hbchrist

I am about to retire my 1994 Taurus, and Edmunds says that the Fusion is
a much better car for the money than the new Taurus. Does anyone have
any experience with the Fusion? What are your opinions?

Thanks in advance,
hbchrist

 

Art

I would not pay list price for it or debug it for Ford. Let someone else
buy it first model year. There are tons of cars out there that are similar
and have known service records.


"hbchrist" <hbchrist@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5J_ff.2868$vq1.1814@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>I am about to retire my 1994 Taurus, and Edmunds says that the Fusion is a
>much better car for the money than the new Taurus. Does anyone have any
>experience with the Fusion? What are your opinions?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> hbchrist

C. E. White

"hbchrist" <hbchrist@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5J_ff.2868$vq1.1814@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>I am about to retire my 1994 Taurus, and Edmunds says that the Fusion is a
>much better car for the money than the new Taurus. Does anyone have any
>experience with the Fusion? What are your opinions?

It has gotten good reviews. I have only seen a few in this area. Supposedly
Ford had to add a shift to keep up with the demand. The chassis is carried
over from the Mazda 626. 4 cylinder engine is a Mazda engine, V-6 a Ford
Duratec. I'd except it to be relatively trouble free, even if it is a "new"
car since most of the actual running gear is a know quantity.

Ed

Mike Hunter

Actually the chassis is an all new Ford chassis, a variation of which was
first used on the Mazda6, not the 626 chassis. I bought a loaded 2006
Lincoln Zephyr last month, for just over 27K, it is built on the same
chassis. It is a well put together car, nice size for my wife, plenty of
power and able to attain over 30 mpg on the highway. The only objection I
have is I do not trust the handling of FWD so I needed to retrain her on how
to drive it properly. An AWD will be available in spring however.

mike hunt


"C. E. White" <cewhite@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:oragf.3507$wf.2903@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "hbchrist" <hbchrist@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5J_ff.2868$vq1.1814@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>>I am about to retire my 1994 Taurus, and Edmunds says that the Fusion is a
>>much better car for the money than the new Taurus. Does anyone have any
>>experience with the Fusion? What are your opinions?
>
> It has gotten good reviews. I have only seen a few in this area.
> Supposedly Ford had to add a shift to keep up with the demand. The chassis
> is carried over from the Mazda 626. 4 cylinder engine is a Mazda engine,
> V-6 a Ford Duratec. I'd except it to be relatively trouble free, even if
> it is a "new" car since most of the actual running gear is a know
> quantity.
>
> Ed
>

Ed White

You are correct. I think of the Mazda 6 and 626 as the same thing,
while technically, the Mazda6 is a new design that replaced the 626.
AsS to whether it is a Ford chassis or a Mazda chassis, I suppose that
is senmatics. Mazda did the design work, so to me that makes it a Mazda
chassis. If the car had been based on the European Mondeo instead, then
it would have been a Ford chassis. But since Ford effectively controls
Mazda, it really amounts to the same thing.

Ed

Mike Hunter

GM and Ford are doing what the Japanese manufactures have been doing for
many years. Develop a chassis or component, build it in small numbers in
lower volume models then later introduce the proven product in their higher
volume lines. Several chassis and components have been devolved in this
manner by Ford via Volvo and Mazda

mike


"Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132595725.155794.323410@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> You are correct. I think of the Mazda 6 and 626 as the same thing,
> while technically, the Mazda6 is a new design that replaced the 626.
> As to whether it is a Ford chassis or a Mazda chassis, I suppose that
> is senmatics. Mazda did the design work, so to me that makes it a Mazda
> chassis. If the car had been based on the European Mondeo instead, then
> it would have been a Ford chassis. But since Ford effectively controls
> Mazda, it really amounts to the same thing.
>
> Ed
>