9th Sep 2007, 21:15
I couldn't agree more that Americans are very much spoiled by lower gas prices than the rest of the world. Many of my friends support much higher gas prices as a means to encourage people to drive smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles. Unfortunately, such an argument is a two-edged sword. Yes, it would encourage middle income people to buy smaller vehicles. The problem is that so many Americans live very far from their places of employment. Higher fuel prices would be disastrous for poor families on small incomes, many of whom do not have the option of living nearer to work. It's easy for those of us with decent incomes to buy $5 a gallon fuel, but for a working single mother who has to drive 40 miles to work it is impossible.
11th Sep 2007, 11:10
Off Topic: about fuel.
I had to chime in. I grew up in Germany and live since 20 years in the US. The US have been lucky enough to have lots of oil gushing out of the ground. Therefore, the States are used to cheap and plenty gasoline. Europe on the other hand never had enough oil to supply its own demand. Therefore, Europe installed policies to make better use of the stuff they import.
Diesel is much more efficient than gasoline. Europe put a lower tax on diesel than on gasoline. Trucks, taxis and other high mileage per year vehicles are usually driven by the more efficient diesels. The higher cost of purchase pays off in lower fuel bills.
The typical personal car had a gasoline engine. Only recently have diesels became the top choice. Again tax policies helped along: Despite the known particulate problems of diesels, they were classified as environmentally "clean" in Germany and are taxed at a lower rate, similar to that of cars with regulated catalytic converters. (Don't mind errors in detail, the big picture counts here).
The US is now talking about ethanol as a fuel to reduce dependency on foreign oil. What nonsense. It takes 1 barrel oil equivalent to find 6 to 10 barrels of oil. It takes 1 barrel of oil equivalent to produce 1 to 1.4 barrels of oil equivalent in ethanol. So all they do is converting oil into ethanol without gaining any meaningful energy. However, food prices are sky rocketing because the feed grains are converted to ethanol. That truly hurts low income households.
I think US needs to wake up, realize that the days of oil-independence are over and apply tax policies that Europe has applied all along: reward fuel efficient technology and discourage fuel wasting technology in transportation and anywhere else. Who knows, the States might just become oil independent again.
16th Dec 2007, 23:27
Actually, if you check ALL the categories in Consumer Reports car reviews (not just reliability, which Fusion scores a "much better than average" in), you'll find that in virtually EVERY category the Fusion scores a "much better than average". The Accord DOES score very well, but not as high as the Fusion, and the Camry is WAYYYYY below either.
In addition, the Fusion does not look just like a 1997 Saturn LS, as the "new" Accord does, nor does it require 5 visits to the dealer in the first 3 months to "make adjustments" as the Camry does.
19th Dec 2007, 16:13
23:27 I don't care how the Fusion 'scores'. I care about how cars hold up in the long run. Since you seem to like to read all of those ratings, take a look at 'used cars to avoid', and such categories that show how a certain car performs in the long run, according to people who have owned them. Ford scores VERY badly in every single year of the last 20 at least. It's the imports that have shown to hold up in the long run, led by Honda and Toyota. The Fusion won't stack up just like every other Ford car ever produced can't stack up.
20th Dec 2007, 20:44
I also care very much about how cars hold up in the long run. That's why I got rid of my last import in 1999 and have driven only Fords and GMs since.
21st Dec 2007, 14:54
So you must avoid used Toyotas because of the engine sludging problems, Hondas because of the transmission problems, and Lexus because of the transmission problems. You are right -- domestics apparently hold up much better!
21st Dec 2007, 16:18
In 1994 when I bought my first brand new car, a 1994 Ford Explorer Limited, I bought it with long-term reliability in mind. I wanted to keep it until I drove it into the ground, and not surprisingly, I haven't done that yet! I have had only one problem with it, and that was the transmission needed to be replaced at 140,000 miles (because Ford used a different transmission than the C4 for this year). I replaced it with a new transmission for 1993. To this day it still feels as solid as it did when I bought it new; no leaks, rattles, etc. The leather is still perfect, and it has 199,000 miles on it. This was the only repair I've had to make on it; all I ever do is hop in and go! And what surprises me the most, is it actually has about the same comfort level of newer cars these days. Power sunroof, leather, great sounding stock CD player with subwoofer, power memory seats, great punch from the 4.0, etc. and it looks great.
Now when someone tells me that Domestic cars are junk, that arouses great laughter from me. Among all the different Domestic vehicles my family have owned, not one has required any major repairs, and most have had well over 100,000 miles.
21st Dec 2007, 21:24
The 12-19 16:00 hr comment. I REALLY AGREE!!! For one thing, the Fusion has not been around that long. Not long enough to get the true data of these! You need to drive it for a few years to see how good these really are.
And the other, THIS IS LIVING PROOF about how bad quality American cars are. This CARSURVEY.ORG website (look at Fords, Dodge's etc) and Consumer Reports, AND MY BAD EXPERIENCE with American cars. I had MANY more problems with all the Fords I owned; transmission died or engines die... PICK N SAVE and 99 cent quality they are! On the 100k mile mark!!
On the imports; they were NOT ANYTHING like the problems I had with my American cars. My experience is enough proof for me, as far as I'm concerned.
9th Sep 2007, 21:07
Before buying a new Mustang, the Fusion was one of the cars we gave the strongest consideration. I drove both the V-6 and I-4 Fusions and found both to be incredibly smooth, solid, well built and great handling vehicles. The V-6 was very fast, but the 4 was impressive for a 4.
The fact that the Fusion is the highest rated car listed in Consumer Reports rating system (A "much better than average in every category, but one, which got a "better than average") almost swayed us to go with it.
If Ford offered a sporty, 2-door version of the Fusion we would bought it on the spot. As it was, we wanted a slightly more sporting look and opted for the beautiful retro styling of the Mustang.