Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan
5511 messages, Last post on Nov 11, 2009 at 9:26 AM
You are in the Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: m6user (Apr 20, 2009 2:23 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: explorerx4 (Apr 19, 2009 2:27 pm) As someone who sells cars for a living, I would expect an understanding of selling the sizzle more than the steak. Bench racers everywhere are going to point out 0-60 times, horsepower ratings, etc. Can anyone feel 1 tenth of a second or 3 horsepower? Probably not. Are the cars going to be rated with specs? Also, why does a Fusion have to be inherently dull? If I wanted a dull sedan I would get a Camry. Ford will lose the race to the bottom. They need to make cars that are engaging to drive. The previous Fusion was a huge step in the right direction...I don't have enough seat time in the new one yet to know if the trend continues. |
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Apr 20, 2009 2:31 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: m6user (Apr 20, 2009 2:55 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: nomoreford2 (Apr 20, 2009 9:48 am) i had an 89 sho, it's 'been there, done that', 20 years ago. jeez, i'm getting old. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Apr 20, 2009 10:09 am) The 2010 numbers quoted are from Ford themselves, and they are conservative to say the least... I agree though. Wait until C&D or MT tests a 2010 for themselves, then compare them to the current car from the SAME source. I can almost guarantee they'll be different (and most likely lower). |
|
|
Replying to: m6user (Apr 20, 2009 2:55 pm) Yes. |
|
|
Seeing and reviewing all pictures, details and reviews, on the 2010 Fusion/Milan, I can’t help but share a few thoughts. While I am mostly impressed to see what Ford is capable of, having built a nice package, quite nice design (exterior), good ride/handling in addition to AWD, loads of features, good fuel economy (especially in the Hybrid version), plus add to that the good reliability Ford is joining recently, I still have some critic, especially on the interior. Why on earth is Ford adding more and more buttons with every redesign? Don’t they see that the button-cluttered interiors are getting bad reviews all over, even the good cars like the Honda Accord? Why do we need 12 separate buttons, plus an additional 12 "soft buttons" on the navigation LCD (=24 buttons) just to control the temperature? Why does it need to be so confusing? What’s bad with the old, tried and true, easy to use, 3 or 4 rotary dials? They can design it that way even for the automatic temperature control and even for dual zone! The Camry is a good example of an easy temperature control layout, but even the Camry has room for improvement (on the automatic temperature versions. The manual controls are perfect). The only so-called benefit is that you can "speak" temperature up/down, but IMO it's not worth it! And the stereo/radio controls are not much better either, still confusing. The Camry is a good example for the stereo system as well, and so is Hyundai Sonata. Even the Chevy Malibu is better (without NAV). For everything, it’s always better to use dials rather than buttons, and all the buttons has to be large, and easy to control even in middle of driving (a good example is the Toyota Highlander – giant controls!!). And what’s up with that steering wheel? To start off, it’s the largest in any midsize car! This size almost suits for a truck, and reduces the sporty feeling. It rather feels like you’re driving a big truck. All the Japanese steering wheels are much smaller and more comfortable to handle. And then, the Ford/Mercury/Lincoln steering wheel design is so sick and old.... can’t they come up with something fresh? And the integrated controls are confusing as well. They should be more divided and apart, not have so many look-alike buttons together. And in general, I think the interior does not look too clean and smooth. I can’t pinpoint exactly what it is, maybe the textures, maybe the colors, ergonomics, might be the control layout (or the fonts? I don’t like them), but either way it needs refinement. The new Taurus will be a bit better (the angled dash helps), the Flex is also better, but still not so elegant, attractive, or inviting, as many of the competitions. Also the gauges, while much better than previous Ford’s, can use some more sophistication. Otherwise, I think Ford is on track with the best out there. Keep it on; you’re going in the good direction!!
|
|
|
Replying to: samnoe (Apr 30, 2009 2:02 pm)
|
|
| In 06 when I purchased my Fusion SEL V6 with the 3.0 I questioned the 0-60 times posted at some sites. I saw times ranging in the low 7's to the high 8's. But as one person said.. these are family sedans, not sports cars. When I test drove the 2.5 auto it felt much quicker and responsive than the 2.3. Who is going to tell .4 seconds? can you count to .4 seconds? I honestly believe more people are going to buy the 2.5 in the auto configuration. When test driving and comparing to the 4cyl Accord or Camry the Fusion will go head to head no problem. The Fusion/Milan will win some would be Accord/Camry buyers and that is what Ford is trying to do. Give credit where credit is do. Ford is listening to consumers and delivering a car that finally competes with Toyota/Honda. | |
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Mercury Milan
2010 Ford Fusion
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
