By on December 2, 2009

fusionsefront

When it comes to the freshened 2010 Ford Fusion, TTAC’s got you covered like Alan Mulally’s life insurance policy. Over the past few months, no fewer than three full-length reviews have served up our impressions of the base gasoline 4-cylinder SE (with manual trans, no less), the hot-rod AWD 3.5-liter V6 Sport model, and even the much-lauded Fusion Hybrid planet-saver. Interestingly, the mid-line FWD 3.0 V6 SEL model has somehow escaped our scrutiny. Until now.

Devoid of the 3.5 Sport model’s lower body cladding and the Hybrid’s prominent “I-care-more-than-you” exterior badging, the 3.0 SEL Fusion provides an uncluttered look at the 2010 model’s across-the-board spruced-up styling.  Profile-wise, not much has changed, and the attractive basic shape of the car remains thankfully intact. The front end, however, alerts us to a possible clearance sale at the fake plastic chrome warehouse. Yeah, there are loads of ’06–’09 Fusions on the road, and it was very important for Ford to highlight the new model with some clear exterior differentiation. But take it from someone who loves Eisenhower-era levels of chrome—the previous-gen Fusion took the brightwork ratio to the good-taste max—on this car it just looks excessive and inauthentic. You can sidestep this styling blunder by selecting the $900 Monochrome Appearance Package (only available in certain colors); however, in transitioning to body color, the grille gives the whole front end a much duller Camry-esque appearance.fusionseside

Less controversially, the rear end’s treatment works well for a mid-cycle update and cohesively embodies a little resemblance with another member of the Ford Family of Fine cars. Unfortunately, that member is the aging, down-market Focus. Still, despite its aesthetic shortcomings, the Fusion looks better than the frumpy Camry (if not the Bimmer rip-off Accord) and is by no means ass(tek)-ugly.

When the Fusion nameplate debuted five years ago, critics were largely taken with an interior so original that it seemed to minimize the cheapness of its abundant hard plastic. The 2010 refresh offers more sound-deadening, softer-touch surfaces, and more comfortable seats. Regrettably, it loses some of the individuality of the previous car’s cabin, and the new materials are now merely on par with the competition—they never fully distract from the fact that you’re a long way from Audi-ville. Still, compared with a new Camry I recently drove, I can confidently say that the Fusion doesn’t give up anything to its main competitor in interior fit and finish and actually edges it out ergonomically with terrific primary controls, a large, well-positioned infotainment screen, and clever interior storage. But what’s up with the distracting blue instrument cluster?

Where the Camry (and other competitors) do outpace the Fusion is in the area of perceived interior space. Actually, the Fusion isn’t much smaller, but it seems like it is, especially in the back. Thankfully, the rear seats are comfortable and rear leg room feels more substantial than it looks, a welcome attribute when compared to many competitors’ uncomfortable, short-cushioned rear seats that only conjure the illusion of ample stretch-out space.

Speaking of stretch-out space, a long ribbon of open interstate seems like just the place for the 19-horsepower richer (for a total of 240)—but still fairly relaxed—3.0 Duratec V6. It seems that Ford has recently discovered a way to add more power to vehicles while masking the enjoyment inherent to such augmentations, and other than straight-line slab-cruising, it’s hard to imagine getting excited over this mill in any type of driving.  Everything is more refined here than in last year’s model; even without the stabilizing benefit of AWD, torque-steer is kept at bay, and even the hardest acceleration comes off relatively drama-free. While it doesn’t rev as smoothly or as quickly as its rising-sun rivals, the 2010 Duratec 3.0 is a lot more polished than last year’s version, only showing its five-o’clock shadow at revs north of five grand.

fusionseintI guess it’s hard to argue with progress, but the slightly raspier, less isolated 221-horse unit from the 2009 model I drove several months back seemed more enjoyable overall.  Ford would probably say that’s what the new-for-2010 Fusion 3.5 Sport is for, but should the potential for enthusiastic driving always be an extra-cost option?

Another enthusiasm-curber is the new Fusion’s chassis, which sadly follows the Camcord’s glazed-eyeball approach to steering and suspension tuning. The electric power steering is less responsive than the previous generation’s hydraulic system, though on-center feel and tracking are still better than the Camry (if not the Accord or Mazda 6). The suspension tuning is full-bore boring: it’s not floaty or unpoised, but it is several notches less exciting than the outgoing Fusion’s slightly sporty demeanor.

Pouring the Fusion into tight corners at 50–60 MPH reveals a car that feels like it corners worse than it really does and like it’s a lot bigger than it really is. Not that this is unsettling, just unremarkable. As evidenced by the few mid-corner steering corrections I had to make and the lack of untoward body motions I noticed, the new Fusion prescribes to Swiss levels of neutrality in all but the most immoderate hustles: you don’t have to fight abominable understeer or anything like that, but you occasionally think you might. I guess it speaks fairly well of the (not completely disable-able) stability system’s calibration that, even when switched on, it has a relatively high threshold of non-interference. But confidence inspiring it wasn’t. And fun it wasn’t. Picture doing some spirited driving in a rental car and that about sums it up.

Despite the reduction in motoring mirth, the 2010 Fusion is an excellent automobile and will almost assuredly serve thousands of owners very well for many years. Ford should be praised for building an honest, reliable car that’s every bit as good (and in some ways better) than the perennial leaders in this market segment—something Dearborn hasn’t done since the Taurus’ ill-fated 1996 re-design. However, the company should be rightfully criticized for making a very good product better but less fun to drive, which was an attribute that previously set the Fusion apart in its class and does so no longer.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

48 Comments on “Review: Ford Fusion SEL 3.0 V6...”


  • avatar
    Liger

    The changes Ford make seem to be working for sales.  The redesigned Fusion is the 10th best selling car in the US now.

  • avatar

    Even the 3.5-powered Sport isn’t nearly as engaging as it ought to be, so no surprise that the driving experience with the 3.0 borders on boring.

    EVERYONE dislikes the revised front end. How did it clear Ford’s process?

    Can’t say I agree with some other points in this review. The Fusion’s interior has always failed to impress me. The revised IP is better, but the door panels continue to look crude and cheap. The rear seat is fairly roomy, but the bottom cushion is so flat that I find myself sliding forward on it, and cannot find a comfortable position. Should be easy to fix with a more contoured cushion, but they haven’t.

    What has so many people now recommending the Fusion is its proven reliability. TrueDelta’s stats include the 2010–it’s reported repair rate of 20 repair trips per 100 cars is clearly better than average. Stats for previous years also here:

    http://www.truedelta.com/car-reliability.php?stage=pt&bd=Ford&mc=98

    55,000 car owners signed up to help with the survey so far. More participants = better info for everyone.

    • 0 avatar
      Jimal

      I actually like this front end; it is a huge improvement on the original Fusion front. I had one of these as a rental down in southern Florida back in October and was more than a little impressed with it. A very nice car.

    • 0 avatar
      PennSt8

      Fairly crude and cheap compared to what? Certainly not the Malibu, Sonata, Camry (the Accord is slightly better, but not by much). The 06-09, I’ll agree….but the 2010, far from it. It’s padded where it needs to be and soft touch up top.

    • 0 avatar

      Mike

      I think there’s too much Chrome. In fact, If they replace most of it with MESH, it looks alot better.

      Have you seen MESH grills for the MKS?
      http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/LINCOLN-MKS-2009-T-REX-CHROME-MESH-BUMPER-GRILL-GRILLE_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem3efab1f566QQitemZ270493939046QQptZMotorsQ5fCarQ5fTruckQ5fPartsQ5fAccessories

      And yes, I’m glad TTAC agree with me for once on interior space.  The Camry definitely has more of it. Its really amazing that the 300C, S550 and CAMRY are cars I can get comfortable when the  SHO, A8 and BMW 7 I can’t.

    • 0 avatar
      Ernie

      EVERYONE dislikes the revised front end. How did it clear Ford’s process?
       
      *cough*acura*cough*
       
      Razor blades or a beak, take your choice :)

    • 0 avatar
      baldheadeddork

      C’mon Mike – EVERYONE?
      As design statements go, Ford’s far from the worst. Audi looks like a plankton-eating whale, Chevy looks like the focus group was made up of Hertz, Avis, Dollar and National, Acura is angling for a place in Transformers III, and Toyota…well, it’s hard to be snarky about something that doesn’t exist.
       
       

  • avatar
    gslippy

    A vanilla car – just what many buyers want, as proven by the sales numbers.  If it’s reliable and affordable, too, then Ford has a winner.

    • 0 avatar
      dolorean23

      Absolutely true. The Camry SE  is hardly what I would call excitement but you can get a “sport” version. Unfortunately I was hoping that Ford would bring back the SVT Contour in a Fusion version with a Direct Injection, turbo V6.

  • avatar
    The_Mase

    Seems like a reliable car that gets good gas mileage and isn’t overpriced. Not hard to figure out why Ford has a winner here. Maybe GM and Chrysler could take note.

  • avatar
    guyincognito

    I’ve already stated my dislike of the Fusion on the other reviews so I’ll save those comments. However, I don’t understand why you would pick the “ye old duratec” over the lighter, cheaper, more efficient, and just as engaging (or unengaging as the case may be) 4 cyl.

  • avatar
    Ernie

    Okay – enough lurking, had to register (to vent).
    Would it kill them to put a MT6 in this vehicle?
    (okay, not much of a rant, but, please, tell me that someone else agrees?)
    -Ernie
    “Besides, SHO does not come with the manual in this iteration, so, I am sure they
    might as well paint it pink and call it a Ford Taurus Mary Kay edition.” -Nutcase Friend of Mine

    • 0 avatar
      davis1d0

      I’m with you 100%, I asked the reps about that when they were in Chicago talking and do press work on the car.  I just got blank looks.
       
      Off topic, but why do these reviews always compare cars to an Audi.  They are not the greastest things in the world…. tie rod problems for 20yrs anyone??

  • avatar
    Lemmy-powered

    When there’s a three-pedal wagon version of this car, Ford will have my attention.

    Until then, I don’t care about the Fusion and neither does anyone who can afford to shop the aspirational brands.

  • avatar
    ronald

    I prefer the new grille, though apparently I am in the small minority.
    It may not generate enthusiast-level enthusiasm, but the people I know who just bought one of these LOVE it. Different strokes . . .

    • 0 avatar
      WildBill

      Not in love with the grill but it does get your attention, and not in a bad way. I pass a black one everyday on my way from my parking spot in the company garage to the building and it’s way better looking than most sedans I see there, and that includes Acura, MB, Lexus, etc. I think Ford has a winner here.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    When there’s a three-pedal wagon version of this car, Ford will have my attention.Until then, I don’t care about the Fusion and neither does anyone who can afford to shop the aspirational brands.
     
    Which amount to about twenty or thirty people, and those who want an “aspirational’ brand will skip by Ford anyways.
     
    Meanwhile, the Camry, which doesn’t offer a stick shift wagon (with a diesel!) sells four huundred thousand copies per year.   Mazda, which did offer a car with a V6, wagon and stick shift, sold a few thousand in it’s entire model run, while VW, which also sells two wagons with a stick, sells fewer cars (cars, not Passats and Jetta, all the cars they sell) than Ford sells Fusions in North America.
     
    I think Ford can safely ignore the AWD/Diesel/Wagon/Stick crowd.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      I think Ford can safely ignore the AWD/Diesel/Wagon/Stick crowd.

      LOL…great post.

    • 0 avatar
      Lemmy-powered

      I disagree. You are thinking like THEY do.

      Ford should not ignore the enthusiast/technical crowd.

      The perception still exists that American car companies have given up on everything but fleetworthy sedans, soccer-mom CUVs, and pickups.  I’d say that perception is getting stronger every day. Mark my words — that’s going to hurt them.

      What was the wisdom here the other day? Ford did best when it attacked GM (Toyota) from the side?

      It ain’t all about chasing the Camry.

    • 0 avatar
      golden2husky

      Would it really kill them top offer the MT6?  It would not be the top seller but it would certainly sell enough to justify it.

    • 0 avatar
      Len_A

      Would it really kill them top offer the MT6?  It would not be the top seller but it would certainly sell enough to justify it.
      You would think so, but it’s not necessarily true. Besides adding one more power-train combo to the assembly mix (and to hold manufacturing costs down, most manufacturers try to minimize that as much as possible), the other big issue is crash testing and certifying the car for NHSTA. Unless an MT6 version uses exactly the very same mounting hardware underneath, where the engine and transmission mount to the front cross member, by law, Ford has to completely recrash test an MT6 version. For the 1996 model year Taurus SHO, that’s what did in the manual version – the cost of crash testing a manual version wasn’t justified by the previous generations sales numbers.

    • 0 avatar
      dolorean23

      The biggest problem with offering a 6 spd manual vs. an automatic is the lucrative rental and government fleet services. Few people it seems want to row it themselves on vacation or on TDY.

    • 0 avatar
      davis1d0

      The thing is the manual transmission is already in production in other markets… getting it done can’t be that hard that ford is willing to just let Ford fans turn to other makes because we can’t get a manual on something a bit more powerful and nicer then an entry level Fusion or a Focus.  I know that it has turned me away up untill just this year.

  • avatar
    willbodine

    I like these cars and agree with the reviewer.  Actually considered a MKZ but for the clunky front power seat gizmos all too visible in the rear seat footwells. That is a major deal-killer to anyone “stepping down” from a “real” luxury car.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Thanks for the review, Don – well done. I’ve been planning a comparo of this car and am holding off until I can get my hands on the new Hyundai Sonata. As far as handling goes in this segment, you can pretty much sort the competitors into three categories: isolation tanks, faux-sport-sedans, and the inbetweens.

    Isolation tanks: Hyundai Sonata, Chevy Malibu
    Faux-sport-sedans: Mazda 6, Nissan Altima
    In-betweeners: Honda Accord, Ford Fusion, Toyota Camry

    You might be surprised to see the Camry as a non-isolation tank, but the ’10 model has a retuned engine and suspension that has made a pretty dramatic difference in how it drives. I found the Fusion to have an Accord-like handling/steering feel balance – probably comes closest to that bogey among any car in this class.

    Personally, I thought the Fusion drove sweetly, but the one I tested had a coal-black interior that sent me in search of Prozac, and the styling was overwrought. At least Ford got the driving experience right.
     

    • 0 avatar
      sacrat

      I assume that Sonata (2011) vs. Fusion will be called “Battle of the Beaks”. Personally I love the beak on the new Sonata at least in pictures. The Fusion, not so much…

  • avatar
    salhany

    The Fusion was made to be the ’80s-90s Taurus of today: a mainstream sedan average people could buy and enjoy driving while getting good reliability. Looks like they’ve achieved that goal which is to their immense credit.
    I see these new ones everywhere on the road now. They are apparently selling very well. If I had to buy one I would probably opt for the new Milan, as it doesn’t have the razor blade grille and sports very appealing SEAT-style tailights. Of course, I think FoMoCo’s sold about 15 Milans total this year.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Why is Ford softening up their cars?  I liked the ride quality on the last Fusion a lot for a sedan.  It wasn’t a Mazda6, but it was certainly better than the Accord and Camry.  My opinion was it was just about perfect for this type of car.  It was a unique selling point….never punishing or harsh, but gave you some confidence in the turns.
     
    They did it with the Focus too….went from pretty fun little rig (drive an SVT….I prefer it to any of the other cars it competed against…) to apparently softer as well.
     
    Maybe its what the masses want?  I always liked it as a distinguishing feature.  EVERYONE does soft and comfy.  Some do sport.  Fusion and Focus straddled the middle just right.
     
    Makes me wonder how the Fiesta will be….
     
    Its also interesting the difference in priorities for the US and Europe.  I know they’re different markets,  but Ford got their reputation in Europe for making “everymans cars” but they all had brilliant suspension and steering setups on them.  They stood out, and they sell extremely well.  Why not do it in the US?  I’m sure they’ll use the increased sales as evidence they made the right choice, but I might be prone to argue that it isn’t the suspension getting softer that caused this, but rather the improved exterior and interior, Ford’s not taking a bailout, and their quality ratings.
     
    What ya gonna do?  Its one of those things where you might like to drive a certain brand of car (support US car companies, quality is there, fuel efficiency is there, etc) but when a company doesn’t offer what you’d like, you just won’t buy.  Its a bit of a shame…

  • avatar
    tonycd

    I test drove the 4-cylinder, 6-speed Malibu and the 4-cylinder, 6-speed Fusion.
    Surprisingly, both have enough acceleration to not get you killed. Both handled pleasantly, with good suspension geometry and adequate roll control. The big difference that jumped out at me was the engine noise under acceleration — Chevy tamed it, Ford didn’t. The unpleasant thrashing really undid the car for me. It’s the kind of thing you wouldn’t care about if you didn’t care a bit about your car, but Toyonda and now Chevy don’t force you to live with it.
    As a personal gripe, I also keenly dislike those blue gauges on the Fusion. All of them are knockoffs of Acura, but the Malibu does it well (as does the new Taurus) while the Fusion’s treatment comes off as a cheap, garish imitation.

  • avatar
    Deorew

    I totally agree.
    This Fusion seems to be a great car, but I want my V6, 6 speed manual transmission.
    Until then, I will stick with my 295,000 mile Contour V6, 5 speed manual.
    Ford, my cash is waiting.
    Friends and family have seen my Contour over the years, and it has sold many Fords for you. 
    Ford, give me the Fusion I want.  You will sell more auto-box Fords, not to mention the additional respect you will get from automotive publications, which will sell even more Fords for you.
    Hope to make a deal with a dealer soon……   :-)

  • avatar
    PennSt8

    I’ve yet to drive a Fusion Appearance/Monochrome Package, and with the suspension mods and change in tires…..I’d assume that overall handling is cleaned up a notch or two.
    Not sure why so many folks rave about the 06-09 (outside of the Sport Pkg and steering rack), because it wasn’t that spectacular either. It did the job and was engaging, but it didn’t set the wold on fire either.

    • 0 avatar
      revolver1978

      Keeping this in mind for my partner who currently drives a Passat 2.0. . . . doesn’t need an exciting ride, and flashy lights and good reliablility are important to him.
      PennSt8 – is that a Saab IP i see in your avatar?

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    55,000 car owners signed up to help with the survey so far. More participants = better info for everyone.

    Holy cow Michael – you’ve really built TrueDelta up!  Nice work!

  • avatar
    SupaMan

    Hard to believe those points made about the Fusion being a boring drive. Especially when the Fusion is based on the old Mazda6 CD3 platform which was genuinely a fun-to-drive car. Apparently, in all the reworking and repackaging, Ford managed to take the fun factor out…a shame really.
     
    The old Fusion was a genuinely fun car in the same vein as the ’02-08′ Mazda6.

  • avatar
    jimble

    I rented a Fusion a couple years back and found it reasonably pleasant and competent, as rentals go, but there was one ergonomic flaw that drove me batty: it was impossible to activate the turn signals without a very awkward reach off the steering wheel. Most people don’t seem to use turn signals at all so perhaps it’s not an issue for many buyers, but I’m pretty fanatical about using them consistently and the Fusion was the only car I have ever driven in which reaching the turn signal lever was a problem at all. My partner agreed that it was a bad setup, so unless he was just humoring me it wasn’t all in my head.
    Has anyone else ever noticed this? Has it been fixed?

    • 0 avatar
      PennSt8

      Nope same setup.
      We have an 06 and I don’t recall ever having this issue. I’m 6’3″ and drive with my hands at 10 & 2 (for the most part), and I have no problem at all reaching for the turn signal (even with my hands on the steering wheel). Not trying to debate that it wasn’t an issue for you, just stating that it isn’t an issue for me.

    • 0 avatar

      Its funny you said that, when I had my ’08 MKz I used to engage the high beams when I tried to use the signal to change lanes, I was thinking of getting a bumper sticker that said “didn’t mean to blind you, my high beam switch sucks ;) )

  • avatar
    Z71_Silvy

    This car is hideous no matter what grille you have…and who left their hair nets on the taillights?

  • avatar
    NickR

    EVERYONE dislikes the revised front end. How did it clear Ford’s process?

    Next year it will have four blades and five the year after.

    Sounds like a car perfectly suited to its niche.  But, geez, even though many of us are at the life stage where have to drive something fairly prosaic does not mean we don’t want to get some satisfaction from driving.  Please, give it sport package with tighter suspension and quicker, more positive steering, and a raspier exhaust note.  That’s not a lot to ask, is it?

  • avatar
    Bimmer

    Mr. Don Gammill Jr.,
    is it SE or SEL model that you’re reviewed? Article says SEL, but it’s headline SE.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Ford should not ignore the enthusiast/technical crowd.
     
    No, but they shouldn’t design for them, either.  Enthusiasts are a fickle bunch to start with, and don’t offer a market near large enough for Ford to survive on.  The appeal to the enthusiast crowd should be the kind taken by the Nissan with 2003+ Altima (eg, power), not the kind taken by Mazda with the 2004-2008 6.
     
    It ain’t all about chasing the Camry.
     
    No, it’s all about beating the Camry.  One of Bob Lutz’s biggest mistakes as GM’s “Product Guy” was to try and sell boutique products at mass-market price points and margin levels.  Boutique is all well and good when you aren’t geared to be profitable at 20%+ of the market and have economies of scale to cope with; it’s not so good when you find yourself trying to hock a cramped, rough-riding, ergonomically-compromised, enthusiast-oriented car that appeals to maybe twenty to fifty thousand people per year but only turns a profit at four times that.
     
    The Fusion needs to be a better Camry in order to succeed.  This means it needs to get better mileage, be more reliable, offer more useful space and better ergonomics.  Oblique attacks on the market don’t work, especially not for a mass-market brand like Ford.  If alternative-by-nature brands like Volkswagen or Subaru can’t make a market case for an AWD wagon with a stick shift, Ford would be insane to even try.

  • avatar
    Don Gammill

    Hey guys, per Bimmer’s comment above, please note the correction: this review is actually for an SEL model, not the SE model that’s indicated.

    The fact that it says “SE” is entirely my fault – even though I put “SEL” in the e-mail, I accidentally left off the “L” in the file name of the Word document I attached to the e-mail message (and again in the title above the article).

    I’ll e-mail Ed and ask him to change it.  Sorry for the confusion.

    • 0 avatar
      tomaxhawk

      I have a 2010 Fusion SEL V6 and the picts in this review show the SE. (different wheels). The SEl is a better looking car in silver with tinted windows and alloy wheels. The picts show plastic wheel covers.

  • avatar
    wstansfi

    I think they got the interior colors upside down. When you put light and dark, generally you put the dark on the floor mats to hide the dirt and stuff, and you put the light colors on the dash, maybe seats to brighten up the interior. They did it backwards. You only want pale beige carpets in your ride if you’ve got someone to detail it for you every two weeks. Not so much for Ford’s target demographic.

  • avatar
    ponchoman49

    The changes made to the 2010 model are very typical of what most manufactures are doing these days. More sound insulation, less engine noise, in your face garish over wrought front end treatment, decontented bodyside molding door protection with a resulting plainer more basic side appearance, silly looking over sized wheels and tires, terrible harsh cheap feeling cloth seat material, no more glovebox lights, lack of interior color choices save gray, tan and black and Star Trek guage clusters that light up as the Starship Enterprise. This pretty much sums up the Fusion for 2010 or in other words for every improvement comes 2 cheapened areas or items removed from the car to keep the bean counters happy. This is my biggest annoyance with todays cars. They are all looking increasingly blah and alike. They are all using colorless boring  interiors. They are using harder seats with that cheap crap cloth that is impossible to clean and keep clean and they are all serving up smoother quiter driving experiences with a resulting less fun to drive attitude. It really seems to me like ideas have run out and everybody is just copying the Jones and Smiths.

  • avatar
    mtymsi

    As the owner (leasee) of an 07 SE w/ sport pkg, 2.3L 5spd auto for most drivers the 3.oL V6 is not necessary as the 4cyl has plenty of power for normal driving. The only circumstance I can think of that the 6 cyl would be necessary is if your normal driving consisted of two lane highways and you had to pass frequently as the 4 cyl doesn’t have enough power for that application. I am not a fan of the new front end styling and while I don’t think it looks terrible I don’t think it looks good either. The quality of the interior trim in the new model is a definite improvement from the original especially the metal finish center console. My biggest complaint about my car is the engine noise and though I haven’t  driven a new one thought I’d read they were much quieter, apparently not. Overall at least Ford has a very competitive entry in this market segment. The thing that bothers me the most about the restyle is the lack of bodyside molding. The result will be numerous parking lot dings and scrapes, sheer stupidity not to at least offer it as an option.
     
    For those that think a manual trans should be offered you’re maybe 1 in 10,000 buyers and Ford knows that so that’s why there’s no manual trans offered.

  • avatar
    GoHuskers

    Some of these ultra negative comments about the Fusion seem to have originated from nitpicking old ladies with too much time on their hands…  Lighten up guys and gals…, who cares about hair nets WTF?


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States