By on June 9, 2016

2017 ford fusion sport

Ford’s comparing itself to the Germans again, but this time the vehicle isn’t a Granada, and the disco era isn’t still raging.

The automaker just announced it boosted the output of the 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6 in the 2017 Fusion Sport, keeping horsepower levels the same while adding an extra shovelful of torque.

The upcoming mini-SHO is now rated at 325 horsepower and 380 pounds-feet of torque, a bump in twist of 30 lb-ft. Expect the hottest version of Ford’s bread-and-butter midsizer to jump off the line slightly faster than anticipated.

Feeling sassy, Ford targeted not just the six-cylinder Honda Accord and Toyota Camry in its release, but those foreign guys across the pond, too. The automaker wants BMW, Audi and Mercedes-Benz buyers to know that the Fusion Sport, which lands this summer, is a performance bargain with an MSRP of $33,475.

It doesn’t look like them, though. That ad campaign was put away forever, alongside Ford’s wide lapels and platform shoes.

Ford gleefully claims the torque rating outclasses the BMW 535i, Audi A6 3.0T and Mercedes-Benz E400, but maximum output is only achieved using 93 octane gas. Don’t make plans to gloat at the competition while you fill up on regular.

The boosted EcoBoost will be mated to standard all-wheel drive and a six-speed automatic transmission. Tamer versions of the mill can be found in the F-150 and Edge Sport, but the version in the Lincoln MKX matches the Fusion Sport’s torque rating.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

83 Comments on “Ford Discovers Extra Torque, Adds It to the 2017 Fusion Sport...”


  • avatar
    NoGoYo

    A 335xi is like 50 grand, you have to be a real German car snob to not try this out first.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      I don’t think anyone pre-disposed to buy a BMW is going to settle for a lowly Ford.

      • 0 avatar
        tooloud10

        You’d be wrong about that. I traded my V8 X5 for a Ford pickup and it’s been a great vehicle. I used to be ‘pre-disposed’ to buy BMWs, but grew tired of the ridiculously poor reliability and having the dash lit up like a Christmas tree all the time.

        I’ve heard lots of good things about the Fusion Sport and can’t wait to try one out.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      I would pay that premium for RWD and stickshift.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      It’s now the 340i (xDrive), but point taken.

    • 0 avatar
      Reino

      but TORQUE STEER.

    • 0 avatar
      tekdemon

      Interestingly Ford compared itself against the 535i, which I guess does make sense when you look at actual interior volumes. I’m guessing they didn’t pick the 340i because the 340i actually puts out a ridiculous amount of power despite it’s lower rated output (since BMW is notorious for crazy underrating their motors it makes almost as much at the wheels as their supposed crank rating) and it weighs a lot less. But against a 535i a Fusion sport might actually manage to both outpower and outhandle it-the last MKZ with sport suspension and PSS’s like the M5 managed to outdo the M5 in slalom testing so the platform can definitely do some great things.

      If I was going to actually buy a new car this would be at the top of my list for sure, but I know I’d probably end up blowing up the option boxes and buying a $45K fusion which would basically depreciate $20K in a year. At that price you might as well just buy an MKZ with the rear-biased GKN setup.

  • avatar
    True_Blue

    That’ll be quite the sleeper. A spiritual successor to the original SHO, minus the cable-shifted MTX gearbox.

    • 0 avatar
      yamahog

      To say nothing about that V6 gem from Yamaha.

      • 0 avatar
        kuruma

        That was a V8

        • 0 avatar
          jhefner

          The MTX manual transmission would be a reference to the first and second generation SHOs, which had the Yamaha V-6. The third generation (catfish) SHO had the Yamaha V-8; but it only came with an automatic.

          • 0 avatar
            True_Blue

            Yessir – MTX cars were the 3.0L Yamaha V6 (although in ’94-’95 you could get a bigger, bored-out 3.2L version bolted to an AX4S automatic trans), & the late first and early second-gen cars also got rod shifters. The 3.4L V8 was Yamaha heads on a Ford block, from ’96-’99.

            I had a ’95 MTX, last and possibly best of the Yamahammers. It didn’t wake up until 4K RPM but what a glorious sound it made the butterflies opened and the whole intake roared.

        • 0 avatar

          It was a 225-HP V6 in the original (pre-ovoid) SHO . I owned one.

          • 0 avatar
            tooloud10

            220HP in the original ’89 SHO. I had one and absolutely loved it, despite the build quality being pretty atrocious.

        • 0 avatar
          maxxcool7421

          V6 for the original, not the garbage v8 that ate the cams after 50k miles.

        • 0 avatar
          slap

          It was a Yamaha V6 back when the SHO had a manual.

    • 0 avatar
      zamoti

      Why didn’t they call it the ST? Maybe because no manual? I suppose it would fall outside of their current conventions. Turbo FWD=ST, turbo AWD=RS, but only with manual transmission.
      If nothing else, a Taurus SHO sitting next to this would probably be a relative bargain for those who like to haggle.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Because it fits in more with the Edge Sport, Explorer Sport, and the previous Fusion Sport then with the ST twins. It’s a really nice Fusion with a big engine and some other upgrades. It’s not as comprehensive in it’s changes as either of the ST vehicles.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    Looks like they discovered the cooling system was performing a bit better than expected in testing.

    With this torque level in a FWD-based platform, the real question in my mind is how the AWD system is set up. Are we thinking more like Fusion 2.0T or Focus RS? Will it provide significant torque to the rear wheels as a baseline? How quickly will it respond to a need for additional torque at the rear? Will there be any side-to-side torque-vectoring trickery? The answers to these questions will determine whether the car feels like a real sport sedan or like a hilariously overpowered front-driver.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Before it was stated that they plan to use the Focus RS’ Torque Vectoring rear diff.

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      Using the RS differential.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      I am pretty sure it’s the standard Ford AWD system. It’s not the GNK rear diff that the Focus RS, MKZ, and Continental use.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        if by that you mean the same Haldex-style system the Taurus SHO uses, then it should be fine. I don’t recall any serious torque steer on the SHOs I’ve driven.

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      I’m not sure how relevant this is for the Fusion Sport, but the 300HP in the AWD 3.7 MKZ is handled very nicely with zero torque steer. I’ve driven the same car with FWD and, by comparison, it suffers from massive torque steer so, clearly, Ford is doing something right with their AWD drivetrain on this platform.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        bunkie, you are correct. It should be fine. The AWD 3.7L MKZ is fine without the trick diff. However, the GNK diff in the RS and MKZ is more proactive than the standard system. This should be fine though.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Absence of torque steer isn’t a bad thing, but what I want to know is what the baseline power distribution is. If it’s still 100/0 F/R unless there’s a traction event, then *bzzzzt* thanks for playing.

    • 0 avatar
      Grenade

      I’ve been patiently waiting for this one to come out. I had no idea about the MKZ being styled like the yet to be released Continental. Ford may actually be trying with Lincoln now…

  • avatar
    Papa Smurf

    With an MSRP of $33,475 this is the performance bargain of the decade…Very slick-looking and rated at 325 horsepower and 380 pounds-feet of torque(!!!) My ’14 Charger R/T wouldn’t be able to keep up with this. The Fusion Sport should sell like hotcakes- at least here in Metro Detroit.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    If you don’t believe Bark’s talk about a “leasing bubble” – go check leases on Fusion’s (including the Sport).

    More tempting than a bottle of vodka to the average alcoholic.

    • 0 avatar
      yamahog

      Why does it matter whether or not you believe Bark?

      If you believe him then you can value your lease on a very favorable expectation of depreciation.

      If you don’t believe him, then you can evaluate the lease like any other lease.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Will it also use the RevoKnuckle front suspension, to cope with torque steer?

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Looks like it will go fast.

    Is the chassis up to the torque?

    Will this deliver the usual EcoThirst FE? But most who buy this are only buying the horsepower and probably wouldn’t car if it is getting around 18mpg, if you are lucky.

    My friends Honda in Miami is only getting 19mpg.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      The chassis is up to the torque. We’ll see how the differential reacts. Hopefully this isn’t a torque steer monster.

      • 0 avatar
        bunkie

        The 2017 MKZ 3.0 (according to the specs I could find) has even more power and torque: 400/400.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          The MKZ will be an even better sports sedan.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Will it, though? Won’t it have a softer, more ride-oriented suspension and more weight?

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            With the “Driver’s Package” and the 3.0T, it’ll be a few steps ahead of the Fusion Sport. 75 more HP is a lot more.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            The cheapest configuration you can get with the Driver’s Package is $48,720 according to Ford’s site. That’s a lot of extra coin. Nice-looking car and quite the sleeper, but it’s a lot of money.

            I also still wonder whether even the “sport-tuned” suspension that comes with the Driver’s Package will be as good as the Fusion Sport’s.

            Late edit: fully loaded (all options, no accessories) it’s $59,400. Holy smoke. That’s decently equipped A6 3.0T money, and a well-used W-Impala below a 550i.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

            The Lincoln should be better than the Ford. Ford (brand) is about value, Lincoln should be about no-compromise cars, but a value against a similarly equipped compeditor from Europe or Japan.

            That’s how you truly justify buying a Lincoln over a Ford. Not just nicer materials and standard everything the Ford has optional. A true higher experience up the ladder. They’re doing the right thing.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I’d get the MKZ without the Driver’s Package. The AWD and 3.0T is enough.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Configured that way, it seems more likely to be an overpowered highway cruiser than a sporty car.

            Even in 325-hp Fusion form this could well be a sub-5-second 0-60 car. With that level of performance I really want very good body control.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            If I bought an MkZ 3.0T, I would be looking for an overpowered highway cruiser.

          • 0 avatar
            sgeffe

            @John: Yes, they seem to be trying.

            There once was a name for a dressed-up Ford: Mercury.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            sgeffe:

            The Fusion Titanium is the Mercury replacement. Same body panels, engines, nicer interior, and some different exterior fascia.

            The Lincoln MKZ is more different from it’s Ford platform mate than basically any Mercury or Lincoln since before the 60s. It has a completely different interior and exterior and a unique engine.

      • 0 avatar
        Papa Smurf

        A little torque steer wouldn’t be a bad thing… Also a little oversteer would be appreciated.

        • 0 avatar
          bunkie

          All I can say is that my AWD 3.7 MKZ feels very nicely planted. It has no bad manners (aside from slightly numb steering), whatsoever that I can detect. I’m really impressed with the transmission programming both in normal and sport modes. The car always seems to be in the right gear, it reminds me of my last V8-powered car in its almost effortless power delivery.

          I priced out a 2017 MKZ with the 3.0, Revel sound, panoramic roof and a couple of other small options. It came to about $46K. is that a lot of money? Well, it’s a nicely equipped car with AWD and 400HP. If you can forget that it shares a lot with a Fusion, it seems fair. Not to minimize the Fusion, Ford clearly got the platform right with this car. Put a decent engine/drivetrain in it and it really shines.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            It’s wonderful to watch you evolve before my eyes, in real time.

            When you owned a GMCadillac CTS, you were often dismissive of my truth bombs about horrid GM quality, poor GMClackillac design, poor GMClack-i-lack customer service & reliability, and poor GMClack-i-lack everything.

            But you’ve since moved on from GMClack-i-lack, and I expect your dislike of all things GM to grow with time, as it naturally should.

          • 0 avatar
            bunkie

            The difference between us, dear DW, is that I try to keep an open mind. You are a broken clock and, like a broken clock, you are sometimes right. But only sometimes.

          • 0 avatar

            Leave it to DW to take a Ford thread and make it about Cadillac.

  • avatar
    Verbal

    This car is going to be a game changer.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Its certainly unlike anything out there.

      Maybe people will stop calling Camry SE’s “sporty” when this car defines midsize mainstream sports sedan.

      Imagine if Honda came out with a similar-performance Accord trim, then others. It could start a war where every consumer wins.

      There hasn’t been a dedicated car in this class since the Contour SVT and third gen SHO. Maybe some Malibu SS, but I don’t think anything this hardcore has been tried in a long time.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        i think he’s riffing on Derek.

      • 0 avatar
        sgeffe

        If Honda were to throw every trick short of a turbo at the V6 in the Accord Touring, it’d be close, but it would still lack AWD, and be down a little on power. T-charging the V6 would raise the price above the Fusion Sport (and put it into base TLX territory), as would cobbling-together some sort of AWD.

        • 0 avatar
          Bazza

          Honda is traditionally slow to react to market (not necessarily performance) deficits…remember how long it took them to put a six cylinder in the Accord after the Camry came to market with its V6.

          Honda has an excellent AWD solution with SH-AWD but it’s a near certainty they’ll want to continue pushing customers to Acura for that feature. A damn shame, really.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    “Maybe people will stop calling Camry SE’s “sporty” when this car defines midsize mainstream sports sedan.”

    Kind of cocky considering the Fusion’s “sportiest “trim featured a wheezing uncompetitive 2liter for 4 straight model years, don’t you think?

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      Only on TTAC could a 240 hp 2.0 liter be called “wheezing.” you people are unbelievable.

      • 0 avatar
        sportyaccordy

        Given that the Fusion 2.0T is SLOWER than a naturally aspirated 4 banger Accord I think that’s a pretty fair assessment.

        • 0 avatar
          Kenmore

          Funny how the less real world traffic lets you use it, the more speed is fetishized.

          HP Gollums and The Precious.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            Do you just wander over here when the local senior center and bingo hall is tired of hearing your opinions on the loss of comfortable H-points and ride quality in today’s newfangled modern sedans?

            Anyway, your statement is partly true, but I still have enough opportunities in my day to day routine to use a quick car.

      • 0 avatar
        bunkie

        The EB Mustang I rented last weekend certainly made a lot of wheezing noise from the turbo. That, plus the noticeable turbo lag made it the least appealing of the three available engines. Yes, it was torquey, which was impressive, but the delay between requesting power and the delivery thereof made the car seem very reluctant.

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        It could have 2400 horsepower and it’d still be wheezing crap in my book. The entire formative part of my life, when 4 cylinder engines only went in crap boxes for poor people and being a poor person I usually had to settle for one, poisoned the well for me forever. That 4 cylinder buzz is a no sale for me.

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        Jim, the 2.0 Ecoboost in the Fusion sounds and performs like sh*t compared to the V6s it competes against.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    Oh dear, it’s new car time for me in 2018 and now here is another strong candidate. I wouldn’t even look again at a Camry or Accord V6 for this price, $34K is a deal for this level of drivetrain performance. Time will tell how the chassis and AWD handle that power.

    I hope demand wanes in two years because $34K is a bit more than I want to spend and this car has the potential to make me stretch my budget a bit.

  • avatar
    White Shadow

    Torque is so much more important than HP. Yet bragging rights always seem to favor HP figures. Personally, I love driving cars with good low end torque. Sort of the opposite of a car like an S2000. Even modern cars with 2.0T engines are lots of fun simply because they tend to make 250+ lb.ft. at just 1500 rpm. Ford has finally starting putting some torque into their mainstream sedans.

  • avatar
    S2k Chris

    Highly interested in this, as it seems a lot more interesting than the TLX SH-AWD that would be my ho-hum default choice to replace my TSX. I’ve had some more mundane Fusions as rentals, and the only thing I dislike is the small door opening means you have to duck pretty far down to climb in, but for 325hp/380lb ft I could get used to it. I’m still sorta hoping for some more interesting TLX drivetrains for 2018/2019 (detuned V6TT Honda????) but if not I’m going elsewhere.

  • avatar

    “Ford gleefully claims the torque rating outclasses the BMW 535i, Audi A6 3.0T and Mercedes-Benz E400, but maximum output is only achieved using 93 octane gas. Don’t make plans to gloat at the competition while you fill up on regular.”

    Uh…the drei Deutscher cars also need Premium…?

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      I have to look especially hard to find 93 octane here in Oklahoma City / Edmond anyway. Still, I think this is stellar. Let’s hope Ford floods the market with these and they depreciate to the price of a base Focus within a few years.

      • 0 avatar
        Papa Smurf

        Right on about the 93 octane. It’s not impossible to find here in Metro Detroit… typically it’s 91 at all the non “premium” gas stations.

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          Eh? in the Detroit area I’m actually *surprised* when I encounter a station which has 91 octane swill as “premium.” I think I’ve only seen it at a couple of Valero stations.

  • avatar
    madman2k

    It should be a fun car but it would be more fun with RWD and that motor in a small light car.

    What I am wondering is if the fuel economy will exceed 30 on the interstate, with 87 ethanol blend. It should. My F150 has that motor and is rated for 26 highway. Cruising along at 50 with few or no stops it can exceed that, but in town it’s definitely worse.

    If it will knock out over 30 on the highway it would probably be a great car for covering long distances quickly (I mean at the speed limit…) and eat up hills like they are nothing.

    I sat in a Fusion and thought the interior was pretty well designed. Never driven one though.

  • avatar
    carguy

    It an Audi S4 for the masses.

    Now if only Ford would do something about its poor assembly quality then this might be a really interesting car.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • GregLocock: “smoking hot figure of 400 hp. According to our source, the reworked FA24 in STI spec will employ a...
  • Hellenic Vanagon: The Syncro Heresy has the answers.
  • eggsalad: No, I broke it out. But fancy cars can cost $1200/year.
  • Scoutdude: While those numbers paint a rosy picture of Tesla there are some factors that make those numbers seem...
  • ToolGuy: Art, The Popular Mechanics estimate of “27 to 180 deaths as a result of rear-impact-related fuel tank...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

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