The Fusion Still Needs a Better Optional Engine.

[RichardJensen]

well, it is a little confusing

 

No more so than the "best in class towing and best in class fuel economy" style ads that have been airing for years.

[ehaase]

I am not concerned about the Fusion getting higher power engines. I wish the 2.5L had fuel economy more competitive with that of the Altima, Accord, and Camry base engines.

[Hydro]

I've posted this before, but it just solidifies that the Fusion is lacking in the engine dept. The star of the show is the Accord in both engine segments. Sad when it'll tag you for a full second to 60mph and get 4 mpg better with regular driving.

 

 

Model Engine 0-60 mph EPA mpg CR mpg

Ford Fusion 1.6L Turbo 4 8.9 28 25

Hyundai Sonata 2.4L Four 8.2 26 27

Kia Optima 2.4L Four 8.6 27 25

Toyota Camry 2.4L Four 8.4 28 27

Honda Accord 2.4L Four 7.7 30 30

Nissan Altima 2.5L Four 8.2 27 31

Ford Fusion 2.0L Turbo 4 7.4 26 22

Hyundai Sonata 2.0L Turbo 4 6.6 26 25

Kia Optima 2.0L Turbo 4 6.6 26 24

Toyota Camry 3.5L V6 6.4 25 26

Honda Accord 3.5L V6 6.3 25 26

Nissan Altima 3.5L V6 6.3 23 24

Edited November 6, 2014 by Hydro

[fuzzymoomoo]

Why are people so fascinated with 0-60 times? It really doesn't mean much in real world situations.

[Hydro]

Why are people so fascinated with 0-60 times? It really doesn't mean much in real world situations.

To me it does. I enjoy spirited driving. I love a good ol stop light race, not to 100 mph but run to 60 and shut it down. Plus, why wouldn't you want a quicker car to 60 mph? It makes freeway merging easier and safer..... also, lets not forget the other cars go faster to 60 AND achieve better mpg. Just giving my facts and opinion to this thread ...

"The Fusion Still Needs a Better Optional Engine"

Edited November 6, 2014 by Hydro

[fordmantpw]

To me it does. I enjoy spirited driving. I love a good ol stop light race, not to 100 mph but run to 60 and shut it down. Plus, why wouldn't you want a quicker car to 60 mph. Makes freeway merging easier and safer..... also, lets not forget the other cars go faster to 60 AND achieve better mpg.

 

That explains why your fuel economy sucks!

 

But really, on the street, are you going to notice that extra 1 sec going to 60? I know I wouldn't. Hell, I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've had my foot to the floor in my 22 years of driving. I have no trouble merging on the freeway, even with my fifth wheel behind, foot nowhere near the floor.

 

Not to mention, I routinely average at or above EPA numbers, so I would probably get better fuel economy in the Fusion than the Accord. But I still have that power if I want to have fun.

[2b2]

I've posted this before, but it just solidifies that the Fusion is lacking in the engine dept. The star of the show is the Accord in both engine segments. Sad when it'll tag you for a full second to 60mph and get 4 mpg better with regular driving.

 

Model Engine 0-60 mph EPA mpg CR mpg

Ford Fusion 1.6L Turbo 4 8.9 28 25

Hyundai Sonata 2.4L Four 8.2 26 27

Kia Optima 2.4L Four 8.6 27 25

Toyota Camry 2.4L Four 8.4 28 27

Honda Accord 2.4L Four 7.7 30 30

Nissan Altima 2.5L Four 8.2 27 31

Ford Fusion 2.0L Turbo 4 7.4 26 22

Hyundai Sonata 2.0L Turbo 4 6.6 26 25

Kia Optima 2.0L Turbo 4 6.6 26 24

Toyota Camry 3.5L V6 6.4 25 26

Honda Accord 3.5L V6 6.3 25 26

Nissan Altima 3.5L V6 6.3 23 24

TY, Hydro!

that 2.4 Accord makes me wonder what a non-EB 2.3 could do?

we haven't heard ANYthing about one, have we?

[Dave-S]

I have to feel comfortable a car has adequate power when you need it and my 1.5L Turbo does that for me. So far I am averaging (combined) 28.7 mpg as well so I guess you can say I like my engine. My previous car was a 2012 Sonata with the standard engine rated at a higher HP than the 1.5L engine. Still, the 1.5L feels a tad quicker based on the "butt-o-meter".and the Fusion gets better MPG to boot.

[Hydro]

 

That explains why your fuel economy sucks!

 

But really, on the street, are you going to notice that extra 1 sec going to 60?

I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've had my foot to the floor in my 22 years of driving.

 

You'll notice 1 second if you're either 3 cars lengths ahead or behind

Holy hell, man. I think I've almost floored my truck more times today getting to work than I can count on one hand. Once to merge on the freeway, once to pass, once to get ahead of a big rig on the offramp (don't worry I passed with plenty of space) and finally to make sure I stayed ahead of a late 2000's chevy who seemed to like my bumper .

 

 

ps, my fuel mileage sucks ass babying my vehicles. I've done a whole tank hypermiling and driving like an egg under the pedal and it got me maybe .8 mpg more (13.2 mpg vs. 14mpg combined driving). So I figure why not use the power and have some fun. I'm not mad at Ford for their EB. It's awesome power in the f150, but they dropped the ball IMO on the Fusion and Mustang. I just saw a Motor trend report on the 15' Mustang EB and a VW GTI owns it all around....sad.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Hydro

[RichardJensen]

 

I just saw a Motor trend report on the 15' Mustang EB and a VW GTI owns it all around....sad.

 

If you want proof of just how stupid MT is, there you go.

[97svtgoin05gt]

The GTI is a smaller car and lighter as well. This is the first iteration of the EB Mustang, the GTI by contrast has been tweaked for years.

[aneekr]

I've posted this before, but it just solidifies that the Fusion is lacking in the engine dept. The star of the show is the Accord in both engine segments. Sad when it'll tag you for a full second to 60mph and get 4 mpg better with regular driving.

 

 

Model Engine 0-60 mph EPA mpg CR mpg

Ford Fusion 1.6L Turbo 4 8.9 28 25

Hyundai Sonata 2.4L Four 8.2 26 27

Kia Optima 2.4L Four 8.6 27 25

Toyota Camry 2.4L Four 8.4 28 27

Honda Accord 2.4L Four 7.7 30 30

Nissan Altima 2.5L Four 8.2 27 31

Ford Fusion 2.0L Turbo 4 7.4 26 22

Hyundai Sonata 2.0L Turbo 4 6.6 26 25

Kia Optima 2.0L Turbo 4 6.6 26 24

Toyota Camry 3.5L V6 6.4 25 26

Honda Accord 3.5L V6 6.3 25 26

Nissan Altima 3.5L V6 6.3 23 24

 

Thanks, Hydro. Yup, the Accord is the gold standard in this segment. Both engines in non-hybrid Accords are amazing. Mazda6 also offers an enviable combination of real world performance and fuel economy:

 

Model Engine 0-60 mph EPA mpg CR mpg

Mazda 6 2.5L four 7.5s 30 32

 

Another worthy contender for those who aren't that fascinated with 0-60 times but would like all wheel drive is the updated Subaru Legacy:

 

Model Engine 0-60 mph EPA mpg CR mpg

Subaru Legacy 2.5i Premium 2.5L four 10.2s 30 26

[Deanh]

 

You'll notice 1 second if you're either 3 cars lengths ahead or behind

Holy hell, man. I think I've almost floored my truck more times today getting to work than I can count on one hand. Once to merge on the freeway, once to pass, once to get ahead of a big rig on the offramp (don't worry I passed with plenty of space) and finally to make sure I stayed ahead of a late 2000's chevy who seemed to like my bumper .

 

 

ps, my fuel mileage sucks ass babying my vehicles. I've done a whole tank hypermiling and driving like an egg under the pedal and it got me maybe .8 mpg more (13.2 mpg vs. 14mpg combined driving). So I figure why not use the power and have some fun. I'm not mad at Ford for their EB. It's awesome power in the f150, but they dropped the ball IMO on the Fusion and Mustang. I just saw a Motor trend report on the 15' Mustang EB and a VW GTI owns it all around....sad.

Hydro....I havent seen the test, but theres 3 axles avail for the eco Mustang...and believe me, the difference is night and day....also, the eco mustang in its mainstream iteration is a good performing daily driver, in which case you should probably compare it to the mainstream Golf...if Mustang gets a SVO eco, then the comparison would be somewhat more valid...

[silvrsvt]

Its not like a Ecoboost Mustang can get into the mid-12's (if not faster with some additional tuning) with a just a $800 buck tune also...I'd like to see GTI do that.

 

As for MPG estimates...lets see my SHO is rated at 17/25 and I avg about 20 MPG driving to and from work and I can get 22-25 in long distance highway driving. I have a tune on it that makes it a high 12 second card....and I'm not afraid to get on it either...so I'm impressed with the mileage I'm getting.

 

But like they say...your mileage my vary....

[papilgee4evaeva]

But really, on the street, are you going to notice that extra 1 sec going to 60?

 

I vote "yes." My wife's car is faster to 60 than mine, and it's easily noticeable.

 

I blame the transmissions though. Mine is laggy.

[akirby]

If 0-60 is that important then why do the vast majority purchase the base engine instead of the faster v6?

[aneekr]

If 0-60 is that important then why do the vast majority purchase the base engine instead of the faster v6?

 

Higher initial cost and greater fuel consumption for optional engines are commonly cited as reasons. This makes the Fusion's 1.5L Ecoboost engine option a real head scratcher. It costs nearly $800 more than the base 2.5L four that's standard on the SE grade Fusion. Yet its combination of performance and fuel economy is truly subpar - even worse than the 1.6L unit. Here are the results for Fusion SE 1.5L Ecoboost:

 

Model Engine 0-60 mph EPA mpg CR mpg

Ford Fusion SE 1.5L turbo four 9.2s 28mpg 24mpg

Edited November 6, 2014 by aneekr

[NLPRacing]

I've been driving a 2014 Fusion with the 2.0L EcoBoost for a few weeks now and feels pretty damn quick to me, but so did my 2013 Escape with the same engine. I've driven the last gen V6 Fusion, V6 Escape and V6 Sonata and I'll take the off idle torque of the 2.0L EB for a daily driver over a high revving V6 any day. Plus, I've been averaging over 22 mpg in what is 99% "city" driving and I'm a bit of a lead foot. I am curious what it would in the 1/4, I may have to take it to the track soon.

[RichardJensen]

 

Yet its combination of performance and fuel economy is truly subpar

 

According to CR's *incredibly* simplistic highway test which consists of steady state cruising at 65MPH, a test which is relevant only if you live in the country:

 

Highway mpg is measured by driving on a particular stretch of sparsely used freeway near our test track at a steady pace of 65 mph.

 

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2013/08/the-mpg-gap/index.htm

[aneekr]

 

According to CR's *incredibly* simplistic highway test which consists of steady state cruising at 65MPH, a test which is relevant only if you live in the country:

 

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2013/08/the-mpg-gap/index.htm

 

The 24 mpg figure is overall fuel economy, not highway. The Fusion 1.5L Ecoboost achieved 34 mpg in the highway test. Both are worst in class.

Edited November 6, 2014 by aneekr

[Biker16]

The Transmission used by the Fusion doesn't help.

 

When going up against Cars with CVTs, the old 6F doesn't seem competitive. I'd like to see the Wet DCT used on the Fusion and Escape.

[aneekr]

The Transmission used by the Fusion doesn't help.

 

When going up against Cars with CVTs, the old 6F doesn't seem competitive. I'd like to see the Wet DCT used on the Fusion and Escape.

 

+1

Ford's 6F35 wasn't all that competitive back in 2009 when it was introduced on the model year 2010 Fusion.

 

Has the wet clutch Powershift transmission suffered from reliability issues like the dry clutch version has?

[papilgee4evaeva]

 

+1

Ford's 6F35 wasn't all that competitive back in 2009 when it was introduced on the model year 2010 Fusion.

 

Has the wet clutch Powershift transmission suffered from reliability issues like the dry clutch version has?

 

I read that in Europe they decided not to put the dry clutch unit in the refreshed Focus since it didn't pair as well with the heavier car as it did with the Fiesta.

 

Google doesn't show any problems with the wet clutch though. I always thought they should have used that version here.

[fordmantpw]

 

I vote "yes." My wife's car is faster to 60 than mine, and it's easily noticeable.

 

I blame the transmissions though. Mine is laggy.

 

If you are comparing the Maxima to the Rainier in your signature, then yeah, I could believe that.

 

But we are talking the difference between 6.4 and 7.4 seconds to 60. You aren't going to regularly notice that unless your foot is planted firmly on the floor.

 

And maybe yours is, like Hydro's.

[papilgee4evaeva]

 

If you are comparing the Maxima to the Rainier in your signature, then yeah, I could believe that.

 

But we are talking the difference between 6.4 and 7.4 seconds to 60. You aren't going to regularly notice that unless your foot is planted firmly on the floor.

 

And maybe yours is, like Hydro's.

 

95% of my driving is city driving during the academic year. I wish I could floor it more often, but I can't. Too many traffic lights and wayward undergrads.

 

But even accelerating onto the highway is noticeably slower in my truck. My wife's transmission gets to 2nd pretty quickly for a 15-year-old transmission. Mine? Well, I tried to floor it on the way home today. I'm STILL waiting for it to kick down.