Ranger20 Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 My wife wants a new Fusion and I'm running out of excuses for not getting a new car. We were thinking of getting the smaller Ecoboost because of the better economy and its much easier to find on the SE models we're looking at. My understanding is the 1.6 has a timing belt and the 2.0 has a timing chain. Is that correct, and does anyone know if the new 1.5l has a belt or chain? I'm not sure if I want a car with a timing belt, not really a big deal I guess but don't want the hassle or expense down the road. She is trading out of a '03 Taurus with the dohc V6. Any opinions on if the 1.6 is similar in performance, or is the 2.0l more like the V6 power-wise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 The1.6 IS a belt. the 2.0 a chain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadman64 Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 The 2.0L is the replacement for a V6, yes. I have the 2.0L and have not been disappointed power wise. Not as good economy as I was hoping but I do have a heavy foot. I've heard people post on this forum that the 1.6L has pretty good performance, but I would test drive them both so you can form your own opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcats98 Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 If you drive like EPA, you will get EPA numbers. However if you like to drive like you like driving...you wont achieve EPA numbers. :-) I have 18xx on my 2.0. Got a fill-up yesterday and hopped right on the highway for about 53 miles and got 32.7 via the computer. Fully loaded (two adults, two kids) cruising at 70. However, I don't traditionally get those numbers over that same drive. ;-) Knowing the games around the EPA numbers (IE they can only really be used for car to car comparison because the EPA is delusional if they think their test is a true representation of driving) I am pleased with what I can get out of her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 If you drive like EPA, you will get EPA numbers. However if you like to drive like you like driving...you wont achieve EPA numbers. :-) I have 18xx on my 2.0. Got a fill-up yesterday and hopped right on the highway for about 53 miles and got 32.7 via the computer. Fully loaded (two adults, two kids) cruising at 70. However, I don't traditionally get those numbers over that same drive. ;-) Knowing the games around the EPA numbers (IE they can only really be used for car to car comparison because the EPA is delusional if they think their test is a true representation of driving) I am pleased with what I can get out of her. The EPA never intended for their fuel economy numbers to be representative of the actual mileage one could expect to achieve because there are too many variables to consider and the range of real world results is too large. It's really about CAFE and providing a standardized test for comparing 2 vehicles. Just because people continuously misinterpret the meaning of the window sticker mpgs isn't really the EPA's fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Or, you could save yourself a lot of hassle and buy the 2.5L naturally aspirated 4 cylinder....power is similar to 1.6L, has a timing chain for durability and will give you years of trouble free service.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.