By on October 15, 2012

Katt Williams once famously commented on the supposed resemblance between the Chrysler 300 and the better class of Anglo-German luxury cars, and in this image from The Smoking Tire‘s Matt Farah we see a similar confrontation: the Fusion meets an AM Rapide in Beverly Hills. What say you, TTACers? Imitation, inspiration, or idiocy?

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

87 Comments on ““The Funny Thing Is That It DO Look Like A Phantom… Till A Phantom Pull Up.”...”


  • avatar
    bunkie

    A few things are certainly true:

    The Fusion won’t eat you out of house and home the way an Aston-Martin will (a friend of mine found that out the hard way), the style may be stolen, but it looks good and, finally, it’s so much better than the Gillette razor look from a few years back.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    I think the Fusion looks great, especially side by side with the DB9?.

    Now they must see fit to offer Fusion in a coupe…

  • avatar
    -Cole-

    PAGfail

    the aston is better looking

    • 0 avatar
      Detroit-Iron

      Yes, but is it five to seven times as better looking?

      • 0 avatar
        Quentin

        That would imply that the only reason one would buy an Aston is for the looks (or that the Fusion delivered equivalent performance.)

        I think that is my biggest beef with this rather normal sedan looking like an Aston. The look implies that it is going to be a performance vehicle. 90% that we’ll see on the road won’t break 180hp while weighing 3400lbs. Countach kit car, if you will.

      • 0 avatar
        kkt

        The exterior, no, maybe twice as good looking. But the interior is about 10 times as good looking.

    • 0 avatar
      tatracitroensaab

      lol of course its better looking, it’s a low, long coupe. What bothers me is that people forget sometimes how important proportions are. People say oh, (insert sports car) is so beautiful, why cant they make sedans like that? or oh, old cars are so pretty, they dont make them like they used to. It’s not like the designers got any worse, it’s just that theyre dealing with inherently ungainly proportions. A (space efficient) four door sedan will NEVER look like a sexy sports car. If it does, it probably is somehow less practical than a mainstream midsize or compact. Cars back in the day could afford waste and were less regulated. The rolling American sculptures from the 1950s-1970s can never be again. They are not aerodynamic, use too much space, probably dont meet pedestrian crash safety tests, etc. etc. etc.

      There is a reason why cars now look the way that they do.

      • 0 avatar

        Well C&D in resent comparo complained that Fusion is not very practical compared to Passat or Accord. The complained about head/knee room in back seat, narrow trunk opening and too stiff German-like structure (which adds to weight and compromises). Accord took the 1st place btw and Passat the last. Fusion was second and Altima – third.

  • avatar
    raph

    I like rhe headlights better on the Fusion

  • avatar
    Conslaw

    I’ll take the Fusion and the price difference in small bills – or large bills.

  • avatar
    sco

    Imitation bordering on theft. How is it that Samsung gets sued by Apple for putting rounded corners on their phone while Ford does this?

    • 0 avatar
      jz78817

      1) the Apple-Samsung suit wasn’t about “rounded corners.” It was about trade dress and the possibility of “passing off.”

      2) nobody is going to mistake the Fusion for an Aston Martin.

      3) The Evos concept is the obvious origin of this styling direction for Ford. Why weren’t people complaining when that was unveiled?

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        “Trade dress” is a Trademark litigation term, but my understanding is that Apple prevailed primarily on design patent infringement claims, not trademark infringement claims. Not that it should have prevailed on either.

    • 0 avatar
      dolorean

      A court decision heard around the world. Ironic it came from the Corporation who famously threw the hammer down on Big Brother Blue IBM has now become the synthesis of ThoughtSpeak.

      I love the lines on the new Fusion, but wouldn’t call it a dead-ringer for an Aston. But it sure does channel that groove baby.

    • 0 avatar
      tuffjuff

      To be fair, the new Fusion is evolved from the previous Mondeo, and as pointed out by jz78817 the Evos concept of several years ago. The only big difference? The actual Fusion doesn’t open up like a Transformer.

      Also, Samsung’s default UI, physical device, etc all played off to look nearly identical to the iPhone. With the Galaxy S3 they’ve moved from this look, but it doesn’t change the fact it happened.

    • 0 avatar

      Either it’s just different enough or Ford retained some rights from its former ownership. (Don’t they still have a minority stake?)

      No one will mistake it for an Aston? They will if they only see the front. A few months ago I noticed this Aston approaching in my rearview mirror near DTW (and thus near Dearborn)–turned out to be a Fusion.

      • 0 avatar
        highlandmiata

        According to the infallible Wikipedias, Ford is indeed still an owner of Aston. Not to say Aston could not still get mad about it, but Ford has some pretty deep pockets that they probably like to access from time to time.

    • 0 avatar
      Detroit-Iron

      I don’t think the law will care if you steal from your left pocket to pay your right.

    • 0 avatar
      racer-esq.

      Aston Martin does have a design patent on this car, dating from
      December 28, 2010. Under the current law there is protection based
      on first to file, so it would not matter if Ford already had Fusion
      prototypes at that time.

      http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=D0629718&PageNum=&Rtype=&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page

      A couple possibilities:

      -Ford may have an agreement with the new majority owners that it
      sold Aston to.

      -This design may be different enough to fall outside the patent.

      -Aston Martin may be embarresed to admit, through litigation, that
      a $20,000 family sedan looks enough like an Aston Martin that Aston
      Martin is willing to sue.

      Here are the search results for all of the design patents assigned
      to Aston Martin. The “front portion” and “rear portion” patents
      are for the Cygnet, obviously Aston Martin cannot claim a patent on
      the rest, which is just a Toyota iQ.

      http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=APT%2F4+and+AN%2F%22aston+martin%22&d=PTXT

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        Maybe they’re playing a waiting game. Let Ford sell a few hundred thousand of these eyesores, and then sue for treble damages to trademark. They could make far more this way than they can selling cars.

      • 0 avatar
        Chicago Dude

        CJinSD – that strategy doesn’t work in the US.

        Equitable estoppel would hold that the AM would be guilty of misleading conduct by allowing F to continue to misuse their trademarks/design patents. The best they could get would be damages from the misuse prior to first learning of it – in other words, they can at best do no better than suing upon first learning of the misuse – but the court system will not look kindly on them for attempting to play such games so they may actually come out worse.

        The point at which they first learn of the misuse is extremely important during the discovery phase as it serves as the point at which AM absolutely must start preserving documents related to the case. Playing games with that (and not getting away with it) will absolutely get them sanctioned by the court.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        Since Ford does business in the UK, couldn’t Aston file there? It’s probably easier to play pinata with a US company on the other side of the pond, as GM learned from their dealings with Fiat.

      • 0 avatar
        Detroit-Iron

        I think nature could claim prior art for the catfish.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        I doubt that Aston is happy about how the Fusion looks. But I do not expect a suit. Even if there is a basis (i.e. even if the AM spin off does not bar these kinds of suits against Ford, and the design is close enough, based on precedent, to merit a suit).

        This is not a clear cut case, like it would be if Ford made a 100% replica of the car, and damages from infringement will be difficult to prove, since they are not direct competitors. AM would have to show that customers bought Porsches or Jags instead of Astons because Astons now look like Fusions. Not to mention that Ford has massively larger legal resources than AM.

        There will be no legal action.

    • 0 avatar
      hifi

      A number of reasons….

      1) Ford fully owned Aston until recently, and still has a minority stake
      2) The Aston grill is a double design, with an upper and a lower mesh. Fords is just a single.
      3) Aston has themselves put their grille on a lowly Toyota economy car. Ford could argue that this makes the design ubiquitous.
      4) Samsung directly competes with Apple. Ford and AM don’t. It’s the same reason Audi wouldn’t win in a suit against Kia.

    • 0 avatar

      I think Ford cannot sue itself. AM was designed and developed by Ford.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    Both are attractive benchmarks that stand atop their respective segments in the looks department. Inspiration. After all the money Ford dumped into Aston the dozen years it owned it, it’s allowed a little inspiration. Sure, the DB9 is prettier, and a lot of its sexiness is in its relative unattainability. We’ll see how hot the Fusion it still looks when there are as many of them rolling around as there are Altimas.

  • avatar

    Speaking as a former Aston owner, AMOC member, etc…. the Ford looks great, and it’s no worse a ripoff than the Tesla Model S, any recent Kia, etc. Whether you like it or not, get used to it, because I suspect that Ford is gonna sell an awful lot of ‘em.

    • 0 avatar

      John,

      I see more Maserati in the Tesla Model S front end than Aston Martin. When I asked Franz Von Holzenhaus, who’s in charge of styling @ Tesla about the Model S looking like a Maserati, he said “I don’t know what you’re talking about. They look completely different.” I should point out that he was smiling broadly when he said that. Evoking the look of a more expensive car without copying it is one reason why guys like Franz get paid the big bucks.

      • 0 avatar

        Indeed it is, and even Ian Callum’s original designs for Aston (DB7, the first Vanquish; the cars that launched Aston’s modern era, designwise) were influenced by cars that had come before. The Model S’s side profile screams DB7/DB9 to me, but I agree the grill is more Maser, and we could argue that the profile is more generic “big upscale European GT” than Aston per se.

        Still, it’s a) a very good looking car and b) not a particularly original shape.

  • avatar
    mcarr

    I would probably be sorely tempted by a Fusion coupe.

  • avatar
    LBJs Love Child

    I think the design similarities are being over blown a bit, but then, the current AM design language was done back when Ford owned AM, and many of the designers are still FoMoCo employees.

    Good looking sedan, but it doesn’t really look like a DB-9, even if it does share some of the design language.

  • avatar
    Ion

    In a lighter color you can see that the Aston’s grille is a different shape. Now if Ford chromed the grille more and moved the oval onto the grille it would look like a Toyota Higlander’s.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    I’m not going to claim the Fusion is ugly, though the “gasping-for-air-gaping-wide-open-catfish mouth” look is getting really, really old (Ford, and everyone else using it, should ditch the entire look).

    As far as Ford cribbing Aston, everyone cribs everyone today, so it literally doesn’t matter anymore. I remember when the current generation Sonata came out and people were claiming Hyundai cribbed every company from Mercedes (CLK) to Volkswagen (CC).

    Here’s my real reservation with the Fusion: A 1.6 liter, 178 horsepower motor, charged with the unenviable duty of hauling approximately 3,500 (or more) lbs of car, passengers & cargo around.

    (Cue the uber-engineers whose duty it is to chime in and tell everyone how automakers have NOT sacrificed reliability or durability in their quest to help their large & heavy, sold-in-heavy-volume, midsized cars meet CAFE standards and obtaining the best possible MPG-for-marketing-purposes, that the new, better-er materials [such as unobtanium alloy] automakers are using will alleviate problems posed by basic laws of physics in past times, and that the little 1.6 liter will hold up for hundreds of thousands of miles, as will the slushbox it’s connected to).

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      So Ford has a decent 200+hp engine in the Ford Focus and Volvo S40, and yet the Fusions starting off with a tiny 1.6 to move its weight?

      A year later the car is recalled due to fires.

    • 0 avatar
      potatobreath

      The little 1.6 L engine sounds like it’s turbocharged if it’s putting out 176 hp and not ~100 hp. Maybe it’s not that little and inadequate, if a turbo is providing variable displacement.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        @potatobreath:

        All these turbocharged gasoline mills that are on the order of sub-2 liters pulling almost two tons of weight are akin to the new pioneers of the automotive world.

        The most that can be said about their long-term reliability and dependability is “time will tell,” but paint me skeptical.

      • 0 avatar
        NMGOM

        DeadWeight…

        You have every right to be skeptical. Just because Saab could make a simple, reliable turbo with modest boost, doesn’t mean it can be generalized by other car makers to run a higher boost. MIke Miller, technical editor writing for “Roundel” magazine, has already issued a warning about what it will cost for the new “twin-turbo” unit and attendant goodies at 100,000 -200,000 miles in the new BMW’s. And, you’ll note that some top manufacturers have intentionally shied away from turbos in their own products: Ferrari and MB C63 AMG. And all this, of course, says nothing about rev-ability and instantaneous response of a naturally aspired engine. And what about that gas mileage stuff? For example, if Corvette can get 28 mpg out of a 6-liter, then there must be other ways to improve efficiency without forced induction….right**? Or is the lure of a turbo the easy quick thing to do, like the siren’s call….? Paint me skeptical too.

        ** Does that mean that a 3-liter using the same principle could get 56 mpg? (^_^)…

        ————

      • 0 avatar
        potatobreath

        NMGOM,

        Fuel economy-wise, the Corvette’s engine* isn’t performing any magic that other cars aren’t capable of doing. A modern 6-speed transmission with double-overdrive gears will let an engine run slowly and quietly on the highway at cruising speed. A Chrysler 300C has similar EPA ratings. City mileage is still pretty bad.

        Highway fuel economy from an engine half the size, albeit not double, could be impressive, but I doubt Corvette buyers want a turbo-V6 (turbo to maintain high performance) under the hood.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Kinda of funny when it was VW with the CC that totally cribbed off the CLS.

    • 0 avatar
      tonycd

      Notice how many automakers are getting ripped now for big ugly grilles?

      I don’t think it’s a coincidence. I believe it’s the pedestrian safety regs that dictate a high front end so there’s collapsible space under the front of the hood.

      Like the crash safety standards that are making bodysides so tall the car looks ill-proportioned unless you go with stupidly giant wheels, factors outside the stylist’s control are making the stylists look stupid. They don’t have the option of simply making the front of the car a featureless flush panel; they have to fill it up with something.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      The way people accelerate from a light or onto a highway around here, that 1.6 I4 has about 160 more horsepower than they really need.

      We have an on ramp here that s about a half mile long and people routinely merge onto the highway 5-10 miles under the speed limit. Even at nearly 180 HP, folks would be hard pressed to burden that engine.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        It’s more the torque relative to weight and the commensurate stress on the transmission than the acceleration time that’s relevant to the long-term durability/reliability, IMO.

        Throw an always-and-forever spinning turbo into this mix, and an additional layer of potential problems just presented itself.

        There are many slooooow diesels that will last pretty much all of 350,000 miles (or more) because they have enough torque matched to the weight of the vehicle they’re pulling and because many of them are built robustly, and not to a consumer, volume-centric price point (that many have manual gearboxes doesn’t hurt on the transmission reliability front, either).

    • 0 avatar
      corntrollio

      “Here’s my real reservation with the Fusion: A 1.6 liter, 178 horsepower motor, charged with the unenviable duty of hauling approximately 3,500 (or more) lbs of car, passengers & cargo around.”

      It wasn’t that long ago that a 2.5L 4-banger and a 3.0L V6 powered a 3000 lb 1st generation Taurus). That 2.5L I-4 had 90 horsepower/130 ft-lbs (18/24 with dismal 3-speed automatic, 19/29 with manual, curb weight probably 150 lbs lower), and that V6 had 140hp/160 ft-lbs (18/26 with 4-speed automatic, top of line LX curb weight 3001 lbs).

      Fusion (Taurus successor) curb weight is 3223 lbs. It has a 1.6L turbo with 178 hp/172 ft-lbs as the base engine 27 city/37 hwy. And that’s the base model.

      For comparison, Audi put 1.8Ts in A4s (same weight category) for B5 generation (1996-2001) and B6 (2002-2005), and the face-lifted B5 had similar hp/tq. Google says curb weight of a B6 is 1525 kg = 3362 lbs.

      In Europe, they use small engines in 5-series BMWs. The E39 and E60 had a 520i (E34 had a 518i). The E39 520i was 3461 lbs and had 167hp/155ft-lbs. For comparison, a US-spec 535i in 2008 was around 200 lbs heavier.

      I think it’ll be just fine.

  • avatar
    Spanish Inquisition

    I’m not going to lie: I thought the Fusion was just another Aston, looking at my RSS feed’s pictures. It doesn’t help that it’s black, and half in the shade.

  • avatar
    Tstag

    Did Ford outsource their styling to China?

  • avatar
    fredtal

    The new Fusion is a nice looking car, but the Aston Martin is beautiful. Pictures really don’t the AM justice.

  • avatar

    The Fusion looks more badass. And it do look like an Aston, until an Aston pull up…

  • avatar
    MLS

    Though I never saw the resemblance myself, I thought the uninformed masses likened the Chrysler 300 to a Bentley. Since when has it looked anything remotely like a Rolls-Royce Phantom?

  • avatar
    daviel

    “It Look Like A Phantom… Till A Phantom Pull Up.”… has to be the all time great saying about styling.

  • avatar

    As a Bentley connoisseur, I always thought that the Chrysler 300 looked more like an Arnage than a Rolls-Royce Phantom, and it poses an even closer similarity to the new Mulsanne.

    This is unless, of course, you actually know something about cars.

    As far as the new Ford Fusion goes, this is not the first resemblance between a plebeian ride and a blue-blooded one. The most failed rip-off I can remember is the Kia Amanti, which looked remarkably like the already-hideous Jaguar S-Type.

    And let’s not forget the fact that Ford did for several years own Aston Martin. But whether or not the style was ripped off, it is coherent with Ford’s newest school of design and it was implemented extremely well (and this is coming from a huge General Motors fan).

    • 0 avatar
      Ciriya.com

      I always thought it looked like a modern day rendition of the 70s/80s boxy Chryslers/American cars in general, with a dash of 70s and 80s Mercedes-Benz thrown in for good measure.

  • avatar
    ponchoman49

    I would take the Fusion and use the rest of the money to buy a new house.

  • avatar
    blowfish

    Merc had been doing this for a few yrs now, the difference between the high & low model are the size, rest is almost the same.
    The Maybach looks like a S. Infact it is re-badge and 3x the price, is like going to a pricey steak joint, ofcourse the maitre’D would be in a pressed , starched jacket.

    How often when a Ford park next to an Aston? If u own an Aston your only consolation is ” Imitation is the closest sincerest form of flattery”

    All ve need now is go out to buy an AM badge.

    • 0 avatar

      This is why Maybach will be defuct next year. Yes, the 57 and 62 models both looked like remarkably like the Mercedes-Benz S-Class, but they were significantly more dated. It got to the point that one would rather be seen in an S-Class than a Maybach. It surprises me that this happened since Daimler AG is one of the most advanced companies in the world and surely had the resources to build an aristocratic luxury line. Volkswagen AG and BMW did far better with Bentley and Rolls-Royce, respectively. The Continental manages to hide its Phaeton roots and the Ghost differs sufficiently from the 7-Series with which it shares a platform.

      It’s a shame Daimler didn’t get the memo, as Maybach could have been unstoppable.

  • avatar
    acuraandy

    I must say, that neo-Fusion is sexy looking. If (and that’s a BIG if) I ever went domestic again (other than Panther or LX) for a passenger car, that’d probably be it.

    Unless Senor Marchionne approves a ‘Demon Dart’ 2-dr variant of the neo-Omni…..:) Pentastar, ya listening? :)

  • avatar
    RobAllen

    I’ll take one of each please in piano black with brown leather.

  • avatar
    86SN2001

    You gotta laugh at Ford on this one.

    We all know why Ford is copying Aston. Ford is biter that Aston was grabage when they owned them and are trying to lessen the brand value of Aston my styling their mediocre family appliance to look like an Aston. It’s crystal clear.

    And it’s funny that Ford would so blatantly copy another companies intelluctial property considering it was FORD that sued Ferrari for wanting to use “F-150″ ON A FORMULA 1 CAR. Of course, Ford is also the company that sued their own enthusiast group for having the gaul to put Mustang logos in a Mustang calendar the group had made. Did I mention this was a Mustang enthuiast group?

    And now Ford is ripping off Aston Martin with their frumpy, oddly proportioned, mediocre Fusion. It’s not that great looking of a car. There are far better in the segment.

    • 0 avatar
      86SN2001

      Wow, posting from your phone leads to a lot of mistakes. Oops!

      • 0 avatar
        el scotto

        If it’s got a blue oval, you’ll be snarking it; we can set our watches to it. It’s your usual mediocre prose.If you had read the above posts, many are praising the Focus and not laughing at Ford. As usual, you have no proof to back up your first paragraph. Call it you opinion fine, calling it a fact begs for proof. I guess haters gotta hate. Good day sir.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      Ford trying to devalue Aston Martin with the Fusion? After the Cygnet, that claim would get laughed out of court. Also, Aston Martin had a unique grill that I think could have been protected, but they’ve managed to morph it into a more generic shape that is it tough to protect (as in trade dress protection).

      It could also be argued the the Fusions look is an evolution of the 58 Ford and the 1960 Thunderbird. Not exact, but you can see the lineage.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      I am not part of your all encompassing “we”; please refrain from presuming my thoughts when you write. I’m sure I’m not the only one one here who doesn’t walk in lockstep with you. Clear writing is the sign of a clever mind.

    • 0 avatar
      ranwhenparked

      Why would Ford want to devalue a company that they own 12.1% of? They’d be wrecking their own investment. This is just a case of Ford continuing to employ a bunch of ex Aston designers from the 2000s that are now reinventing pet themes that they know have proven to resonate with buyers.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      How has Ford “so blatantly copy another companies intelluctial property”? Who has determined it is intellectual property and has indeed been copied? Again, conjecture not facts for the reading public.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      It is true about Ferrari and the Mustang group. However, they aren’t germane to subject. Do you have a list of “things I hate about Ford” and pointlessly put them in your posts? I fail to see how those two items link to anything or make your comments more insightful.

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    If Jack sees an Aston Martin here in central Ohio, I want him to e-mail me ASAP. I feel like I am as likely to see an Aston martin as I am to see a sunny day between now and next May.

  • avatar
    kjb911

    while having routine service done to my focus I noticed a delivery of new fusions had arrived. Seeing it in person answered two questions.
    1.] It is an elegant car that while having similar lines does not get mistaken for an Aston Martin (by myself anyways)

    2.) With the offerings of a manual, this may be my choice come time to trade in my focus.

    Hell throw in a v6 with a stick call it an RS and id be begging/borrowing/stealing to get one

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    After being in my co-worker’s Aston Martin DBS, I don’t think Aston really needs to worry about the Fusion, even if the Fusion is a damn good car.

  • avatar
    Robert.Walter

    Maybe this could be the start of a trend.

    Which Ford models should co-opt the design language of:
    • jaguar (Lincoln)
    • land rover (Explorer has already done this)
    • Volvo (Taurus)
    • Aston (fusion done)
    • Mazda (focus, fiesta, kuga)
    • mercury (mustang – but just as special XR-7 package, with traditional front and rear fasciae of the Cougar!)

  • avatar
    dantes_inferno

    All of this design imitation nonsense only goes to show:

    “There are two types of people in the world – those who are, and those who wannabe…”

    • 0 avatar
      rnc

      Considering Ford paid for the development of all of the above vehicles listed in the post above yours, I think they’re kind of free to use whatever they’ve paid for (additionally the design themes were probably in the claymation stage before those 4 brands were sold)

  • avatar
    dude500

    Actually, the side-by-side picture makes the Fusion look more like a Mustang to me, especially the bulge on the hood…

  • avatar
    mcs

    I was kind of looking back for the roots of the Aston Martin design language and found an interesting link. Take a look at this 1947 Alpha and compare it with this DB3.

    1946 Alfa: http://goo.gl/vps3R
    1952 DB3: http://goo.gl/OOkfy

    So you can see Aston has had inspiration from other auto makers as well. In fact, it’s signature grill seems to have originated with Alfa.

    • 0 avatar
      NMGOM

      mcs….

      Wow! Good research work. That is absolutely amazing. So, car makers have obviously been “copying” each other for quite some time. Probably since the Model “A” Ford, which looks like every other car in that era…..

      ———–

  • avatar
    Junebug

    I think the new Fusion looks great, finally saw one at the dealer last week. Although we can all “Monday Morning Quarterback” let’s see how it goes over and check in with some sales numbers in a few months.

  • avatar
    panzerfaust

    For a moment there I thought this was a story about one of those hand made Chinese copies that look pretty good until you get within ten feet. The Fusion is a great looking car, if you’re going to imitate, an Aston Martin isn’t a bad place to start.

  • avatar
    ccode81

    I always feel Aston Martin V8 of 70s to 80s has borrowed the face from original Mustang.


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

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India