If this car had 20-30 more hp I would consider getting one. I think it's one of the better looking cars in this class and its interior is much better than Fusion. I would say this is the 2nd best American midsize sedan after Aura, but it may go to 3rd after Malibu comes out. This is yet another Detroit car that is destined for mediocre sales because its not an import. If this car wasnt a Mercury they would be selling like hotcakes.

Karl,
 
Are you aware of any talk of Mercury putting the 3.5 L engine in from the Sable? They already have it in the MKZ, it would seem that the Milan would be the natural next candidate.
 
Personally I like the simple lines of the Milan better than the MKZ.

1487, Brett,
 
I thought I was the only who liked this car, again even better than it's platform mates. The only things I dont like are it having a six speed auto with just drive and low selectable, and the weak v6.
 
Btw the new 3.5 that ford is using, is there a reason the cars they've put it in don't seem to perform like other cars with similar specs?

I'm really not into the looks. Looks like a Buick (read old person's car) crammed into a smaller more modern frame. I prefer the Camry's round styling and definitely the Accords curves to it.
 
To be honest, it looks like one of those cars you look at 10 years down the line and say, why would ANYONE buy this car when they had so many other options... (Similar to how people think about a le sabre, or a mirage)

I like the Mercury Milan. It has good looks and sharp styling. The 3.0 Duratec is old but maybe Ford has something in the works to update the power plant. Putting the 3.5 engine will take buyers from the taurus (nee.. 500) I think. It needs something like an update version of the 3.2 SHO/YAMAHA ENGINE to get it competitive with the Asian and domestic cars.

What a waste of a potential contender to imports (Fusion and Milan both). Ford has yet to prove to us how Mercury is more than a trim level, but its own distinct brand. As Ford's platforms become internationally shared, I hope they take advantage and use the Mondeo or other European models in order to create a unique Mercury identity.

Karl,
 
Call me crazy, but I'd spend the extra $1,000 for the Milan just to get the LED taillights, and be driving the "white collar" make. This is the same reason I'd choose a G5 over a Cobalt.
 
I agree that there should be more differentiation between the two in general, but when the prices are so close why not just buy the model or brand you like better, whatever the reason is?

THere have been no plans that I know of to drop the 3.5L in the Fusion and Milan. I think Ford wants to keep the Taurus and MKZ above these two cars.
 
The 3.5L engine has not been road tested in many cars yet. C&D got poor results with an MKZ and I dont know why. In the Edge I believe they got a 7.7s 0-60 time which is good for a 4500lb vehicle. That being the case I dont see how the MKZ could get a 7.4s (approx) when it weighs 1000lbs less. I would estimate the Taurus should get to 60 in 7secs or less. One
 
itsallmuscle,
 
you have got to be one of the few who thinks the Milan is unattractive. Curves on the Accord? what accord are you talking about? The Accord looks better than the Galant and Legacy but thats about it. The Aura, 6, Milan and Altima look better.

Motor trend just had an issue with the taurus/sable at 7.6 sec(mfr est), and mkz at 7 sec. With 260 horses and similar displacement and architecture as the competitors (aura, altima, camry) these things should be faster.

1487, the Accord looks better than the Legacy? Wth?
 
I don't know about that. I will concede the Accord is a better all-around car if high performance and AWD are not needed/desired.

The Fusion / Milan aren't bad for now.....maybe they will bridge a gap to better stuff from FOMOCO in the near future. I see these cars as somewhat competitive in their segment but not winners and I don't think will be able to stay with the pack very long.
 
Where would FOMOCO be these days without Mazda and Volvo to fall back on?

"a 3.0-liter V6 with 221 horsepower that is barely adequate in this segment"
 
It is amazing that 200 plus HP is belittled in a midsize car. Just a sign of the times?
 
How much HP and speed is NEEDED in this segment? My Mazda6 has a less than 160 HP four cylinder which is more than adequate for my needs. No worries since 4cyl or 6cyl is optional.

1487, I actually find the Fusion/Milan are unattractive in the (exterior) styling department. They're not ugly, but they're simply too boxy for my liking.....they look like '90s models.
 
Moparbad, I agree. How come a 3.0 engine with 221 hp is considered "inadequate"? 170 hp is adequate and 200 hp or more is more than adequate! The fact that most buyers in this class opt for the 4-cyl models proves my point.
 
I reckon Karl was referring to the competition when he made that statement. The Accord has 240 hp, the Camry and Altima have more than 260 hp. Sure, these cars have more power than is necessary, but the fact is that power sells..........unless the Fusion/Milan have some extra qualities, most buyers would opt for the Altima, Accord and Camry if it costs about the same, although they don't need the extra power. When you look at it this way, Karl is right that 221 hp is "inadequate". I guess with the segment becoming more and more competitive, manufacturers are resorting to providing (unneeded) power!
 
I'd rather they cut the weight, maintained around 220 hp and provided better fuel economy!

The Mecrury Milan looks ok in person, but unfortunately no Milan drivers look like Jill Wagner. Would be willing to rent a Milan from Hertz.

Karl - you are wrong. Fusion has more chrome than Milan. Both cars look ing sharp but Milan looks more sophisticated. Still you definitely say it is an American car from grille.
 
Someone complained about absence of curves. I would prefer simple and elegant design to curvy Asian cars. These curvy cars will look outdated pretty soon as it happened already with Accord. Why said Accord is great design? Shame on you! It is one of the ugliest cars ever created! But I am not surprised by American tastes anymore when Camry and (American) Accord are best selling designs in USA. So called "boomer" generation has no class - how they dress, how they speak and behave, how they look (fat most of time) , and what cars they choose.

"So called "boomer" generation has no class - how they dress, how they speak and behave, how they look (fat most of time) , and what cars they choose."
 
Oh yeah, who says so? (Baby boomer and proud of it -- not fat or bald either.)

Ouch! We are discussing subjective opinions of car design at this point, aren't we? No need to cast insults at an entire generation.

Karl - You are always bitching about gas mileage. But, here you are bitching about an optional V6 in a midsize car with ONLY 221HP and no mention of gas mileage? If Merc offered a 250HP engine but it got less MPG, you'd probably ignore the HP and be bitching about the gas mileage.

rob - maybe karl didn't comment b/c in this case, the Fusion-Milan's 3.0L lags the fuel efficiency of the Altima/Camry/Accord. less power, more fuel does not a winning combination make

"Moparbad, I agree. How come a 3.0 engine with 221 hp is considered "inadequate"? 170 hp is adequate and 200 hp or more is more than adequate! The fact that most buyers in this class opt for the 4-cyl models proves my point.
  
I reckon Karl was referring to the competition when he made that statement. The Accord has 240 hp, the Camry and Altima have more than 260 hp. Sure, these cars have more power than is necessary, but the fact is that power sells..........unless the Fusion/Milan have some extra qualities, most buyers would opt for the Altima, Accord and Camry if it costs about the same, although they don't need the extra power. When you look at it this way, Karl is right that 221 hp is "inadequate". I guess with the segment becoming more and more competitive, manufacturers are resorting to providing (unneeded) power!
  
I'd rather they cut the weight, maintained around 220 hp and provided better fuel economy!"
 
I agree wholeheartedly! Although I can understand where Karl is coming from if this lack of power is not providing returns in fuel economy. Perhaps it would have been better to say that the power is inadequate given the lack of a fuel economy advantage.
 
Suby you will never talk me into buying that WRX over the 128, but I will agree with you that the Legacy is better looking than the Accord. I also like the Fusion/Milan styling, though I don't love it or anything.

Alpha - Point taken.
 
However, while the Mercury has a slight MPG and HP disadvantage, it does have a fairly signifcant price advantage (as does the Ford Fusion)!
 
2007 EPA MPG Ratings and Base MSRPs (lowest price models with both Auto and V6):
 
Ford Fusion 20/28 $21,810
Mercury Milan 20/28 $22,660
Toyota Camry 22/31 $24,160
Honda Accord 20/29 $25,795
Nissan Altima 22/28 $25,125
 
The 2008 EPA MPG ratings of the Fusion/Milan and Camry are even closer:
Mercury Milan 18/26
Toyota Camry 19/28
Honda Accord N/A
Nissan Altima N/A
 
Sources: fueleconomy.gov and kbb.com
 

"But I am not surprised by American tastes anymore when Camry and (American) Accord are best selling designs in USA."
 
I don't think these are best sellers because of their looks, or, in the case of the Camry driving dynamics. They are selling because of reliablility and quality; the domestics seem (I hope) to be rediscovering these atributes.
 
Grand Funk RailRoad fans should not question the tastes nor class of anyone or any age group.

Why does Mercury exist?
 
I guess I see the rationale for an invisible, nicely built, inoffensive compact sedan. But for a company that's driving itself to bankruptcy, cars like the Milan and whatever the Taurus clone is are a surprising waste.

Based on looks, the Milan beats the Camry . Case closed. In my opinion, the interior in the Milan is better than that of the Camry. But Ford's problem is it's fragmented resources to market the Milan properly. Rather than make a good car and use 100% of the marketing resources to make it available to the public, they rebadged one car to make it available to two brands, Ford and Mercury. So ford gets 75% of the available marketing resources and Mercury gets the rest. Toyota is applying all of their resources for the Camry to only one brand, Toyota. It's working because the Camry sells in spite of the reality that it is an absolutely awful vehicle. But every dullard seems to drive one simply by default. Toyota's more focused marketing works better.