Ford Fusion V6 Sport Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am not a forum member but after reading about the Fusion sport, I am taking an interest in buying one. I have decided I want to read some of the car tests from the car magazines before I decide to buy or not. The main concern I have is: Since the sport has AWD, when driving in normal everyday traffic, how are the drive wheels biased? Does it act as a front or rear wheel drive car. Right now the road test would have to be very positive for me to give up my present sport car. Also, why is it taking so long for the mags to road test this car?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
The car is FWD and under hard acceleration sends 50% of the power to the rear wheels. What is your current vehicle? No idea why mags are taking so long to properly road test them. I will say this, its a nice car, its a quick car, its a comfortable car, its a family sedan first. If you are coming from a true sports sedan like an Audi/BMW/STI/EVO then this would be a down grade in terms of raw driving performance. For performance comparison, I ran mine last night in the 1/4 mile and did a best of [email protected] MPH.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I am disappointed that the sport is fwd and only sends power to the rear wheels only under hard driving. I was hoping Ford did it right and made it rwd with the extra power going to the front during hard driving. I guess I may have to wait and see if Ford makes a rwd only Fusion sport. I drive a Mazda 3 Hatchback as my year round daily driver. My fair weather fun car is a 2010 Nissan 370 Z. For backup, my wife drives a 2014 Mazda CX-5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
I am disappointed that the sport is fwd and only sends power to the rear wheels only under hard driving. I was hoping Ford did it right and made it rwd with the extra power going to the front during hard driving. I guess I may have to wait and see if Ford makes a rwd only Fusion sport. I drive a Mazda 3 Hatchback as my year round daily driver. My fair weather fun car is a 2010 Nissan 370 Z. For backup, my wife drives a 2014 Mazda CX-5.
I really dont understand why its such a deal breaker? What does have the RWD work all the time and only sending power to FWD offer in performance over the Sport? Ive never once felt wheel spin in my car or got a feeling that AWD wasnt working exactly as needed in every situation. As soon as you accelerate with anything more than 25% power the car starts sending power to the back wheels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
I come to the Fusion Sport after having owned and driven, in order, 1999 Mustang Cobra, 2003 Mustang Cobra, 2005 Mazda RX8, 2011 Mustang GT, 2013 Mustang V6 Performance Package, and 2014 Fiesta ST. It is safe to say that the Fusion Sport does not fit into the mode of either the RWD cars I have had (2 or 3 of them were GREAT cars relative to contemporaries) or the Fiesta ST (which is the most fun car I have ever owned--not best, most fun).


In my experience, the Sport has very little if any tendency toward torque steer. It does not drive like a RWD car because when under acceleration, the thing just hunkers down and goes. You can watch the AWD system working in real time, and I have been a bit surprised about how often the rear wheels are engaged. It is more often than I expected. I have only a few times thought to myself while driving the car that I wish it was a more RWD-biased AWD setup. When accelerating through corners, it is possible to get the car going sideways, but then the stability control rears its head to keep it from getting too fun and/or unsafe. If driven in a hamfisted manner, the car will understeer, but even then not to the degree I have experienced in my mustangs before the were properly Koni'd and tired. Actually, the worst understeering car I had before changing dampers and tires was my RX8 of all cars. I believe that switching to a stiffer rear sway bar and adding camber to the front along with a good set of tires would make the Fusion Sport handle extremely well. There might be more room for improvements with struts and springs, but I have been pleasantly surprised really with the dampers that come with the car stock. I do wish the car had the option of the trick torque vectoring rear differential, but it doesn't.


If anything, the driving experience with the Fusion Sport, again in my opinion, is more hindered by the automatic transmission than anything else. When I put the accelerator down, I am never quite sure what I am going to get. (actually, I know I am going to get a good half-beat of nothingness to the point that when attacking a corner, you have to recalibrate when to get back onto the gas). At times, I get acceleration that literally challenges my old 2003 Cobra, at other times, the thing falls on its face. So, if I am going to complain, it would be more about the transmission, or maybe more accurately the transmission programming in conjunction with torque management that takes place at the engine. Apparently, there is a new transmission in the wings, and maybe it will address some of these concerns if it is ever put in a Fusion Sport. There might be ways to address this with a tune as well though I do not believe that I am going down that road.


I have been extremely happy at how nice the Fusion Sport is in terms of just being a car. It is probably the quietest car I have ever owned. It makes our Navigator sound like a truck (yes it is a truck). Sync 3 is not without glitches, but it is pretty darn good. And my growing children actually have room for their legs in the back seat. And the trunk, OMG the trunk.


Those are some Friday morning thoughts. The only way to know if you would like the car is to drive it. So, pretty much everything I have written here is moot. I would encourage you to take the time to drive it and then go visit an Audi dealer and drive an A6 3.0T. Compare the experiences and price tags. I was happily surprised when I did that. If they were the same money, I would own an Audi, but they aren't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
I generally agree with jayson. In normal driving on public roads, there is very little to be gained by rear bias >50%. If you are pushing this car to the limits of it's setup on public roads, you're a danger to others. Maybe the OP wants to track his car and then there's a clear advantage for his preferred setup. Only problem is, this isn't a track car. It isn't made to carve the perfect apex.

OP, the one thing that would be very different between the FS and your 370 is low end grunt. That VQ is a wonderful engine, but man it needs to spin. Since your already in the family, and want rear bias and four doors, you need to check the new Q50tt. That thing is pretty special, and if they can break code and tune, watch out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
I'm so happy that I love driving this car. I just find it crazy that Ford didn't make it exactly like my '69 Shelby. Like seriously, what were they thinking. All I need is the wind in my hair, Floyd on my Hi-Fi stereo, a pair of my tightest flared pants and 300 ponies to my rear wheels.

I don't know why they bothered updating cars. The 70's man! Life was perfect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
I've driven with my Sport's AWD display for that past few days, just to see how it behaves. My observation is that it is FWD under constant speed or very mild acceleration. Put your right foot down at all and it starts sending torque to the rear. Under heavy acceleration, torque is split fairly evenly front-rear. My last two cars were and AWD Audi and an AWD BMW, so I'm used to a car that's very composed under almost any reasonable (and most unreasonable) conditions. The sport is very similar. It's impossible to break a wheel loose except on snow or ice. If you're looking for a car to fling around, the Sport is not for you. It's doing everything it can to remain composed, put the power to the ground, and spoil your "fun." But if fling-ability is your goal, it's odd to be looking at a two-ton four-door sedan in the first place. The Chevy SS might be worth a look, but given its dismal sales numbers I wouldn't look for Ford to go down that path very far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
I don't know why they bothered updating cars. The 70's man! Life was perfect.
You mean the decade that brought us mile-long (literally) lines at gas stations and emission controlled engines that barely ran at all? Remember the Mustang II and the Vega? The 60's, on the other hand . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
First of all, thanks for all the replies. Lots of good info and thoughts. One thing that I thought Ford could do is when in the sport mode, bias more power to the rear wheels. I thing they could easily do this with a software change. Two reasons why I like the sport is price, and since I am not quite ready to settle down yet, it has some good get up and go for a 4 door sedan. Also, living in Iowa, I can drive it year round. During the winter, my 370 Z gets parked in the garage. It is not a winter car but I knew that when I bought it. One plus is that the sport is rated the same as my Z when it comes to EPA gas mileage. So I wouldn't be spending more on gas.

One question I have are what are the hp and torque specs. I have heard several different numbers based on what octane you are using. Here in Iowa, it is hard to find 93 octane. 91 seems to be the only one that most gas stations carry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,156 Posts
First of all, thanks for all the replies. Lots of good info and thoughts. One thing that I thought Ford could do is when in the sport mode, bias more power to the rear wheels. I thing they could easily do this with a software change. Two reasons why I like the sport is price, and since I am not quite ready to settle down yet, it has some good get up and go for a 4 door sedan. Also, living in Iowa, I can drive it year round. During the winter, my 370 Z gets parked in the garage. It is not a winter car but I knew that when I bought it. One plus is that the sport is rated the same as my Z when it comes to EPA gas mileage. So I wouldn't be spending more on gas.

One question I have are what are the hp and torque specs. I have heard several different numbers based on what octane you are using. Here in Iowa, it is hard to find 93 octane. 91 seems to be the only one that most gas stations carry.
HP is 325 and torque is 380. That is using 93 octane. No one has tested numbers with 91 octane, and we have only had one dyno run, and also had a 1/4 mile run posted recently. I am pretty sure those were both with 93 octane. Minor loss going to 91
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1153

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
HP is 325 and torque is 380. That is using 93 octane. No one has tested numbers with 91 octane, and we have only had one dyno run, and also had a 1/4 mile run posted recently. I am pretty sure those were both with 93 octane. Minor loss going to 91
Gotta admit that's one of the things I'm most curious about, there are absolutely no 93 Octane stations around my city, highest I can get is 91
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,156 Posts
Gotta admit that's one of the things I'm most curious about, there are absolutely no 93 Octane stations around my city, highest I can get is 91
Same for me. I would love to see what the difference between 91 and 93 is, but I gotta feeling it will be a while before i find that out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
778 Posts
I doubt there is much of a difference on a stock tune between 91 and 93. The only reason there would be a difference would be if it detects detonation and retards the timing. If it were detonating on a stock tune with 91, you wouldn't be able to get much out of an aftermarket tune on 93.

As for the drive wheels, this car DOES NOT drive AT ALL like a FWD car. It acts more like an AWD car that shuts the rear wheels down during economy cruising to improve mileage. You would never know this was "supposed" to be a FWD car with RWD assist if you weren't told it was.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
529 Posts
One thing that I thought Ford could do is when in the sport mode, bias more power to the rear wheels. I thing they could easily do this with a software change.
What would be the reason to bias more power to the rear? I don't know that it would benefit anything.

With regards to how the AWD system reacts, I've watched the dash visual of the AWD system and can tell you that it does engage the rear wheels frequently and does so at a varying percentages (assuming that visual is an accurate representation of drive application). Under hard WOTs sure, the split is darn near 50-50... but there are times under a firm acceleration where its 25-30-35%.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top