day another car maker will, but the Fusion is not the one. Every time Ford (or GM for that matter) comes out with a "new and improved" model, they claim "This is the car that will compete with the Camry and Accord. It hasn't happened yet, and 07/08 will not be the year either. Ford and GM seem to think a new (high priced) executive will turn the company around. Engineers design cars, through Research & Devolopement. Will Ford and GM ever realize this? It doesn't seem so. They are certainly not going to catch up with Toyota by buying technology from them. It will only give Toyota more money to do the research that Ford refuses to do.
That is the way I see it. Your outlook may be different, and I am sure it is.
Many of us have already figured it out. The sales numbers are the proof. If the Accords and Camrys sell for more, and still sell more, something has to add up here. The only question I have is, what is taking you so long to figure it out?
Well I cannot argue with that. I can only add that then Ford Explorer and Ford F150 are benchmarks too. And do not forget aged Corolla - it is also the benchmark.
You just don't get it. In the past Ford's designers were constrained by cost cutting mandates and cost targets which led to cheap components. The bean counters were in charge of product development. Fields took over last year and told them that wasn't working and they needed to start adding more features and better products. When they started cutting costs they didn't cutback on the product design and engineering side. And now Mulally has taken control of Capital spending away from the board. He now has the power to decide what gets built and what doesn't because he holds the purse strings.
They were not spending enough (on engineering)in the first place. If they were, the engineers were wasting it.
And now Mulally has taken control of Capital spending away from the board. He now has the power to decide what gets built and what doesn't because he holds the purse strings.
What he decides to build, or not build, makes no difference, if they don't have the "know how" to build them better. What they should do is offer some of the High Quality Engineers at Honda and Toyota some big $$$ to come and work for them. Because by the time they come up with the "know how" on their own, they will be out of business. Right now Ford wants to buy Hybrid technology from Toyota, when what they should do is buy the engineers who know how to build them.
I know its a show car!
I like the interior of my fusion, the wheel controls make it easy to set the radio and temp (it is winter here, so easy to leave alone) and the stereo is awesome.
Ford is comparing the Fusion to the Accord and Camry. Why compare it to those and not say a Sonata or a Legacy? It suggests Ford believes that consumers think the Camry/Accord is the benchmark that the Fusion has to surpass.
I can only add that then Ford Explorer and Ford F150 are benchmarks too.
Chevy and Toyota are definitely targeting the F150 sales with their trucks. Ford is definitely a truck company no doubts about it - its the cars they still are struggling with. Demand for Explorer type SUVs are down given the prices of gas these days. Trucks still serve a useful purpose, but soccer moms have alternatives to the Explorers.
And do not forget aged Corolla - it is also the benchmark.
Isn't it amazing how Toyota can sell such numbers of the outdated Corolla? It speaks volumes about how Toyota dominates the car market.
We are here to compare the attributes and features of the Fusion and the Accord. That does NOT mean we are here to denigrate the vehicle we don't have or don't like.
The negativity and the hostility in here are not helpful to anyone. The real purpose of this discussion, indeed, this entire message board, is to help people decide what vehicle would best fit their needs. Some of you are acting like the purpose is to prove to others that your vehicle is the best thing since sliced bread and everything else is awful.
Let's get out of junior high school, okay? And let's treat each other like intelligent adults instead of 12 year olds. We all deserve that.
Thanks.
A 4 star crash test rating in no way says "Death Trap" And for those consumers smart enough to look and read the difference between a 4 star and 5 star crash test rating will see this. Yes, I agree a 5 star would look better for Ford and Yes they should have thought of this. The Fusion is not an unsafe vehicle like you want so badly to portray..
Many of us have already figured it out. The sales numbers are the proof. If the Accords and Camrys sell for more, and still sell more, something has to add up here. The only question I have is, what is taking you so long to figure it out? "
So what? McDonalds sells more burgers does that mean they are the best burger? NOPE!
Besides, I'm one consumer who has also figured out you don't need to spend the extra $$ for a perceived reliabitlity/quality advantage that Honda/Toyota use as a marketing ploy. I'm sure I won't be the last..
Obviously people think the Big Mac is the best burger, for the price, or they would go to Burger King. I go there strictly for the fries, myself. Burger King's fries suck.
I think that's enough about fast food chains.
So before anyone goes off on someone else by saying that safety is their #1 priority, then they're already sacrificing some level of safety by going to this class of vehicle. And every time they drive over the speed limit their sacrificing some level of safety. And every time they drive in the snow, rain, or at night they're sacrificing some level of safety. And on and on and on.
Since there are so many factors affecting safety when driving a vehicle, going from a 5 to a 4 star rated vehicle may have less of an impact on preventing serious injury then just staying home one snowy day a year.
Just as crash test ratings are only one measure of safety, safety ratings are only one measure of a car's characteristics...you have cost, space, comfort, reliability, handling, etc..., many of which are subjective.
What I like about these forums are when people honestly point out their likes/dislikes about cars they currently own, so folk in the market to buy can read about other people's experiences to see if the things they like/dislike about a particular car are the same sort of things they value when buying a car.
No matter what anyone says here, there are no "good" or "bad" cars on the road today, but there are some with varying degrees of safety, quality, resale value, and other things that can be measured, as well as more subjective aspects which is where people's opinions can be helpful.
Anyway, enough of my sermon. Now I'll go back to cleaning the garage that I was putting off by typing here!
I agree its good to have opinions and likes/dislikes. It is unfortunate that some feel the need to shove the Fusion down at everyone else as the best thing out there every chance they get... look back in the thread history and you can see what was the catalyst of the entire recent discussion on this particular topic. The constant Ford sermons need to stop, that's all.
No, it just means they are the best value to the most people.