Ford Fusion Hybrid to start $27,270, 39 mpg city!
After debuting the 2010 Fusion at the LA Auto Show this week, Ford has just launched a new micro-site for the Fusion that finally includes pricing information. The base Fusion S starts at $19,270 with the four cylinder engine and 6-speed manual gearbox. The new Fusion Hybrid however, is nearly 42 percent more, starting at $27,290, a price point that includes the SmartGauge instrument cluster, satellite radio, 17" wheels and electronic stability control. For comparison, the Camry Hybrid is $26,150, but that doesn't include $450 for the upgraded audio with satellite radio. It also doesn't include anything quite like the SmartGauge which buyers will have put their own value on. Where the Fusion really jumps ahead of the Camry is fuel economy. The Ford's city fuel economy will now be at least 39 mpg, 6 mpg more than the Toyota. The Fusions should be on sale early in the new year.
[Source: Ford]
Gallery: 2010 Ford Fusion hybrid on the stand
Milan live photos copyright ©2008 Jonathon Ramsey / Weblogs, Inc.
Fusion live photos copyright ©2008 Michael Harley / Weblogs, Inc.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
phil easler 2:13PM (11/21/2008)
Wow, only a $8020 differnece between the hybrid and the 4
cyl model, say the 4 banger gets 32 mpg vs. 39 at $3/gallon, breakeven is only 471,764 miles.
Phil
Reply
Brn 3:13PM (11/21/2008)
Phil, I agree about the break even points for hybrids (or any alternative propulsion), but your comparison is unfair. The hybrid gives you the power of the 6cyl and an automatic transmission. It's best to compare it to the proposed price and mpg of the V6 auto ($25,825). The break even point shifts dramatically.
This thing has tons more room than a Prius and should smoke it off the line.
Personally, I'd like to see them putting 1.0L engines in hybrids. Give them less than the power of a 4cyl.
JF 4:28PM (11/21/2008)
Phil,
You're comparing the city mpg for the hybrid vs. hwy for the 4cyl. The current 4 cyl gets 20 mpg city. Lets say the new one gets 22 mpg city. The difference is 17mpg, not 7. Apples to oranges.
BoneHeadOtto 7:32AM (11/24/2008)
@ PHIL
I see these comparisons all the time and they ignore one very big variable... DEPRECIATION. A car with an $8000 premium will not sell used for the exact same price as the other 4cylinder car. Plus we dont know what the depreciation on the Hybrid will be. So far depreciation is far less on hybrids. So in the case of the Prius it may have commanded $4-6k more than a comparably equiped camry, but after a few years that margin disappears because the Prius depreciated far slower than the camry. So the price difference absolutely makes sense for these cars especially since price is not always the driving factor. The ability to reduce gas consumption is often the driving factor for purchasing one of these cars. It certainly was the only reason to purchase one when they came out and gas was seriously cheap
Phil Kulak 2:23PM (11/21/2008)
Seems to me like there's a lot more included then just 6 more mpg. Besides, if you just wanted the lowest cost of getting from point A to B, you'd buy a used car, not a new Fusion.
Reply
Phil Kulak 2:23PM (11/21/2008)
Hmmm... how about a link to this new site?
Reply
Sam Abuelsamid 4:33PM (11/21/2008)
Phil, try the Source link.
Mike Z 2:33PM (11/21/2008)
Too bad there likely won't be a Mazda 6 Hybird
Reply
Gary 2:48PM (11/21/2008)
Is it just me?
I've been driving a Civic Hybrid getting about 50 MPGs for almost 6 years now. I find it laughable when these manufactures come out with cars in the upper 30's (or less) and it's supposed to be a big deal. And my car was only $20K at the time I bought it and even now it's still below the price of the Fusion Hybrid. Maybe I'm just a bit jaded on this but these baby steps aren't going to get us where we should/need to be.
Reply
Joe 3:00PM (11/21/2008)
To be fair, the civic is one class down from Camry/Fusion. Less weight/frontal area, better mileage.
Duodenum 3:01PM (11/21/2008)
The Fusion is a much larger car than your Civic.
Brn 3:28PM (11/21/2008)
Gary, this also isn't fair. If we're using EPA ratings for one vehicle, we need to use it for all of them. The 2003 Civic Hybrid weighed 2600lbs, had 93hp, and is EPA (new standards) rated at 39/40/43.
The demands of today's consumer cause significant increases in weight and horsepower. Given all that, the Fusion hybrid is doing pretty well.
On a side note, the 2009 Civic Hybrid (much smaller than the Fusion) weighs in at 2870lbs, has 123hp, and gets 40/42/45. That's a real improvement over your 2003.
sunrooftop 11:20AM (11/24/2008)
Yeah. And when u compare the driving experience and safety scores of yr 6 year-old hair shirt and the new Fusion H...
Oh wait... there is no comparison.
packman 6:25PM (11/24/2008)
my 1986 civic crx got 45mpg. 22 years ago, no batteries, etc. a 40mpg hybrid doesn't really impress me.
ecd4me 3:26PM (11/21/2008)
I just want to see them get some product out there that people will buy. You cant compare a loaded up hybrid with their econobox. If supply ever catches up to demand they will offer hybrid drive without adding every other expensive option to it.
Reply
GoodCheer 5:00PM (11/21/2008)
That's a good point. Knowing that they won't be able to keep them on the lots, Ford very smartly threw in all the profit-adding options. I too hope that, like GPS navigation, premium stereos, and even cup-holders before them, these will 'trickle down' to lower spec vehicles for people without that much money who still want to contribute to reducing our fuel imports, global warming etc..
phil easler 4:54PM (11/21/2008)
I stand corrected, the 4 cyl Fusion only gets 29 hwy (the best mpg for it), the hybrid only get 39mpg (best mpg for it), the breakeven is only 308,460 miles (at $3/g) instead of 471,000. At a 8 grand difference, does this make sense (even with bigger tires, bigger cup holders, and electric heated seats).
Phil
Reply
cazancoz 5:14PM (11/21/2008)
Phil,
Please stop. Like others have already said.. why are you comparing the base model with the hybrid model without any regards to the features.
If you really wanna make a valid point, compare the Hybrid with a gasoline model that has the same features (automatic transmission, 17in wheels, etc). These make up at least a couple of grand, even more.
You do have a good underlying point that the price of gasoline (as much as we like to complain about it) is really relatively small in comparison with the price hikes of news cars in general.
Brn 9:15PM (11/21/2008)
Phil, thank you for ignoring an apples to apples comparison. Let me try to be as fair as possible.
The hybrid has about the same power as the 3.0 V6 fusion. They don't give a price for the 2010 3.0, but let's put it midpoint between the 2.5 and the 3.5. About $24,900 (correcting my mistake from the prior post). The 3.0 is expected to get a significant mileage increase. I think it's fair to call it 24mpg combined.
The hybrid is expected to get about 39mpg combined.
Given the above, the break even point is 50K miles at $3/gal. That's pretty good.
I'll repeat myself and say that I'd really like the greenies to have a hybrid that has less power than the 4cyl. If you're going to wear the green badge, you should be willing to make a sacrifice.
BoneHeadOtto 7:32AM (11/24/2008)
@brn amd Phil
actually its far less than 50k miles. That price differential will still exist in the used car market meaning that the hybrid will still sell for more than the v6 non-hybrid. That premium will depreciate at the rate of the car so now we are looking at only 25k-35k mi to break even at $3 a gallon whose days are numbered. Just wait till gas hits $5 a gallon in 6-7 years and then sell your hybrid. I guarantee that the hybrid will have depreciated far far far less than the v6.