New Ford Fusion Sport Review

[Frisky Dingo]

So I was bored yesterday, and being potentially genuinely interested in this car, I took a trip to the Ford store down the road from me. Magnetic Grey Sport sitting under the awning up by the showroom. Looks pretty slow, so I go check it out. Nobody comes out. I walk inside and find a sales guy. He doesn't introduce himself. Doesn't ask me my name. Doesn't as how he can help me. Awkward. I ask for the keys to the Sport. He proceeds to walk me out to it, let me in, and tells me precisely 0 about the car. Asks me exactly 0 questions. Is this this guy's first day? I ask for a drive, he goes and scans my DL, comes back with a D-tag and says, "There you go, see you when you get back." Perfect. I then took the car on about a 15 mile drive down a twisty back road nearby. The following are my impressions of it.

Right off the bat, I'm not thrilled. I don't like the seats. I'm not a big fan of the center stack. It looks kinda cheap. The touchscreen in the center was kind of antiquated looking. Not as responsive as I'd like. Organized in a rather haphazard manner. Steering wheel rim was squishy and too thin. Strange. All of a mile down the road, and I no longer dislike the seats. I hate them. They are horrendous. They don't go low enough, so the seating position is weird, the lumbar doesn't go out far enough, and it's way too high up. There's no real bolstering. The cushioning and support is just so-so. Not looking good.

The next few miles are better. Driving through traffic, I'm quickly digging the power delivery. Some slight lag down low (more than my GTI), but a nice, fat midrange that makes passing a breeze. In Sport mode, the automatic did a pretty good job of responding and shifting at the proper time and with impressive smoothness. The ride too, is impressively smooth. Bumps and dips were taken with general aplomb with little to no impact harshness. Damping seemed really well tuned. Really liked the brakes. Nice pedal feel, with a linear action. The factory stereo was actually pretty decent, as well. Shame about the seats.

Out on the back road, it's quickly very apparent this thing is a bag more mixed than Chex. Sure there's the good stuff- the Chex cereal- but then you get one of the stupid little bread sticks or rye chips out of the bag and you can't help but be disappointed. In this case, the good stuff is the mostly the aforementioned attributes- brakes, ride quality, power deliver. The bad stuff is steering, body control, and handling balance.  The steering is a touch too light, and making matters worse, it's a little slow off-center and almost entirely devoid of feel. The car skips a beat before turning in, changes direction, and ends up giving you this oddly disconnected feel as you make several minute corrections of the wheel to make your desired arc. It's just kind of unnatural feeling. Braked hard and turned into towards a tight apex, the steering goes comatose, and you're left fighting understeer. Ditto under under hard acceleration out of tight bends. The same soft damping that makes for a cushy ride has difficulty holding itself together over sudden elevation changes, transitions, and mid-turn road imperfections. It also upshifts too early, doing so on it's own some 300rpm earlier than you expect even while using the shift paddles. The shifting it does let you do on your own is rather slow, with a noticeable disconnect happening from when you pull the paddle, to when the gear change is made, to how quickly forward progress is resumed. While it will make it down a curvy road rather quickly and without embarrassing itself, it's certainly not overly enthusiastic nor enjoyable in doing so.

To anyone who was expecting a more or less cut-rate Audi S4, this car is not it. I had hoped it would be, but it is far closer to standard Fusion than bonafide sport sedan. The power and acceleration is hard to ignore, and it does have a healthy amount of zest sprinkled on top of the base Fusion ingredients, but it leaves you wanting more. And it could have been so much more. You get the impression that there's room above this car for a Fusion ST with some proper performance credentials. The engine is a high point and even sounds good, with a nice throaty growl. The overall interior is quite good, with mostly nice materials and fit and finish. Textured silver metal-looking trim is spread throughout providing a an upscale look.  The seats are near torturous imo, however, and they would be a deal breaker in themselves. Aside from that, what you ultimately have here is a nice, powerful family hauler that gives you a dash of sportiness in an overall competent, practical package. The AWD capability alone is a nice plus that makes it worth over a V6 Camry, Accord, or Altima that are only marginally cheaper. The car I drove listed for $35,489, and provided you can stand the seats, I'd much recommend it over the aforementioned V6 offerings it shares the segment with. That said, if you're wanting a 4 door sedan that has some serious performance chops in it's repertoire, you're better off with a CPO S4 or 335i X-Drive.

[ccap41]

Thanks for the review, Frisky! Nice read.

I'll have to see if one of these comes to my local dealer and see if my buddy will let me take it for a spin.

Edited September 16, 2016 by ccap41

[smk4565]

Good review, I like the Chex Mix analogy.  I never drove one, but I imagine the problem comes down to trying to cram power into a front drive chassis and make a family sedan sporty.  It wasn't designed to compete with an A4.  Gotta have a rear drive biased car if you want performance.  

Quite the sales experience they have going on at the Ford dealership too.  That is pretty embarrassing really.  It isn't hard to greet some one, introduce yourself and shake a hand.  I do that when dealing with customers, I'd expect the same when I am a customer some where.

[A Horse With No Name]

It seems like this is sort of like the Maxima...marketing itself as  a sports sedan when it really isn't one.

Nice, well written rational review.

[Stew]

This disappoints me as i really had this on the list for possible purchase in 3 or 4 years.

[Frisky Dingo]

Thanks guys.

@A Horse With No Name It is certainly closer to the mantra of the Maxima than the Maxima itself. 

@Stew Yeah, I at least had some slight interest in it, but no longer. Sounds great on paper, but in real life, not so much. Then again, that's a long list of cars.

[Stew]

20 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

Thanks guys.

@A Horse With No Name It is certainly closer to the mantra of the Maxima than the Maxima itself. 

@Stew Yeah, I at least had some slight interest in it, but no longer. Sounds great on paper, but in real life, not so much. Then again, that's a long list of cars.

I hear ya on the long list.  So many look good on paper or get reviews in the media like they are the best thing since sliced bread and then you get in them and are like WTF?  Opposite is true sometimes too. 

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

The S4 is already an insane bargain at $50K to start, comparing to a 340i that is easily $60K.  I doubt anyone really expected the Sport to compare to the S4 by simply adding a bigger engine and improved dampening.  But kudos to Ford for having the guts to offer it. Few cars can touch it for its price. In fact, nothing can touch it for it's price.

[Frisky Dingo]

On 9/25/2016 at 10:23 PM, Wings4Life said:

The S4 is already an insane bargain at $50K to start, comparing to a 340i that is easily $60K.  I doubt anyone really expected the Sport to compare to the S4 by simply adding a bigger engine and improved dampening.  But kudos to Ford for having the guts to offer it. Few cars can touch it for its price. In fact, nothing can touch it for it's price.

To compare directly? No. But perhaps be more sporting and engaging than it is. Truth is the car kind of lies in a no-mans land of average run-of-the-mill sedans that offer a true hardware upgrade, but not to the extent to sway prospective buyers of premium and more sport-oriented marques. Some may see the car as a nice blend of multiple attributes. And I get that. I see a car that is stuck in between roles and compromised because of it.

[cp-the-nerd]

This doesn't bode well for the new crop of Lincoln sedans. I thought the Fusion Sport was going to be a taste of how high they can elevate their FWD/AWD chassis in power and dynamics. I agree on your criticism of the Fusion's center stack and touch panel. Pictures are more kind than reality in this case.

How does the acceleration and feeling of thrust compare to other performance cars you've driven? This car is expected to have a low 5-second 0-60 mph, and presumably a mid-13 second 1/4 mile.

[ccap41]

3 hours ago, Frisky Dingo said:

To compare directly? No. But perhaps be more sporting and engaging than it is. Truth is the car kind of lies in a no-mans land of average run-of-the-mill sedans that offer a true hardware upgrade, but not to the extent to sway prospective buyers of premium and more sport-oriented marques. Some may see the car as a nice blend of multiple attributes. And I get that. I see a car that is stuck in between roles and compromised because of it.

I think we knew from the get go that it would be in no-man's land. It's the only "performance" oriented mainstream mid size sedan so that alone puts it in company of 1.

I do see what you mean in compromised in both sport and "lux" and not the greatest at either. I think that attribute would make it a very enjoyable daily driver(especially when somebody offers a nice tune for it.) . At least here where the roads all suck anyway...

[Frisky Dingo]

2 hours ago, cp-the-nerd said:

This doesn't bode well for the new crop of Lincoln sedans. I thought the Fusion Sport was going to be a taste of how high they can elevate their FWD/AWD chassis in power and dynamics. I agree on your criticism of the Fusion's center stack and touch panel. Pictures are more kind than reality in this case.

How does the acceleration and feeling of thrust compare to other performance cars you've driven? This car is expected to have a low 5-second 0-60 mph, and presumably a mid-13 second 1/4 mile.

 

The acceleration felt pretty good. The midrange, in particular, was strong. It reminded me a lot in power and delivery and acceleration of the N55 335/535 cars. Just a bit more lag down low. I think the performance figures are pretty accurate. The transmission tuning and response is what really lets it down, though. The paddles aren't much better than useless. Shifts are slow and soft, and it races to top gear.

[Frisky Dingo]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

I think we knew from the get go that it would be in no-man's land. It's the only "performance" oriented mainstream mid size sedan so that alone puts it in company of 1.

I do see what you mean in compromised in both sport and "lux" and not the greatest at either. I think that attribute would make it a very enjoyable daily driver(especially when somebody offers a nice tune for it.) . At least here where the roads all suck anyway...

 

Dude, what?!?! You're crazy. There are some absolutely phenomenal driving roads around here!! You need to hurry up and buy something fun so we can take a drive!!

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

This car really is in the company of one, and thus, should sell well.  It is not what Ford would call a ‘performance car.’ That title fits their Ford Performance products and their respective capabilities.  What this is supposed to be, and Ford was clear on it, was a V6 Fusion for those that requested it, and in athletic clothes. Nothing more.  Ford can’t control what expectations people might have, they can only deliver on what they promised, and deliver they did.  The car is roomy and easy to live with and powerful, sporty and affordable, and IMO, very handsome too.

 

That all said, what a great platform to tweak it for much better performance.

[Frisky Dingo]

*Straight line performance.

 

And it has plenty of shortcomings in other areas. I don't think I've leveled unwarranted criticism at the car. The point isn't that Ford gave us what they said they would, it's that they could have done more. Toyota delivers what they say they will too, but I don't see any shortage of people bashing them because they make cars that are 'boring' or 'dull'. People have no problem ignoring that the cars are efficient, reliable, practical, and cheap to own and operate- just as Toyota intends. 

[ccap41]

14 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

 

Dude, what?!?! You're crazy. There are some absolutely phenomenal driving roads around here!! You need to hurry up and buy something fun so we can take a drive!!

Where??? I know a couple hours past stl heading south you can run into some mountains and that would be fun but my side of the river.. flat.

[ccap41]

26 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

The paddles aren't much better than useless. Shifts are slow and soft, and it races to top gear.

I have to believe they respond like the stupid button I have in my Escape.. and it's dog$h!, IMO. It's nice to have..i guess.. But if those paddles respond anything like my Escape then they are just a waste.

[Frisky Dingo]

20 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Where??? I know a couple hours past stl heading south you can run into some mountains and that would be fun but my side of the river.. flat.

About 15 minutes outside of STL metro area to the west and southwest. Sublime roads.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

38 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

*Straight line performance.

 

And it has plenty of shortcomings in other areas. I don't think I've leveled unwarranted criticism at the car. The point isn't that Ford gave us what they said they would, it's that they could have done more. Toyota delivers what they say they will too, but I don't see any shortage of people bashing them because they make cars that are 'boring' or 'dull'. People have no problem ignoring that the cars are efficient, reliable, practical, and cheap to own and operate- just as Toyota intends. 

Actually, many people dump on Toyota for not producing an exciting car, including myself.  

I would own a Honda.

I would never a Toyota.

Ford delivered what it 'intended' to deliver.

 

[Frisky Dingo]

2 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

Actually, many people dump on Toyota for not producing an exciting car, including myself.  

I would own a Honda.

I would never a Toyota.

Ford delivered what it 'intended' to deliver.

 

That's EXACTLY my point. Toyota isn't trying to build exciting vehicles. They are building appliances for the masses for basic transportation. 

The Fusion Sport isn't exciting to anyone who's driven a sports coupe, either.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

The Fusion Sport is a more powerful Fusion. 

That's all it was ever supposed to be, but there is plenty of excitement and very little competition.

 

[Frisky Dingo]

2 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

The Fusion Sport is a more powerful Fusion. 

That's all it was ever supposed to be, but there is plenty of excitement and very little competition.

 

 

'Bout sums it up.

[cp-the-nerd]

Car & Driver just released their instrumented test on the Fusion Sport. Their impressions are almost identical to yours. On all season tires, handling is basically the same as a non-sport trim. The engine is the best thing about the car.

0-60: 5.1 sec
1/4 mile: 13.7 @ 101 mph
Weight as tested: 4128 lbs

www.caranddriver.com/reviews/tested-2017-ford-fusion-sport-review

Edited October 7, 2016 by cp-the-nerd

[ccap41]

It makes sense though. That's probably why they never went ahead and used ST/RS/GT or anything like that for it. They kept it a soft daily cruiser with some brawn.

13.7 is pretty good. 101mph sounds like most EcoBoosts...running out of breath on the top end.

North of 4100lbs is quite chunky. But I guess a twin turbo V6 with AWD that does happen..

[cp-the-nerd]

For perspective:
Chevy SS Sedan - 3900 lbs
Cadillac CTS V-Sport - 4000 lbs
Dodge Challenger R/T - 4100 lbs

I know they're all 2WD, but damn. If they kept it under two tons, it might be a bit more willing to dance!

[ccap41]

None of those are AWD and only one of those has two turbos and is comparable, imo. I know size of vehicle they might be similar but two turbos, plumbing, and an AWD system isn't the lightest thing you can do to a car.

None of those cars are even available with AWD in those engines.

My Escape's FWD vs AWD weight is 3621lbs and 3769lbs(Ford website for 2.0T) . So there's a big bulk of the additional weight, the AWD system.

Edited October 7, 2016 by ccap41

[Frisky Dingo]

Yeah, I read that earlier. Their review is very similar to mine. We differ in opinion on the brakes and dampers, however. I thought the brakes were pretty good for such an application. I've driven much sportier cars with worse. As for the damping, it allows too much body movement for my liking. 

 

Regarding the weight, there's absolutely no reason for this car to weigh as much as it does. It's a full size-class up in weight. The TT V6 and AWD aren't legit reasons. These things aren't exactly dripping in luxury accouterments and rolling on 20's.

[ccap41]

It's also the only car in its class with a twin turbo V6 and AWD. It WILL weigh the most. Over 4100lbs... still heavy but I don't see it as a massive surprise. Ford has been good at most things until the aluminum F150 at being overweight.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

9 hours ago, ccap41 said:

It's also the only car in its class with a twin turbo V6 and AWD. It WILL weigh the most. Over 4100lbs... still heavy but I don't see it as a massive surprise. Ford has been good at most things until the aluminum F150 at being overweight.

Actually, the listed weight is far less for the Sport.  I wonder what changed in this test model or what was added that extra difference.

But this is not some optimized package.  This is a late change in an old platform that supports hybrids and PHEV and must now stuff in a twin turbo V6 that demands better cooling and of course AWD and stouter bits to handle the power.  Nothing in that formula allows for weight reduction and optimization.  

But I doubt the demographic cares or will ever know what it weighs. 

Edited October 8, 2016 by Wings4Life

[Stew]

Fantastic acceleration numbers and it seems to have a decent ride/handling balance.  May still check out one in a few years. 

[cp-the-nerd]

4 hours ago, Wings4Life said:

Actually, the listed weight is far less for the Sport.  I wonder what changed in this test model or what was added that extra difference.

But this is not some optimized package.  This is a late change in an old platform that supports hybrids and PHEV and must now stuff in a twin turbo V6 that demands better cooling and of course AWD and stouter bits to handle the power.  Nothing in that formula allows for weight reduction and optimization.  

But I doubt the demographic cares or will ever know what it weighs. 

The CD4 platform isn't dated at all. It was introduced with the 2013 Fusion, which makes it the same age as GM's Alpha platform. That whole argument is a cop out. Ford continues to use the CD4 to underpin all of their brand new midsize and fullsize sedans and crossovers. Do you want to open a can of worms where "old platform" is a blanket excuse for roughly half of Ford/Lincolns entire product line?

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

1 hour ago, cp-the-nerd said:

The CD4 platform isn't dated at all. It was introduced with the 2013 Fusion, which makes it the same age as GM's Alpha platform. That whole argument is a cop out. Ford continues to use the CD4 to underpin all of their brand new midsize and fullsize sedans and crossovers. Do you want to open a can of worms where "old platform" is a blanket excuse for roughly half of Ford/Lincolns entire product line?

You focused on the word old platform and ignored the rest?  

CD4 was part of a global platform underpinning many products, faster with the emphasis of saving capital.  It has been very successful for them, but relative to all new platforms being developed, yeah, I would consider it old, not 'dated' as you put it.  I was speaking in terms of relativity, you thought I was discounting it due to it's age?  Not at all.   Just that there was no opportunity at this stage, to reduce weight. That comes with new platform designs, not bulking up for more power.  That was my main point.

But hey, if you want to get into how successful each platform has been, compared to the Alpha, I am happy to get into it.  Why don't we start with sales.  

 

[cp-the-nerd]

47 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

You focused on the word old platform and ignored the rest?  

CD4 was part of a global platform underpinning many products, faster with the emphasis of saving capital.  It has been very successful for them, but relative to all new platforms being developed, yeah, I would consider it old, not 'dated' as you put it.  I was speaking in terms of relativity, you thought I was discounting it due to it's age?  Not at all.   Just that there was no opportunity at this stage, to reduce weight. That comes with new platform designs, not bulking up for more power.  That was my main point.

But hey, if you want to get into how successful each platform has been, compared to the Alpha, I am happy to get into it.  Why don't we start with sales.  

 

Completely irrelevant response.

You just split hairs about "old" vs "dated--which is utter semantics--and then out of left field you made it an Alpha versus CD4 sales/success pissing match, even though one is ultra high volume FWD and the other is low volume performance RWD. Alpha was cited because they're the same age, and nobody in their right mind would consider either platform old.

Ford let the Fusion Sport balloon in weight, which negatively affected driving dynamics. If they're already handicapped by the 3-4 year old platform, they have a problem. Great performance cars like the Fiesta ST and Focus ST/RS set the bar much higher for handling.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

1 hour ago, cp-the-nerd said:

Completely irrelevant response.

You just split hairs about "old" vs "dated--which is utter semantics--and then out of left field you made it an Alpha versus CD4 sales/success pissing match, even though one is ultra high volume FWD and the other is low volume performance RWD. Alpha was cited because they're the same age, and nobody in their right mind would consider either platform old.

Ford let the Fusion Sport balloon in weight, which negatively affected driving dynamics. If they're already handicapped by the 3-4 year old platform, they have a problem. Great performance cars like the Fiesta ST and Focus ST/RS set the bar much higher for handling.

LOL

You are the one that brought the Alpha into this in the first place, and then thumped your chest as if to challenge it.

Whatever man. There was absolutely ZERO chance of reducing Fusion weight by simply adding a new engine.  If you think they dropped the ball, then so be it.  Meanwhile, I will wonder when the competition will try to match it.

[regfootball]

this is still faster than any 

SHO

 

Fusion SHO

This car holds appeal to me someday used, but then I would probably get an Edge Sport if that were the case.

5.1 is fast, and i never canyon carved in any of my SHO's.  I'd be fine with 'great highway cruiser'.

4100 pounds though, liking heavy cars less and less these days.....

I'm ok with the 'just a faster ford' part...but i can see why some folks may have pinned their hopes on this being finally something close to holy grail for a Ford badge.

Edited October 9, 2016 by regfootball