Good read! Thanks for the comparison!

 

Thanks!

It almost feels like the 2015 is a downgrade. I really could not find any points that are positive over the 2012 model. However we are comparing a fully loaded to a base model vehicle.

If I was just me looking to buy a car and it was the 2nd gen vs the 1.5 gen.. I’d most likely go for the 1.5 gen. But it’d be tough because if I could have a 2gen at near the same price you have the ego in the back of your head saying “get the new fresh car. Don’t get that old out-dated one”.

 

I've driven a few new fusions that were similarly spec'd to my Sport as well. I didn't any of them to be as nice or comfortable as my Sport for some reason. Not cause it's my car and I don't want to admit anything wrong with it. Public, i'm about the same build as you, 6'3" 180lbs and i felt cramped in the new fusion versus mine, can't really pinpoint what they did but it didn't feel right. The features in the newer car were very nice but i can live without all of that stuff. My sport definitely out handles the new one though.

For what it's worth I drove the 2.0L one. Nice fun lil engine especially with the turbo.

 

Indeed.

How did you consider the drive/handling of the 2nd gen over your sport?

 

Might just be me but the 2nd gen had more roll to it, but that's to be expected i guess since it's a slightly larger car it seems. IMO it had a smooth ride, probably about as nice as my Sport. Sport definitely handled better though.

Power wise. The 3.5 had better power throughout the whole range of RPMs whereas the 2.0L lacked in some ranges, but that's a given considering the fact that it is a turbocharged engine.

 

To me the new fusion was like driving a nissan altima. (Haven't driven the newer ones more so the prior two generations of altima).i felt like I was pushing the car around corners rather than driving it around them not sure if that makes sense or not. Kind of hard to explain. A well designed and built car fits you and you feel as if you’re driving it and everything you tell it to do it does. I feel like the new fusion just kind of looks at you and says "yea i hear what you’re telling me to do but I’m not going to do it". I remember hearing a lot of the same complaints from the first gen fusion when it first came out but most of those where fixed in 2010. Honestly i see that Ford cut all kinds of corners with the new fusion but figures people will buy them anyway because they look so good that the little stuff will get missed.

 

.... Honestly i see that Ford cut all kinds of corners with the new fusion but figures people will buy them anyway because they look so good that the little stuff will get missed.

Such as?

 

Sadly, at altitude, the 3.5 is just slightly slower than the 2.0 ecoboost as proven at the track.

We ran four times and the 2013 was able to edge me out each time at the quarter mile mark. Not by much though. The video above was my worst time unfortunately. The best I've run at that track (thus far) has been 16.567 @88.21MPH.

Granted, at the time I was running a Steeda tune that I think was not quite right. I'll have to go back with the tune I have now as its a bit better for the car.

Vidmo

 

Sadly, at altitude, the 3.5 is just slightly slower than the 2.0 ecoboost as proven at the track.

This has been addressed before several times. If you took two cars with the same weight, transmission gearing and power levels at sea level and bring them to a higher altitude. The N/A car is going to loose more power then boosted will at sea level.

 

I'd like to see a lap around a track to see which one is faster. Like a Stig power lap from Top Gear.

Seems like everyone thinks that the Sports handle better. For me I would rather have a more fun to drive/ better handling car then a slightly faster car with worse handling.

Kind of like how every automotive journalist says Fiesta ST> Focus ST even though the Focus is faster.

 

Unless I am misreading your statement, a boosted car should not make more power at altitude than it will at sea level. That is unless the boost was increased. I do agree a boosted car will make more power than a N/A car at altitude that were near equal at sea level.

 

Yeah.. I think he typed that wrong.

There is less air at higher atl. Plain and simple. If anything it'd take longer to make turbo boost!!

 

It is wrong, dumb computer. I fixed it.

 

It's OK. We all make mistakes from time to time

 

What you talking about I'm superman I never make mistakes. I just typed too fast and my computer didn't spit it out correctly once it deciphered my awesomeness. :metalcord:

 

Like a boss

 

Yup test drove a 2014 titanium the same day I got my sport. And to me it was like night and day difference. The 2.0 has no low end power at all. Whereas the sport takes off like a rocket lol... ok maybe not but compared to my old 07 2.3 it is... corning the sport had a huge advantage. Don't know if it's cuz of the size of 2.0 but it's got a lot of roll compared to the sport...

 

I own a 2013 Fusion with the 2.0L turbocharged engine and it feels powerful enough to beat, or at least keep up with, most mid-size sedans. I love the leather interior of my car and we can all agree that it's probably the best looking sedan in its price range. To me it's a very balanced vehicle; great looks, more than enough power, and great handling...at least in the titanium trim.

I think you should drive a Titanium model to make a decent comparison. By the way, before I bought my 2013 Fusion I was actually also looking at the 2012 model...but once I got behind the wheel of the 2013 Titanium I was sold. So far it's been an awesome car. I get compliments all of the time. In any case, as long as you drive a Ford, you're cool in my book. I just had to represent for the 2013 model.

 

Thanks for posting up your thoughts

 

Thanks for your insight.

When I first saw a 2nd-gen in person, I did feel that it just looked... lighter and flimsier. Like it was a little too small to be a true American sedan. Maybe it's the higher ground clearance at the front? Makes it look more like a plastic shell on top of the frame or something to me.

I just now noticed for the first time in your picture that the 2015 has that additional little window by the side mirrors. Interesting. At least it's a decent shape and not that odd glass used on, say, the Buick Lesabre.

I could just never get 'into' the dash design of the new Fusions. The steering wheel has too many buttons and I absolutely hate the way the center cluster smoothly swoops down on new cars. I sit like I'm black, I need my knee space to the side.


Completely unrelated, I hate how KBB will provide an option for the Voga package, but not for blind spot radar. I'm fairly certain having BLIS adds to the value of my car, but it won't let me get a price with it equipped.

 

Well sir I assume you are very hairy!
More so than the general public!
So congrats on your new fusion for as late as it may seem!
How ever I will wait for when the 9 speed tranny comes out and see what hand we are dealt this time.

 

Did all you guys that think the '13/'14 Eco-Boost 2.0 is "slow" have the shifter in "D" or in "S"? It makes a huge difference!

 

That surprises me too, I drove a '12 Sport at the same lot right before I drove the '13 2.0 and the '13 definitely "felt" a lot faster. Plus, as far as looks go, the '13 definitely gets the edge by a long shot IMO. Not putting down the first gens, just my opinion. The main complaint I have about the '13 is that the paddle shifters are not as responsive as they should be, but does very well if you just leave it in sport mode.

 

Not sure how fair it is to compare a 2015 base 4 cylinder to a 2012 mid level 6 cylinder. Of course the 2012 will have more power. In addition, the 2012 will have fatter tires (doesn't the 2015 S have 205x65x16 low rolling resistance tires?). That will have a big effect on handling.

I had a 2012 Fusion S with manual transmission. Due to a knee injury, I traded in that car for a 2014 Fusion SE with auto and 1.5 Ecoboost.

The front passenger area does seem slightly tighter, but due mostly to the wider console in the middle. But the center armrest is more comfortable. The rear seat looks a little smaller, but I haven't sat back there much. The seats are more comfortable, the fabric has something to do with that as well as the power driver seat controls on the SE. My wife says the seats are more comfortable also. I am disappointed that the trunk and trunk opening is smaller, the hinges take up a lot of space.

In terms of the 1.5 Ecoboost vs. the 2.5, the little Ecoboost has stronger midrange torque. Overall the Ecoboost makes only a few more horses, but the torque curve makes it more pleasant to drive. The transmission is a little sluggish in "D" mode, but feels more lively in "S" mode. I use that if I'm in a hurry around town or need quick downshifts. Fuel economy has been a little disappointing so far, about 5% less than the 2.5 in mostly city driving. I haven't done much highway driving yet, hope to do that soon.

The SE has much fatter tires than the old "S" (235x50x17 vs 205x60x16) so it will handle better (and affect gas mileage). Just before I traded it in, I had 215x60 Bridgestones put on and it helped reduce understeer. I would call the two cars close to even. The new car does handle a little flatter and is a bit quieter.

The turbos have a different torque curve compared to the normally aspirated sixes. More torque at lower rpm should give more oomph off the line once the turbo passes the initial turbo lag. Overall they seem to be similar to an equivalent 2.5 (vs. 1.5 turbo) or 3.5 (vs 2.0 turbo). The 2.5 isn't a bad engine, though. I was on the interstate once and did 80-110 pretty quickly in 6th gear...

 

That seems to be a good, unbiased, realistic comparison.

 

Car and Driver just did an instrumented test of a 2014 2.0 AWD Titanium and compared it to the 2012 SPORT AWD. Simply stated the obvious:

-2014 has a much more refined ride
-2014 has much nicer interior and sweet looks
-2012 is faster to 60 and though the quarter mile
-2014 does not deliver on the fuel economy promises unless driven with a feather foot
-2014 is the better car, but the 2012 is slightly faster

I wasn't surprised by the results.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/ford-fusion-titanium-20l-ecoboost-awd-test-review

 

I love my 2010 S. But I like the 2nd gens much better. Just IMO.

 

I feel like the 1.5 gens look classier than the 2nd gens. Something about it just looks nicer. But nice and cool are two different things and the front end of the 2nd gens are def cooler haha.

 

I love my sport. I have driven a ecoboost fusion and noticed the lag between shifts or what I read on it "Turbo Lag" . The shifting didn't feel smooth felt rough. Now that was new and hasn't been broken in yet.

 

I bought my '10 Sport for 18k early last year. I do like the looks of the newer model but to get the newer one loaded would cost alot more then what I paid for my loaded sport so I'll stick with the older model. I lowered it with steeda springs and put aftermarket wheels and tires and cross-drilled/slotted rotors. The thing handles amazingly. There are a few more things I want to do like the steeda CAI, programmer and TB spacer as well as the magna-flow exhaust and strut tower brace. Even after all of that it will be alot cheaper to own and already looks better then most sports I have seen so Im happy keeping it. Also I havent had a singal mechanical issue out if it.

 

One thing that is interesting is the gas mileage comparison. Almost all of the 2013 2.0L on Fuelly are getting between 18-22 avg mpg whereas I am easily getting 22-25 without being conservative in my 3.5 Sport. I even managed 27.1 MPG on a trip from Chicago to Toronto (about 500 miles).

 

23.1 mpg avg on my '14 2.0L AWD Ecoboost, over 12,000 miles.