With it's flappy paddles, 2.7L V6 ecoboost churning out 325lb, and AWD but...
How is it basically .1-.3 faster to 60 and in the quarter then the Accord V6?
I love the recent ford models across the board (sans edge) but are they inflating the HP numbers on the EB motors? The Focus RS has nearly 50 more HP then the Golf R, STI and recently departed Evo X, but it's the same story in terms of 0-60 and ETs.
Is it a gearing thing? I'm the first person to admit that there's far more important things to consider then stright line speed, as it's also the easiest thing to improve in the aftermarket, but the lack of improved straight line numbers from Ford EB products versus their competitors with lower published power outputs is a bit baffling.
The Fusion Sport was not created by the ST/RS folks. It is all about bragging rights to big HP numbers...not real performance. A Fusion ST would eschew some of the weightier options, have a real suspension, better gearing and tuning and would be the legitimate budget S4 that everyone was hoping for.
Probably because it still has some middle of the road all seasons on it?
In reply to RossD:
But I'd assume that's similar to the rubber fitted on V6 accords and camrys as well.
I don't think the engine is overrated, the issue is that the car is a 4000+ pound porker. The Accord is like 700 lbs lighter.
Regardless, I really like the Fusion Sport as a quick, comfy, good-looking AWD daily driver. And the 2.7TT should have some tuning potential, it's bigger brother certainly does.
Tom_Spangler wrote: I don't think the engine is overrated, the issue is that the car is a 4000+ pound porker. The Accord is like 700 lbs lighter. Regardless, I really like the Fusion Sport as a quick, comfy, good-looking AWD daily driver. And the 2.7TT should have some tuning potential, it's bigger brother certainly does.
450lb difference per this review: http://jalopnik.com/the-325-horsepower-2017-ford-fusion-sport-is-not-the-au-1785980191
needs more lightening, quicker shifts and more boost?
Can you special order without all the garbage? ..
Why do I care, I'm not buying it.
STM317 wrote:Tom_Spangler wrote: I don't think the engine is overrated, the issue is that the car is a 4000+ pound porker. The Accord is like 700 lbs lighter. Regardless, I really like the Fusion Sport as a quick, comfy, good-looking AWD daily driver. And the 2.7TT should have some tuning potential, it's bigger brother certainly does.450lb difference per this review: http://jalopnik.com/the-325-horsepower-2017-ford-fusion-sport-is-not-the-au-1785980191
C&D says the FuSpo is 4128lbs as tested: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/tested-2017-ford-fusion-sport-review
And 3593 for the Accord: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2016-honda-accord-v-6-sedan-test-review
So, a bit under 600. But still enough to more than account for the acceleration difference. I trust C&D's numbers more than Jalopnik, C&D actually puts their test cars on a scale, Jalopnik (I think) goes by manufacturer numbers.
In reply to Tom_Spangler: We'll go with your numbers then.
Holy cow that's heavy. In 2008 the Ford Taurus X which is a full size car based cuv, was just over 4,000lbs. Now their mid sized car is over 4,000 pounds. Why the bloat in the last few years? Both are AWD v6 powered things. The Taurus X seems huge compared to a Fusion.
In reply to Tom_Spangler:
That explains a lot, including earlier feedback of a less than sporty feel.
I hope that they sell enough of them to pop up on copart in decent numbers in a few years. I want to see someone 2.7TT swap a focus rs, yes it's less power when stock, but the 2.7 has far more potential when modified and fitted with bigger EFRs then the 2.3L EB. Now fitting it to the 6spd will be an issue I'm sure.
I've heard the hot ecoboost is the 3.0 in the new lincolns. Get that one on copart. I sat next to a ford engineer at a bar in Amsterdam and he stated 425 lb-ft is what they're shooting for on the 3.0
In reply to Fueled by Caffeine:
I frequently have impure thoughts involving a V6EB and rwd Volvos #confessions
captdownshift wrote: In reply to Fueled by Caffeine: I frequently have impure thoughts involving a V6EB and rwd Volvos #confessions
Those are very pure thoughts my friend. Virtuous and pure.
captdownshift wrote: In reply to Tom_Spangler: That explains a lot, including earlier feedback of a less than sporty feel. I hope that they sell enough of them to pop up on copart in decent numbers in a few years. I want to see someone 2.7TT swap a focus rs, yes it's less power when stock, but the 2.7 has far more potential when modified and fitted with bigger EFRs then the 2.3L EB. Now fitting it to the 6spd will be an issue I'm sure.
I don't think you'll have any trouble finding one, as they are putting them in F-150s. It's also been out for a year or two in the Edge sport.
4,000lbs? Jesus! What's an SHO weigh?
Appleseed wrote: 4,000lbs? Jesus! What's an SHO weigh?
Only about 100lbs more. Which is why I'm probably going to get a used SHO rather than a new FuSpo.
After living with the 2.0 EB in our MKC for 20k miles, I'm firmly in the EB fanboi camp. Even tows ~3k in the maryland mountains like a champ.
In reply to Tom_Spangler:
Have you seen the prices of used SHOs lately?
I had no idea the SHO was that inexpensive.
Brett_Murphy wrote: I had no idea the SHO was that inexpensive.
Have you sat in one? It's incredibly nice, well-built vehicle. I'm surprised to see the used ones that cheap.
EDIT: Nevermind, I wouldn't touch a twin turbo car with those miles.
Think of the Police Interceptor as a Bargain/Stripper version of the SHO.
Add a few hundred dollars worth of intake and tuner and you run really low 13s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZAwTb142ic
RossD wrote: In reply to Tom_Spangler: Have you seen the prices of used SHOs lately? http://appleton.craigslist.org/cto/5889935618.html http://appleton.craigslist.org/cto/5864641225.html
A bit, yes. I have a spreadsheet with pretty much every local SHO that's for sale on it, actually. 
I'm not looking for an Interceptor, I want the civilian version with the creature comforts, and WAY less miles than those, but that's still doable for low $20s around here.
You want to know what's really a bargain, though? The Lincoln MKS Ecoboost. Basically a tarted-up SHO with more standard equipment, and they are even a bit cheaper than SHOs for some reason. I haven't ruled them out, but I do like the interior of the SHO a bit better, there's more storage and versatility.
Anyhow, someone buy my Mustang so I can get one! 
I just found a 2011 SHO with 65K miles on it at a local dealer for $17,999
The SHO had massaging front seats available. I want one of those.
You'll need to log in to post.
