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 Safety & Crast Test Ratings
114 messages, Last post on Mar 19, 2007 at 4:46 AM
You are in the Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: backy (Jun 03, 2006 5:30 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: scape2 (Jun 03, 2006 5:59 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: scape2 (Jun 03, 2006 5:59 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Jun 03, 2006 7:01 am) Where are we going with this folks? Is someone here trying to make the Fusion/Milan out to be a death trap? or what? If so they are pushing incorrect information. Anyone educated enough and intelligent enough to read the data on the difference between 5 star and 4 star will see the Fusion/Milan are safe vehicles. In no way am I trying to give Ford a break on this issue. I have already complained online to Ford Motor Company. I know the vehicle I purchased has a lower crash safety rating than comparable vehicle. I also know the difference between a 4 star and 5 star safety rating. And the difference between "Good" and "Acceptable".. Acceptable means safe, maybe not safest, but SAFE... 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: scape2 (Jun 03, 2006 6:05 pm) Not sure what your point is there... Are you saying insurance industry earns greater profits by having safer cars on the road? I don't think that is really the case, but even if it is, why is that a problem? No it is not a "death trap"...as I had said before, the Fusion crash test results were disappointing to me. |
|
|
Replying to: scape2 (Jun 03, 2006 6:05 pm) The issue is not only if it is acceptable or not, it is also that the competition is SAFER: Fusion is lower on basically all possible scores, whether with or without side airbags, whether government or insurance industry tests. If competition gets "good" on both front and side, five stars on both NHSTA tests (some of them do) and you get acceptable on front and poor on side, there is a sizable gap to make up for. Four stars on NHTSA indicates that IIHS is likely to be not so great even with airbags unless they redesign the chassis. NHTSA checks just torso and lower body injuries on side impact, IIHS weighs all possible injuries, NHTSA uses male dummy, IIHS uses female (smaller), NTHSA uses smaller impact vehicle and lower bumper position than IIHS. It is very simple to me: in its current form, Mazda6 platform, while well-handling is simply not robust enough to support crashworthiness comparable to the competition and airbags are not likely to change that. Adding them standard in '07 is great, but what they really need to do is get FAST to the drawing board and design some major strangthening of the chassis.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: dino001 (Jun 03, 2006 7:19 pm) I am not so sure about that... Fusion had 5 star for driver, with side air bag. For comparison the Malibu w/o side airbag got 4 star and a "safety concern" note. With side air bag it got 5 star for driver (rear passenger fell from 5 star to 4 with the side air bag  ). IIHS rating was poor w/o side air bag and good with it for the Malibu...it also had the same "acceptable" safety cage rating as the fusion. Also note that Mazda 6 only got 3 stars in Gov't side test, so clearly Ford did do some improving there. Which also shows up in the IIHS structure rating difference. Oh...one other note on crash tests. In Mazda 6 brochure, I recently noticed that it says the brake pedal is designed to fold away in the case of an accident to minimize leg/ankle injury. Could this be all there is to the difference in IIHS frontal rating between Fusion and Mazda 6?
|
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Jun 04, 2006 3:55 am) My message is: Fusion is a good product to start with, but needs some fast improvement and steady R&D to stay in the game. Unfortunately Ford has a nasty habit of starving their existing models from R&D - milk it, then suck its blood, once it's dry just dump and move on with new name(Lincoln LS, Thunderbird, Taurus, entire Mercury lineup, also watch for Crown Vic in next couple of years, etc.). Others usually try to keep the name alive, fix problems fast, come with new designs - Ford often takes a different path. I'm just afraid for Fusion taking the same route. |
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Jun 04, 2006 3:55 am) http://www.safercar.gov/NCAP/Cars/3712.html You may find this interesting: http://www.informedforlife.org/UserFiles/File/2006RiskOrder.pdf |
|
|
Replying to: m1miata (Jun 04, 2006 10:45 am) As far as the IIHS. They are affiliated with the insurance industry. You can look at it 2 ways. The insurance industry doesn't lower preimiums based on your car being "safer" by thier standards. One way they force automakers to build safer vehicles. They cut thier losses, but don't cut your premiums..
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Safety & Crast Test Ratings
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Ford Fusion
2010 Mercury Milan
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
