2013 Ford Fusion Spy Video

illusionist_k says:

06:19 PM, 10/31/2011

@BD...

"In fact, at 7.0 seconds to 60 and 15.4 at 91.5 mph to the quarter mile, the 2.0T barely edged the 200-horse Camry Hybrid"

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1112_2011_hyundai_sonata_se_vs_2012_toyota_camry_se_vs_2012_volkswagen_passat_vr6_sel_comparison/viewall.html#ixzz1cPcW7UcH


The 3.5L Fusion only needs 6.7 seconds to 60mph... Seems you need to get your facts straight before you comment.

illusionist_k says:

09:08 PM, 10/30/2011

@BD, I think it's time to update your dictionary then.

You're inability to read only articles that affirm your belief means you have a confirmation bias when presented with contrary evidence, especially since you failed to address any point that I made.

FYI: MT sucks

K

blackdynamite1 says:

02:03 PM, 10/29/2011

Illusionist
1.  Why would I be offended by someone who uses the currently non-existent word "Credulity" in a sentence?

2.  Motor Trend said the exact opposite.  They said it sucked out loud.  

So Motor Trend hates it, and I never read the C&D article on it.  

Doesn't matter.  I'm not in the market for one.
BD

lolxd says:

09:26 AM, 10/29/2011

It doesn't matter if this thing will look either more Evos concept or more Mondeo, it will surely be a looker. The evos was already a hot looking thing and though outdated, the Mondeo is not too shabby either.

Sticking with the one ford plan, I guess this will also serve as the new Mondeo for Europe.

illusionist_k says:

07:52 AM, 10/29/2011

@BlackDynamite, of course you won't say it moves the Explorer around comfortably, that's why it's best not to take what you say with any kind of credulity... No offense.

The Sonata Turbo's un-defeatable traction control negates it's power numbers as you're not getting 275lb-ft off the line without wheel spin, torque steer, or an intrusive TCS. The 2L Ecoboost makes less power but will be more manageable... I've seen you regurgitate this argument before.

"Ford readily admits that the four-cylinder Explorer is not ideal for crossover buyers who intend to tow. Rather, Ford says it is a better match for workaday tasks like shuttling the kids to school and grocery-getting" -C&D

"Off the line acceleration is quite good" -C&D

Car and Driver states that this engine is a good match in the Edge that's only 450lb lighter than the Explorer. It stands to reason that this engine will be perfect in a vehicle that's 1000lbs lighter still.

If horsepower is still your fancy, the Fusion's 3.5L will get Ti-VCT that will bump output to 280-290hp like in the Explorer, Taurus, Edge, and MKX--This is likely get the Sport designation, where the 2L will be the volume seller.

blackdynamite1 says:

10:15 PM, 10/28/2011

brn
I wouldn't say the 2.0L moves the Explorer around "comfortably"

It takes 9.2 seconds to get to 60, most likely the slowest in it's class.  And a 4-banger being tied to too much vehicle means it is working hard all the time, and that negates much of any fuel economy advantage.  Motor Trend couldn't hide their hatred for the combo.

4500 lb SUVs and 4-bangers just don't mix, turbocharged or not.

The 2.0 would do much better in a Fusion, but wouldn't be considered a class leader either

The Ford Escape is probably the perfect vehicle for it.  And it will be featured there next year.
BD

mk40 says:

03:55 PM, 10/28/2011

I'm not so gungho about the 2.0Ts in these midsizers... I yet to see one with a higher observed mpg of a V6 in any of the mid-size sedan comparo tests.    I see no reason why with a V6 a 3400lb mid-sizer with a good tranny with 6spds or higher should not be able to achieve E
PA 21/33.  They're just not tuning them right yet.... they don't even need DI either.  If a 4500lb Odyssey can get 19/28 with a 6spds and 3.5L non-DI I see not reason why they couldn't tune a 3.5L V6 in a 3400lb midsizer for 21/33.    I mean the the 4000lb 300 8spd V6 has a EPA 19/31... 21/33 should be no problem for the cost of no intercooler, turbo or DI... they just need VVL.  

Looking forward to seeing what Chrysler achives in the 200 if they put in  pentastar/9spd.  I'd rather the money go toward a good tranny than a turbocharger and intercooler and DI.    

brn says:

06:16 PM, 10/27/2011

I'm surprised that some readers are thinking the 2.0L ecoboost will leave this vehicle at a power disadvantage.

First, 240hp is nothing to scoff at.

Second, it puts out 250ft/lbs from 1750rpm to 4500rpm.  V6's don't have that much down low torque.  Diesels don't have that much torque up high.

It comfortably pulls around a freaking Explorer.  As arumage indicates, it's likely to move the new Fusion quite well.

I'm interested to see what kind of MPG they'll get out of a 200hp 1.6L ecoboost.  It's going to pull quite a bit harder than the current 2.5 NA motor and likely get impressive mileage.

sixwheeler says:

04:08 PM, 10/27/2011

I can just about make out a Mondeo somewhere under all that wrapping.