Karl on Cars

The manual transmission isn't available with the V6, which sucks, and I might consider a Fusion otherwise. Honda pulled this same stunt with the Accord sedan with the new 08 model. Makes me feel like I'm the only person who likes to drive a car and needs four doors. Certainly doesn't say much for how much Americans "love" their cars. Sure the weight of the V6 hurts handling, but 160 hp on a 3200 lb car won't wake me up on Monday mornings, even with a stick.

Karl, just to clarify things: is your test car a V6 with a manual? If so, I'd forgive the power deficit and buy a Fusion if I were on the market for a mid-sized car........it'd probably be hard to find but I'd special-order it and wait!

It was a four-cylinder with a manual. As bepperb said, no manual and V6 is offered (lame...but understandable considering the low take rate for manuals in this country).

Oh! :-(
 
Bepperb, you're certainly not the only one! I was so disappointed Honda omitted the manual from their V6 Accord sedan. I bet they'll introduce a V6 manual later in the Accord's life cycle just like they did for the previous model.
 
Nissan offer a V6 manual for the Altima but it's a stripper........what's annoying is that the moment you start choosing more features they tell you the features come in a package that is only available with an automatic! [Ironicallly, it might be a blessing in disguise because Nissan supposedly have terrible manual transmissions.]
 
Only Mazda offer a V6 manual mid-sized sedan that can be optioned to the same extent as the automatics. Let's hope Mazda continues this practice.

That's a very nice looking picture up there, I especially dig the rims.
 
Maybe you could post a shot of the interior as well?
 
As far as horsepower I think whatever the Fusion makes up in horsepower it makes up in handling style. 221hp isnt bad, the Fusion is only about a half second off the pace of the Accord and Camry.

The powertrain & radio were the two items that kept me from considering a Fusion.

Do all the Ford cars edmunds test have bland and unflatering colors...but its nice to know that the Fusion can still hold its own against the new, updated, and more powerful compition

I'm really curious about how the revised Sonata with Sport package will do. Apparently they beefed up the suspension, a first in Hyundai options. Not to mention the interior looks hella nice, very Veracruz-like.
 
Only thing the Fusion should really have is projection lenses, it would just make it much hotter. Hell, xenons as an option would look very upscale.

I have always disliked the "sport" package for cars. Generally there is no additional sportiness. I've always associated these kinds of packages to be desperate measures to fool secretaries and shampoo girls into spending a few more bucks for a lame car that's reached the end of its shelf life. Sport stickers were common on crappy little Toyota Tercels and Ford Contours. It's a dated practice. The Fusion is a smart looking car that sells well. Ford should have hired a really expensive branding company to come up with a better term. Something super genius like the "roadtrip" package. Because, personally, if I were to suggest that I drive a Fusion "sport" sedan, I'd feel awkward as if I said I was wearing a Rolex that I bought in Chinatown.
 
I will say though, that these wheels do make a good looking car look even better.

Powertrain sucks and center stack also. And interior in general even though good quality is somehow designed to give cheap expression.
 
Sonata made a nice upgrade of interior - it is time for Ford to do the same. But still my opinion is that Ford is for masses. If you want sportiness - consider Mazda6. BTW new Mazda6 is based on Ford Fusion platform and similar in size but I can assume - with much better interior and tighter suspension.

ne1butu, I think in most cases, "sport packages" are actually more about looks. In most cases, the "sport package" cars do look better than the standard version. Take the (now prev-gen) Corolla: The Corolla S looks way better than the CE and LE. The same can be said for the prev-gen Lancer: the OZ Rally looked better than the EX. In both cases, I know that the "sport" designation is about appearance, but I just can't resist the better looks of the "sport" package.....the only prev-gen Lancer or Corolla I'd consider buying are the "sport" versions.
In truth these should be called "appearance packages".
 
I think sport packages on some cars like the 3-series and Cadillac CTS actually enhance sportiness.
 
Savetheland, I agree with you on the Fusion's interior, especially the center stack. I don't think it looks cheap, but it looks outdated and inelegant. I think the Fusion's powertrain is still decent. 221 hp is really enough for a family car.

221 hp (at 6250) is a brochure advertising number. Who drives a car like this boiling at the redline? Without a stick or a manumatic, you couldn't do that even if you wanted to.
 
The important number is 205 ft-lbs peak torque at 4800 rpm. Weak and way too high.
 
Honda can get away with doing that in a family car because their engines are smooth and quiet enough that the upper midrange is usable in relaxed driving. Ford can't.

"The important number is 205 ft-lbs peak torque at 4800 rpm. Weak and way too high."
 
205lbft of torque from a 3.0 isnt bad at all, although another 5-10lbft wouldnt hurt.
 
"Honda can get away with doing that in a family car because their engines are smooth and quiet enough that the upper midrange is usable in relaxed driving. Ford can't."
 
Even though this generation of Honda V6's are over 11 years of age they are still among the best in overall refinement. On the contrary the VCM equipped models are not to my liking as they just dont have that signature Honda surge. Honda could have certainly executed the VCM technology better WITHOUT the decrease in performance.
 
The non VCM equipped Accord V6 (6MT) is simpy a beast. In reality that engine makes somewhere around 275-280 hp as that car traps in the 101-102 mph range. Keep in mind that this is a simple SOHC intake only "mild" VTEC application not some DOHC DUAL VVT direct injected piece and its still more than impressive.
 
Ive always thought Fords Duratec V6 was pretty refined especially the early 2.5L V6 they offered in the Probe and Mazda twins. It was pretty smooth and made good noises. Fords new 3.5 seems to be pretty stout too as Ive not heard anything negative about it.

"The non VCM equipped Accord V6 (6MT) is simpy a beast. In reality that engine makes somewhere around 275-280 hp as that car traps in the 101-102 mph range. Keep in mind that this is a simple SOHC intake only "mild" VTEC application not some DOHC DUAL VVT direct injected piece and its still more than impressive. "
 
Not sure about that one. Edmunds tested the Accord Coupe and it was slower than the 252hp G6 GTP coupe they tested even though the pontiac had an auto.
 
The Fusion will be updated for 2009 folks so I would expect the power issue to be corrected with a 2.5L I-4 and the 3.5L V6. The Sport model is MORE than an appearance package, it does have a sportier suspension as well. I have seen this car in person and it looks very good. I would think some of the improvements expected on the 2009 6 will be on the 2009 Fusion as well and that shold move it close to the top of the pack.

"Not sure about that one. Edmunds tested the Accord Coupe and it was slower than the 252hp G6 GTP coupe they tested even though the pontiac had an auto."
 
That's only partially true. The Accord trailed the G6 by a 10th to 60 (6.2 vs 6.3s), but the Accord was quicker through the quarter mile (14.6 @ 101.6 vs 14.8 @ 95.9).

blackadder, the problem with Duratec 3.0 (V6 in Fusion) is not hp but low torque at low rmp even though it is 24 valve DOCH VVT. It makes city driving difficult and acceleration feeling slow. I do not care about Honda smoothness - I would rather like to hear rmp without looking at tach.
 
But then again, I remember V6 3.0L in European Scorpio somehow better and smoother than similar engine in NA Fords. I don’t know the difference. May be it had additional technology to balance shafts, eliminate resonance in intake manifolds and so on. What is evident to me is that whatever sold by Ford in NA is cheaper and less tech version of what they sale worldwide.

"That's only partially true. The Accord trailed the G6 by a 10th to 60 (6.2 vs 6.3s), but the Accord was quicker through the quarter mile (14.6 @ 101.6 vs 14.8 @ 95.9)."
 
No its 100% true since I was talking about 0-60 times. Even with the 1/4 mile time being slightly faster I think the G6s performance is impressive considering its higher weight, lack of manual and power deficit. Then again the Honda engine isnt SAE rated so we dont know if its making 268hp as claimed.

That's great for Ford to make a family car that's sporty and with a stick. Hopefully it gets more people interested in driving instead of plodding. It's nice to see that sticks are being associated with sporty and not stripper as was traditionally the case.
 
It really doesn't matter if the G6 out accelerates the Accord or not. It's a terrible car that got panned in every review as having an awful chassis and is really only suited for rental fleet duty.

I have owned a sports package SE V6 (auto) for almost a month. It is identical to the one in Karl's photo with the exception of tinted windows. Bottom line - I love it. I am not true a car enthusiast, but I drive a lot. In my past, I have driven some performers owned by family (Porsche, BMW, Mercedes). To my point - there is a reason they named this car Fusion. The blend of cost, features, attractive looks, fuel efficiency, and just plain driving satisfaction are what make this car a standout. For the money, I feel I bought a hellavalot of car. Bottom line. And I can't see the big deal/difference in my satisfaction between it and the lower end models of the makes above. Pull out a gauge or timer and I'm sure the results are consistent with some of the review comments.
  
I am a true believer of form following function - or at least thoughtful design that has the end user in mind. When you "use" this car, you appreciate the thought that went into it's design for someone who wants style and more performance than the guy next to you during the daily grind, but not at the cost of an uber-euro performer. I say "use" because the Sync technology makes me feel like I'm not only driving, but something more. I am not distracted by my phone or iPod but can still enjoy them without as much risk of distraction.
  
A few random comments: the speed from my V6 auto - no complaints, only grins. All I can say is the feedback is positive, both mine and my passengers. Also, the Audiophile package is THE best sound I have heard in a vehicle, including basic Bose systems. I read one comment that said the sound was one reason they reconsidered. You have no idea what you're missing. There are 8 speakers, and it shows. Finally, I will be driving 80 and feel like I'm going 40. It's stable, tight, and there is no noticeable road noise.
  
My advice - if you're seriously considering one, test drive it overnight. I did, and was able to test ALL features including the Sync. One final word - it's a Ford. How great is that? Give them a little credit with this effort.

Something to consider as well: even though the Fusion I4 only puts out 160 hp (versus 190 on the Accord), it only puts out 6 less lb/ft of torque (156 vs 162 on the Accord). And, the Fusion's torque comes earlier (4250 vs 4400 rpms). Thus, the Fusion might not be as slow as some would think against the Accord (which is also heavier).
 
Given the 18" wheels, sportier interior, cleaner appearance, and stabilizer bars and shocks, this package is probably the best $895 you can spend on this car.
 
It's a shame more manuals for this car aren't out on the road; this is probably one of the few bright stars in the Ford model lineup at the moment.