Ask the Car People.SM


Mercury Milan vs Toyota Camry??

218 messages,  Last post on Nov 30, 2007 at 9:12 PM

You are in the Toyota Camry Forum.

What is this discussion about? Mercury Milan, Toyota Camry, Car Comparisons, Sedan

Messages Page 17 of 22

#159 of 218 Re: If the Camry is so [akirby] by walterquint

May 17, 2007 (5:25 am)

Replying to: akirby (May 16, 2007 8:32 pm)
On my prior post, I was not referring to that "Fusion Test" marketing campaign. I was referring to a conventional, full-scale comparison test done by a major car mag. I only draw conclusions from instrumented testing procedures.
 
That "Fusion Test" has some minor merit, but it's merely a marketing ploy. GM did a similar "test" for the Achieva in the 1990s--those buyers chose the Olds over Honda/Toyota too. Now, the Achieva is littering junkyards (including mine).
 
IMO, many are choosing the Fusion/Milan over the Camry because of its features, looks and price. It's consistently $2500 less than Camry/Accord. That does not make the Milan a better car, or even an equal one. As I noted, Ford likely took some minor engineering shortcuts to reach that lower price.
 
In 2004, I bought an Alero. It saved me $3k over a Mazda6 and $5k over a Camry. The symphony of squeaks/rattles in my Alero keeps me company on long trips. I wonder if Fusion/Milan owners will be similarly annoyed, over time ??

#160 of 218 Re: If the Camry is so [walterquint] by akirby

May 17, 2007 (6:54 am)

Replying to: walterquint (May 17, 2007 5:25 am)
The problem is tests done by the automotive media are not necessarily reflective of the general car buying public. Just look at all the cars that the media hates but that the public continues to buy. There are buyers who prefer the styling of the Sonata over all the other cars. It's all subjective.
 
There should be no argument that the Fusion handles better than the Camry. So does the Accord. Most people wouldn't notice that unless you put them on a test track and specifically asked them. Or put all 3 cars side by side and let folks rank their styling. Again - something you wouldn't normally do outside of this type of test.
 
Automotive writers are like film critics - they're evaluating vehicles entirely differently than an average buyer would evaluate them.
 
How, then, is Ford supposed to get this type of real world test without paying for it? Would C&D or MT or Edmunds go out and pay for this type of test? Of course not. The reason they outsourced it to C&D and R&T was to ensure that it was a fair test.
 
The only thing this test points out is that the Fusion is competitive and should be considered. This gets people in the showroom that would have otherwise written off the Fusion and once they actually see it and drive it they end up buying one.
 
Of course it's advertising but to say it's biased or not valid is just sour grapes.

#161 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [stlpike07] by scape2

May 18, 2007 (7:09 pm)

Replying to: stlpike07 (May 16, 2007 7:35 pm)
"It is funny that the Fusion was the V6 AWD model.....versus the 4-cylinder Camry and Accord. They should have tested the V6 SE Camry and the V6 Accord. Maybe the "results" would have been different. "
 
This statement shows that you did not read the entire article. The Camry/Accord were V6's. So is the Camry/Accord offerning stability control and the Fusion not an issue?

#162 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [stlpike07] by thegraduate

May 18, 2007 (7:33 pm)

Replying to: stlpike07 (May 16, 2007 7:35 pm)
They should have tested the V6 SE Camry and the V6 Accord. Maybe the "results" would have been different
 
Eh, not quite. The Ford commercial at least used V6 models of all cars. Should they have used the best handling variant of all of them (Camry SE)? Yeah, since the one of the only three criteria the commercial measured was handling.

#163 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [thegraduate] by stlpike07

May 19, 2007 (11:37 am)

Replying to: thegraduate (May 18, 2007 7:33 pm)
In one of the first articles I read about the test, the author said the camry was a 4-cylinder. That stuck out right away to me......Maybe the newer tests used the V6.
 
Also, using an "all-wheel drive" car against two without awd.........I really don't care what the results were. All I was saying is that the "advertisement" was a ploy/marketing scheme and that people should do research themselves. Some people are too impressionable and will be unhappy once they realize they made the wrong decision, no matter which vehicle they purchase...thats all.

#164 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [stlpike07] by jeffyscott

May 19, 2007 (11:44 am)

Replying to: stlpike07 (May 19, 2007 11:37 am)
I really don't care what the results were. All I was saying is that the "advertisement" was a ploy/marketing scheme
 
I don't care either, but to me it was just an ad. The purpose of the ad, IMO, was really just to point out that Milan/Fusion can be had with AWD and to show that advantages of AWD.
 
Now most will probably decide not to buy that feature, but this is no different than Camry, Accord, Altima touting their V6 HP numbers, when most buyers end up buying the 4 cyl.

#165 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [stlpike07] by akirby

May 19, 2007 (2:24 pm)

Replying to: stlpike07 (May 19, 2007 11:37 am)
No, all the tests used V6 models of all 3 vehicles. The fact that the Fusion offers AWD and the other 2 don't is a perfectly valid comparison.
 
The "winner" in any of these tests is almost 100% subjective and doesn't prove anything objective. It merely proves that under the right circumstances some people prefer the Fusion to the Camry and Accord. If you don't understand that then you're just biased.

#166 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [akirby] by scape2

May 20, 2007 (8:55 pm)

Replying to: akirby (May 19, 2007 2:24 pm)
Not bias. Just that some cannot understand that there are cars that are every bit as good as the Camry/Accord. Each of these cars was tested under the same critera. These folks were ordinary people, not paid by Ford, not Ford employees. I'm sure each one wasn't taken into the concrete cell and beaten by a Ford gustapo to vote for the Fusion..

#167 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [akirby] by stlpike07

May 21, 2007 (2:13 pm)

Replying to: akirby (May 19, 2007 2:24 pm)
You are right, "...doesn't prove anything..."
 
Of course some people will prefer theFusion over Camry or Accord.
 
Of course I am biased. I test drove both of those cars and picked the Camry. Someone who picked the Accord will be biased toward accord, just as someone who picked the Fusion will be biased toward the fusion. That is normal in my opinion. Who wants to think or feel like they made the wrong decision purchasing one of those cars?

#168 of 218 Re: Milan v Camry [savetheland] by wvgasguy

Jun 07, 2007 (7:36 am)

Replying to: savetheland (May 16, 2007 5:39 pm)
Milan/Fusion and Camry/Avalon are different kind of vehicles. One is for younger crowd who prefer spirited and sporty ride. And later is for older tired crowd who prefer soft and quiet ride.
 
Wow, was that a slam or what? Yeah, my TCH may fit that description, but the SE I drove didn't seem like a car for the "older tired" crowd.
 
I feel the real "vote" should come not from advertisements but from the buying public, who makes choices with the $$$'s they spend.
 
How many Milans will they sell in 2007? Is that because they are limited production or because that's all of the "highly intelligent" people out there that are willing to purchase one?

Messages Page 17 of 22

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement