By on August 6, 2020

Specifically, the Ford Fusion — the last domestic Blue Oval product with four doors and a trunk to remain in production. Until July 31st, that is. That’s the date Ford ceased manufacture of the sedan at a Mexican assembly plant.

The end of production was confirmed by Ford via Ford Authority. Next up for Hermosillo Assembly is the Bronco Sport — a retro-styled, decently modified Escape launched alongside the body-on-frame Bronco last month. Quite a looker in its final generation, the Fusion fell victim to consumer anti-car sentiment and strategic product planning.

Now, it’s just like the others — the Taurus, Fiesta, Focus. All gone. The only Ford with a trunk you’ll be able to get your hands on now is the Mustang, but a family vehicle it is not.

Offered as a hybrid and a plug-in (Energi) with a trunk-gobbling battery pack, the Fusion defined midsize domestic passenger car travel, and we can’t forget that it also spawned one of the previous decade’s best sleepers: the short-lived Fusion Sport, which stuffed the brand’s 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6 under hood, making for a family sedan that hauled serious ass. Appealingly, it didn’t scream “look at me!” to the cops while doing it.

In an email to Ford Authority, Ford spokesperson Sam Schembari confirmed the ceasing of Fusion production while talking up the brand’s alternative products.

“As promised, Ford is reinventing the car to match consumers’ preferences and growing our business by significantly expanding our North America sport utility vehicle portfolio with the all-new Bronco and Bronco Sport, all-electric Mustang Mach-E, and all-new versions of Escape and Explorer, America’s all-time best-selling SUV. As part of this shift, we ended Fusion sedan production on July 31,” he said.

“Reinventing” the car by getting rid of all of the cars is an interesting strategy. SUVs are not cars, but customers don’t seem to care — otherwise the Fusion would still be rolling out of Hermosillo. Hybrid and plug-in hybrid versions of the Escape will step in to fill the gap felt by the now-dead Fusion Hybrid and Fusion Energi, so it’s not like the green crowd has lost one of its children. Mourning might still occur, however, among those who like sitting close to the ground.

Schembari’s words might hold more meaning if Ford follows through on what many expect to be a wagon-like return of the Fusion name. Prototypes of a lifted, Subaru Outback-esque vehicle apparently based on the Euro-market Ford Focus have been spotted, with unusual trademark filings pointing to such a creation.

The Fusion, which always maintained a heavy fleet presence, recorded upwards of 300,000 annual sales in the U.S. as recently as 2015, only to see that number almost halved by 2019.

[Image: Ford]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

76 Comments on “Officially Dead: The Ford Sedan...”


  • avatar
    threeer

    Pour one out…I owned a previous generation Fusion (manual trans!) and loved that car. Good friends of ours bought a current gen Fusion…and love it. While style is subjective, I thought this was a great-looking car. It’s biggest drawback? Not being a friggin’ SUV/CUV.

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    So, it’s officially official now? I’m not going to morn the loss of the great American sedan, if people don’t buy them then why make them? Besides, Ford will still be making sedans elsewhere in the world, so should there be an overwhelming demand Ford could bring the sedan back…

    After talking and teasing about for 5 years ;-)

    • 0 avatar
      RedRocket

      You should mourn the loss this morn anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Dodge will still sell you a sedan that is at least as American as the Fusion.

    • 0 avatar
      Jacob

      Ford sold 150 thousand Fusions a year. And this is a platform that’s shared with other vehicles. If Ford can’t make a business case for such a car, what can they make? This is pathetic. Gifting a huge market share to competition and erasing a decade of customer goodwill for a short term stock price gain.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Agreed. No big deal. If people wanted them, they’d still make them. Why bemoan their loss?
      People whine about the loss of small trucks and manual transmissions as well.

      To those whining, have you put your money where your mouth is? Have you promoted those products to everyone within earshot?

      Domestically, Ford hasn’t done well with anything that isn’t on a frame. Look at the longevity of the large Ford car/Panther platform?
      Their NUMBER ONE seller: Full sized 4 door pickups.

      Incidentally, full sized 4 door pickups are also the top 3 vehicle purchases in the USA.

  • avatar

    pathetic.

    • 0 avatar
      mfrank

      Why? Why keep making something customers aren’t buying?

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        They were buying it. The sold 166,000 Fusions last year.

        Nice legacy the Hack man is leaving. Abysmal quality and the killing of sedans. How did that clown ever become CEO?

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          Does XXX amount of sales always translate to (acceptable) profits?

          Is there a magic number? What was the percentage to fleets, cheapskates and or government? How much went out to rebates, warranty and recalls?

          Do you also wonder why there wasn’t a replacement for the Crown Vic?

          You can literally put a price on “quality”. It’ll cost an automaker XXX to ship quality items.

          Within a company, less losses over here, can mean better quality of over there. At least in theory.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            You are correct volume doesn’t necessarily mean profits. In the case of the Fusion it wasn’t that it lost money now, it was that they thought the segment’s sales and profit margins would continue to fall. So investing in a next generation wouldn’t have as big of a return on investment as they thought they could get on other vehicles. So we got the Bronco Sport.

          • 0 avatar
            MrIcky

            It’s interesting to me to watch the difference between Ford and FCA doing the same thing. There was a lot of lamenting and gnashing of teeth when FCA announced they were doing this with Dodge/Chrysler- BUT it was an actual plan. They’ve let several plans fail in their timing- but on this one they dropped everything but their full sized cars. Ford just seems to be sort of letting it happen, going with the flow, maybe we’ll drop cars for a while and see what happens…

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            “Sell em’ at a loss and make it up on volume”

            – The US Auto Industry in the 80’s

            I think so long as they have a few of their global offerings ready to federalize should market conditions shift than this is fine. They aren’t ceasing sedan production…they just aren’t selling them here. Based on my experience at the rental counter, a significant chunk of those Fusion Sales were fleet.

            I don’t care for it, but I wasn’t buying any Ford sedans either and I see the business case. I think the Explorer platform was built to underpin a sedan as well.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Quite some time ago now, Ford decided upon a global 20/80 approach. Focus on the 20% that makes 80% of your money. SUV’s, CUV’s and pickups are that 80% in the USA.
            They’d need to sell millions of low margin products to offset the low margins. Why bother when one pickup sale makes them more money than 10 small to mid-sized sedan sales.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “ Does XXX amount of sales always translate to (acceptable) profits?

            Is there a magic number? What was the percentage to fleets, cheapskates and or government? How much went out to rebates, warranty and recalls?

            Do you also wonder why there wasn’t a replacement for the Crown Vic?

            You can literally put a price on “quality”. It’ll cost an automaker XXX to ship quality items.

            Within a company, less losses over here, can mean better quality of over there. At least in theory.”

            He said “why keep making something customers are not buying”

            I showed that customers were buying it. He didn’t say anything about profitability.

        • 0 avatar
          mfrank

          The Truth About Cars has this conspiracy theory that the Fusion was actually profitable. Sorry, they don’t cancel sufficiently profitable vehicles. Ford’s shareholders need a return on their capital. Stock up on used Fusions if you like them so much. They’ll be very affordable. Just look at how much a used Oldsmobile or Saturn is.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            I’d argue that Ford being unable to make money on something with the Fusion’s volume is a problem on its own.

          • 0 avatar
            SCE to AUX

            @mfrank: Agreed.

            Ford would drop the F-150 if it was a money-loser, but it certainly isn’t.

            Somewhat off-topic: this is why mfrs don’t want to get into the EV game; unless you can sell 100k+ of them, you’re losing money.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            It WAS profitable, which is why they didn’t do like FCA and say we are killing it and stop production a shortly there after.

            It was that they didn’t think a new version would be profitable enough through its expected life cycle and that investing the money in a CUV/SUV would be more profitable long term.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            TTAC is probably right. The Mustang isn’t profitable yet they still make that. Or maybe only at Ford they can make a sedan on a shared platform (Edge and MKEdge) and a very high number of parts bin components and not make money yet a low volume muscle car with a unique platform and many unique parts somehow makes money.

            Ford is just lazy and they think the new Bronco II and the bigger Ford Blazer…err…Bronco along with all their other SUVs is what people want. Time will tell but so far it’s not working.

  • avatar
    thegamper

    It would be interesting to know if the business case just wasn’t there for having at least one sedan on sale or if it was just a calculated risk in attempting to push Ford customers into more profitable vehicles. Sales figures would suggest the former but it is difficult to really make that determination when you are dealing with 7 year old(?) model that has been on death row for at least a year now. If Ford had a new, competitive product that still wasn’t selling, then yeah, makes total sense. Still cant help feel that this is in some ways a gift to their competitors who will ultimately get some sort of bump in sales and returning customers as a result. Sedans are the new minivan though, a dwindling afterthought in the minds of many consumers despite the fact that, functionally, they may still be the best option.

    Still hoping crossovers will morph into more cross country wagon style vehicles as time marches on. That would actually be a pretty positive development and I think we will see more “carlike” flavors of crossovers as the market gets oversaturated with tall hatchbacks.

    • 0 avatar
      mfrank

      Customers have decided they want crossovers instead of sedans or minivans. I don’t see why this is a problem.

      • 0 avatar
        dividebytube

        The last time I went to a local new car “autoshow” the crowds were all around the sports cars, checking out the Challenger R/T, the Jaguar F-Type, the KIA Stinger, and even trying to squeeze into MINI Coopers.

        People still like (love?) sports car but don’t want the day-to-day hassle of owning one.

        The 2014 Mustang in our fleet still gets a lot of thumbs up and people coming over to check it out – all for a V6! – but not many want to live with one. Which is understandable given the contortions of me or my wife trying to fit in the backseat since our 6’7″ son gets the front passenger seat! But it works.

        As for sedans, I’m still a fan… and they are way less of a hassle that a coupe. But the picking are getting slim.

        • 0 avatar
          JMII

          Correct. I think people would love to own a sports car or coupe but chicken out because they fear that living with it day-to-day is too difficult. I daily a C7 and my wife drives a Q60, no problems at all but we don’t have kids or pets. Plus we have a quad cab Dakota in the garage if we truly need the extra space. Having the truck as backup means we can drive something less practical and still have our bases covered. However honestly even a Costco run is easily handed with the Corvette, it has tons of room in the hatch.

          I swear people buy CUVs for those “rainy day” situations, IE: those one-off times when you need extra space or a high riding vehicle. This means driving something that is no fun 90% of the time yet people just accept that. Thus the marketing message for CUVs is strong – you need one to cross that flooded road and keep your children safe. People have bought into this hook, line and sinker.

          • 0 avatar
            dividebytube

            I call the crossover the “master of nothing.”

            (broad brush and exceptions galore alert)

            They aren’t the fastest versus their car counterparts, the can’t handle like a sports car, the can’t offroad like a Jeep, they can’t haul people like a minivan, they can’t haul cargo like a truck. But they can do enough of those things to be passable for most people.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Let’s see, I want a car that’s easy to get in and out of, sits up high to give me a commanding view of the road and all obstructions around me, is roomy enough to carry a variety of junk, has AWD so I don’t have to white-knuckle it on our numerous snowy days with enough power and economy that I don’t give it a 2nd thought

            What should I buy? (hint, NOT a sedan)

          • 0 avatar
            LectroByte

            >I swear people buy CUVs for those “rainy day” situations

            Or they have kids and pets

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            I’d like a sports car but I am worried about smashing up the front end on steep driveways or parking lot dividers.

            “Normal” coupes are fine, but they are pretty rare offerings and the styling isn’t always better than the sedan counterpart (ie the buck-tooth new 4-series).

          • 0 avatar
            Flipper35

            Lie2Me, if there is enough snow it causes white knuckles, AWD doesn’t really help other than getting out of the ditch you slid into.

          • 0 avatar
            MrIcky

            From people I know who bought CUVs, the reasons they bought them have been:

            Perceived safety-from being able to see more to just the more enclosed upright feeling- they feel safer.

            Room for kids- they feel roomier due to the extra leg space, even if there isn’t any more actual useful room and the kids heads don’t touch the roof. Also, the kids feel more enclosed.

            Keeping up with the Joneses- people think it makes them look poor when all the other young families show up in their AWD cute-utes and you show up in a crappy sedan (this is perception, not making a statement).

            For MOST people, fun in a vehicle is now defined as having good access to music streaming services and audible. Maybe some blingy screens or something. They want to sit in their safe bubble and drink their mocha while they creep along to work. Even the plainest CUV can still be driven fairly aggressively if you’re running late for hot yoga.

            There are still cars for people who really enjoy driving, but q-ships are definitely disappearing fast.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            @Flipper35, I disagree, having driven many different cars in various snow/ice conditions AWD/4X4s with the correct tires are hands down better in bad road conditions. This is my personal experience your experience may be different

            I have never had a AWD car slide off the road or have gotten stuck because of snow, but I sure have with 2WD, plenty of times

          • 0 avatar
            MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

            You say NO FUN but just one data point, years back my fleet fresh off a divorce was two Miatas and a 4WD V6 Escape. The Escape was actually fun to drive, and very practical. Utterly CRANKING audio, too.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          “and they are way less of a hassle that a coupe.”

          Sedans in overall size and interior packaging have gotten so small they are nearly coupes. Have you seen these “tweener” sedans? Trying to provide both coupe and sedan benefits but fail at both. Might as well just sell coupes.

      • 0 avatar
        thegamper

        Is that what customers decided or has it become a necessity as so many vehicles around them grew in height? I am firm believer, as some of you may know, that the proliferation of large vehicles has made driving smaller vehicles a less appealing proposition for anyone who was perfectly happy with more “traditionally” sized vehicles. There is of course the perceived or actual benefit of being in the vehicle with the most mass and of course the marketing steadily convincing people they need ground clearance and AWD despite the fact that humanity has survived with 2WD for 100 years. It is a snowball effect unfortunately, as more tall vehicles populate the roads and continue to grow ever larger, the appeal of smaller vehicles will continue to diminish….to the delight of the automakers recording record transaction prices by convincing people that paying by the pound is completely rational.

        • 0 avatar
          JMII

          thegamper – I with you on this. As pickups and SUVs in general became more popular (for the reasons MrIcky above pointed out) anyone left driving a normal sedan felt very insecure as those beasts towered above them. I know several people who listed “safety” as the main reason for buying an SUV. I mentioned the roll over risk and they act shocked, after all the ads show these vehicle bounding over off road trails covered in rocks with ease.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Wouldn’t a sports car loss-leader make a much better “business case”?
      Than a cheap sedan? The ones you see every day at the rental counter or wear government plates?

      You have to cut your losses at some point. Think of all the automakers that don’t offer a pickup (or a good one), and don’t appear interested?

      Who doesn’t want to be BMW? Or Audi?

      Is it because Ford used to make sedans? Boring, entry level, fleet queens, or otherwise? Verse something they’ve never made?

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Yeah the business case wasn’t there to bring a new generation to market. Sales and margins in the segment have been on a slide for a number of years. When they made the call they had to predict sales 10 years down the road. Shrinking volumes means that each car needs to recover a higher percentage of the development cost. That means a lower margin per car. With margins already shrinking, that meant the return on the investment needed to bring the car to market was going to be low.

      Meanwhile Utility volume continues to increase and they have much higher margins since not only are their base prices higher, people buying utilities are more likely to spend money on high margin trim and option packages.

      For did bring a more car like crossover to market, the current Escape. It lost a little ride height and went for a softer less aggressive design than other CUVs are heading for. Of course they had the Bronco II in the wings for those wanting the higher ride height and a more rugged, aggressive appearance.

    • 0 avatar
      Snooder

      Since they’re still making the things for Europe and China, and even at their low point,they still sold > 150,000 of the things, it’s pretty clear it’s the former.

      It’s not like nobody was buying fusions or focuses. They were, in quite large numbers. Numbers that in an otherwise sane world would be considered quite successful.

      Maybe the basic issue is that the profit margins were too low. I get that. Everybody likes to make money. But “people are suckers who will give us more for a CUV” is a different argument from “nobody wants to buy it”.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    If “SUVs are not cars”, then why is this site called “The Truth About Cars”?

  • avatar
    redapple

    C’mon Man !

    The car is 7 yrs old. It doesnt sell well. Redesign is massively expensive. They need the plant for something that will SELL. Easy decision!

  • avatar
    Matt51

    Styling of modern sedans sucks. Severely sloped front and rear windows encroach on head to windshield clearance, and makes washing the inside very difficult. Also don’t build them too low, make getting in and out easier. Use 2000 era styling, people don’t want to buy a cartoon.

  • avatar
    Imagefont

    Self fulfilling prophesy. An old, poorly packaged and uncompetitive car with a bad reputation – and now its discontinued because sales are falling! Great market research Ford! You guys are geniuses! Can’t wait to here all the excuses for why the replacement is a failure.

  • avatar
    cardave5150

    I completely agree with both Matt51 and Imagefont. It WAS a self-fulfilling prophecy. When you announce that you’re getting out of the car business, but several competitors don’t make any similar announcements (Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Kia, Hyundai), sales WILL diminish. Plus, as has already been stated, it was getting stale, as Ford hadn’t given ANY attention to updating the car in the past 5 years.

    Even people who don’t already know that Ford was going to be discontinuing the passenger car market would quickly find that out when doing an internet search on the Fusion, and there’s a significant percentage of people who immediately consider the car an “orphan.”

    Someone is going to sell a bunch of 4-door sedans as more and more players leave that particular market. The sad thing is that the roads will be boring when they’re all Black/White/Silver Camry/Accord/Sonatas.

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    Ford sold >150,000 Fusion sedan in USA EVERY year from 2009-2019. Over a decade of success IMHO.
    Very disappointed Ford discontinued the Fusion.
    At what volume level is there a business case for a vehicle?
    Why is Ford unable or unwilling to manufacture the Fusion sedan on the same assembly line that manufactures a SUV? Do they not have flexible assembly lines cabable of adjusting volume to demand?

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      They should have been able to assemble it on the same line as a CUV that shared the platform. That definitely would have helped its case as it could make the production line profitable w/o having to move 200k Fusions per year. However there is still the separate tooling and development costs that would need to be recovered. Shrinking volumes in the segment don’t help on that front. The other thing is profit margins are higher on a CUV so if you have to choose which one to send down the line will it be the one with $x profit or the one with $2x or $3x profit?

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    This site needs a name change to “The Truth About SUVs and Trucks” The way things are going in another 10 years there will be few if any cars left to review.

  • avatar
    Jacob

    This is so incredibly stupid. In its chase for short term stock price gain, Ford’s management gave up a big chunk of its revenue and gifted a huge market share to competitors. I bet Champaign bottles were being uncorked at Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai headquarters when Ford announced getting out of sedan business. Even though they said that there is no money to be made in sedans, every supermarket parking lot where I live looks like a Camry/Accord dealership. It’s actually surprising how fast people adopted the new Accord. Sometimes I see two or three of those parked next to each other. There aren’t a lot of Fusions, but hey, you can’t expect a 2012 car to set sales records in 2020.

    • 0 avatar
      Imagefont

      Truth be told, if I was in the market for a new sedan it wouldn’t be a Ford no matter how many models they offered. That’s because their long standing reputation for building inferior vehicles prevents me from even considering them. This is Fords way of declaring victory in the face of utter failure. Ford knows it can’t build a profitable and class competitive sedan so they are leaving that market. Like an overweight kid at a track meet, they aren’t going to win any races.
      Remember “quality is job one”? Some of the worst cars ever built came into being during that time.

      • 0 avatar
        Jacob

        You have no basis to say this. When Fusion came out in 2012 this was indeed a class leading sedan, with AWD, competent handling, and turbo engines at the time when Honda and Toyota were just thinking about it. Later they added a SHO version. It was like a FWD BMW. The Focus and Fiesta were damn impressive too. Besides the problems with Focus’s DCT transmission, cars of that generation did not have significant reliability issues.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Jacob – General Motors had the strategy of having a product for EVERY segment. They went bankrupt in 2008/9.
      Toyota Camry is the appliance most people want to buy. Why should Ford waste billions chasing that segment?
      On the flip side, how many billions did Toyota burn with the Tundra? or Nissan with the Titan?

      It makes much more sense to focus on what sells and what makes money.

      FCA isn’t chasing the sedan appliance market either.

      • 0 avatar
        Jacob

        That’s not the reason GM went bankrupt. They were a trainwreck of brands that competed with each other and with truly mediocre products. Remember those Saturns Chevy’s and Pontiac s all based on the same Opel Vectra but with mediocre 4 speed auto and OHV engines, headed straight to fleets. The Ford Fusion in 2012 had class leading features and even today it’s not too shabby. It was more like a FWD/AWD BMW.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Here’s what happened: Ford decided 12+ months ago to send new fake Bronco product to Hermosillo, when C[ertification]O[f]V[accine]ID hit they were already too far along and saw no reason to change, and on the face of it why would you throw away a sunk cost and stop implementation of a brand new product?

    Here’s what should happen: Ford needs to move the Fusion tooling elsewhere or find some way to keep some of it and produce both models at Hermosillo. Why? Before the crisis the true economic situation is USDM was dire, for years now we’ve been reading about the 84 mo loans for bread and butter models. This is in part because of a decades long divorce in wages vs asset pricing which accelerated from 2012-2019. Ford, not really taking this into account, saw Fusion as a dead model and likely fleet queen to be replaced by a high profit Escape variant which is cleverly disguised as Rambo. However in this environment what *will* sell is something low cost which offers value and can simultaneously be used as a switch car for Escape. Banksters have been upping min credit scores and cutting available revolving credit to a number of people (look it up), there are going to be a number of potential customers on the fence who could qualify for a Fusion but can’t for an Escape at +15% let alone this wannabe Bronco. Continued mfg cost is low, add basic margin and release them to dealers.

    New car dealers make the majority of their profit from service and used cars, and for the latter most of this profit is made on the trade which is vastly different than trade on new cars. A cheap Fusion allows that trade gathering to continue and keeps the used car market flowing just a tiny bit more which benefits all parties. The late great Sergio Marchionne not only believed in this sell both strategy but put it into practice with the Avenger, Patriot, and outgoing Ram model. While Ford had already let it be known it was axing cars, a whole new media BS campaign could be spun up around this. “We in Dearborn care about America and thus we are going to make a new base Fusion available to you for 20,995 or some such”. Yes the foolish sheeple want the Kuga, but media blitz gets the asses in the showroom and for many the line between need and want is blurred (look at recent Iphone sales). Some walk out with a Fusion, some get switched up to something pricier because they actually brought a decent trade etc, but the dealers get to offer Ford Credit as opposed to third party and Ford Credit can choose to lessen its standards to make the sale (Wall St. will not unless its deep subprime). How many sales get lost because of poor customer credit? How many new car dealers play the game of well your payment on used is X, but the new widget is just a bit more with incentives? So I’m 640 FICO and make 45K, am I going to go with the used GM/Ford/Chryco product for 18 and I dunno 14% or the new Ford for 21 and something reasonable say 3.9%? Some say Ford is beholden to Wall Street, here’s an opportunity to make bonus money and net patriotic PR while giving the dealers a bargain basement model -that doesn’t suck like Fiesta- to increase their foot traffic.

  • avatar
    anomaly149

    Go check the midsized segment on GoodCarBadCar over the years. 2014 was the post-recession peak, with 2.43 million units sold. 2019 was 1.54 million, a decline of over a third. That’s not a growing market segment that’s going to reap profits in the future.

    On the other hand, the segmentation-equivalent midsize SUVs have gone from 1.54 to 2.60 million (+70%) and the ATP-equivalent small SUVs have gone from 2.51 to 3.80 million (+51%) over that time.

    The market has spoken pretty clearly here. There’s volume to be had, sure, but Sedans are likely to become a segment like Minivans in the mid-term.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Yes, agreed on the minivan comparison.

      Ford and GM left the minivan market about a decade ago, leaving it to T, H, FCA, and Kia. Kia is barely hanging on there, and only Honda and FCA (IIRC) still make a minivan that can still carry a 4×8 sheet inside them.

      Minivans – a much as I like them – may die out completely in another decade. But if they do, they’ll have had a 45-year run.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    The “squad’s” politics seem to be driving the Democratic party, including its putative nominee, Joe Biden. Currently Biden is leading in the national polls and the media are full of doom and gloom for the Republicans. I’m not here to argue the validity of that prediction; let’s assume it’s accurate.

    So the New Kids on the Block in Washington figure out the inevitable: regardless of how much money has been shoved into their development, EVs are not a substitute for ICE-powered personal vehicles and the public isn’t going for it. (Remember that even Tesla is profitable only because of the sale of emissions credits to ICE-based vehicle manufacturers.)

    What to do? Remember the Obama administration’s approximately 50 mpg target for cars? Revive it, and to get real green cred, end this “light truck” exemption for minivans and SUV/CUVs. The larger frontal area of these vehicles precludes the kind of highway mpg easily attained by any number of sedans and station wagons, including some that are not small. If memory serves, my 2002 Saab 9-5 Aero wagon (with 250 hp) was EPA rated at 30 mpg highway, a figure that I easily attained on any number of drives on the east coast, even with 4 passengers and a full load of “stuff.”

    While the experience of my lifetime shows that predicting the price of petroleum is a fool’s errand, predicting the regulatory environment for motor vehicles is not. The American left — and the greens — are unrelentingly hostile to them.

    So, you’ve bet the company on selling nothing but suboptimally fuel efficient vehicles and EVs, not one of which you have brought to market with any kind of success.

    Not a bet I would take; and the equity markets agree.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    Oddly enough, I actually drove a Fusion for the first time on 7/31 – my rental was a Fusion hybrid, which actually impressed me with it’s 48 mpg in the hills of Pennsylvania.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    Basically the Bronco is the Fusions’s replacement. Yes that means brushing (p!ssing) off “Customer A” for Customer B. Is that a good idea/practice?

    Consider “Customer B” comes with more money to spend. Lots more. And or a former Wrangler or Land Rover owner and possibly has never owned a Ford.

    Yes there’s less of them, but Ford may only need one Customer B to replace 10 Customer A’s.

    As sedans edge towards the niche category, especially for retail (and more especially for retail Detroit-based sedans), why are they any different than any other niche? Like compact roadsters?

    What automaker fills every niche? Where the hell’s my BMW pickup? And when did Ford commit to building sedans forever?

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      I’d say the Bronco Sport is the replacement for the Fusion or where the money was spent that would have gone to a new Fusion.

      The Bronco was committed to before that as it was needed to justify the Ranger and make that line profitable.

      You only have to look at everyone’s favorite punching bag the EcoSport, sells for a good chunk more than the Fiesta did, so even with a lower volume there are bigger, much bigger profits.

    • 0 avatar
      Snooder

      I think the part that gets people somewhat twerked is that the Fusion wasn’t doing all that badly sales wise. Worse than when sedans were the mainstream, but still capable of a solid 150-200k sales a year.

      So it kinda feels like they have to be doing something wrong if they can’t make 200k sales a year profitable. And that doesn’t bode well for the future.

      Also, I just saw the new season of How to Sell Drugs Online on Netflix, and man they need to bring that Mercedes Benz pickup over. It’s not half bad looking.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Little sad at the passing of this car.

    It is still probably one of my favorites in the sedan world, even at the end of this generation. IMHO the hybrid version is excellent.

    Been looking to possibly get one slightly used. Ford hybrid system is apparently very solid, and the prices are quite low for couple year old, low-mileage examples.

    Car looked good, drove very nicely, extremely quiet, about a perfect blend of handling and ride for me, I really like SYNC 3, and I can squeeze out nearly 50mpg in the summer in the hybrid, which I enjoy trying to do.

    I don’t fault Ford for getting rid of it. I think, unfortunately, it is the right move. But it was a good car. They’re not killing a turd here or something.

  • avatar

    I had 2014 Ford Fusion and now 2018 with AWD and both are/were top trim Titanium. Wonderful cars. But it does not mean that my next car would be next gen Fusion. I am fully committed to BEV as my next car and would prefer it to be a hatchback. Because BEV is long overdue and is good for environment and it is more practical too.

  • avatar
    Ol Shel

    Is Ford trying to make ‘Bronco’ its ‘Ram’ brand?

    It seems like a mistake to name a soft-roader Bronco Sport. Didn’t they confuse enough people with Transit and Transit Connect?

    I guess I’m just ignorant, without the advanced degrees, pedigree, and connections required to understand the brilliance of their naming scheme.

    • 0 avatar
      Jacob

      Bronco Sport is a nice affordable entry into the rugged Bronco brand. It has blocking differentials and AWD is standard giving it some off-road cred. I am on the fence about the base 3-cylinder 1.5L engine though.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    We owned a first generation Taurus with the 4 cylinder and a (Mazda sourced) manual transmission. I purchased the manual as a matter of personal preference and in so doing dodged the bullet or the horrible self destructing automatic transmissions of that era.

    It was a good car with many terrific features. The engineering, however, was really incomplete before they started selling them. Major component failures in the first several years included the alternator, plastic! brake master cylinder, self-destructing steering wheel leather covering and the A/C evaporator. By year five the clear coat was already failing on the roof and hood.

    We fixed the mechanical stuff along the way and lived with the horrible paint. I gave it to my sister at around 90k miles and her family got another six or so years out of it.

    Started buying Hondas, Volvos and now Hyundais after that. All of them have been less trouble than the Taurus. Our now 14 year old Acura TSX has 188k miles on it and drives like a new car. Sure I have had to replace ancillaries like the starter, etc. as it got past 160k miles and ten years, but all of those components outlasted the Taurus’ by 2x or more.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    IMO Ford always overreacts. They built way too many car models for the US market since 2010. Now they killed all the cars. Idiotic.

    Now they are building countless SUVs when the market, at best, needs small, medium and large.

    Make a small hatchback car and a Fusion sedan.

    • 0 avatar
      Jacob

      I think the Fusion and Focus were on point (sans the problematic DCT). Taurus and Fiesta could be mixed. Taurus too similar to Fusion, and Fiesta just not very popular in the US market.

  • avatar
    MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

    It won’t be long that I can resist the siren song of a 2018- 2019 Fusion Sport (AWD, twin turbo V6). A car I was both shocked and thrilled they made, and one of precious few Fords I have much desire for.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Pete Zaitcev: I cannot own a typical F-150 size truck, so I am very interested, although I’m worried for...
  • Oberkanone: Ford Ranger XL Supercab equipped with FX2 or STX package may be obtained for $25K. How much less will the...
  • Vulpine: Still looks bigger than I was hoping for but that might just be the camouflage making it look bigger. I...
  • Lightspeed: Our two cars are a 2000 Lexus GS400 and a 2003 Maxima, both in very good condition. The Maxima...
  • Snooder: https://insiderpaper.com/trevo r-milton-arrest-rumors-circula te-on-social-media/ Looks like that rumor has...

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