akirby

All non-F150 EB 3.5L applications are AWD and that's what I meant - FWD based vehicles like Flex, Taurus, Explorer, MKS and MKT as opposed to the F150 application. Look at the torque curve - it's flat as a pancake because it's computer limited. The engine itself is easily capable of 400 lb/ft. The front clip on the D3/D4 vehicles had to be totally redesigned to handle the torque. They're maxed out. There are 2 obvious reasons the F150 version isn't higher - competition for the 5.0L NA engine and detuning for better fuel economy/low end torque/longevity towing heavy loads. Simple math tells you the 3.5L is around 100 lb/ft torque per liter while the 2.0L is at 135 lb/ft per liter. I could be dead wrong but I don't see simple mods yielding big improvements on the 2.0L ecoboost simply because the factory has already come close to maxing it out safely.

Who said you had to stop maintenance or infrastructure projects? Get alternative funding or keep it in the budget and take the cuts elsewhere. But please tell me you understand the simple concept of interest payments. Every dollar the government pays out in interest (and a significant portion of that interest goes to other countries) is a dollar that can't be spent on infrastructure projects or social programs or anything else. The more we keep increasing the debt the more we have to pay in interest. If all of the interest went to U.S. citizens then it might be ok but that's not the case.

You forgot the new tune to go along with it. And I don't consider a new turbo to be a simple mod. You also forgot the new transmission after the first one explodes.

You're forgetting that Ford purposely detuned and limits torque on the 3.5L FWD applications because the chassis and drivetrain can't take full power. Ford is maxing out performance on the 2.0L EB (within safe limits) already. When I read "easy" mods I'm thinking intake, exhaust and tunes - not adding boost. I agree adding boost will add power with the corresponding tune but I don't consider that a simple mod or safe.

I agree the Fusion hybrid is a great vehicle and since the price difference only works out to about $3K compared to the 1.6L EB then I agree you can recover the cost in about 3 years. It would take a bit longer compared to a 2.5L S or SE. That's assuming the SE hybrid has the same equipment level as the SE 1.6L. But that doesn't mean the non hybrids are "mediocre at best".

Fueleconomy.gov only had the 26 rating for some reason. So - outside of diesels and hybrids the Fusion's 27 mpg is best in class - tied with the Accord and Altima. Fordbuyer - how does this translate to "mediocre at best"?

I'd be surprised if you can get an additional 20-30 hp outside of more boost and that won't be an easy mod. Maybe 10-15 with a tune but even that may be generous. The factory is already squeezing max potential out of these vehicles before they arrive at the dealer.

This is what I expected and if executed correctly should be a good addition to the Lincoln lineup. I think the EB V8 is needed for more differentation from the Expy.

So let's say your monthly take home pay is $5000. You have a $400K mortgage, 2 car loans for $50K total plus credit card debts of $50K. You're monthly payments are $6500 and $4K of it is interest. Would you go out and buy a new house just because mortgage rates are at an all time low? That's exactly the situation with the national budget. How can we possibly afford to KEEP increasing the debt when we can't pay for the debt we already have?

The 2013 Accord is 26/35. The Altima gets 27 with the CVT.

Are you saying you don't take every possible legal advantage to reduce your tax liability? If not then you're not too smart. And if I'm not mistaken - a lot of this money comes from overseas in the first place so why should they be obligated to bring the money back to the U.S. just so it can be taxed? Would you advocate for Toyota to send all of the money it earns in the U.S. back to Japan? I didn't think so.

The VIN doesn't tell you exactly when it will be built - it's just another step closer. And where is pretty cut and dried - Hermosillo.

That's 1 and that's actually a mild hybrid. Any others? Buehler? Buehler?

Unless the monthly rags got a preview test a couple of months ago I find that hard to believe. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

Why don't people liberals understand this?

I wouldn't bet on it. They'll probably embargo all the reviews to give the monthly rags time to get their articles in print. What you might see are "first drive impressions" with no real facts or details, which I guess is better than nothing.

I keep asking liberals to explain HOW (exactly) that taking money away from the super-rich translates to more money for the rest of us. Let's be specific - how would you take money away from Bill Gates and how would you give it to others and increase their incomes? How? I want to know. If you can't explain even a simple example then that theory is worthless. And let's say that Wal-Mart decides to give all their employees raises and better benefits. Guess what happens then? Target suddenly has a huge cost advantage and can undercut Wal-Mart's prices. Because - let's be honest - consumers want the absolute lowest cost products and they don't care about the company selling them. If that weren't true then Wal-Mart wouldn't be #1. So now Wal-Mart starts to lose sales and profits. They have to start closing stores and laying off people. You may not like that answer but that's reality and that's how it works in the real world. The market sets the price of goods and labor and unless you own every source of something then you can't artificially increase the price. If you own all of the watermelons and every store has to buy from you then you can set the price at $10.00. But if you're one of 100 watermelon suppliers and try to set your price at $10.00 you won't sell a single one because one of the other 100 will undercut your price until you get to the minimum price that the market can support. You also can't tax a business. A business tax is a consumer tax because it becomes an overhead cost for the business and all overhead costs get passed on to the consumers and are the same for all competitors. Trying to tax your way to economic growth is like trying to lift yourself off the floor by pulling on your bootstraps. So I'll ask again - if I'm a plumber or a mortgage broker or a Starbucks barrista - how is my salary going to go up if we limit the amount of money that Bill Gates can have?

I LOVE Judge Judy! "Um is not an answer!"

Where? I posted the EPA section of a new vehicle sticker above and it has the city and highway in bold with the combined in small print in the center. It's not Ford - it's EVERYBODY. If Ford only advertised combined mileage then the other mfrs would advertise their highway mileage and Ford would look way worse. All the consumers hear is the number (that new Cruze gets 40 mpg but the Focus only gets 33). Unless you get advertising laws changed so that everybody uses the same number it's not viable. Medoicre? The 1.6L auto start/stop gets 26/37. I believe that is best in class for a midisized sedan. Can you find another midsized sedan that gets 26 city? Also - go compare the 5 year costs of the 1.6L auto/start stop SE with the SE Hybrid including the cost of the vehicle and the cost of the fuel for each. I haven't done it but I'm guessing the 1.6L is still cheaper after 5 years due to the lower initial vehicle cost. You can't say it's the "best way to go for the money" unless you include the cost of the vehicle itself.

No - we just think that a company that is now making billions of dollars in profit should actually use some of those profits to pay US back for the money WE loaned them that allowed them to stay in business and make billions in profit. If your neighbor was having a hard time and you gave them $1K to help make ends meet, then 12 months later they're buying new cars and putting in a backyard pool - wouldn't you be a little miffed that they didn't pay you back the $1K? They should have gotten low interest loans that they had to pay back in full. Period. The old GM shareholders got screwed and so did the taxpayers.

Why aren't you buying a Volt? According to you it's way better than any other hybrid or electric vehicle.

Unless you're already President, apparently......

All true but that doesn't make it any less concerning that we're having multiple serious issues on a new launch of an important vehicle. It indicates either larger process issues or bad suppliers - or both.

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they're stuck in a sexless marriage and are only staying together for the sake of the kids or they're just not in love any more. By itself it just doesn't mean much to me regarding someone's leadership abilities.

I don't like the new Mazda noses at all.