iuswingman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) i need 4 seats for my family. 0-60, midrange are not important at all, top end is whats important. almost all cars have enough passing power at low/medium speeds. its the high speed passing power that is most coveted. because having to pass people that are going 90 mph or so is so common these days Might need extra safety precautions for the kids in the back lol feelin the g's Edited January 12, 2012 by iuswingman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 its the high speed passing power that is most coveted. by idiots that like to put everyone around them in danger by using excessive speed. I know, speed doesn't kill, but those speeds are excessive on American highways, I don't care who you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) not sure why you guys keep defending ford instead of pushing them to deliver a more compelling product. I would like to see the Fusion to be a class leading product, but its not when it offers 237hp compared to the 26x-27x of its competitors. You can ask just about anyone around here and they'll tell you that I'm not the guy who is going to sit around and "defend Ford" but i have to tell you that you couldn't be more wrong on this issue. This whole conversation is laughable in fact. I really got a good laugh when you said. what the 2.0EB doesn't deliver is 100-120 mph passing power, which I find much more important. No one floors their car at stoplights, but everyone needs passing power. LMAO!!! No one floors their cars at stoplights? Really? Maybe on planet "Clueless", but this is America pal and half to three quarters of the morons out there are flooring their cars out of the light. There is nothing more ridiculous than some soccer mom in here minivan who is determined to be in front of everyone in traffic and yet it happens every day. This comment that passing power in the 100 to 120 mph range is more important sounds like something that a 16 year old kid who just started driving last week and doesn't have a clue about the real world would say. No its not more important and yes your comment is 180 degrees out of phase with what actually happens out there on the roads. Not that any of this matters because we are talking about a Ford Fusion and a Toyota Camry here. These are mid-size sedans that are designed and priced for your average middle class family to safely carry the kids to school and bring home the groceries. They are not high performance cars and they were never intended to be. Ford actually does know what it's doing in this case believe it or not. 100 to 120 mph passing power. :hysterical: oh man that was rich, especially given that the car is limited at 112 mph. Edited January 12, 2012 by BlackHorse 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Are you guys smelling that? I'm not sure what it is but something sure reeks of troll sh*t..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Are you guys smelling that? I'm not sure what it is but something sure reeks of troll sh*t..... ( shhhhhhhhhh tom, i think we all know that, but dont spoil the fun.......) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 your awd 2.0 fusion will have a > 200 lb disadvantage and have more than 30 less hp. not sure why you think it will win. the only courses where the fusion will be ahead are autocrosses A 2013 Fusion with I4 engine weighs in at 3,400 pounds curb weight. What does a heavier engined Camry V6 weigh? I dare say more, not less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 A 2013 Fusion with I4 engine weighs in at 3,400 pounds curb weight. What does a heavier engined Camry V6 weigh? I dare say more, not less. 2012 Toyota Camry Specs accoring to Toyota: BASE PRICE $22,500-$27,400 VEHICLE LAYOUT Front-engine, FWD, 5-pass, 4-door sedan ENGINES 2.5L/178-hp/173-lb-ft DOHC 16-valve I-4; 3.5L/268-hp/248-lb-ft DOHC 24-valve V-6; 2.5L/156-hp/156-lb-ft DOHC 16-valve I-4 plus 141-hp/199 lb-ft electric motor, 200 hp comb TRANSMISSION 6-speed auto or cont variable auto CURB WEIGHT 3200-3450 lb (mfr) WHEELBASE 109.3 in LENGTH X WIDTH X HEIGHT 189.2 x 71.7 x 57.9 in 0-60 MPH 6.0-8.4 sec (MT est) EPA CITY/HWY FUEL ECON 21-43/30-39 mpg (est) ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 78-160 / 86-112 kW-hrs/100 mi (est) CO2 EMISSIONS 0.47-0.80 lb/mi (est) ON SALE IN U.S. Currently So I assume the 2012 Camry V6 weighs 3,450 pounds, about the same to a little more than 2013 Fusion. The EB 2.0 also has 22 more pounds of torque than Camry V6. Looks to me like straight line match up would be mighty close if you want to look silly and race a mid sized family car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 170 KPH is 105 mph which is 35 mph above the fastest posted interstate speed limit I agree with your over-all point, but some of the turnpikes in Oklahoma (including most of I-44 from MO to TX) have 75mph speed limits, and there are highways in Texas with 80mph speed limits...which really isn't fast enough, given how far apart things are out there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 the top speed of mondeo EcoBoost Mondeo is 154 MPH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) if you have a family of four and are passing cars at 100-125 you sir are an irresponsible moron.......when the kids reached 3 was it Disneyland or bungee jumping?... Tommy: You're drivin' along, {passing cars at 100+ mph} la-de-da, woo. All of a sudden there's a truck tire in the middle of the road. And you hit the brakes. EEEEEEEEE! Whoa, that was close. Ha-ha. Now let's see what happens when you're driving with the "other guy's" brake pads. You're drivin' along, you're drivin' along, the kids start shouting from the back seat, "I gotta go to the bathroom, Daddy!" "Not now, damn it!" Truck tire. EEEEEEEE! I CAN'T STOP! [slams model car into lighter] Tommy: There's a cliff! AAAAAHH! And your family's screaming, [sets car on fire] Tommy: "Oh my God, we're burning alive!" "No! I can't feel my legs!" Here comes the meat wagon. [imitates siren] Tommy: And the medic gets out and says, "Oh my God". New guy's around the corner puking his guts out. [imitates retching] Tommy: All because you want to {pass cars at 100+ mph}. And to me, it doesn't... Edited January 13, 2012 by Mark B. Morrow 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Nice angle: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 So I assume the 2012 Camry V6 weighs 3,450 pounds, about the same to a little more than 2013 Fusion. The EB 2.0 also has 22 more pounds of torque than Camry V6. Looks to me like straight line match up would be mighty close if you want to look silly and race a mid sized family car. More torque that's available at a lower RPM and remains flat through most of power band and it's putting it down through four wheels. Not to mention that the Fusion has better weight distribution with less weight over the front wheels. More torque + better traction + better weight distribution = Camry in the rear view mirror Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 More torque + better traction + better weight distribution = Camry in the rear view mirror + couple of corners = very small Camry in the rear view mirror Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) more torque at higher rpm is better. more torque is required to maintain the same rate of acceleration at higher speeds. it feels much much better to be pulling hard at 6k rpm rather than 3k rpm. The EB torque curve is very flat. That means it's make 250 ft/lb all while your V6 is winding up and is still making it once the V6 peaks. Camry loses. Every. Time. Give it up. Edited January 13, 2012 by TomServo92 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 more torque at higher rpm is better. more torque is required to maintain the same rate of acceleration at higher speeds. it feels much much better to be pulling hard at 6k rpm rather than 3k rpm. There isn't a Volvo sedan made that is "pulling hard" at 6000 rpm. Even the S80 red lines at 7000. Why don't you just admit that your whole argument is full of crap and let these guys get on with their day? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 more torque at higher rpm is better. more torque is required to maintain the same rate of acceleration at higher speeds. it feels much much better to be pulling hard at 6k rpm rather than 3k rpm. you misunderstand what torque Is, torque does not accelerate, Horsepower acelerates things. that said. according to Toyota the Camry Tops out at 3516 lbs. not 3450. the gearing of the Camry is more conservative than the new Fusion 1st -6th to1 Toyota 12.05 7 5.23 3.685 2.63 2.24 Ford 14.7 9.5 6.13 4.65 3.21 2.41 the gearing for the AWD Fusion is even more aggressive but heavier. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) Just looked something up. The Volvo S60 2.0T is not listed at anything more than 203 HP. Scroll all the way down to see. Therefore, there can be no judgments made on the Fusion 2.0EB based on the S60 2.0T. They're not similarly performing at all. Edited January 13, 2012 by papilgee4evaeva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 duratec 30 and 35 pull hard at 6k rpm. why regress? No they don't. I'm done with my contributions to this little conversation. I am starting to wonder how old shabby really is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Nice angle: This is the look our Falcon needs..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 duratec 30 and 35 pull hard at 6k rpm. why regress? I know for a fact the 3L doesn't pull hard at 6K rpm...more like it start to fall on its face then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) there is the 2.0T, and the T5, they are different tunes of the same engine. I was driving the 240ps T5. Um, no. A T5 is a turbocharged I5. The 2.0T was an inline-4. EDIT: you probably drove the European or Malaysian version. Weird that they still call it a T5... Edited January 13, 2012 by papilgee4evaeva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 duratec 30 and 35 pull hard at 6k rpm. why regress? The D37 in my Edge doesn't pull for crap at 6000 RPM. Nor should I ever need it to. :shrug: Your argument is hilariously flawed every which way you slice it. Move on or we'll move on for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) New Fusion versus Taurus versus Falcon, how close can you get: .Apart from 2" more hip and shoulder room Falcon is almost identical. Do we really need three cars this size? Fusion: First row headroom 39.2 First row legroom, maximum 44.3 First row shoulder room 57.8 First row hip room 55.0 Second row headroom 37.8 Second row legroom 38.3 Second row shoulder room 56.9 Second row hip room 54.4 Taurus: First row headroom 39.0 First row legroom, maximum 41.9 First row shoulder room 57.9 First row hip room 56.3 Second row headroom 37.8 Second row legroom 38.3 Second row shoulder room 57.8 Second row hip room 55.8 Falcon: First row headroom 39.8 First row legroom, maximum 42.4 First row shoulder room 59.9 First row hip room 58.5 Second row headroom 38.9 Second row legroom 38.9 Second row shoulder room 59.7 Second row hip room 58.0 Edited January 13, 2012 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 duratec 30 and 35 pull hard at 6k rpm. why regress? Huh! I've owned a 3.0 DOHC 24 valver since 2002 and to say any vehicle short of F1 pulls hard from 6,000RPM is an exaggeration. You need to buy a Ferrari. My Boxster hits full power at 6,500 RPM, but to say it "pulls" hard from 6,000 RPM is way off mark. Better description would be it's at the end of its rope in that range and time to shift to higher gear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Dude, he's been suspended because he's a troll. No point in responding to him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.