Yeah. Only problem with it (other than "normal" oil use) is that it sounds like a freaking weed eater. It'll rev forever, has enough torque to move itself off the line and gets 28mpg doing mostly city driving.

In my experience the GM LZ4 3.5L is quite a bit better performing engine than the duratec 3.0L.

Yeah. Only problem with it (other than "normal" oil use) is that it sounds like a freaking weed eater. It'll rev forever, has enough torque to move itself off the line and gets 28mpg doing mostly city driving.

i bet if i told my sister that she would get one. she's been in an elantra for awhile now and she gets 30. my BIL has been trying to get her back into a ford but she's already had a focus and she probably thinks the fusion wouldn't get great mileage. FWIW, the fusion is just as well priced out the door as some of the current crop of econocars.

In my experience the GM LZ4 3.5L is quite a bit better performing engine than the duratec 3.0L.

I've experienced the 3.0 in the Mazda6 and the 3.5 in the Malibu (and Maxx) and while the Duratec isn't perfect, it was quieter on the road and felt peppier.

And reg, the Fusion gets excellent mileage in the city with the air on.

the fusion is a good car for so many people. i like it, although i kind of like something a bit bigger. i saw an accord value package on the lot this weekend when i went to test drive an odyssey. man, the accord vp is a PATHETIC looking car on the lot. PATHETIC. The base Fusion you buy out the door for around 16-17 is a much nicer car than the stripped out accord.

Edited June 25, 200718 yr by regfootball

If you pay $16 out the door for a base Fusion, you have terrible negotiating skills, base models sit on lots forever (around here at least) so the dealers are a little more generous with them.

This is an LX or an SE. The lack of chrome rings on the controls, cloth seats, and manual tranny gives it away. Without a look at the outside to see if it is a 4 or 6, I would guess four which for Honda means an even cheaper interior. For example, the last model had a DX which meant everything cheap no chrome, LED gauges were replaced with std. backlights, radio was down graded, interior fabrics were different. LX SE was one step better with LEDs, cloth tthe same as the LX, and better radio. LX had upgraded trim (wood or "pluminum"). EX 4 no nav meant leather and better trim. EX V-6 no nav meant fabric covered A, B, C pillars. EX-NAV meant top of the line trims with all of the afformentioned upgrades.

Look for this model to have the same treatments.

Simply put, we are panning a cheap interior. And because this is the cheap model and being compared to a BMW, I would say this is success!

Damn... very nicely put. I never even thought of it that way.

Damn... very nicely put. I never even thought of it that way.

I wouldn't. It's being compared to a BMW in terms of ripping off the styling.

Honestly, the 4cyl is great (its also what most people buy) but a little more power wouldn't hurt. The V6 could be better (its not GM 3.6) but it isn't terrible by any means (its no GM 3.5).

One of the nicest all around rental "queens" I've ever had is a Fusion SE 2.3L. I've had one two times now.....and for the price, you get a decent amount of features and great interior quality.....even the "base" cloth on the seats and door panel inserts is nice.

Plus the car just has a very nice feel to the chassis and powertrain. And yes, the 4-cylinder is a great alternative.

In my experience the GM LZ4 3.5L is quite a bit better performing engine than the duratec 3.0L.

I disagree.......from 51,000 miles in a 2003 Mazda6 3.0L (admittedly with the 5-speed manual.) The car was a rocketship. (0-60 in 6.7 secs I believe from contemporary road tests of the time.)

The Fusion in the pics shown before looks pretty awful, I agree. I had a rental Fusion with the graphite interior, and based on the look of the interior alone, I would buy it. The materials, fit and finish, the luxury look of the dark grey (black?) was definitely above average. HOWEVER, (and this is a big however), the 4 cylinder was noisy and clunky. I have not driven an Accord in a while, but the base Fusion's ride and power is not going to cause GM engineers any loss of sleep.

We all know that the interior of the Malibu (except maybe the SS) is the weakest of this group, but then it has been around for 4 years. Having lived with the Malibus off and one for 5 or 6 years, I gotta say that the package works well, especially when you live with one. The real world gas mileage of both the 4 and 6 cylinders is simply stellar - and I drive hard. First impressions may be a different matter, and seems how superficiality seems to win the day, I am looking forward to the new Malibu in the Fall.

This is an LX or an SE. The lack of chrome rings on the controls, cloth seats, and manual tranny gives it away. Without a look at the outside to see if it is a 4 or 6, I would guess four which for Honda means an even cheaper interior. For example, the last model had a DX which meant everything cheap no chrome, LED gauges were replaced with std. backlights, radio was down graded, interior fabrics were different. LX SE was one step better with LEDs, cloth tthe same as the LX, and better radio. LX had upgraded trim (wood or "pluminum"). EX 4 no nav meant leather and better trim. EX V-6 no nav meant fabric covered A, B, C pillars. EX-NAV meant top of the line trims with all of the afformentioned upgrades.

Look for this model to have the same treatments.

Simply put, we are panning a cheap interior. And because this is the cheap model and being compared to a BMW, I would say this is success!

Well put. An EX-L V-6 with Nav System is going to be several steps higher in quality than the model in these spy shots.

As I recall the Fusion had soft-touch surfaces on teh lower dash, most (if not all) mid-size competitors don't have that...it's hard plastic.

To me, the Fusion's only weak area is the center stack, and the engine. They've got an engine for it, they just need to put it in, and then they just need to redo the center stack.

Material wise, the Fusion's interior is top notch. Design, however, leaves alot to be desired. Not to mention that it just looks cheap. Those door panels are pathetic, only the G6 and DCX twins have worse looking door panels. Even an Aveo has better looking door panels.

Edited June 26, 200718 yr by blackviper8891

In fact, thanks to Infiniti already copying BMWs interior design with the M45 and adding a dash of Japanese to it...

I'm sorry, what?

I disagree.......from 51,000 miles in a 2003 Mazda6 3.0L (admittedly with the 5-speed manual.) The car was a rocketship. (0-60 in 6.7 secs I believe from contemporary road tests of the time.)

My duratec drive time is all on the Taurus and Escape (I think Mazda has a modified version of the 3.0L), while I've also driven an 07 Aura XE and G6.

My duratec drive time is all on the Taurus and Escape (I think Mazda has a modified version of the 3.0L), while I've also driven an 07 Aura XE and G6.

Yeah it was slightly modified.

It had a higher redline, a bit more power (221hp) and really zinged and revved like no other Duratec that I've driven. BUT...that's what it was....a Duratec 3.0. Why Ford didn't crib the Mazda version for everything else, I'll never know.