[slowgo]

Hi everyone. I was excited to learn about this 2017 fusion sport after I took a 2.0 fusion for a test drive in April I thought the 2.0 was under powered. So May 31 I ordered a 17 sport in June I got vin and July the car was shipped. This whole time I am talking to the dealer I ordered it from telling him what I want done to this car before I take it like I wanted it wrapped, tinted and new wheels and tires. Then other dealers started to get their sports mine was held up for some reason. So I wanted to drive 1 so I drove a 30 min away I drove 1. I liked the way it rode . Then I stopped and floored it then the disappointment set in. I drove it back to the dealer he acted so impressed over it I was not. So I called my dealer and asked him if the 1 I ordered came in yet he said not still in transit I told him I drove 1 and wasn't impressed he told me try another 1 so I did. This time I drove a hr away. The dealer went with me on this test drive said lets see what this thing will do. first it was on this back twisty road it was ok. Then we came to about a half mile flat straight stretch he said stop u know whats next. I floored it took it up to about 100. Then we switched drivers his turn, he brought the rpms up then side stepped the brake and off we went to about 115.He drove back the rest of the way. He said if someone comes in for performance auto this not what he would recommend. I called and cancelled on the car I had built. I now wait for some tuners to fix what I feel ford flopped on. 325 hp 380 lb torque and in a car that suppose to weigh 3600 lbs this thing should fly stk. I owned 3 mustangs a Camaro ss and a jeep srt8 from gl and happy tuning.

 

[escape]

in a car that suppose to weigh 3600 lbs

It may weigh about 500 lbs more than this, based on some info that was posted on this forum.

Also, did the test drive cars have 93 octane gasoline in them? That should make some difference, too.

 

[jayson]

I will say this, the engine definitely has a noticeable break in period. The difference in raw power from the time I drove the car off the lot to the 200 miles later is very noticeable. Also, if we see similar numbers from this car as the F150s, a tune is going to make these cars a beast. 330WHP is what livernois is getting out of the 2.7 in the F150. Thats around 375 crank.

 

[elronino]

The 3 FuSpos I drove all had 87 (about 3-4 gallons). Being that these cars are so new to dealers, they are being shipped with 87 from the factory (why Ford does this, who knows... $$$ I assume). That would be a very logical explanation for the lack luster performance you experienced.

As stated previously, the car does have to "break in". I was nervous when I picked mine, thinking I was going to have buyers remorse. 2100 miles later, it puts a smile on my face multiple times a day.

For the people that have asked me about this in person, I tell them to take the test drive with a grain of salt. It could blow you away either positively or negatively. However, as the car breaks in and learns all of the components it has been built with, it turns into a pretty strong car. I think comparing this to pony cars and an SRT8 is really not fair.

 

[FordPWR]

Maybe that grade of fuel has something to do with all the vehicles systems being new and maybe something to do with the calibration or break in?

If you can ask some techs at your local dealer they could provide insight possibly.

 

[Frizz2112]

Expectations do play a big role here. Given that I had narrowed my choice down to the Fusion Sport and the Audi A4, I am still very happy with my Sport despite some of the disappointing performance reports. I can understand that if someone was expecting a 4 door Mustang GT that they might be disappointed. I think the big strength of the Fusion Sport is as a great all around vehicle with strong performance rather than an all out performance monster.

I too think the car feels stronger with some miles on it and a couple of tanks of 93 run through it, but I'm also aware that it's easy for wishful thinking to creep in.

 

[elronino]

I too think the car feels stronger with some miles on it and a couple of tanks of 93 run through it, but I'm also aware that it's easy for wishful thinking to creep in.

^ well said. I'll admit I did the initial test drive hoping for a face melting 1/4 mile car, but quickly had that dream tarnished. Although quick, it is not going to blaze any drag strips.... stock. However, I was blown away by the handling and ride quality in and out of more technical stretches of tarmac... and to me, that is WAY more fun.

 

[RockinZ28]

Guess I'm just getting old, but feels like plenty of power to me. Finally opened her up a few times today after switching off traction control. Still didn't put it in S mode yet. Only pumped 87 so far. Didn't buy this to street race etc., just wanted a modern ride with all the gizmos that drove nice and smooth. With a bit more power than your standard car.

Owned a 2001 z28, 1998 z28 and a 420rwhp 2001 Trans Am WS6 back in SoCal. Sold them in 2013 when I left. If I still lived in SoCal I'd have bought either a lightly used C6 Z06, or a 2017 GT Premium. The Sport should be good year round in WI though.

 

[Donjohnk]

i hope people realize that what automakers say for hp is Crank/motor HP not wheel HP. AWD has crazy drive train loss. Look up what people are getting out of the new Focus RS, people are loosing their minds over it too.

 

[DuFFman]

Lol imagine test driving a car, not enjoying it, then going home and finding a forum based on that car, signing up, and posting just to tell people you don't like that car.

Anyway, I don't believe it.

 

[SouthernBoy]

i hope people realize that what automakers say for hp is Crank/motor HP not wheel HP.

There are a few auto companies that quote wheel horsepower and torque numbers, not that which is delivered to the flywheel. Audi is one of these. My 2016 S4 is rated at 333 HP and 325 ft/lbs of torque. Mine has a manual transmission. The best 0-60 time I have seen with this car in box stock condition is 4.4 seconds with a best quarter mile of 12.9 at 109 MPH. That's with a 183 cubic inch supercharged V6 engine in a 3869 pound car. So you know that it's putting out a lot more than 333 HP and 325 ft/lbs of torque at the flywheel. And it's AWD to boot.

AWD has crazy drive train loss.

Yes, it does. You can figure a loss of around 20 to 22%.

 

[slowgo]

I didn't ask the first dealer what fuel was put in it. The second dealer I did ask he said premium. But I wasn't there so I can only take his word.

 

[slowgo]

It may weigh about 500 lbs more than this, based on some info that was posted on this forum.

Also, did the test drive cars have 93 octane gasoline in them? That should make some difference, too.

I didn't ask the first dealer what fuel was put in it. The second dealer I did ask he said premium. But I wasn't there so I can only take his word.

 

[slowgo]

Expectations do play a big role here. Given that I had narrowed my choice down to the Fusion Sport and the Audi A4, I am still very happy with my Sport despite some of the disappointing performance reports. I can understand that if someone was expecting a 4 door Mustang GT that they might be disappointed. I think the big strength of the Fusion Sport is as a great all around vehicle with strong performance rather than an all out performance monster.

I too think the car feels stronger with some miles on it and a couple of tanks of 93 run through it, but I'm also aware that it's easy for wishful thinking to creep in.

haha a 4dr mustang now that would be ugly.

 

[slowgo]

There are a few auto companies that quote wheel horsepower and torque numbers, not that which is delivered to the flywheel. Audi is one of these. My 2016 S4 is rated at 333 HP and 325 ft/lbs of torque. Mine has a manual transmission. The best 0-60 time I have seen with this car in box stock condition is 4.4 seconds with a best quarter mile of 12.9 at 109 MPH. That's with a 183 cubic inch supercharged V6 engine in a 3869 pound car. So you know that it's putting out a lot more than 333 HP and 325 ft/lbs of torque at the flywheel. And it's AWD to boot.


Yes, it does. You can figure a loss of around 20 to 22%.

this is the more of what I was expecting out a stk sport sub 5 and a mid to low 13 quarter mile.

 

[slowgo]

Lol imagine test driving a car, not enjoying it, then going home and finding a forum based on that car, signing up, and posting just to tell people you don't like that car.

Anyway, I don't believe it.

LOL imagine if you spent your money on hooked on phonics you could read I said I test drove 2 cars not 1. I never said I didn't like the cars.

 

[slowgo]

i hope people realize that what automakers say for hp is Crank/motor HP not wheel HP. AWD has crazy drive train loss. Look up what people are getting out of the new Focus RS, people are loosing their minds over it too.

Yes I know automakers say or post is crank hp not wheel hp.

 

[BOT_ROCKET]

haha a 4dr mustang now that would be ugly.

They are called falcons, and I'm not sure ugly is the word I would use.

 

[BOT_ROCKET]

The felling of speed is fairly skewed in the Sport. Its power is SO smooth that its almost underwhelming. That combined with the poor gas and no break-in, I don't blame you for having doubts. However, I am VERY happy with mine, even if its not on par with the Ford GT.

 

[slowgo]

The felling of speed is fairly skewed in the Sport. Its power is SO smooth that its almost underwhelming. That combined with the poor gas and no break-in, I don't blame you for having doubts. However, I am VERY happy with mine, even if its not on par with the Ford GT.

I didn't expect it to be any where near or on par as the ford gt. all the cars I ever owned since new I took out on a test drive I floored em threw em in some twistys to see how they reacted and when I bought em I pampered em till any where from 500 mies to 5000 miles and I can say they never felt any stronger from there test drives. so that's 1 of the reasons why I joined this forum to read and learn from others what works and what dosent .