If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
01-11-2005, 08:34 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Yadkinville, NC USA
Posts: 3,180
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Originally Posted by 96_Camaro_B4C
It also doesn't have the Five-Hundred's problem of being underpowered (at least as it currently sits with the 3.0L Duratec).
Why is it that 200hp is now considered "underpowered"?
A Mustang or Camaro in 1982 was considered a hot-rod at 150hp. So why is it that so many folks think a car is underpowered today when it has 200hp?
What's worse, the new car not only has more HP at roughly the same weight, but it utilizes a six-speed tranny which offers better gearing for any range of use.
I dunno. Maybe it is underpowered, but to me it seems more than adequate for getting groceries and hauling Billy to the soccer game. On a road course, no, but in everyday life... this car will get you a ticket for 100mph in a 65 zone no problem.
It's basic family transportation... So why does it need more than 200 hp?
01-11-2005, 08:47 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 3,650
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Yes, I agree with you as a general concept. It is "underpowered" in the sense that the competition offers quite a bit more (like the 3.5L or 5.7L 300/Magnum, or the new 3.5L/3.9L/5.3L Impala). Also, even though the car moves decently in tests with just a driver on board, it is a rather large, roomy family car. Packed with 4 or 5 people and their gear, 200 hp is less appealing. Of course, heavier minivans are only in the 200 to 250 hp range anyway.
You are absolutely right, from a practical standpoint. But there is a horsepower war going on, a marketing phenomenon for sure, but also one of customer perception. My 124 hp Saturn has enough grunt to achieve freeway speeds before merging, and so will the 200 hp (but heavier) Five Hundred. Driven the way most people drive their cars, 200 hp will be plenty (especially with six gears instead of 4 or 5).
I meant it was underpowered relative to what the competition is offering, not relative to competently moving the vehicle. But you are right.
You are absolutely right, from a practical standpoint. But there is a horsepower war going on, a marketing phenomenon for sure, but also one of customer perception. My 124 hp Saturn has enough grunt to achieve freeway speeds before merging, and so will the 200 hp (but heavier) Five Hundred. Driven the way most people drive their cars, 200 hp will be plenty (especially with six gears instead of 4 or 5).
I meant it was underpowered relative to what the competition is offering, not relative to competently moving the vehicle. But you are right.
01-11-2005, 01:17 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
I actually like it. Compared to the the Malibu, this car looks better in every regard. I also like the Saturn Aura. Both are steps in the right direction for Ford and Saturn. Now chevy 
.
Auto123 has a review of the 06 fusion btq. I only read 2 pages of it, but they seem to like it it seems.
http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/...tid=34214&pg=1
. Auto123 has a review of the 06 fusion btq. I only read 2 pages of it, but they seem to like it it seems.
http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/...tid=34214&pg=1
01-11-2005, 01:23 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Originally Posted by Omegalock
I wonder if they will go all out and twin turbo the 3.5 V6. Bet it'll be expensive as all get out though.
I think the SVT version of the Fusion if Ford were to come out with one will probably be mirrored after the Mazdaspeed6 which was just released. The Mazdaspeed6 has a 274hp/280lb-ft-tq Turbo 2.3L with AWD and a 6spd manual. Maybe the Ford version will pack a bit more.
01-11-2005, 01:33 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 4,306
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Not nearly as nice as the G6, sorry. And with the G6 getting the 3.9 and 6spd manual soon, along with coupe and hard top vert....sorry, Fusion falls short of anything exciting. Very drab all around.
200hp is underpowerd for a 2 ton car btw. 1982 is 1982...its 2005, and 200hp is sub-par.
200hp is underpowerd for a 2 ton car btw. 1982 is 1982...its 2005, and 200hp is sub-par.
01-11-2005, 04:34 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 599
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Originally Posted by Big Als Z
Not nearly as nice as the G6, sorry. And with the G6 getting the 3.9 and 6spd manual soon, along with coupe and hard top vert....sorry, Fusion falls short of anything exciting. Very drab all around.
200hp is underpowerd for a 2 ton car btw. 1982 is 1982...its 2005, and 200hp is sub-par.
200hp is underpowerd for a 2 ton car btw. 1982 is 1982...its 2005, and 200hp is sub-par.
Horsepower: 160
Optional engine: 3.0-liter V-6 Horsepower: 210
Curb weight: 3,280 pounds
2 tons? You're about 720 pounds shy of 2 tons there, chum.
Let's compare
Pontiac G6:
3.5L V6 engine with 200 hp
Curb weight, lbs 3,380
Chevy Malibu:
ECOTEC 2.2L I4 144-hp
3500 V6 200-hp
Curb weight, 3174 sedan, 3458 hatchback
So you'd call your 3458lb 200hp car underpowered and sub par? Obviously you'd be the target market driving a car that's squarely placed into this segment. You opted for the Malibu Maxx which has the worst hp/weight ratio of the few cars I looked at here. So obviously the power/weight ratio isn't that important to buyers in this segment. Why are you bashing it for that reason if it isn't even important to you as a car buyer? Besides, base 4 cyl and 6 cyl beat out Malibu in HP. The V6 has more HP than the Pontiac and less weight. Why is the G6 the superomgbestbuyoftheyear here again?
01-11-2005, 06:41 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 599
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Originally Posted by graham
Isn't the Malibu in a smaller class than the other 2??
edit: Shouldn't there be an Impala in that comparison??
edit: Shouldn't there be an Impala in that comparison??
Impala doesn't fare that well anyways:
Impala Sedan
180-hp 3400 V6 engine
200-hp 3800 V6 engine
3465lb curb weight
you could spend $30k and opt for the 240hp supercharged model though,
01-11-2005, 07:16 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 319
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Originally Posted by Gold_Rush
I would really LOVE to see the Turbo 4.0L I-6 from down under. 321hp in Xr-6 trim and 366hp/401lb-ft tq in F6 Typhoon trim. But that'd never happen.
I think the SVT version of the Fusion if Ford were to come out with one will probably be mirrored after the Mazdaspeed6 which was just released. The Mazdaspeed6 has a 274hp/280lb-ft-tq Turbo 2.3L with AWD and a 6spd manual. Maybe the Ford version will pack a bit more.
I think the SVT version of the Fusion if Ford were to come out with one will probably be mirrored after the Mazdaspeed6 which was just released. The Mazdaspeed6 has a 274hp/280lb-ft-tq Turbo 2.3L with AWD and a 6spd manual. Maybe the Ford version will pack a bit more.
01-11-2005, 09:55 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 4,306
Re: If only GM had something like this... 2006 Ford Fusion
Originally Posted by MunchE
Base engine: 2.3-liter I-4
Horsepower: 160
Optional engine: 3.0-liter V-6 Horsepower: 210
Curb weight: 3,280 pounds
2 tons? You're about 720 pounds shy of 2 tons there, chum.
Let's compare
Pontiac G6:
3.5L V6 engine with 200 hp
Curb weight, lbs 3,380
Chevy Malibu:
ECOTEC 2.2L I4 144-hp
3500 V6 200-hp
Curb weight, 3174 sedan, 3458 hatchback
So you'd call your 3458lb 200hp car underpowered and sub par? Obviously you'd be the target market driving a car that's squarely placed into this segment. You opted for the Malibu Maxx which has the worst hp/weight ratio of the few cars I looked at here. So obviously the power/weight ratio isn't that important to buyers in this segment. Why are you bashing it for that reason if it isn't even important to you as a car buyer? Besides, base 4 cyl and 6 cyl beat out Malibu in HP. The V6 has more HP than the Pontiac and less weight. Why is the G6 the superomgbestbuyoftheyear here again?
Horsepower: 160
Optional engine: 3.0-liter V-6 Horsepower: 210
Curb weight: 3,280 pounds
2 tons? You're about 720 pounds shy of 2 tons there, chum.
Let's compare
Pontiac G6:
3.5L V6 engine with 200 hp
Curb weight, lbs 3,380
Chevy Malibu:
ECOTEC 2.2L I4 144-hp
3500 V6 200-hp
Curb weight, 3174 sedan, 3458 hatchback
So you'd call your 3458lb 200hp car underpowered and sub par? Obviously you'd be the target market driving a car that's squarely placed into this segment. You opted for the Malibu Maxx which has the worst hp/weight ratio of the few cars I looked at here. So obviously the power/weight ratio isn't that important to buyers in this segment. Why are you bashing it for that reason if it isn't even important to you as a car buyer? Besides, base 4 cyl and 6 cyl beat out Malibu in HP. The V6 has more HP than the Pontiac and less weight. Why is the G6 the superomgbestbuyoftheyear here again?