CR Applauds Fusion Hybrid

[ANTAUS]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130123/AUTO01/301230327/1148/auto01/Consumer-Reports-applauds-Fusion-hybrid-critical-Focus-Mitsubishi-electrics

[BORG]

Interesting that it seems to be harder to get the mileage out of the C-Max than the bigger Fusion.

[aneekr]

The Detroit News headline is misleading. CR rated the Fusion Hybrid and Focus Electric highly; the i-MiEV was "far off the mark".

[akirby]

The Detroit News headline is misleading. CR rated the Fusion Hybrid and Focus Electric highly; the i-MiEV was "far off the mark".

 

They were critical of the Focus electric, even though they recommended it over the Mits.

 

But the magazine noted that the large lithium-ion battery pack consumes much of the cargo space and "can't escape some inherent deficiencies, including a cramped rear seat and frustrating MyFord Touch controls."

 

[aneekr]

Incidentally, reviews of the hybrid and non-hybrid Fusion alike will be posted in the March 2013 issue of Consumer Reports. Their assessment is in congruence with those from other professional reviewers and from potential customers: sporty handling (CR went as far as to crown the Fusion Titanium "the best handling midsize sedan it has tested"), compliant ride, and well integrated hybrid system on the positive side; negatives included underwhelming non-hybrid powertrains (especially the 1.6L Ecoboost), poorly designed MyFord Touch control layout, and the sub-par fit and finish that's not uncommon with Ford products.

 

You can read a preview here: http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130123/OEM/130129972/2013-ford-fusion-gets-mixed-review-from-consumer-reports&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Edited January 23, 2013 by aneekr

[BORG]

The interior fit & finish on my Escape has some issues, specially in the rather complicated dashtop with plenty of visibly ill-fitting parts. The car has also developed quit a few interior rattles, namely the ceiling mounted light fixture near the driver-side door (probably the buttons are rattling) which is right next to my ear. I've never taken my car in for a rattle but this one is really annoying so I will have to get it taken care of.

 

My MKX didn't develop a rattle of any kind until 2-years later, and I did have to have some interior panels (lower dashboard) corrected because they were badly misaligned when I took delivery.

Edited January 23, 2013 by BORG

[RichardJensen]

Their complaints about MFT are basically Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V at this point.

 

Every mention of it will parrot the company policy adopted in 2010.

 

It's so much easier to *write* when you don't have to *think* about what you're writing.

[twmalonehunter]

The interior fit & finish on my Escape has some issues, specially in the rather complicated dashtop with plenty of visibly ill-fitting parts. The car has also developed quit a few interior rattles, namely the ceiling mounted light fixture near the driver-side door (probably the buttons are rattling) which is right next to my ear. I've never taken my car in for a rattle but this one is really annoying so I will have to get it taken care of.

 

My MKX didn't develop a rattle of any kind until 2-years later, and I did have to have some interior panels (lower dashboard) corrected because they were badly misaligned when I took delivery.

I seriously can't believe you still buy Ford vehicles after all the problems you have. You must have the worst luck. Hell my 7 year old F150 with 35" tires and a lift barely has a rattle, and thats only because I have had the dash out numerous times for stereo upgrades. Fit and tfinish on my Focus is near perfect, you're snakebit.

[ds91776]

I sat in and did the "interior push" on every mid-size family sedan at NAIAS. The Fusion, Altima, and Passat were the clear class leaders in material quality and fit and finish...at least according to my experience. Malibu, Sonata, Optima, were the next group. The Accord, Camry and Mazda 6 were next. I was shocked at how low-rent the 6 felt. My Mom's 2006 Mazda 6 felt much nicer...especially comparing the top of the dashboard. The Legacy was kind of embarassing. I would put the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger ahead of the Legacy.

[Gigantor]

Interiors, for the most part, are fine.

 

It's the exterior fit and finish that can be pretty sub-standard specifically in the rear light alignment, trunk lid fit etc. It's most obvious in the 2009 and on Taurus, Lincoln MKX, Focus etc....the Buick Enclave suffered the same fate.

[fordmantpw]

I seriously can't believe you still buy Ford vehicles after all the problems you have. You must have the worst luck. Hell my 7 year old F150 with 35" tires and a lift barely has a rattle, and thats only because I have had the dash out numerous times for stereo upgrades. Fit and tfinish on my Focus is near perfect, you're snakebit.

 

Or you just may not be as picky as him.

 

The only squeak/rattle my F250 has is the back of my daughter's booster seat rubbing against the leather after cleaning it real well. Well, until I put the towel between the two...

[BORG]

I seriously can't believe you still buy Ford vehicles after all the problems you have. You must have the worst luck. Hell my 7 year old F150 with 35" tires and a lift barely has a rattle, and thats only because I have had the dash out numerous times for stereo upgrades. Fit and tfinish on my Focus is near perfect, you're snakebit.

Every car has its problems, but I'm not a blind evangelist that observes but doesn't report. You take the good with the bad.

 

Interiors, for the most part, are fine.

 

It's the exterior fit and finish that can be pretty sub-standard specifically in the rear light alignment, trunk lid fit etc. It's most obvious in the 2009 and on Taurus, Lincoln MKX, Focus etc....the Buick Enclave suffered the same fate.

I do have visible fit & finish issues on my 2011 MKX, especially the right rear lift-gate which is obviously misaligned with the fender (and sucken in), highlighted by the misaligned taillight. The rear spoiler is also misaligned to the roof so it's flatter than the curvature of the roof, a problem I didn't have with my previous MKX. These are problems I could have had fixed, but it's a lease so I'm not overly concerned about them, but it is something that has always bugged me about the car because it's visible evidence of QC issues. I've actually never had so many fit & finish issues with a car as I do on this one and the Escape. I did get the interior ones fixed on the MKX for the most part, but the exterior ones are less important. And in the end, with the exception of MLT, I've had no functional quality problems.

Edited January 23, 2013 by BORG

[Gigantor]

Every car has its problems, but I'm not a blind evangelist that observes but doesn't report. You take the good with the bad.

 

I do have visible fit & finish issues on my 2011 MKX, especially the right rear lift-gate which is obviously misaligned with the fender (and sucken in), highlighted by the misaligned taillight. The rear spoiler is also misaligned to the roof so it's flatter than the curvature of the roof, a problem I didn't have with my previous MKX. These are problems I could have had fixed, but it's a lease so I'm not overly concerned about them, but it is something that has always bugged me about the car because it's visible evidence of QC issues. I've actually never had so many fit & finish issues with a car as I do on this one and the Escape. I did get the interior ones fixed on the MKX for the most part, but the exterior ones are less important. And in the end, with the exception of MLT, I've had no functional quality problems.

 

The misaligned rear tail-lights and by extension the poor trunk fitting looks very bad and cheap, actually, the Mercury Milan had the same problem. It is more pronounced because of the way the rear tail lights are designed. For the Taurus you have the LED lights not matching up at night, the silver piping being 'off'...for the Focus/Old MKZ you have the lights/trunk etc looking poor. It catches your eye and isn't flattering especially given the price of the cars.

 

If prices are rising then those fit and finish issues must be taken care of and the goes triple for the luxury brand that is Lincoln.

 

But anyways, the new Fusion looks great on the road, I've heard some solid anecdotal reviews from various owners and the Car Mag reviews have been good. I'm just still not sold on the 1.6L Ecoboost or even the 2.0L as the top range engine. Wish it had an 8spd transmission to match.

[BORG]

The misaligned rear tail-lights and by extension the poor trunk fitting looks very bad and cheap, actually, the Mercury Milan had the same problem. It is more pronounced because of the way the rear tail lights are designed. For the Taurus you have the LED lights not matching up at night, the silver piping being 'off'...for the Focus/Old MKZ you have the lights/trunk etc looking poor. It catches your eye and isn't flattering especially given the price of the cars.

 

If prices are rising then those fit and finish issues must be taken care of and the goes triple for the luxury brand that is Lincoln.

 

But anyways, the new Fusion looks great on the road, I've heard some solid anecdotal reviews from various owners and the Car Mag reviews have been good. I'm just still not sold on the 1.6L Ecoboost or even the 2.0L as the top range engine. Wish it had an 8spd transmission to match.

Yep, the Milan is the best example of that problem, I haven't seen one that didn't have problems with alignment. It looks like it's a problem they couldn't correct, while the MKX misalignment seems to have largely been cured. For example, the 2012 MKX loaner I have right now looks just about perfect.

[Biker16]

Interesting that it seems to be harder to get the mileage out of the C-Max than the bigger Fusion.

Aerodynamics are better on the Fusion than on the C-Max

[MKII]

If prices are rising then those fit and finish issues must be taken care of and the goes triple for the luxury brand that is Lincoln.

I never understand this thinking. What does price of a vehicle have to do with the manufacturer not trying to do best effort building every vehicle they build.

Its OK to over look shoddy workmanship on a $20,000 vehicle versus a $40,000 vehicle?

I remember reading an article on Alan Mulally when he first started working at Ford, and he mentioned this exact issue and asked why cars such as the Focus, the accepted grade of quality was a B build quality, but for more expensive vehicles the goal was to get a grade A build quality

Either the auto manufacturer takes pride in everything it builds or it doesn't I'd say.

Edited January 23, 2013 by MKII

[Gigantor]

I never understand this thinking. What does price of a vehicle have to do with the manufacturer not trying to do best effort building every vehicle they build.

Its OK to over look shoddy workmanship on a $20,000 vehicle versus a $40,000 vehicle?

I remember reading an article on Alan Mulally when he first started working at Ford, and he mentioned this exact issue and asked why cars such as the Focus, the accepted grade of quality was a B build quality, but for more expensive vehicles the goal was to get a grade A build quality

Either the auto manufacturer takes pride in everything it builds or it doesn't I'd say.

 

I didn't mean it like that.

 

Build quality should always strive for perfection but that hasn't been the case, from what I've seen/heard, lately. If Ford wants to charge a premium for their cars because they are premium cars then their shouldn't be tail light assemblies that look like they were put together by handicapped chimpanzees. It's a marketplace acceptance thing as well as seeing the price of a car as justified.

[ZanatWork]

I'll remain leery of CR forever after so many years of them basically ignoring issues with Toyota and Honda while hating out on Detroit. Even as Toyota became a recall king, they didn't change their stance.

[NLPRacing]

I'll remain leery of CR forever after so many years of them basically ignoring issues with Toyota and Honda while hating out on Detroit. Even as Toyota became a recall king, they didn't change their stance.

For me, the final nail in the coffin was an article in CR about butter alternatives. They picked one that was 50% butter because it tasted more like butter. Well, duh.

[BrewfanGRB]

I seriously can't believe you still buy Ford vehicles after all the problems you have. You must have the worst luck....you're snakebit.

 

This presumes you're getting a full, objective and sincere telling of his experience. Frankly, based on Borg's body of posts here, it's more likely than not that these experiences are exaggerated, muddied by hyperbole or outright...inaccurate.

[aneekr]

I'll remain leery of CR forever after so many years of them basically ignoring issues with Toyota and Honda while hating out on Detroit. Even as Toyota became a recall king, they didn't change their stance.

 

Do you have specific claims in mind that support that? That seems very odd as CR has a reputation for NOT ignoring issues that other reviewers miss or de-emphasize regardless of the product manufacturer.

 

The publication suspended their "recommended" status on all Toyota vehicles affected by the initial recall for unintended acceleration back in 2010.

[akirby]

Do you have specific claims in mind that support that? That seems very odd as CR has a reputation for NOT ignoring issues that other reviewers miss or de-emphasize regardless of the product manufacturer.

 

The publication suspended their "recommended" status on all Toyota vehicles affected by the initial recall for unintended acceleration back in 2010.

 

Richard rant in 3......2........1........

[mustang_sallad]

Aerodynamics are better on the Fusion than on the C-Max

 

Exactly, also probably an excellent indication that their average speed on the highway is higher than the speeds of the highway cycle on the EPA test, as aerodynamic differences would be exacerbated at higher speeds. The EPA highway cycle peaks around 80mph, but spends most of it's time down in the low 70's, upper 60's, and also includes a bunch of slow downs such that the average speed is only 48mph. If a magazine goes and spends an hour cruising at 70+ mph, they're going to get lower than the highway rating.

 

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ojBz-HCQ8fY/SnWzPAkdgBI/AAAAAAAAAYI/ionsQ_FGdPw/s1600-h/us06dds.gif

[Bailey151]

Do you have specific claims in mind that support that? That seems very odd as CR has a reputation for NOT ignoring issues that other reviewers miss or de-emphasize regardless of the product manufacturer.

 

The publication suspended their "recommended" status on all Toyota vehicles affected by the initial recall for unintended acceleration back in 2010.

Depends on who you ask, among those who are "car folks" CR has the reputation of being a worthless rag. Nothing they say carries any weight. Samurai, Isuzu........

 

Just start with their data isn't weighted - an engine failure = an light bulb. Check the 2009+ VW TDI - overall an above average rating w/ a below average rating for the fuel system. Hint there Consumer McDuh - that's an 8 grand repair.

 

Check the history - Toyota's sludge factories = nary a word. Honda's warp-a-minute rotors = nary a word.

 

How about this article -

 

Ford’s pair of EcoBoost turbocharged four-cylinder engines fall short in both acceleration and fuel economy when compared with competitive models such as the Honda Accord, Nissan Altima, and Toyota Camry.

 

Honda = 4cyl is 185hp 24/34/28 (MT) Ford is 178 25/37/29. 6cyl vs 2.0l is 278hp 24/34/28 Ford is 240hp 22/33/26...............wow, huge difference. <sarcasm>

 

Toyota = The 4cyl is 178hp @ 6,000, 268 hp @ 6200 rpm; 248 lb.-ft. @ 4700 rpm @ 4,100, the 6cyl is 268 hp @ 6200 rpm; 248 lb.-ft. @ 4700 rpm Ford's HP is above.....BUT (& it's huge).......the torque is 185 lb.-ft.@ 2,500 and 270 lb.-ft. @ 3,000. Toyota's MPG is 25/35/28 for the 4cyl and 21/30/25.

 

I'm not even going to do Nissan, well because I can't be bothered. Where is the "falls short"? They are comparable and what is quite obvious in the case of Toyota Ford's offerings are far better in terms of driveability. Note to Consumer McDumbass - you buy HP, you drive torque. Making it down low makes the car far easier to drive, I'll pass on the "wind the piss out of it to go anywhere" ToyoHon engines thank you very much.

 

And another note to CR - where exactly is the 2.0l not smooth? Did your idjit ass think the sound it makes was the same as actual vibration? Hint goob - it's makes a growl when wound because Ford figured those who bought the engine wanted it (they were right in my case :D ). At idle it's very quiet, no small trick for a direct injection (look it up CR, might help you in the future).

 

And from a source that might have a clue, MotorTrend.................

 

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/2012-2013-midsize-sedan-comparison--battle-of-the-best-sellers.html?page=all

 

Notice the position of the Camry & Altima?

 

Pretty much always the same - CR said my wife's car (Hyundai) had a fair bit of "cabin noise"....................turns out it was tire noise - glad a professional review knows the difference. Another hint - might be important for you to learn a one can be fixed/modified (tire) and one can't (cabin).

 

My inlaws are CR-philes - they have more junk that's a fail. From a TV that died @ 2 years to a washing machine that needs constant repairs @ 18 months. Me? I'll continue to laugh at them, they are funny (like the weather - how can one be wrong 90% of the time & still be trying)

Edited January 24, 2013 by Bailey151

[RichardJensen]

CR has a reputation for NOT ignoring issues that other reviewers miss

Like oil sludge?

 

They continued to rubber stamp Toyota products while Toyota was *in court* defending a class action lawsuit covering their *extensive* knowledge of a decade long problem with oil sludge buildup.