Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
wrong - in that same issue CR notes that the V6 Camry had recovered from its original teething problems, was now 'better than average' and now 'recommended'.
It will be interesting to see whether those Mexican products can maintain their high reliabililty ratings in consideration of finally getting some badly needed upgrades. Any manufacturer (even Toyota) will likely suffer from a reliability perspective if they are truly developing new products, something Ford, in particular, las lagged on.
The Milan is fairly light at 3150lbs but it also seems to be the exception to the rule.
2002 Galant: 3031 lbs
2009 Galant: 3395 lbs
2002 Accord: 2943 lbs
2009 Accord: 3213 lbs
2002 Grand Prix: 3384 lbs
2009 Grand Prix: 3477 lbs
2002 Altima: 2983 lbs.
2009 Altima: 3145 lbs.
Oh, and for fun - in the spirit of upsizing:
1996 Park Avenue: 3536 Lbs. Note - this is a huge car!
And even more fun:
1959 Mercedes 220S 2976 Lbs. (first Mercedes "S class" sedan)
This is a Chevy Bel Air(or current Altima) sized car with wood dash, heavy steel doors, and acres of glass. It makes you wonder exactly what in the world all that extra weight in these more modern smaller cars is for?
http://www.heckflosse.nl/220sse.htm
Oh - neat fact - these were the first cars built like modern vehicles. They drive like anything from the 70s or 80s. They also gave away almost all of their safety ideas, which Volvo copied. Crumple zones, safety glass, side impact reinforcement... its a large list of firsts. Drive one sometime if you can It took GM until 1987 or so to make a better car. (W body sedans)
Plekto, I think you may have missed the point I was making (or you meant to reply to another poster). The cars referenced in my post #11329 were all current designs, and all felt as though they had sufficient engine for the job.
I agree with you that the MB Fintail sedans were superb vehicles, though I think you'd find they weren't quite the size of the Bel Air you mentioned:
The '59 MB 220S had a 108 inch wheelbase and was 191 inches long (www.heckflosse.nl/dim4.html) and 70.6 inches wide. The current Altima is dimensionally very close to the 220S: 109.3 inch wheelbase, 189.8 inches long, 70.7 inches wide (www.nissanusa.com). But in 1959 the Chevy Bel Air had a 119 inch wheelbase and was 210.9 inches long and 79.9 inches wide (http://www.chevy59.com/data.htm).
I prefer the next generation of the MB sedans (W114/115, aka the "/8" sedans introduced in 1968) because of their more sophisticated rear suspension. Back in the '80s I did a lot of driving in a gold '74 280 with very impressive space efficiency, handling, and comfort. That car really set my expectations as to what a car ought to be able to do. Only in the last few years have most midsize sedans been able to exceed those expectations.
I guess it's impossible for some to realize the Ford has made tremendous strides to better their product.
For years, Ford, and all domestics, have lagged behind in the passenger car market. If you have not been living under a rock for the last decade, you would know this. By Ford's own admission, they were concentrating on pick-up trucks and SUV's during this time. The Japanese (Toyota and Honda included) still do not know how to build a pick-up truck that is actually a work horse. Who lags there? Japan. The Tundra still lags behind in durability and functionality to the F-150 and Sierra. Don't get me started on the Oddesey...ahem... I mean Ridgeline....whatta joke of a pick-up.
Let's get off the Ford bashing because it is obvious those who asses these cars for a living know what they are talking about. It's really getting so stupid about the same things said over and over and over that are just not true anymore.
"extra, extra....read all about it....Ford builds a good car!!!" welcome to 2009....
Give Ford credit for not waiting for a new platform to make huge changes:
New IP and center stack
Manumatic shifting
6 speed auto and manuals across the board
upgraded 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder engines with more power AND better FE
new hybrid and 3.5L V6 powertrains
new features - blind spot, cross traffic and rear view camera
new front and rear styling
capless fueling
I'm sure there are a few more. And Ford did all of this just 3 years and 4 months after the Fusion first appeared in dealers. That's unheard of (but also necessary), even for Honda and Toyota.
Time to give kudos where they've been earned.
The fact that Ford has managed to improve quality in the face of their financial problems is certainly worthy of note, even if it has cost a bunch of Americans their jobs.
This is what I find hard to forgive. Ford has been doing what it has needed to be doing in the last few years and may just be the lone survivor of the 'Big 3'.
Umm, exactly WHICH automobile in the class has blind-spot detection? Capless fueling? 6 speed trannys on ALL engines?
Trannys...GM did 6 speeds, Honda only has 5, Toyota maxes at 5 speeds (weren't they using a 4 speed on the 2.4 liter recently?).
Blind spot stuff, NONE of them have it. Ford has SURPASSED the competition in several areas, get over it. You hate Ford, that's fine, but try and at least be objective. I hate GM but I'm not going to deny the fact that THEY were in fact the first ones in the class to put 6 speed auto trannies on ALL engines in the Malibu except for the "hybrid" one.
That was worded so oddly it needs to be highlighted that CR is saying that the Fusion is more reliable than the Toyota Camry. That is a huge victory for Ford.
i like not having to carry my keys with me when i leave the vehicle.
drop the keys somewhere inside and retrieve them when you need them.
if the kids need something out of the car, they know the combination and can get in to get it without the keys.
right now i am using it because the garage door opener remote in my car isn't working for the most part.
i back out of the garage, walk over to the explorer which is always parked outside, punch in the entry code, use that remote to close my garage door, lock it back up and drive away in my car. i don't need to carry the explorer keys to do this.
Ford didn't just catch up - they've leaped ahead in every category that I can see (with the 2010 model).
Ford is really putting a lot into the new Fusion. I look forward to seeing one.
I have a 6-speed 3.6L Malibu and the transmission is amazing. Ford is using the same one, the factory that makes them is a joint venture Ford/GM.
Ford does now offer a hard drive with their Nav system. However it is not like MyGIG where you can get it without the Nav so it's not quite as readily available or affordable.
I'm not a big fan of the whole hard drive in a radio thing but I do know a few people with new Chrysler vehicles and they love their MyGIG. Maybe I need to play with one to truly appreciate it.
And sync can call 911 in an accident - without a built-in phone, extra phone line and national call center to relay the call.
we know you like the transmission.
what are your other likes/dislikes?
Mazda has it in the 2009 Mazda6 and has been using it since 2008 in the CX-9.
****
Well, I did mention the older ones to make my point more than anything. IMO, a 250SE was about the best of the lot - and the first of the 2nd generation W114/W115 era). Astounding cars, even today, and also why that era's SL roadsters still command a hefty premium. Drive an early 70s SL and it's just amazing how it doesn't show its age. IMO, a trick only a few cars have managed. The 2002Ti and the Porsche 928 are in this group. They seem to defy age in how they drive. And the sedan versions also are very good and under appreciated.
Hmm, I guess I'd just put the remote that works in the car that actually goes in the garage, rather than leaving it in the one that sits in the driveway. :confuse:
If I ever needed to steal a car, I guess I'd start by smashing the windows of the ones with that keypad...figuring one of you guys probably left the keys in the locked car.
I think only from CDs as well but I'm not positive.
And sync can call 911 in an accident - without a built-in phone, extra phone line and national call center to relay the call.
It calls from your cell phone though right? My 74 year old mother does not have a cell phone so she'd be out of luck. I doubt she and my dad would pay the $20 per month OnStar fee, along with all the other GM owners I know, to have it call either though. The tech is out there and improving by the minute. However it's not foolproof just yet. Unless I'm missing something?
Mazda has been in the midsize class for years. The 6 has been around since '03, and the 626 was before that.
And technically, the Fusion is "basically" a 6, since Mazda shared development with Ford on the CD3 platform (or GG/GY in Mazdaspeak), and the 6 was the first to market, a full 3 years before the Fusion went on sale.
If you already own a cell phone then there is no additional charge with Sync and you're not tied to one phone or phone number.
yes you could smash the window, but then the alarm is going off and you still have to find the keys. try it and let us know how it works out. :P
Then have fun driving down the road in single digit temps with no driver's side window! :surprise:
I too use that keypad on our Explorer all the time. It's often easier to use it when your hands are tied than to dig in your pocket for the fob.
All right now, children, if you don't stop squabbling you will be sent to bed without your supper!
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-01-07-toyota-ford-midsize-hybrid_N.htm
Man, I would move if I got tied up that often.
Where have you been? The Mazda6 has been around since 2002 as a MY2003. BTW, Ford used Mazda's GG/GY platform to develop the Fusion/Milan and Ford saved $10 billion by doing so (something I learned at my recent tour of the Mazda6 factory in Flat Rock, MI).
Now that Mazda6 is all new for 2009, and the Fusion went under the knife, they are hardly similar, with the exception of a basic platform and a Mazda designed 2.5L power plant. Calling them "basically the same" is such a total lie in regards to their current form. The 06-09 Fusion was almost a rebadged 03-08 Mazda6. Ford used the award winning Mazda6 architecture to get back into the mid-sized segment after the demise of the Taurus. 5 minutes of web surfing would have told you that.
Saying CX-9 has it means nothing since we are specifically discussing the mainstream midsize class
Means everything. Ford was not innovative by using a blind spot monitor detection system, Mazda has it in their Mazda6, and has utilized that technology for over a year now.
Surfing the Internet reading about the Fusion/Mazda6 relationship. The Mazda6 was significantly smaller than a typical midsize, so I'm not sure it really counts as a midsize (same with the Subie Legacy, come to think of it). Ford took that gen Mazda6 and heavily revised the platform, including lengthening and widening it, to make the Ford Fusion (also added AWD, which was not available on the 6). Mazda in turn used THAT platform to make the NA market Mazda6 with Mazda-tuned suspension and tranny (and probably steering rack but I'm not sure). Still can't get AWD or Sync on the 6 though, which kinda sucks, but what can one do?
It's not blatant badge-engineering like Cobalt/G5 (or Fusion/Milan, come to think of it) but there's definitely a very close relationship between the two vehicles.
Personally, I'd prefer to see the pistols at noon
The 1st-gen 6 counts as a midsize in this forum, and about 99% of all other automotive publications, as well as the EPA classification system.
It's a midsize. Always has been, probably always will be.
Not to get nit picky, but, that's not true. Again, I visited Auto Alliance International in Flat Rock, MI, and had an extensive lesson about the Mazda6 and learned some valuable information from people on the Mazda6 project and engineer insight.
there's definitely a very close relationship between the two vehicles.
They are more like third cousins now.
CD3 is what Ford renamed it in reference to their "global" identity. I learned that the platform was not jointly developed, but, rather developed by Mazda alone. Ford was allowed to just use it and modify it. Ford essentially modified a complete Mazda6 and gave the world the Fusion. This saved Ford $10 billion. Yes, $10 billion. Since Ford uses this platform in several vehicles, Ford made out very well.
The 06-09 Fusion and 03-08 Mazda6 were so very very close. The power plants were identical and transmissions were different. In fact, the dash board architecture were identical. HVAC vents were in the same place. The top center of the dash was a storage compartment. If you were to open up the hood of both I4 and V6 models, you could not tell the difference between the two. Everything was in the same exact place. Where the differences came in were suspension components, steering system, braking system and enhanced frame rigidity points. The Mazda was tuned for performance and the Fusion was tuned for a more forgiving ride.
What we see now with the 2010 Fusion and 2009 Mazda6 is that they have grown apart. The Mazda6 went the route of improving their award winning vehicle by loading it with technology (keyless ignition, BSMS, Bluetooth phone and audio, Xenon HID lights etc...), larger in size, competitive with fuel economy and still be the best mannered on the road.
The Fusion has really grown into it's own and really separated it's self from the Mazda. We see it has a more aggressive and sporty design. It offers Sync and other updated technology. It offers 6-speed trannys in every model (which helps it's FE). Interior layout is nothing like the Mazda6 anymore. And Ford added a wonderful Hybrid engine and updated 3.0L (it's about time, too!!)
As far as I know, the Mazda designed 2.5L and Ford designed V6 (3.5L for Ford and the Mazda built and tuned 3.7L) and the basic platform (which is not a big part of the car), there is not much of a similarity anymore. I'm sure there are some parts that they use the same supplier for, like various electrical components etc...
We all know that Ford is a little late to the party, however, they are here and they are offering one hell of a car. It's irrevelant how long they took to get here. They are here, and lets hope they are here to stay.
then it drops down another level towards the center of the car.
makes for a good side impact area.
I guess at Ford Fuel Economy is now Job 1!
http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=29670
And here are the tops of the class:
Tops of the class:
2010 Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan 6-spd auto - 23/34
2009 Chevy Malibu/Pontiac G6/Saturn Aura 6-spd auto - 22/33
2009 Nissan Altima 6-spd manual - 23/32
2009 Hyundai Sonata/Kia Optima 5-spd auto - 22/32
2009 Kia Optima 5-spd manual - 22/32
2009 Nissan Altima CVT - 23/31
Ironic no Toyota/Honda on that list (until you go further down).
Dunno about Honda, but they're dangerous and will attempt to top Ford.
This is also 2 mpg city and 4 mpg highway better than the Mazda6 gets from the same engine.
Technically, the Elantra and Prius (along with the Spectra) are the smallest cars in the EPA's mid-sized or "family car" class. And guess what? They (Prius and Elantra) get the highest fuel economy in the class (well, Prius for sure for hybrids and Elantra for non-hybrids in the city and maybe overall). No big surprise there--they are considerably smaller, lighter, and lower-powered than the rest of the class. Which makes the EPA results on the 2010 Fulan even more impressive.
They're dangerous because... they'll try and remain competetive? Is Honda the "bad guy" to you? Maybe not, but your wording makes it sound that way.
The Fusion/Milan being undersized is not the point. The point is, it is smaller, so it should get better mileage than an Accord or 6. If you are giving up interior space, shouldn't you be rewarded, with better mileage?