urnews

The silver 55s look nice and I didn't know the GT came in anything but red.

It's fun -- but a complete waste of time -- to fantasize about winning a MegaMillions lottery and what kind of car you would buy with unlimited resources. I think my car, under those circumstances, would have Mercedes-Benz written on it. Maybe a couple of them.

Good points Allen. Our 1997 Thunderbird has a 3.8-liter V6 that only produces 140 horsepower, compared to the Fusion's smaller 3.0-liter V6 that yields 221. Both get 13 mpg in city driving -- the same streets and the same routine pattern of driving. I foolishly thought the Fusion would actually deliver the EPA estimated 19 city, recently revised to 17 mpg. Wretched mileage in the year 2007. We should have bought an I4 (160 hp), but you don't see may SELs equipped that way, not in our area at least.

That's quite a wish list Dean. I seriously doubt if the FoMoCo "Santa" will be filling it, however. Several items you mentioned are very desirable though, but not likely to appear in a $20,000 Ford, maybe a $30,000 one.

That's all well and good Allen, but this is 2007, not 1997 or 1987 and the 3-liter V6 engine is 180 cubic inches, not a 351 cubic inch engine and the transmission is a six-speed automatic, not a four-speed one. It is a bitter pill that the latest technology can only produce 13 mpg in city driving. Heck, even the old EPA city estimate of 19 mpg (now 17) is nothing to write home about. Can all of this be blamed on emission controls? Are we that technology impaired?

In Maryland it used to be that driving without a safety harness was a secondary offense; the officer could only write a ticket for that if you were stopped for another infraction. They changed the law. Driving without a seat belt is now a primary offense, one that will get you a ticket. Indeed, one of the state police slogans is "Click it or ticket."

That's funny. Actually I'd like to trade for an SEL I4 5-speed automatic, with heated leather and a moon roof.

That's a good report, Jimmy.

Ditto.

That is a very discouraging update. Hope things improve for you soon. :happy feet: Keep us posted as to how all of this turns out.

DJRick, You are going to take a beating on your proposed deal. I also would not recommend the AWD option unless you live in a climate with a lot of snow. The mileage for our 2007 V6 SEL AWD Fusion is a horrific 13 mpg in city driving after 1,800 miles and it shows no sign of improving. Just to give you an idea, there is an EXTRA $539.24 a year cost between the EPA estimate of 19 mpg and 13 mpg based on 10,000 miles driven with gasoline at $2.22 per gallon. As other posters have noted, you would make out a lot better to add the features you want to your present car (except for the AWD) by going to the after market for a navigation system and a better sound package.

It has been estimated elsewhere that FoMoCo spends $100 million to $200 million per year on NASCAR. That's wasted money in my humble opinion. Money that could be better spent on developing new products and upgrading existing ones.

Dyoct, Your pictorial about your trip was informative and entertaining. I agree, the EPA estimate must be a challenge. Lord knows we would be happy campers if our SEL AWD ever equaled the EPA estimate for city driving. The "new" EPA figures for our car are 17 mpg city, 24 mpg highway. The "old" numbers were 19 city and 26 highway. We have achieved 26.5 going and 24.2 returning during a 360-mile trip Feb. 2-3 but are still only getting 13 mpg city. I seriously doubt that this is going to improve much. We have 1,800 miles on the car and enjoy most everything about it EXCEPT the horrific in-city mileage. Unfortunately, 95 percent of our driving is in the city, stop and go but not bumper to bumper. It is a sad commentary on American know how that a 3,200-pound car with a V6 and six-speed automatic transmission will only deliver 17 mpg (EPA estimate) in the year 2007. We now regard our purchase as a mistake. Hindsight is always 20-20 isn't it?

The new EPA ones are more realistic, 17 mpg city; 24 mpg highway for our 2007 V6 AWD Fusion (had been 19 and 26) but we are still getting 13 mpg in city, stop and go, driving. About 1,800 miles on the car since it was purchased Dec. 4, 2006.

Sounds like a shady deal to me.

Bob, Your humor and compassion is greatly appreciated. We did get 26.5 mpg (going) and 24.2 mpg (returning) on a trip a few weeks ago but our 13 mpg city is a constant. Unfortunately, 95 percent of our driving is short hops, in city. Some cars get good mileage; some don't. Ours is going to be in the later category I fear. I agree with you, the six-speed auto tranny is a bunch of whooey, more hype than substance. The first four gears are way too short, for scoot ability. They need to be taller for in-town mileage. However, fifth and sixth aren't too terribly bad. At 65-70 mph the engine is only turning about 2,000 rpms, which is decent. Our backup car, the 1997 3.8-liter V6 Thunderbird with 85,000 miles on it gets, 13 mpg in city, as good as the AWD Fusion, and its 500 pounds heavier and only rolling on 15-inch wheels. I hate to say it, but your friend with the MXZ sounds like a prevaricator, at least when it comes to mileage. Either that or he constantly drives downhill at 40 mph. LOL. I believe your numbers; I don't believe his. I've pretty much decided that the AWD decision was a very bad one on my part. I should have ordered a car rather than take the one that was on the lot. But, supposedly, the V6 without AWD is EPA-rated at 20 mpg city, 27 highway, I believe. I honestly thought this car would deliver the EPA-estimated 19 city, 26 highway. It will do the highway part but will never see the in-city figure.

Amazing. I am both impressed and envious. Must be trick photography. LOL.

I didn't take your post to mean that we were poor drivers. The EPA estimate (which are always optimistic) for this drive train is 19 mpg city, 26 mpg highway. On a recent trip the car did deliver 26.5 mpg going and 24.2 mpg returning. It's just the in-city 13 mpg that is so frustrating -- and expensive. The difference between 19 mpg and 13 mpg is an EXTRA $539.24 A YEAR, based on 10,000 miles driven with gasoline at $2.22 per gallon. I could use the extra $10 a week in other ways. I participate in three Fusion forums. A majority of the AWD posters report poor gas mileage but very few as low as ours. Some report getting the EPA average, which is outstanding. I would be delighted with 19 mpg. The EPA "range" for this vehicle is 16 to 22 mpg. Supposedly, the EPA is going to change its calculation method beginning with the 2008 model year. I will be very interested to learn what the new number is for an '08 V6 AWD Fusion. I'm sure it will dip significantly from the present 19 mpg. Our friendly dealer, Sherwood Ford, Lincoln, Mercury in Salisbury, MD, checked the car with a computer (highway driving only) at 1,500 miles and reported that everything was "up to specifications." They provided me with a printout that indicated the car was achieving 24 mpg during highway driving. They did not do a re-flash of the Powertrain Computer Module (PCM), however. They agreed to check it again at 5,000 miles when the oil and filter are scheduled to be changed. Frustrating is the appropriate word for our dilemma, so is the word "disappointed." Given that this is the year 2007, I simply cannot comprehend that a 3,300-pound car with a 182-cubic-inch engine and 6-speed automatic transmission that will not deliver at least 19 mpg in city driving.

Our city driving is stop and go, but not bumper to bumper. Wife drives the car to work and back, maybe 5 miles one way and about 15 minutes. She goes grocery shopping, picks up prescriptions, typical short hops. The in-city mileage has consistently remained at 13 mpg. I seriously doubt if the car is ever going to do better than that. We have about 1,800 miles on it now. It was purchased Dec. 4, 2006, $27,105 MSRP.

Funny line about the temperature control. Did you read something about the 2008 interior lighting? There definitely should be an overdrive on/off button for the automatic transmission. I wonder why there isn't one. Anyone have any theories? By the way, what happens if you pull the lever into "L" at say 50 mph? I haven't tried that. Does it "hurt" anything, like the transmission?

Robert, I couldn't agree more. Well-stated. Ford had a fifth-place finish at the Daytona 500 Sunday and two cars in the top 10 finishers. Chevy took the first four places and six out of the first 10 spots. Dodge had two finishers in the top 10. NASCAR is now all about the drivers and teams, not corporate sponsorship. Given the sad state of financial affairs at FoMoCo, the company has no business being in NASCAR, especially not to the tune of $100 million or $200 million A YEAR. Where's the return on investment? There isn't any. That money could be spent on actual product development or for any number of worthwhile endeavors. The days of "race it on Sunday, sell it on Monday" disappeared decades ago. Ford is foolish to invest in something with so little return.

A new fifth gear should fix the noise (grinding) problem but what caused the leaking of fluids?

That sounds pretty good for an overall average. Have you tried re-setting the mpg on-board computer to zero when you fill the tank? I would be curious as to your in-city mileage following your trip. You should have gotten something like 26 mpg for the highway travel.

I like the blue but the 6 o'clock positions would take some getting used to, especially when 60 mph is at 9 o'clock and not closer to noon. To each his/her own. Different strokes for different folks.

Same here. It's a tremendous waste of money for Ford. Big bucks that could be better spent.