Yes :) so does mercury milan. what do u know it turns out Ford still is able to make good cars

i feel the same way, all american automakers have potential and experience to turn all this crap around and to get in better shape. personally i blame managment for not being more responsible with quality of there vehicles . making those gas gazzlers was a huge mistake.

This year all I’ve replaced are the battery(most people would call this a wear item) and the original thermostat(wear item or not??).

Your engine history is a little jumbled, though.

The 2.5 in your 1998 was a stroked version of the 2.3 in mine.
That engine dates back to the Pinto.

Since 2000, Ford has used the Mazda-sourced “new 2.3″.

I lament that once I’ve worn out this Ranger, there won’t be any more new ones to replace it with.

I used to drive nothing but Fords until I re-married and acquired 3 more kids.Then, I bought the first of the 3 Chrysler-built minivans I’ve owned over the past 20 years.

The Aerostar had a nicer interior and tighter body than a Voyager/Caravan, but a rental version of the one that I could afford–the RWD model– really sucked on snow and ice.

Windstar and its replacements were clearly inferior in every way to either Aerostar or the Chryslers. IMHO, the only way that Ford could move Windstars was to de-content the Aerostar and starve it of R&D money so it would die a quiet death in 1997.I’ve often wondered why Ford couldn’t figure out how to make an FWD Aerostar.

I hope Ford survives. They are the most deserving of the Detroit 3.

And, as someone who currently owns a 2003 Accord, and is turned off by the bigger current version, I will be giving the Fusion a serious look when it comes time for a new car. (The good ratings in Consumer Reports are also encouraging.)

Justin: Some of the cars you listed had some serious flaws. The GTO and Solstice/Sky, for example, didn’t flop only because they were too oriented towards enthusiast drivers. Ditto for the Saturn Astra.

Look, all of us enthusiasts want turbocharged 400 horsepower diesel stick shift cars that offer as cheap options sunroofs, AWD, hatches, wagons, 7 seats, leather, cloth, manual seats, and whatever else.

The bottom line is that interesting cars are the kiss of death for manufacturers in the US. You have to build what will sell at a good volume.

Frankly I was shocked to learn that the AWD V6 Fusion will continue and that the 4-cyl/stick combo will continue. We should be grateful for that much.

Just think about all the Car-Nerd-oriented cars that have been sales duds:
–Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky
–Pontiac GTO
–Pontiac G8
–Lincoln LS stick shift
–Mazda6 hatch and wagon
–Toyota Supra
–Volvo S60R and V70R
–Volvo C30
–Ford Focus hatch and wagon
–Ford Focus SVT
–Saturn Astra
–Toyota MR2
–Lexus IS300 sedan and hatch
–Honda Civic Si hatchback

I finally saw the rear of this thing, and all I can say is: woof. Few redeeming design traits. This thing will be remembered as fondly as the 1988.5 Tempo.

I’ve benchmarked a new Mazda-6 at work and it’s pretty nice-probably nicer than the ‘new’ Fusion/Milan…kind of like how the previous Mazda-6 was nicer than the Fusion/Milan siblings.

Couple corrections to posters above:
1) Ford NA had no role in FoA’s decision to engineer the Falcon for RHD only compatibility. The problem with Ford before Mulally is just that everything was too disjointed for Ford NA to *encourage* FoA to make it LHD compatible.
2) The 2.5 in this car evolved from the 2.3, but it wasn’t a simple bore and plop on some heads. This is nothing like the 2.5 from the Taurus from decades ago. Reaching for straws there.

The only thing I see as mediocre here is its longevity. The style is good, both in and out, and I have no doubt that the Fusion will continue to offer the same quality that earned it tons of praise from Consumer Reports. But… I don’t think this design is sleek enough to make it to 2012. It will fall about 18 months short, I think. Granted, the 4-cylinder Ecoboost is due sometime around late-2010, and it will likely make its way under the hood shortly after (1.6 – 190hp/190tq, about 30mpg or so combined) to help things out… but I just don’t see how this will remain fresh until the next-gen arrives.

Honestly, until I drive it, that’s the only thing I see.

Imagine an AWD Fusion SHO, maybe with a turbocharged version of the 2.5L I4. I’d buy one of those.

Hopefully going forward they will design the whole car to be top notch out of the shoot – I am talking to you 2010 Taurus!

Everything Ford has come out with in the last 3 years seems to be a checklist improvement on an existing model rather than a clean sheet design – Flex, MKS and 09 F150 excepted, and even these were launched without upcoming powertrain improvements, so they will need their own major mid-cycle upgrades.

The only thing I don’t like about the 2010 Fusion is that I can’t get the 4 cylinder stick with leather. Of course, I couldn’t get that in 09 either… I have an 08 Fusion SEL 4 cylinder stick with leather and roof and love it. Love SYNC and use it every day. Ford has 16 months to come out with something else for me.

I’d consider cross-shopping the Fusion based on the power pedals alone. My wife loves the power pedal feature on our ‘04 Camry.

Remember the 2.5 HSC Taurus engine anyone?

I do.

Ugly interior fitments aside, Ford is doing the right thing here, and they’ve addressed a lot of the issues with the 1st gen Fusion (ugly instrumentation especially) and gave it a good kick. That’s a better sign than letting it rot and waiting for a ‘hail mary.’