2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid: 52 mpg

jwmorrice

Gentleman by Profession
Jun 30, 2003
7,133
2
0
In the laboratory.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-neil19-2008dec19,0,1742816.story
From the Los Angeles Times
2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid: 52 mpg and the darkness before dawn
Even when Detroit manages to do something right, the timing and execution are off.
By DAN NEIL

December 19, 2008


As we know from the works of Cormac McCarthy, despair can be kind of gratifying. And yet, as much as I hate to disturb our national mood of decline, I have some good news regarding the auto industry. You may return to your comfort drinking presently.

The 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid, and its twin, the Mercury Milan Hybrid, are mid-to-full-size sedans that seat five in surprising comfort and offer a full-size trunk measuring around 12 cubic feet. They measure 190.6 inches long and weigh a goodly 3,720 pounds. The gas-electric output is 191 horsepower and zero to 60 mph acceleration is under 9 seconds.

The retail price of a nicely equipped Fusion Hybrid -- with blandishments such as rearview camera, blind-spot alert and 17-inch alloy wheels -- is $27,270. With the applicable federal tax credit, the car should cost consumers about $25,000, I estimate (final numbers have not been announced).

On a test drive of a Fusion Hybrid last week in West L.A. traffic, I managed, without much trouble, to get 52 mpg in mixed city-highway driving.

Wait, so, has somebody invented the car of the future and didn't tell us?

It's a worthy question. The scolding undercurrent of recent congressional hearings on the auto-industry bailout was the notion that Detroit had failed to invest in next-generation technology that could help wean us off foreign oil. Not so. What they did fail to do was sufficiently commercialize this technology so that it was ready and waiting at dealerships when people got stampeded this year by spiraling gas prices.

Had Ford made a few hundred thousand of these cars available in June -- along with the financing to sell them -- we'd be erecting 50-foot equestrian statues of William Clay Ford and Alan Mulally in city squares, and the streets of Dearborn, Mich., would be repaved with diamond cobblestones.

As it was, the meme of national incompetence and inferiority vis-a-vis the Japanese carmakers -- Toyota, Honda -- was again reinforced. Of course, Detroit can't build a desirable high-mileage car. We're the country that bungled Iraq and bred a Bernard Madoff, that turned the mortgage market into three-card monte and put Britney back on top. It would seem almost a shame to interrupt the soothing pleasures of such self-pity.

And yet, here we are, with a car that seemed purely theoretical -- a desirable, affordable, no-compromise sedan that gets 40-plus mpg -- about to show up at Ford dealerships in the first quarter of 2009. Somebody ought to tell Thomas Friedman.

Now what? Now people have to buy them.

For all the game-changing glow around the Ford Fusion Hybrid, it's actually a fairly conservative and programmatic approach to gas-electric propulsion. The system is an evolution of the hybrid system in the Ford Escape. The battery is nickel-metal hydride, not lithium (lithium chemistry batteries are lighter and more energy-dense, but they are also expensive and finicky, which is to say, flammable).

The nickel battery will please many in the green-car movement who argue that the search for the perfect battery -- a la the Chevy Volt -- has only delayed development of the good. ( Edmund Burke said the worst thing a man can do is do nothing because he can do only a little.)

The Sanyo-supplied battery pack -- 270 volts and 1.4 kWh, if that helps -- is 30% smaller in volume and 23% lighter than the one in the Escape. The smaller battery is easier to cool, requiring only cabin air ducted from underneath the back seat.

The battery supplies enough glowing ponies to propel the car to speeds up to 47 mph on all-electric power. This is key to the car's in-city mileage. On my 50-mile drive, I was able to feather-foot the throttle enough to accelerate to commuting speeds without waking the gas engine. When I needed to accelerate faster, I could dip in to the engine horsepower briefly to overcome inertia, then maintain momentum with the electric motor. At one stage I was getting 63 mpg.

To make a full-size car go fast on electric power alone, you need a boatload of voltage. But high-voltage systems involve increased impedance and heat losses, which is wasted energy. To unknot this problem, the Fusion uses a variable-voltage converter that temporarily steps up system voltage during peak demand or hard braking, when the battery is forcefully recharged.

This is actually one of two high-tech converters on board: The second system provides juice to an array of high-voltage systems such as steering, air-conditioning and brakes.

There's a lot of other arcane technology that goes into a car, like reams of software code that allow all the various components to talk sweetly to one another. But perhaps the most valuable bit of software is the wetware, the stuff between the driver's ears. To that end, the Fusion Hybrid uses a delightful, LCD instrument cluster with modules that coach drivers on how to save fuel. In one panel, the more lightly you drive, the more leaves that grow on a set of animated vines. You can go from lead-footed, gas-bingeing knucklehead (like me) to abstemious hyper-miler in a matter of minutes. Brilliant.

So, is this the better mousetrap we've been waiting for? Well, there's a problem. The price of gas has dropped by two-thirds in six months, thereby de-motivating buyers who might have been willing to bear the incremental cost of a hybrid. What we really need is an increased federal gas tax, but the chances of that getting passed in Congress are comparable to my chances of being named Miss Universe.

Ugh. I'm getting depressed again.
 

stang

Banned
Oct 24, 2002
4,947
0
0
S ontario
Finally. Even I would consider that one.
They're starting to look attractive.
 

S.C. Joe

Client # 13
Nov 2, 2007
7,139
1
0
Detroit, USA
Now why wasn't that for sale in the summer of 2008 :confused:
 

herames

Retired Hobby Horse Rider
Apr 5, 2006
2,952
0
36
Hamburger-ton
www.jeffbuckley.com

herames

Retired Hobby Horse Rider
Apr 5, 2006
2,952
0
36
Hamburger-ton
www.jeffbuckley.com
additonally>>
Ford's 64 mpg Car---For Europe. Not U.S.http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2008/07/fords_64_mpg_ca.html

Ford unveiled a road-ready car at the auto show in London this week that gets 64 mpg. That’s better than a Prius or Civic Hybrid and alamost twice the fuel economy of Ford’s best fuel sipper in the U.S. today—the Ford Focus. It will go on sale in Great Britain THIS year. That means it’s road ready, just not in the U.S. Oddsbodkins!!!
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,749
3
0
herames said:
additonally>>
Ford's 64 mpg Car---For Europe. Not U.S
As the article points out there are two principle factors:

1) U.S. and Canadian air quality and fuel efficiency differ significantly enough from Europe’s that they require costly retooling for whole separate set of regulations and standards.

2) North America is far behind Europe in the adoption of clean diesel technology and distribution.

3) the article does not point out the completely different auto safety regime between North America and Europe.
 
Last edited:

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
A 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid getting 52 mpg is NO BIG DEAL!

VW used to have a Rabbit diesel in the 80s that got better fuel economy.

I had a 98 Chevy Geo Metro that got 48-51 mpg.
That 3 cylinder, 1.0 liter, 56 horsepower engine with a 5 speed man/tranny, ran smoother than some 4 cylinder cars I drove!
Put 80,000 trouble free miles on it the few years owned, I have to drive a lot. Only downside was it had no power but cost only $5 bucks to fillup with gas at times back then, which got me 450-500 miles/tank of gas!

When gas prices fell GM dropped that Geo line. GM didn't like Geo because it meant mini profits, it was very inexpensive to buy. if GM still sold them last summer they would have sold like hotcakes.
 

herames

Retired Hobby Horse Rider
Apr 5, 2006
2,952
0
36
Hamburger-ton
www.jeffbuckley.com
WoodPeckr said:
VW used to have a Rabbit diesel in the 80s that got better fuel economy.

I had a 98 Chevy Geo Metro that got 48-51 mpg.
That 3 cylinder, 1.0 liter, 56 horsepower engine with a 5 speed man/tranny, ran smoother than some 4 cylinder cars I drove!
Put 80,000 trouble free miles on it the few years owned, I have to drive a lot. Only downside was it had no power but cost only $5 bucks to fillup with gas at times back then, which got me 450-500 miles/tank of gas!

When gas prices fell GM dropped that Geo line. GM didn't like Geo because it meant mini profits, it was very inexpensive to buy. if GM still sold them last summer they would have sold like hotcakes.
you know the geo is a suzuki in disguise right!?
 

herames

Retired Hobby Horse Rider
Apr 5, 2006
2,952
0
36
Hamburger-ton
www.jeffbuckley.com
Aardvark154 said:
As the article points out there are two principle factors: 2) U.S. and Canadian air quality and fuel efficiency differ significantly enough from Europe’s that they require costly retooling for whole separate set of regulations and standards.

2) North America is far behind Europe in the adoption of clean diesel technology and distribution.

3) the article does not point out the completely different auto safety regime between North America and Europe.
what can we Do...petition for wishing to have these here!?...i think the emissions is just red tape...Diesels don't really need tune ups...so the service departments at the dealership is going to lose large... oil changes are the only thing... these are not the diesels of old..no waiting a near minute or 2 to get the glo-plugs up to warmth. near instant start.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,749
3
0
herames said:
what can we Do...petition for wishing to have these here!?
Write to M.P.s, Representatives etc. . .,talk to others. The climate is right at present for these sorts of changes to be made. Actually clean diesel is already on it's way, to these shores, but far more can still be done.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,474
12
38
Forty ywears ago I got that mileage in an Austin 850—the original Mini—and For's only just now catching up? No wonder they're on the edge of bankruptcy.

All the bandaiding of an electric motor/generator onto an old-fashioned polluting, internal combustion engine doesn't alter the fact that it's the same sort of oversized, dumb box on wheels that Detroit's been making (and losing money on) for decades, but now it comes with a whole new electric side to go wrong.
 

toughb

"The Gatekeeper"
Aug 29, 2006
6,731
0
0
Asgard
2009 Corolla = 50 MPG
 

stang

Banned
Oct 24, 2002
4,947
0
0
S ontario
WoodPeckr said:
VW used to have a Rabbit diesel in the 80s that got better fuel economy.

I had a 98 Chevy Geo Metro that got 48-51 mpg.
That 3 cylinder, 1.0 liter, 56 horsepower engine with a 5 speed man/tranny, ran smoother than some 4 cylinder cars I drove!
Put 80,000 trouble free miles on it the few years owned, I have to drive a lot. Only downside was it had no power but cost only $5 bucks to fillup with gas at times back then, which got me 450-500 miles/tank of gas!

When gas prices fell GM dropped that Geo line. GM didn't like Geo because it meant mini profits, it was very inexpensive to buy. if GM still sold them last summer they would have sold like hotcakes.

Sure, but I'd hazard a guess there's a big performance, comfort and practicality improvement driving a 2010 Ford Fussion over a Rabbit or Geo.
 

toughb

"The Gatekeeper"
Aug 29, 2006
6,731
0
0
Asgard
Powershot said:
Maybe imperial MPG on the highway.
+ A Fusion feels like driving a BMW compared to a Corolla.
************

Hybrid Fusion = BMW; not likely.

A suggestion. Take a CorollaXR out for a spin. You could be saying what is a Fusion. :)
 

lewd

Member
Aug 29, 2001
949
1
18
Interiors still look like crap.
IMO, the exterior designs are still way behind German but catching up the Japanese brands.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
stang said:
Sure, but I'd hazard a guess there's a big performance, comfort and practicality improvement driving a 2010 Ford Fussion over a Rabbit or Geo.
Not all that much because I never really went for small cars anyways but at that point in time I wanted a vehicle that got 50 mpg and Geo delivered.

And yes herames, I knew the Metro was a suzuki in disguise.
It seemed well made and trouble free.
It was far better made than either a Pinto or a Chevette....:D
 

Powershot

Active member
May 18, 2003
2,059
1
38
The dash which was just a let down/a bore before the update with some cheap looking elements now looks downright ugly.
 

ig-88

New member
Oct 28, 2006
4,729
4
0
I had a Ford Fusion as a rental.

The ride was smooth and handled fine. There were some sleek lines to the exterior, but the car screamed "government sedan."

The interior looked shockingly like a throwback to the 80s. So much so that for a while, I thought that I had gotten some car FROM the 80s. Funny because the Ford Focus actually has a futuristic looking interior.

The seating was actually pretty comfy and I agree with the other comment, that aside from the horrible aesthetics, the car felt roomier and more comfy than a Corolla.

I think it would be a fine sedan for anyone, but I suspect (as is the general perception) that you may have a greater probability of decreased reliability with American cars.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts