By on October 29, 2008

Ford has just released the first picture of the 2010 Fusion, a facelifted version of the current car. While the Fusion we have now is a decent ride, it’s just decent. The refreshed Fusion attempts to rectify the current model’s below-class horsepower, among other improvements:

–The current 2.3 liter 4-cylinder is replaced with a “new” 2.5 liter 4-cylinder with 175 horsepower (the same engine that’s in the Mazda6 4-cylinder), a jump of some 14 ponies. Torque for the 4-cylinder is also up to 172 lb ft now, an increase of 16 lb ft. The 4-cylinder also has variable cam timing, a nice addition.

–The 3.0 liter V6 will stay, but is now up to 240 horsepower from 221 and its 6-speed automatic now has a manumatic shift mode; this should prove helpful in getting around the infuriatingly geared economy-friendly transmissions.

–The range topping “Fusion Sport” will feature Ford’s not-so-awesome 3.5 liter V6 with 263 horsepower.

–All models get 6-speed automatics, an upgrade for the 4-cylinder.

–A hybrid model will come at some point with the newer generation 2.5 liter 4-cylinder unit in the 2009 Escape Hybrid.

–No EPA testing yet but Ford claims 32 mpg highway for the 4-cylinder model.

As for which one I’d buy if I was in the market for a Fusion, unless there are major suspension changes to the 3.5 liter V6 Sport model, I’d rather keep the weight down and take the almost-as-powerful 3.0 liter V6. Then again, what I’d really want is a turbocharged AWD Fusion with 350 horsepower, but considering the market’s current implosion, I doubt Alan Mulally thinks that’s a good way to spend Ford’s money.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!


39 Comments on “2010 Ford Fusion Facelift Revealed...”

  • avatar
    Michael Ayoub

    Wow, I really like it. It’s very clean looking.

  • avatar

    Someone forget to tell Ford that the Fusion has 5 blades, not 3. Helps with the razor rash.

  • avatar

    Not bad. Hopefully they have rectified the dash and moved the climate controls up from knee level.

  • avatar
    Stephan Wilkinson

    We have an “infuriatingly geared” Volvo V50. Fine with me. I’m not a hypermiler, but I’m done with driving stupidly. Let the thing shift up at 2,000 rpm, I’m happy, and I have more important things to think about than whether I’m outdragging the mindless dork in a pickup the next lane.

    Funny, a couple of weekends ago we were going to a Bonnie Raitt concert with our daughter, home to New York from San Fran, who was driving. This former track star in our 911 was motoring along at 50 and 55, I kept looking at my watch and finally said, “Brook, WHY are you driving so slowly?”

    “That’s how I drive now,” she said.

    Our children are the future, thank god.

  • avatar

    I have to guess that this is the look Acura was going for, but failed.

  • avatar

    I’ll second the “not bad.” But most people won’t notice anything new.

  • avatar

    And here I thought the Fusion couldn’t get any uglier.

    Why does Ford insist on making everything look so crass with their refreshes? The F-150, E-Series, Super Duty…and now the Fusion.

    Now I am convinced that Ford NA cannot design a good looking automobile.

  • avatar

    Looks good to me, better than any other midsizer…especially domestic. A nice, clean, and somewhat brash design. Finally no more PRNDL on the autos. Maybe I’ll consider an AWD V6 model now…if I go with a sedan.

    No, I’ll just go with the new 6 instead.

  • avatar
    Justin Berkowitz


    I haven’t driven this, obviously, but I have driven the new 6. If it came down to the current V6 Fusion or a new Mazda6, I’d take the Fusion. Far more fun to drive. We’ll see what this is like when the time comes, I guess.

  • avatar

    The haedlights are much nicer looking in the update. They’re wider and shorter, generally better proportioned. The projector lenses also look pretty cool.

  • avatar

    I like the new look, but I want to see photos from more angles.

    I wouldn’t call the 3.5 liter a ‘not-so-awesome’ engine. Not only does it put out respectable hp and torque, but it is extremely smooth and has a great sound – it is quiet unless you thrash it then it sounds angry, and not like it is barfing on itself. Yes, there are other 3.5 liter engines that put out bigger numbers, but almost all of those require premium to get there, the Ford unit runs on 87 octane.

  • avatar

    The only option I want on the new Fusion is manual with AWD. That’ll replace my aging A4, very nicely.

    What say you, Ford?

  • avatar

    I actually saw one of these “in person” while driving up Hwy 1 (along with a few Milan mules, including the hybrid) — it was heavily camo’ed, but it looks a bit better in all of its dimensions from what I could tell.

    That said, I’m not a fan of the chrome eyebrows its got going — in fact, I think there’s just too much chrome in general. It’s louder than the current gen, but in a borderline ostentatious way. At least Ford is living up to its “bold moves” claim, albeit in minute increments.

    I have to say, though, that I definitely like the hints of the Mondeo in the front (especially with the faux air intakes/fog lamp housing).

  • avatar

    Hummmm Is this what we down under can expect, if the falcon survives beyond 2010? putting up with a 4 cylinder and an anemic 3.5l engine against the turbo 6’s? Might as well buy a Mazda 6 and bury Ford Australia with Mitsubishi Australia.

  • avatar

    As few of those I see on the road, I wonder was it worth even to print this?

  • avatar

    I love it! Looks like the Interceptor concept.

    Wonder if they’re doing anything with the center console design.

  • avatar

    Forget the Fusion. Bring the Mondeo to the US!

  • avatar

    AMEN! The Mondeo outclasses the Fusion in every way. Looks, quality, etc.

    This “new” Fusion looks like a clown car…or a rapper with a “chrome grille”.

    The Malibu and Accord look MUCH better. Not nearly as crass.

  • avatar

    240hp? Great, now it’s a match for the Accord V6…in 2003. I don’t understand why Ford is still sticking with the 3.0, the 3.5 in the MKZ gets better fuel economy than the current 3.0 in the Fusion/Milan. And only offering the 3.5 in “sport” trim sounds really hokey. I can already picture the over-sized rims and spoiler, all for a car whose performance is still not going to be particularly noteworthy compared to all the mid-sized V6 sedans already on the market.

  • avatar

    Maybe the Mercury Milan version won’t look so goofy.

  • avatar


    Even if it does, it will have Jill standing next to it, so no one will notice until it’s too late.

  • avatar

    It doesn’t look half bad if you ask me. That said, there’s still too much chrome.

  • avatar

    Redrum – I can only imagine they will rework the transmission enough that the 3.0 can get better economy in the 2010. The 240hp gets 26 mpg in the Escape, so, with the more aerodynamic and lighter Fusion, 28mpg plus shouldn’t be an issue.

    Also, as long as the next sport model mirrors the current sport package, it is pretty low-key and fairly attractive – darker chrome, wheels with grey painted pockets, small rear lip spoiler, and some unique interior materials. Ford isn’t going to throw a WRX wing on a Fusion and call it a day.

  • avatar

    The 2.5 is not the exact same engine as in the Mazda6. The basic architecture and some components are the same, but Ford has some different programming and breathing. And I think Ford claimed 33 mpg… we shall see, though. It is the same engine as in the Escape, just with different breathing.

    Earlier releases hinted that its hybrid will be rated about 40 mpg in the city, which would put it pretty far up the pecking order – especially with midsize sedans.

    The 3.0 was given a stay of execution because it would be EPA-rated better than the 3.5 according to some insiders on BON. After seeing the numbers for the Escape, I doubt that somewhat, but it’s possible. My guess is that the 3.0 will be 19/29 or so like the Camry and Accord V6s.

    If there is ever a 4-cylinder in a Falcon, it will be an Ecoboost with ~260hp/260tq that gets low/mid-30s on the highway.

  • avatar

    Thank you Ford. No superfluous creases on the flanks, proportionate headlight clusters, decent proportions. Maybe the current trend toward hideous sedans can be reversed after all.

  • avatar

    Maybe its just my part of the country but there are a lot of Fords, especially Ford Fusions on the road out here.

    I like the exterior; say what you will but you see the front end and you know exactly what it is from any distance. That’s fairly unique these days.

  • avatar

    Another “not bad.” Give Ford credit; they’ve achieved a look that’s distinctive without being ugly.

    Any word on whether the current five-speed manual will be replaced by a six-speed, presumably from Mazda?

    Now, can I have the option to get a manual transmission with leather seats without having to buy some goofy appearance package? No, the “Blue Suede Package” is not acceptable either. I mean, who buys that, Elvis impersonators?

  • avatar

    Wow this is a lot better looking than the current one with the proportional lights. Hate that giant chrome grill though. It’s classy and understated looking and then they add that low class fat gold chain in the front.

  • avatar

    I like it, although it could do with just a little less chrome. If they had made those chrome grille bars thinner and put, say, a black honeycomb style mesh insert between them, it’d be perfect. The headlights definitely look better than those of the current car.

  • avatar

    Improvement. And I generally hate BIG CHROME.

    With the very nice reliability record it is building it is one of the few domestics I would recommend to a friend.


  • avatar

    A bit too much chrome for me, but the Mondeo influence is a step in the right direction…

    If they ditch the “chrome” taillights, it will be a plus.

  • avatar

    The grill is a bit too blingy for my taste, but I like it anyway – it’s a good update for the car.

  • avatar

    I’m delighted by this refresh; AB reported that (according to Ford’s press release) there’ll also be pretty appreciable MPG increases. If the HWY number is finally over 30 for the 4-cylinder, this’ll be getting a long hard look from me when the time comes to replace my car in a year or two. Also, the hybrid version has me very excited, I’m impressed with the drivetrain’s performance in the Escape and I wonder what efficiencies they’ll wring out of it in the sedan.

    Of course, they could go GM and (for whatever ungodly reason) try and squeeze as much power out of the 2-mode as possible a la the 2-mode Vue. Man what a bunch of dumbasses they got over there at GM HQ.

  • avatar

    Any word on when this would be available? Originally, I thought the refresh was going to be for the 2009 model. Is this going to be an early 2010 model?

  • avatar
    Justin Berkowitz


    I just emailed Ford to ask –
    response was “Spring 2009”

  • avatar

    This is exactly what Ford needs to do – keep a decent car fresh with mid-cycle tweaks. The more powerful AND more economical engines are just what the doctor ordered.

    It’s also much better looking than the current Accord and Camry.

    My 2003 Accord has been a great car, but I’ll be giving the new Fusion a serious look when it comes time to replace it, given what Honda has done to the current Accord.

    Justin, any word on interior improvements?

  • avatar
    Justin Berkowitz


    check out my new post on the 2010 fusion for more info.


  • avatar

    I like the old Fusion’s sheetmetal better for the same reason the Ford 427 Concept was better looking than the Intercepter Concept.

    I wonder if there’ll be a GEN II Milan. It would look better, but we all know another wanna-be Ford sedan really shouldn’t be.

  • avatar

    My mother-in-law has either a 2008 or 2009 Ford Fusion, purchased within the last 6 months. She has reported astounding gas mileage of always north of 30mpg and easily 35mpg. I’d have to go back and ask again, but I think she was about to knock down 40mpg on a highway trip that was taken in it. Hers is the current 4-cyl that is being replaced. As far as Ford’s gas mileage claims go, I believe them. It’s also surprisingly large on the inside and doesn’t feel hugely slow. No idea how they did that, but it is a whole lot farther from ‘not good’ than I ever expected the vehicle to be. Maybe it was the color she got it in that threw me….but the vehicle itself is surprisingly good.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Moparmann: Lessee, in descending order & cubic inches: 440 c.i. Mopar (Dad’s car) 340 c.i. Mopar 318 c.i....
  • DenverMike: They just need you to hesitate long enough and put off buying what you were about to buy, until you can...
  • Halftruth: This car is not Chrysler’s best example. They slapped it together and shoved it out the door. They...
  • ScarecrowRepair: If I were FCA, I’d be advertising that GM think FCA products have better trade-in value than...
  • Felix Hoenikker: In the film, GM also suggests the car based cell phone. However, that didn’t materialize till...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber