2013 Ford Fusion

[outback_ute]

Seeing as I raised the point (and my comments were on the Fusion not the MKZ), why does it matter? Well I'd estimate that most days I would scrape the front of my (work) car on a driveway or over a speed hump despite taking reasonable care. Its not something that I enjoy, nor is slowing down to tippy-toe speeds to cross a gutter.

It's not necessarily about the length of the front end of the car, fwd cars tend to have a minimal clearance from the a pillar to axle, related to the transverse engine layout ahead of the axle. It can be reversed to have the engine behind the wheels - see Toyota iQ - which would also improve weight distribution. All for the cost of having the front wheels a bit further forward, the only downsides I can see is a slightly larger turning circle and the front suspension/wheels would be a bit more vulnerable in a crash but by that severity it doesn't really matter. For the VE Commodore they relocated the front axle on the chassis rails. (perhaps because they knew they would also be basing the Camaro off the platform?)

In any case it was just an observation on the way the whole industry is going, not intended to stir up controversy!

Finally I think the picture Wretched posted is fairly easily explained, the 2.0 Ecoboost is a mainstream/launch engine and the US has a large proportion of sales as AWD, it makes sense that combination is available. Also I think the hybrid model is most often seen in light blue, you can pick it by the round charging port cover on the LH front guard.

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Ahhh yes supercars, definitely the exception to the rule. (every rule has one) And yes, it is a rule. Porsche have long front overhang as well, but its been significantly reduced for the new 911 which has a longer wheelbase.

Well which rule are you worried about? Your main concern seems to be about looks, but the biggest effect the overhangs have is on the balance of the car. Thats why the RWD Germans have pushed the front wheels forward, and supercars still have them right infront of the doors.

[Bucknaked]

Originally Posted by Polyal

WTF the "overhang" thing again...

My wasteline

[demondan]

The headlight treatment on the Euro model looks more aggressive, hopefully this is the version shipped down here. Put some decent wheels on it and from that angle it would look awesome.

[jpd80]

New Fusion versus Taurus versus Falcon, how close can you get:
.Apart from 2" more hip and shoulder room Falcon is almost identical.
Do we really need three cars this size?

Fusion:
First row headroom 39.2
First row legroom, maximum 44.3
First row shoulder room 57.8
First row hip room 55.0
Second row headroom 37.8
Second row legroom 38.3
Second row shoulder room 56.9
Second row hip room 54.4

Taurus:
First row headroom 39.0
First row legroom, maximum 41.9
First row shoulder room 57.9
First row hip room 56.3
Second row headroom 37.8
Second row legroom 38.3
Second row shoulder room 57.8
Second row hip room 55.8

Falcon:
First row headroom 39.8
First row legroom, maximum 42.4
First row shoulder room 59.9
First row hip room 58.5
Second row headroom 38.9
Second row legroom 38.9
Second row shoulder room 59.7
Second row hip room 58.0

As a note new Fusion is available as an AWD but only with 2.0 Ecoboost.
Hmm, I'm thinking 179 Kw and maybe 366 nm with AWD in a 1600 kg car
I wonder whether it torque biases to the rear on take off like Taurus SHO?

[Falc'man]

you made that up!

If the Falcon had a rwd stablemate that was practically the same size, and was selling 5 times as much... hmmm...

So... Taurus looks like it's become a niche vehicle, may as well be RWD.

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by jpd80

New Fusion versus Taurus versus Falcon, how close can you get:
.Apart from 2" more hip and shoulder room Falcon is almost identical.
Do we really need three cars this size?

Fusion:
First row headroom 39.2
First row legroom, maximum 44.3
First row shoulder room 57.8
First row hip room 55.0
Second row headroom 37.8
Second row legroom 38.3
Second row shoulder room 56.9
Second row hip room 54.4

Falcon:
First row headroom 39.8
First row legroom, maximum 42.4
First row shoulder room 59.9
First row hip room 58.5
Second row headroom 38.9
Second row legroom 38.9
Second row shoulder room 59.7
Second row hip room 58.0

As a note new Fusion is available as an AWD but only with 2.0 Ecoboost.
Hmm, I'm thinking 179 Kw and maybe 366 nm with AWD in a 1600 kg car
I wonder whether it torque biases to the rear on take off like Taurus SHO?

Clearly the Falcon is a proper E segment vehicle...... Just not on the outside so much.

Time for that whale carcass Taurus to be dragged out to sea. Falcon to underline next D/E segment RWD Fords. (There's your next headline Drive journos)

[Bossxr8]

Yeah, whats the point of the Taurus then, if the Fusion is basically as big inside as it. All the extra bodywork does is create extra weight, maybe a slightly bigger boot?

Being FWD its pointless having another one, better off ditching it and using Falcon as your large vehicle, with RWD being the point of difference. Then make a flagship Lincoln out of it too to put up against 7 series, S class and Caddillac CTS?

Probably won't happen solely because of Detroits "Not Made Here Syndrome". Same reason Ranger didn't make it to the US.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Yeah, whats the point of the Taurus then, if the Fusion is basically as big inside as it. All the extra bodywork does is create extra weight, maybe a slightly bigger boot?

Being FWD its pointless having another one, better off ditching it and using Falcon as your large vehicle, with RWD being the point of difference. Then make a flagship Lincoln out of it too to put up against 7 series, S class and Caddillac CTS?

Probably won't happen solely because of Detroits "Not Made Here Syndrome". Same reason Ranger didn't make it to the US.

Could it be that CD4 Taurus is planned to be a widened version of Fusion with a slightly longer boot?
If such a large vehicle is no longer needed in Australia, i can see why they passed it up..

[FPV GTHO]

Ford US might do the Aurion trick and keep Taurus V6 whilst Fusion sticks to Ecoboost.

Alot of possibilities though and nobody is really talking about the SUV's that need to be supported by these platforms yet

[AC]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Probably won't happen solely because of Detroits "Not Made Here Syndrome". Same reason Ranger didn't make it to the US.

There's nothing to stop them taking the blue prints to the states and producing it there, I think a lot of Australians would rather they pick up the design make it there and leave us to our devices. Although I could see FoA saying "What do we get out of it" which generally kills most ideas when one side asks too much.

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Yeah, whats the point of the Taurus then, if the Fusion is basically as big inside as it. All the extra bodywork does is create extra weight, maybe a slightly bigger boot?

Being FWD its pointless having another one, better off ditching it and using Falcon as your large vehicle, with RWD being the point of difference. Then make a flagship Lincoln out of it too to put up against 7 series, S class and Caddillac CTS?

Probably won't happen solely because of Detroits "Not Made Here Syndrome". Same reason Ranger didn't make it to the US.

They getting better. The Fiesta and Focus are imported there. And a few of their domestic only vehicles are made in Mexico.

FoA provides the most dynamic, most versatile platform of any Ford in the empire. A RWD with sibling RWD/AWD variant. Capable for sedan and SUV. Able to take engines from the 2.0 EB (Global), 2.7 Duratorq(Widespread), 4.0 I6 (local), and 5.0 Coyote (NA and Oz). The vehicles form a balance between cars suited to Americans and Europeans... but not dead set towards either.

The platform could underpin vehicles in D to E segments with multiple powertrain variations, and sedan and SUV. Cars that could spawn off of it? MKS/MKT, (Falcon and Territory obviously), Mustang... and Lincoln Mustang (Mercury Cougar comeback)

[Buntz]

Lincoln MKZ sets itself on fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69DyI...ayer_embedded#!

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

FoA provides the most dynamic, most versatile platform of any Ford in the empire. A RWD with sibling RWD/AWD variant. Capable for sedan and SUV. Able to take engines from the 2.0 EB (Global), 2.7 Duratorq(Widespread), 4.0 I6 (local), and 5.0 Coyote (NA and Oz). The vehicles form a balance between cars suited to Americans and Europeans... but not dead set towards either.

You're blowing hot air there. If you want versatile, C2 wins. Dynamic? C2 might still win even though its FWD. EUCD aint too bad either and D2C betrays its low cost origins. E8 as it stands, is not AWD capable. Territory and Falcon do NOT share platforms, they share parts.

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

You're blowing hot air there. If you want versatile, C2 wins. Dynamic? C2 might still win even though its FWD. EUCD aint too bad either and D2C betrays its low cost origins. E8 as it stands, is not AWD capable. Territory and Falcon do NOT share platforms, they share parts.

That's as good as. They share suspension layouts, engine and transmission packages. And common interior design, and layout. Falcon and Territory come as a pair in the Ford world. I believe the capability for AWD is there with Falcon as tried with Territory. The skill, the infrastructure and IP are there.

Which is a good thing.

[janddbone]

GRWD could easily do 250,000 sales annually. How could they not do it???

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by brett.r.johnstone

GRWD could easily do 250,000 sales annually. How could they not do it???

They have Mustang, Falcon, Explorer, Territory, Edge and Taurus all with claims to go on a RWD platform and all needing something unique. That can get quite expensive if they want 1 thing to do everything. More than anything they dont want to compromise Mustang, which is possibly the most unique amongst that bunch. It might be just as expensive to keep Mustang on an updated version of D2C and to switch everything else to EUCD2. Good platform development though might allow them to develop not a singular platform, but different vehicle modules.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

They getting better. The Fiesta and Focus are imported there. And a few of their domestic only vehicles are made in Mexico.

FoA provides the most dynamic, most versatile platform of any Ford in the empire. A RWD with sibling RWD/AWD variant. Capable for sedan and SUV. Able to take engines from the 2.0 EB (Global), 2.7 Duratorq(Widespread), 4.0 I6 (local), and 5.0 Coyote (NA and Oz). The vehicles form a balance between cars suited to Americans and Europeans... but not dead set towards either.

The platform could underpin vehicles in D to E segments with multiple powertrain variations, and sedan and SUV. Cars that could spawn off of it? MKS/MKT, (Falcon and Territory obviously), Mustang... and Lincoln Mustang (Mercury Cougar comeback)

Focus and Fiesta are also built in the US aren't they now. But they already had the Focus and they had nothing Fiesta sized, so they didn't have to replace anything US only, cause Focus was already built there. They already have a large car in the US, so they won't want it replaced by something foreign, no matter how much they preach One Ford. It might be One Ford, but its USA number 1, then everyone else comes second. Just like the Ranger was rejected for the US because they didn't want it to step on the toes of the F series.

[janddbone]

Not sure I would want to step on the toes of the best selling vehicle in the country either... Imagine the $$$ at risk...

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Ford US might do the Aurion trick and keep Taurus V6 whilst Fusion sticks to Ecoboost.

Alot of possibilities though and nobody is really talking about the SUV's that need to be supported by these platforms yet

I've heard through Austin on blueovalnews that FoE are developing the replacement Edge on EUCD/CD4.
At the moment, the Edge is on the Mazda CD3S platform and looks like a slightly wider CX-7
but is only 100 mm shorter that Territory due to its hatchback crossover look.

IMO a Territory sized SUV would be a great fit and work well on a global platform.

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Focus and Fiesta are also built in the US aren't they now. But they already had the Focus and they had nothing Fiesta sized, so they didn't have to replace anything US only, cause Focus was already built there. They already have a large car in the US, so they won't want it replaced by something foreign, no matter how much they preach One Ford. It might be One Ford, but its USA number 1, then everyone else comes second. Just like the Ranger was rejected for the US because they didn't want it to step on the toes of the F series.

Their Focus was different to the one dev'd at Cologne. Not sure if it shared some parts with the euro Focus... but it definitely had an all American... all hideous top hat even a Mother would hate.

The new Ranger gets lots of thumbs up from yankee bloggers over on autoblog. It really is a truckers nation. But I can neither agree nor disagree with Fords decision. Ford sold over 500,000 units or something silly over there last year. Anything impeding on such results... I can understand. but when it's one of your own products??? (Then again... keeping the 'F-Brand' strong is also good.) However I'd like to think that Ranger would supplement the F series for the minority of Americans that aren't obese.

And the Ford brass still don't turn their nose up at having some of their line built by de Hombres.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

Their Focus was different to the one dev'd at Cologne. Not sure if it shared some parts with the euro Focus... but it definitely had an all American... all hideous top hat even a Mother would hate.

The new Ranger gets lots of thumbs up from yankee bloggers over on autoblog. It really is a truckers nation. But I can neither agree nor disagree with Fords decision. Ford sold over 500,000 units or something silly over there last year. Anything impeding on such results... I can understand. but when it's one of your own products??? (Then again... keeping the 'F-Brand' strong is also good.) However I'd like to think that Ranger would supplement the F series for the minority of Americans that aren't obese.

And the Ford brass still don't turn their nose up at having some of their line built by de Hombres.

The Yank Focus was still based on the original Mk 1 Focus, it wasn't a good looker. What I was saying was that because Ford already built the Focus in the US, replacing it with the new version isn't really replacing an american made vehicle, cause Focus was already made there, even if it was an older version its still a US built Focus.

It would be different if the Americans decided to replace Focus with an imported, European made version, to replace the US made Focus.

As for the Ranger, they previously had a unique US built Ranger that was placed under F series, but when the new Ranger was built they decided not to use it cause it was too close to F series, but the previous US made Ranger was ok. One Ford (Not unless its made here) is alive an well. If the new Ranger was going to be US or Mexican made it would probably be on sale there by now.

I apologize for my cynicism, but i'm a bit over the way they preach One Ford, but it still seems that Ford North America can twist things to suit themselves. But I guess being a North American company and having the sales figures to back it up provides them that.