19th Apr 2007, 07:58
Excuse me! The Accord looks just like a Fusion if not better looking. The Fusion even looks like a Honda Prelude to me and even so a 94-95 Accord. So which one looks better? I will say Honda because they are more innovative than the company that gave us the Tempo and the Pinto. Sorry, but when you build a car that looks exactly like your competitor you cannot call the other one butt ugly. With your reasoning the Fusion is butt ugly too. HA caught you there pal!
19th Apr 2007, 08:30
The Fusion has only been out for 2 years and it still has not proven anything. The Accord is eating the Fusion.
8th May 2007, 13:49
It's true. The Fusion doesn't have a long term track record, whereas the Accord does. It's a gamble to buy a Fusion. But then again, Consumer Reports seems to think it's a good bet.
And what is it they say in stocks? Past Performance is no guarantee of future returns.
8th May 2007, 19:05
I thought I remember them giving the Contour a good rating too back in the day. I was only ten, but I remember how excited everyone got from when it first came out. Consumer reports recommending the Fusion does not mean anything.
9th May 2007, 11:40
Hey! Don't bad mouth the Granada. My Dad bought a silver Granada in 76, and it was one of the first cars I learned how to drive on. Personally, I think it was one of the better cars Ford built during the 70s. Mid-size, good on gas, fairly stately looking at the time, reliable, good features, and decent enough room.
My father sold it to his ex-wife (my Mom), she named it Sigfried, and proceeded to drive that thing trouble free for the next 13 years. Of course, my mother was a stickler about performing ALL the maintenance on time.
9th May 2007, 11:45
I doubt that CR gave the Contour a good rating. Nevertheless, my wife owns a 99 Contour. Other than the stupid dash peeling up, it's been a good car. We've had only 2 repairs on it. A fuel pump died, which was my fault because last year I ran it dry, and a brake job to replace the pads and 1 rotor.
For an economical compact car, it's done just fine.
9th May 2007, 11:47
You are correct on that one, I don't take what consumer reports says about initial quality seriously because they recommended the Contour and that car was crap on wheels. I had a Toyota Celica that had 235K miles and I wanted something newer so I was looking at a 95 Honda Civic, but then I read on the contour so I gave Ford a chance in part to Consumer Reports. Needless to say that was one of the biggest mistakes of my life and because of its whooping 18 recalls and overall lack of knowledge on their own vehicles I have not looked at a Ford Since. The contour was built as a "Civic and Corolla killer" and the Contour has been dead for about 7 years, and the Civic and Corolla are still going strong. The same thing will happen to the Fusion.
10th May 2007, 21:25
The problem with all you import owners is that if consumer reports was recommending your vehicle, you guys would be all over that as a reason your car is better than the domestic. This time an American car prevails, and you cannot seem to grasp the concept that your added cost of purchase for your foreign car is no longer worth the expense, because the American counterpart is just as reliable.
11th May 2007, 09:19
Like I said Consumer Reports initial quality reports mean abssolutely nothing. Its their follow up reports (i.e. 5 years) that really count.
20th May 2007, 23:19
So much negativity about the Tempo. I owned one of those in my late teens/early 20's all the way to 303K then sold it and it was still running strong. I put so much abuse into that engine, redlining it all the time and changing the oil inconsistently. The car was very reliable and I didn't have to put any money into the drive-train. The Tempo isn't a bad car, people who have never driven it just assume it's bad and like to bash it. I quite preferred that car to a friend's '93 Corolla.
7th Jun 2007, 14:27
Guys, guys, read the disclaimer. The purpose of this forum is to review cars, not argue the superiority of hondas and toyotas over fords. All CR is saying is that Fords are getting better, and I sure believe it. In my family, I've leased/purchased 4 Fords: two Taurus wagons (91, 96), a 03 Focus and a 93 Aerostar, which I beat the crap out of. I encountered one bad transmission with my first wagon. The Aerostar needed one power window motor, and clunked and rattled for 140K miles, afterwhich I traded it in for the Focus, which needed some suspension work out back at 10K, and a wiper motor. Suspension was $235, and the wiper motor I got off ebay for $30. The car now has 60K with no other problems. I loved driving each of my fords, especially the Aero. God I miss that van.
I now own 3 Hondas: two Accords (98, 2003) and a 2001 MDX. Reliabiliywise, the Acura has 110K on it, and it's on its THIRD transmission. (first was faulty, second they installed wrong, so a bearing wore out, third times a charm, I hope) As for the Accords: 98 is a 4-cyl 5-speed with 150K on the clock that I use daily. It went through two alternators, a wheel bearing, and a couple suspension pieces and suffers from piston slap. The 2003 I bought new and has been throwing a check engine light for a good part of it's 60K miles, and has a bad a/c compressor. And don't get me started on the brakes for all three. (Good lord Honda doesn't know how to make a decent set of brakes). In all, I've had less problems with the Fords than I do with the newer Hondas, and that's with the Focus still in the mix, you know? The recall list topper!!!
Anyway, my point is I've known people who have had many problems with fords, and few with the imports, and I've know people like myself that have had problems with imports, and few with domestics. It's hit or miss with cars nowadays guys. People get gold units, people get lemons no matter what company you go for. In my book, Japan's oh so flawless reliability is overrated. Google "honda transmission problems", or "toyota sludge" and you'll see what I mean, but I'll still drive them, cause I like the balance of performance and great gas mileage.
As far as Ford, The Fusion and Edge have yet to be recalled, and new owners aren't reporting as many problems with initial quality (ahem, delivery) as before. But who cares. Take that focus. I paid 16,5 for it, loaded, and threw 300 bucks into it over 60K miles. hmm, 16,800 to drive 60K miles. What's a similarly equipped civic ex or corolla s cost? 18+K? hmm, did ford let me down? I'd gladly buy another.
Oh, and a 2007 Camry vs. a 2007 Fusion from a stoplight goes: the 3.5L gem of a V6 in the new Camry will blow the Ford away any day of the week. Gets your facts straight first before you start arguing over which is faster. The 220hp 3.0 V6 in the fusion that dates back to 1994 can't hold a candle to the new corporate 268hp 3.5 in the Camry. And it doesn't take a Fusion 8 seconds to hit 60, I've read reports that got as low as 7.2, still a couple ticks off of the 6.5 it takes the new Camry, but you know what? Considering the new Camry handles like an 82 eldorado, the.7 second difference shouldn't be considered given the much sportier suspension in the Fusion. The Fords more fun to drive, that's why I bought that focus over a civic. Who cares if it's a bumper length off in the strait-away.
PS: to anyone thinking I'm biased towards the aformentioned companies: when that 98 accord goes, I'm tossing a coin between Nissan or Mazda. Time to try something different.