Fusion Sport?

[alkemyst]

Holy crap, $30k? I thought the Fusions were lower end.

There are a lot of cars at that segment, what draws you to the Fusion?

That $30k can go a long way on a 1 year old < 10k mile car.

I did the new car thing once...bought two new cars in 1996, a 97 GTI VR6 and Camaro RS, both loaded. 6 months later both could be found with a few thousand miles on them for ridiculously less.

Plus most of the time all the initial dealership issues have been wrung out by the previous owner doing all the legwork.

if your credit is up and tight, pedfed.com can finance you at 2.99&#37;

 

[rcpratt]

That's about as much as you can spend on a Fusion, yes. But I like them a lot and for that price, it's hard to find something better imo. They always really push the 2 year leases in Michigan (money factor is 1&#37; vs. 5% for 3 year) and with the A/Z making a huge dent in the gap between retail and residual prices...mm. So yes, I'm leasing. I'll never be a guy that hangs on to a car for more than 5 years. /flamesuit

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Why lease when you can actually purchase? You know that in the long run, with a lease you pay much more than the car is worth. With car's depreciation, you still make payments as if the car is brand new.

 

[Bignate603]

Even though FWD is sufficient, I would suggest taking an AWD vehicle like a Subaru Impreza out for a test drive while there is still snow on the ground. One test drive and you'll be sold on AWD.

I hate to break it to you but most other people don't blame their FWD car because they can't stop themselves from flooring it when there's snow on the ground. After your whole "AWD should be required by law" rant in the other thread I can't really take your opinion seriously.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Why lease when you can actually purchase? You know that in the long run, with a lease you pay much more than the car is worth. With car's depreciation, you still make payments as if the car is brand new.

Errr, just as you do if you finance. The monthly payment on a loan doesn't reduce in line with the value of the vehicle, unless you live in an alternate universe where banks throw free money at people for fun.

 

[Arkaign]

Holy crap, $30k? I thought the Fusions were lower end.

There are a lot of cars at that segment, what draws you to the Fusion?

That $30k can go a long way on a 1 year old < 10k mile car.

I did the new car thing once...bought two new cars in 1996, a 97 GTI VR6 and Camaro RS, both loaded. 6 months later both could be found with a few thousand miles on them for ridiculously less.

Plus most of the time all the initial dealership issues have been wrung out by the previous owner doing all the legwork.

if your credit is up and tight, pedfed.com can finance you at 2.99%

Ford really brought the Fusion to world class with the new 2010 gen, it definitely deserved the MT COTY award it got. There are indeed a ton of cars at that price point, though for midsize sedans it's solidly there with the best, the interior quality, driving dynamics, features, it's just an outstanding vehicle.

The only niggling thing that bothers me just a little bit about the current Fusion lineup is the missing ecoboost option. It's definitely ready to go, and I'd guess we'll finally see the Fusion GT in late 2011 for the 2012 model year. It will deliver better power and fuel economy over the current 3.5L sport, given the results we see in the Taurus/etc. It will probably come in at a higher price point than Fusion sport though. No idea why they kept the 3.0 V6 in the lineup, that powerplant was always disappointing, and the new 2.5L i4 offers similar usable power with better throttle response and hugely better fuel economy.

Anyhow, go sit in and if possible drive a current loaded Fusion, the interior is as good as I've seen from Acura/Infiniti, and inches from the better Lexus models while better than the IS/ES Lexus.

Agreed on used cars being a much better value overall, although the type of person who constantly leases newer cars might not care too much. The discounts described are pretty good, and driving a new loaded Fusion sport for $280/mo is a steal.

 

[ShawnD1]

I hate to break it to you but most other people don't blame their FWD car because they can't stop themselves from flooring it when there's snow on the ground. After your whole "AWD should be required by law" rant in the other thread I can't really take your opinion seriously.

You didn't do well in physics did you?
Physics would predict that flooring it would accelerate faster because the open differential equalizes torque on both wheels. Putting more torque on the wheel with no traction also puts more torque on the wheel with traction, and that's how you accelerate.

Then there's also the fact that the car really does accelerate faster when traction control is turned off. Ask anyone who owns a car with traction control. Does the car accelerate faster with traction control off and snow flying or does it accelerate with traction control on and no slip at all?

Do a google search for "traction control stuck" and you'll see how well feathering the throttle works. Flying snow keeps the car moving. Cutting the throttle will get you stuck or in some cases it will even get you rear ended because your crap car won't accelerate after turning onto a main road.

 

[yh125d]

AWD, as it relates to snow, mostly helps you with taking off, which if you are a good driver you're probably not concerned with anyways. It doesn't help you stop, which is what everyone could use more of in wintry conditions. IMO, AWD gives you too much confidence in ice/snow, because you take off easier and that may lead to you driving faster, faster than you can slow down.

 

[LTC8K6]

You didn't do well in physics did you?
Physics would predict that flooring it would accelerate faster because the open differential equalizes torque on both wheels. Putting more torque on the wheel with no traction also puts more torque on the wheel with traction, and that's how you accelerate.

Then there's also the fact that the car really does accelerate faster when traction control is turned off. Ask anyone who owns a car with traction control. Does the car accelerate faster with traction control off and snow flying or does it accelerate with traction control on and no slip at all?

Do a google search for "traction control stuck" and you'll see how well feathering the throttle works. Flying snow keeps the car moving. Cutting the throttle will get you stuck or in some cases it will even get you rear ended because your crap car won't accelerate after turning onto a main road.

Which type of T/C are you talking about?

The simple ones just brake the spinning wheel and help you not much.

The better ones also reduce engine torque and help you quite a bit.

It may seem like your car "won't go", but it's probably actually going about as fast as it can if you have the more sophisticated traction control and you have gunned it on a slippery road.

Instead, with an auto, you should have taken off in second and carefully modulated the throttle to keep traction and help the T/C system to help you.

In many small cars, there is way too much throttle tip-in, making it just about impossible to modulate the throttle well on a slippery surface. They set the throttle up that way to make the car seem faster off the line in the dry.

 

[ShawnD1]

The simple ones just brake the spinning wheel and help you not much.

Actually the simple ones tend to work a lot better because their behavior resembles that of a clutch type limited slip differential. By applying a resistance to the side with no traction, it allows more torque to be delivered to the side with traction. The down side of such a system is that it puts a lot of wear on the brake pads and it burns a crazy amount of fuel because a good portion of your engine power is going to the brake pads.

The better ones also reduce engine torque and help you quite a bit.

This is what my crayola has. This type of traction control tends to get cars stuck because the computer doesn't allow the car to throw any snow. What did your parents always say when you're driving in snow? Never stop. If you stop, you're not going to get started again. Stopping is exactly what the traction control does. It cuts the throttle when it detects slip, which will be all the time when there's snow, and it brings the car to a stop. Once it stops, you have the pleasure of shoving around your car and swearing about how the city should really have all of the side streets plowed even though you got stuck in snow that fell today (some idiots on the radio were bitching about getting stuck in snow that fell literally half a day ago and blaming it on the city).

It may seem like your car "won't go", but it's probably actually going about as fast as it can if you have the more sophisticated traction control and you have gunned it on a slippery road.

The fastest acceleration in my car (not all cars) is when the traction control is off. It throws snow around like mad and it accelerates correctly. Without snow flying everywhere, it's extremely slow. The car assumes it is on dry pavement, but it's really on snow that drives like sand. If you've ever seen sand tires, you know how those are designed to work

 

[LTC8K6]

Actually the simple ones tend to work a lot better because their behavior resembles that of a clutch type limited slip differential. By applying a resistance to the side with no traction, it allows more torque to be delivered to the side with traction. The down side of such a system is that it puts a lot of wear on the brake pads and it burns a crazy amount of fuel because a good portion of your engine power is going to the brake pads.



This is what my crayola has. This type of traction control tends to get cars stuck because the computer doesn't allow the car to throw any snow. What did your parents always say when you're driving in snow? Never stop. If you stop, you're not going to get started again. Stopping is exactly what the traction control does. It cuts the throttle when it detects slip, which will be all the time when there's snow, and it brings the car to a stop. Once it stops, you have the pleasure of shoving around your car and swearing about how the city should really have all of the side streets plowed even though you got stuck in snow that fell today (some idiots on the radio were bitching about getting stuck in snow that fell literally half a day ago and blaming it on the city).



The fastest acceleration in my car (not all cars) is when the traction control is off. It throws snow around like mad and it accelerates correctly. Without snow flying everywhere, it's extremely slow. The car assumes it is on dry pavement, but it's really on snow that drives like sand. If you've ever seen sand tires, you know how those are designed to work

Sorry, but with the two cars I have owned that had traction control, it worked well and helped on slippery surfaces.

Spinning your wheels like mad so that the "snow flies" is not the way to drive on a slippery road.

I suspect your Toyota's excessive throttle tip in is the problem. You get too much throttle in the first bit of accelerator pedal travel, making winter driving very difficult. It's a common problem with small cars.

Back in the days of throttle cables, there were kits to correct it.

 

[Bignate603]

You didn't do well in physics did you?
Physics would predict that flooring it would accelerate faster because the open differential equalizes torque on both wheels. Putting more torque on the wheel with no traction also puts more torque on the wheel with traction, and that's how you accelerate.

Then there's also the fact that the car really does accelerate faster when traction control is turned off. Ask anyone who owns a car with traction control. Does the car accelerate faster with traction control off and snow flying or does it accelerate with traction control on and no slip at all?

Do a google search for "traction control stuck" and you'll see how well feathering the throttle works. Flying snow keeps the car moving. Cutting the throttle will get you stuck or in some cases it will even get you rear ended because your crap car won't accelerate after turning onto a main road.

Look up the difference between static friction and sliding friction and you'll understand quite a bit more about how your car handles in the snow.

If you can achieve static friction between your tires and the road (wheels can move the car without spinning) you'll accelerate MUCH faster than if you're spinning your tires. Sliding friction is much lower than static friction, so spinning your tires like crazy can make the car accelerate slower. Spinning your tires like crazy is only really helpful when there's absolutely no hope of moving your car without the tires slipping.

It's the same theory that people use in drag racing. During a good launch there will be a slight amount of wheel spin but then the tires hook up with the pavement and the car can accelerate more quickly. If you give it too much throttle and the wheels keep spinning without hooking up you'll accelerate much more slowly than your car is capable of.

If you don't believe me go and find a snowy parking lot and give it a shot. Try to accelerate quickly but without spinning your tires, then repeat it while you have your foot all the way to the floor.

 

[videogames101]

Actually the simple ones tend to work a lot better because their behavior resembles that of a clutch type limited slip differential. By applying a resistance to the side with no traction, it allows more torque to be delivered to the side with traction. The down side of such a system is that it puts a lot of wear on the brake pads and it burns a crazy amount of fuel because a good portion of your engine power is going to the brake pads.



This is what my crayola has. This type of traction control tends to get cars stuck because the computer doesn't allow the car to throw any snow. What did your parents always say when you're driving in snow? Never stop. If you stop, you're not going to get started again. Stopping is exactly what the traction control does. It cuts the throttle when it detects slip, which will be all the time when there's snow, and it brings the car to a stop. Once it stops, you have the pleasure of shoving around your car and swearing about how the city should really have all of the side streets plowed even though you got stuck in snow that fell today (some idiots on the radio were bitching about getting stuck in snow that fell literally half a day ago and blaming it on the city).



The fastest acceleration in my car (not all cars) is when the traction control is off. It throws snow around like mad and it accelerates correctly. Without snow flying everywhere, it's extremely slow. The car assumes it is on dry pavement, but it's really on snow that drives like sand. If you've ever seen sand tires, you know how those are designed to work

Physics, learn it.

 

[ShawnD1]

Look up the difference between static friction and sliding friction and you'll understand quite a bit more about how your car handles in the snow.

Snow doesn't have static friction. It's fluid like sand. This is why snow tires have very deep grooves in them.
If you could rely on static friction in winter, then winter tires would look exactly the same as summer tires. Tire engineers know this, and that's exactly why snow tires look nothing like summer tires.

The above is a summer tire. Notice how flat it is and how shallow the grooves are. This tire uses static friction and large surface area. The grooves are mostly parallel to the direction of motion so water can flow around the contact area rather than causing it to hydroplane.

The above is a winter tire. It has deep grooves to grab and throw snow. It even has little grooves. Every part of the tire has grooves. Whoever designed this tire believes snow moves, and that the tire should be able to guide where the snow is moving when it does move.

This is a sand tire. Sand is fluid and it has no static friction. The only way a tire can propel something in sand is by displacing the sand. By pure 100% coincidence, a sand tire looks a hell of a lot like a snow tire.

Physics, learn it.

lol. Are you fleabag's alt account? He said he could design a better car than a Korean car engineer can, and now you and a few other people are saying you can design better tires than a tire engineer can. Those stupid engineers at Michelin and Toyo with their fancy degrees and decades of experience honestly think snow is a fluid-like material that is most effectively dealt with by treating it as if it were similar to sand or mud. If they just came to the Anandtech garage to confirm that snow is, in fact, similar to paved road then we could have avoided such a silly mistake.

Those idiots at Michelin also should have asked Toyota what is the best way to deal with snow. For the past 100 years or whatever, Michelin and their material engineers have (incorrectly) thought that snow should be displaced and that snow tires should have deep treads with zig zag patterns. Obviously that is wrong, obviously. The boys at Toyota have done it again with their ground breaking engineering skills. They figured out once and for all that we should rely on static friction to move a vehicle on snow, and this is why the traction control they put on all Toyota vehicles prevents the tires from spinning and completely eliminates the point of a snow tire having deep treads with zig zag patterns.

To get perfect traction in the snow, you should get rid of your winter tires and use summer tires. The summer tires have big slat spots with shallow treads which maximize static friction on snow. Using anything other than summer tires on your minivan means you hate your family.

 

[Bignate603]

lol. Are you fleabag's alt account? He said he could design a better car than a Korean car engineer can, and now you and a few other people are saying you can design better tires than a tire engineer can. Those stupid engineers at Michelin and Toyo with their fancy degrees and decades of experience honestly think snow is a fluid-like material that is most effectively dealt with by treating it as if it were similar to sand or mud. If they just came to the Anandtech garage to confirm that snow is, in fact, similar to paved road then we could have avoided such a silly mistake.

Those idiots at Michelin also should have asked Toyota what is the best way to deal with snow. For the past 100 years or whatever, Michelin and their material engineers have (incorrectly) thought that snow should be displaced and that snow tires should have deep treads with zig zag patterns. Obviously that is wrong, obviously. The boys at Toyota have done it again with their ground breaking engineering skills. They figured out once and for all that we should rely on static friction to move a vehicle on snow, and this is why the traction control they put on all Toyota vehicles prevents the tires from spinning and completely eliminates the point of a snow tire having deep treads with zig zag patterns.

To get perfect traction in the snow, you should get rid of your winter tires and use summer tires. The summer tires have big slat spots with shallow treads which maximize static friction on snow. Using anything other than summer tires on your minivan means you hate your family.

It's funny that you've accused somebody else of being fleabag, because I was about to ask if you were his brother.

You're misunderstanding why they put those features (voids, lugs and sipes) into the tires. It's not to make them into something similar to sand tires where you have paddles dig down deep into the snow. For a paddle style tire to work in something that's very fluid it needs to have a paddle that's deep and wide enough to grab a large hunk of it and really fling it. That's why sand rails throw massive rooster tails. They have to dig in and move a massive amount of sand to get moving.

While the voids (the spaces between the tire lugs) are much larger on snow tires they are still nowhere near the size you need to propel yourself by flinging snow. Even if you had 100% packing efficiency into voids of the tire and flung it all out at 60 mph the amount of snow you're chucking out would be a tiny fraction of the amount of forward force you'd need to effectively move the car. Also, the assumption that snow directly beneath your car tire is a "liquid" is completely false. Snow packs down into something that is slippery but quite solid.

The tread on a snow tire can be designed to try to deal with the snow in multiple ways, but here's some that are pretty common:

1. Deep grooves between the tire lugs and different aggressive features allow tire tread to dig deeper down into the snow. Ideally in small amounts of snow the lugs will reach all the way down to the pavement. In deeper snow it basically uses the voids to grab on to the snow on the ground, packed snow holds to itself better than rubber can hold to it. With the lugs holding on to the snow that's packed into the stuff on the ground the tire can pull itself forward. Some of the snow sticks to the wheel as it spins away from the ground and gets ejected. A good snow tire will expel that snow so by the time the wheel gets all the way around the voids are clear and ready to dig down into the next portion of snow.

2. Small grooves called sipes that are cut down into the tread lugs can do a few things. They allow the lugs to flew more easily (big solid lugs are not very flexible and can't easily conform to the ground) and some manufacturers claim that the sipes help absorb or remove the water that can exist between the tire and the snow.

3. Some manufacturers add a grit into the rubber of the tire tread to better dig in to hard packed snow (which will occur under your tire in many cases) or ice. This helps increase the static friction on these surfaces.

4. Softer rubber. Summer tires have a rubber that's designed for warmer weather. At cold temperatures its more stiff and doesn't conform as well to the road surface.

I'm sure the tire companies have more tricks up their sleeves but these are pretty common.

 

[rcpratt]

Purdy. Lots of fun to drive...big improvement over the '08 SEL.

 

[ElFenix]

Purdy. Lots of fun to drive...big improvement over the '08 SEL.

nice

 

[Vic Vega]

The Fusion Sport beat out all competitors in Edmonds family sedan test last year including entries from Honda, Toyota, Chevy and Hyundai... solid car all around.

 

[mb]

Purdy. Lots of fun to drive...big improvement over the '08 SEL.

That's it? Such a tease.

 

[yh125d]

That's it? Such a tease.

heres my new s-class

 

[rcpratt]

heres my new s-class

I c wut u did thar.

 

[Lakedaimon]

Purdy. Lots of fun to drive...big improvement over the '08 SEL.

you from downriver like me and deathBUA? that generic apartment complex looks familiar.

 

[Castiel]

Nevermind

 

[rcpratt]

Nah, Royal Oak.

 

[sdifox]

I don't see the point. Either go Mustang or stick with Fusion SEL. It's not like they changed the suspension on the Fusion Sport.