Next Generation Fusion

[Admiral]

So, does anyone know if the next generation Fusion is under development (are you working on the project)? When is Ford going to update this already all-around good car? Is it going to stagnate like the Taurus, Ranger, E-Series, Panthers, etc.? Hopefully an all-new Fusion comes out in no more than four years, to keep it fresh and competitive with Accords and Camrys.

[silvrsvt]

I'd say 2010 for an update...4 years after its intro. Addition of a coupe.

[Swizco]

I'd say 2010 for an update...4 years after its intro. Addition of a coupe.

 

Its 2008 for the refresh, 2011 for the redesign. I've heard strange talk of a body structure using both alloy and plastic - I'll keep my ears open for details. ...Provided I still have a job.

 

Swizco

[ZanatWork]

One word: IOSIS.

[Admiral]

One word: IOSIS.

 

I like the sound of that (rather, the look of that). I wonder where that name came from. Perhaps scoliosis?

[Edgey]

Hopefully the Fusion will see frequent and aggressive updates in its future. The Fusion is in a very competitive segment and the only way to keep the factory producing is to make sure there's something fresh to attract interest.

 

We should see some minor cosmetic and mechanical upgrades in 2 years while an all-new Fusion is probably 5 years away. The 500 will probably have a much longer life-span between updates. Cosmetic updates are a given, but I doubt we will see much 'all-new' coming from the 500 in the next 6-8 years. I'm not sure the 500 is a product that has a guaranteed future like the Fusion.

[waymondospiff]

A quick follow-on question: will the Fusion stay on CD3 next go around, or will EUCD migrate to the US?

 

And while the Iosis is a hot car, it previews the "design language" of FofE, not NA. The 3-bar and blocky styling will be our language for a little bit longer. Now, of course if Ford really wants to differentiate Ford & Mercury, giving Mercury FofE-style design language...well, that'd make sense.

 

Scott

[RichardJensen]

I like the sound of that (rather, the look of that). I wonder where that name came from. Perhaps scoliosis?

iosis is the last step in alchemy, when transmuting base metals to gold.

 

I'm not sure the 500 is a product that has a guaranteed future like the Fusion.

Nothing has a guaranteed future.

 

The Five Hundred is fine. D3 will capably fill Chicago. CD3 Hermosillo.

 

A quick follow-on question: will the Fusion stay on CD3 next go around, or will EUCD migrate to the US?

Fusion should stay CD3 based. Ford may, in the 'in the long run, we're all dead' term, unify EUCD and CD3--the CD3 is something of a throw-together, Ford needed a midsize for NA, and the 6 was very competent, and very available. However, it proved unsuited for EU adoption (mainly because it can't fit the I-6), so EU went with a scaled up C1.

[Edgey]

The other problem with the Fusion going forward might be the overall packaging. It's a low riding car compared to some of the trends toward taller riding CUVish sedans. In a few years, if the competition follows that trend, the Fusion will need a total replacement instead of minor reskins and updates. However, I don't think we are seeing a major shift in that direction yet so Ford has time to consider its direction with the next Fusion. In some ways, we might see a reversal from that direction if you compare the next gen Malibu to the current.

[ebritt]

Hopefully the Fusion will see frequent and aggressive updates in its future. The Fusion is in a very competitive segment and the only way to keep the factory producing is to make sure there's something fresh to attract interest.

 

We should see some minor cosmetic and mechanical upgrades in 2 years while an all-new Fusion is probably 5 years away. The 500 will probably have a much longer life-span between updates. Cosmetic updates are a given, but I doubt we will see much 'all-new' coming from the 500 in the next 6-8 years. I'm not sure the 500 is a product that has a guaranteed future like the Fusion.

If they don't screw it up, Fusion could whip on Camry.

[Edgey]

If they don't screw it up, Fusion could whip on Camry.

 

They are doing a good job keeping Fusion out of fleet, more so than Camry which has to absorb any marketshare differential with fleet dumping because it makes so many of them.

 

Ford has to watch how much of the 500 they allow pass into fleet hands if they want to keep it from turning into the next Impala.

[bravestar]

I for one, am glad that it isn't a car with a SUV wanna be ride height. Not everyone wants a Checker Cab ride height and it does not work very good for sporty sedan styling.

[ehaase]

With Ford gutting its white collar staff, whatever happens to the Fusion, I think you can be sure it will always share most components with the Mazda 6. Someone posted that Ford seems to be shifting most of its engineering to Mazda, Volvo, or FoE.

[igor]

I would be surprised to see CD4 platform - I expect next gen Fusion/Milan/MKZ/Mazda6 (the gen after the 208 Gen2) and anything else on CD3 to move to EUCD2 in next generation.

 

CD3 was intendended as global midsize FWD/AWD platforms, but Volvo and the rest of PAG rebelled - they did not like the driving dynamics and Volvo could not fit their I6 into it. So FoMoCo built them EUCD.

 

Consider CD3 as botcherred predecessor to C1 - which is itself the predecessor to the GPDS which Ford has now online.

 

Expect C2-based EUCD2 to be truly global starting 2011-2013.

 

especially with Mulally and Fields at the top.

Igor

Edited September 16, 2006 by igor

[ehaase]

I think it would be very sensible for Ford to have one B platform, one C platform, and one CD platform used worldwide. Perhaps let the Fusion eventually be a LWB version of the Mondeo. I would like to see, maybe around 2015, a new worldwide RWD platform with various wheelbases used to replace the Mustang, the Panthers, the Falcon, and the D3 platform. Ford has to get its money's worth out of D3, so there should be an extensively restyled and reengineered 500 around 2010 or 2011, but eventually I would like to see a new RWD sedan replace the D3 and the Panthers.

[igor]

I think it would be very sensible for Ford to have one B platform, one C platform, and one CD platform used worldwide. Perhaps let the Fusion eventually be a LWB version of the Mondeo. I would like to see, maybe around 2015, a new worldwide RWD platform with various wheelbases used to replace the Mustang, the Panthers, the Falcon, and the D3 platform. Ford has to get its money's worth out of D3, so there should be an extensively restyled and reengineered 500 around 2010 or 2011, but eventually I would like to see a new RWD sedan replace the D3 and the Panthers.

 

this is where Ford is (should be) headed. the EUCD is really LWB of C1... making Ford having only 2 FWD/AWD platforms in Europe: B and C1 - and C1 underpinning everything from the Focus, to the Volvo S80 and Land Rover LR2.

 

I would definitely love them to have a similarly flexible platform for RWD/AWD applications.

 

Finally - B platform will likely remain separate, with torsion beam rear suspension, and other bits that make it cheaper, but thus unfit for larger, more sophisticated applications.

 

Igor

[Biker16]

I think it would be very sensible for Ford to have one B platform, one C platform, and one CD platform used worldwide. Perhaps let the Fusion eventually be a LWB version of the Mondeo. I would like to see, maybe around 2015, a new worldwide RWD platform with various wheelbases used to replace the Mustang, the Panthers, the Falcon, and the D3 platform. Ford has to get its money's worth out of D3, so there should be an extensively restyled and reengineered 500 around 2010 or 2011, but eventually I would like to see a new RWD sedan replace the D3 and the Panthers.

The advantage of a RWD/AWD archtechture is profit. this will easily be Ford's most profitable archtechture.

 

It can fullfill the needs of premium and out of mainstream models. I.E profitable.

 

D3 is dead, EUCD replaced the S80 and eventually the XC90, leaving F-NA with a lonely bastard platform.

[RichardJensen]

If they don't screw it up, Fusion could whip on Camry.

Ford will never (as in 'never say never') build the Fusion in those numbers.

 

The advantage of a RWD/AWD archtechture is profit. this will easily be Ford's most profitable archtechture.

 

It can fullfill the needs of premium and out of mainstream models. I.E profitable.

 

D3 is dead, EUCD replaced the S80 and eventually the XC90, leaving F-NA with a lonely bastard platform.

I consider the idea of a modern day Fox to be incredibly questionable--at least as a foundation for Lincoln products. You can either compromise the Mustang, or you can compromise the Lincoln. You cannot make a decent AWD/RWD platform that will underpin both.

 

Now, a couple sedans (4 door coupes if you must) priced slightly above the Mustang, with more luxury, and less sport. Yeah, I think the market would support that. But a $40k+ Lincoln? No way Jose.

 

---

 

The next EUCD will probably be designed to scale up to D size, in order to replace the D3 architecture. This should happen before the D3s get long in the tooth.

[Blue II]

The MKS AWD which is a D3 has a target weight of 4700 lbs. Something has to be done for future designs to loose weight. I don't think a Panther weighs that much.

[silvrsvt]

The MKS AWD which is a D3 has a target weight of 4700 lbs. Something has to be done for future designs to loose weight. I don't think a Panther weighs that much.

 

Kind of hard to do with all the safety stuff found on cars today and not to mention all the electrical do-dads people want in cars. The only way it will lose weight is if it gets smaller (not likely) or exotic materals are used (even more unlikely)...

[ehaase]

Ford will never (as in 'never say never') build the Fusion in those numbers.

I consider the idea of a modern day Fox to be incredibly questionable--at least as a foundation for Lincoln products. You can either compromise the Mustang, or you can compromise the Lincoln. You cannot make a decent AWD/RWD platform that will underpin both.

Well, the Lincoln Mark VII and Continental used the Fox platform in the 1980's, and they were fairly successful cars for the time.

 

Rumors from credible insiders on other boards (Hudson at GMI) are that GM's Zeta platform will be used for the Camaro, Impala, Lucerne, and DTS. I'd like to see Ford have something similar to replace D3 and Panther.

[DRODMOTORS]

Ford better up the production some how, can't get enough of these bad boys. Then again, almost full sticker sales are very nice! :happy feet:

[Extreme4x4]

Sorry, you must be mistaken............ or haven't been reading the negatoids posts lately.

 

Otherwise, you would know that the Fusion sucks, and Ford will be out of business long before a refresh comes............ much less a redesign.

 

Remember, no Ford sells near sticker, except the Mustang............... plus, noone wants Ford cars........... except the Mustang.

 

BTW, its nice to hear. My statements above are just a reflection of my annoyance of this board......... of late. (basically the overwhelming negativism). I fully expect to get crucified over my sarcasm, by the negatoids.

[RichardJensen]

Well, the Lincoln Mark VII and Continental used the Fox platform in the 1980's, and they were fairly successful cars for the time.

 

Rumors from credible insiders on other boards (Hudson at GMI) are that GM's Zeta platform will be used for the Camaro, Impala, Lucerne, and DTS. I'd like to see Ford have something similar to replace D3 and Panther.

Operative words: "for the time", as in "BL, before Lexus".

 

I don't think that Ford should replace D3 with an RWD architecture. And I don't think that they should try to replace what has become a special purpose architecture (the panthers, or the CVPI, taxi stretch, and Town Car) with something general purpose.

 

Ford has to think small. Why not have a Fusion that sells 125-150k units a year, the Five Hundred at 100-125k units, and the Thunderbird at, say 50k units a year. All would be built on shared architectures in flexible plants, so there would be no steep investment involved in small volume.

 

No more 'magic bullets'.

[Edgey]

Ford is still thinking in terms of magic bullets, otherwise they would have a larger variety of products. The diffence this time is that they are not trying to make blockbuster cars with massive production volume. There really is no difference in their product strategy beyond improving profitability and reliability. Their mission is still focused on basic core products targeting a broad audience with as little differentation as possible. You don't see the Fusion Maxx or Fusion Coupe for example.

Edited September 18, 2006 by Edgey