not a SHO but...

[johnnyrauder]

https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/inven...=false&filtersModified=true#listing=204934828
anyone own one of these. thoughts, opions?

 

[Lostneye]

I've ben in them but never drove one. Seem like a decent car but they are not quick. there are tunes and other performance parts out there but you still will be seeing stock SHO taillights.

 

[SHOCALL]

I've ben in them but never drove one. Seem like a decent car but they are not quick. there are tunes and other performance parts out there but you still will be seeing stock SHO taillights.

VIN is a 3. Assembled in Mexico. No thanks. One if the finest features of the SHO, to me, is that it is proudly assembled here in the US (chicago subs).

 

[Majestic]

Price is too high on that one. I bought my daughter the same car, minus AWD, model year 2016 with 16k miles for $16k.

 

[johnnyrauder]

Price is too high on that one. I bought my daughter the same car, minus AWD, model year 2016 with 16k miles for $16k.

the AWD and ecoboost drive the price up

 

[Jeff2017]

The Fusion with the 3.5 Ecoboost would have been a fun car to own. Not sure what Ford was thinking.

 

[Matt M PA]

The Fusion Sport has the 2.7 EcoBoost and AWD. I test drove one prior to ordering the SHO. A nice car, ran strong...but I just preferred the bigger Taurus.

 

['14SHO]

Yeah it slower than the Taurus too. Though it’s lighter and has more torque

 

[SHOdded]

Definitely a tad bit slower than the SHO, in reports from mags and owners alike. Still fun to drive and has features that the SHO will never have, like CCD.

 

['14SHO]

Yeah. I test drove one and I truly did enjoy it. It’s a different animal

 

[tech10002]

I drove a leftover 17 Sport before I decided on an SHO. It was plenty quick but the SHO feels a little more snappy and solid. It has more torque than an SHO and it’s lighter, but it’s slower?? I think Ford crippled it intentionally with torque management to not beat the SHO or even a Mustang GT. It should be stupid fast with 380 lbs of torque and 4100 pounds. I was ultimately put off by the stories of heat soak, oil leaks the dealers can’t fix, lemon buybacks, etc.

My wife had a 2013 2.0 Ecoboost Fusion. It wasn’t slow but nothing like an SHO, maybe 7 seconds to 60. That’s way too much money for a 13. They really dump value. Watch out for a rough shifting transmission. That why we dumped ours. We had the trans worked on maybe 10 times at the dealer. They never could fix it. It would shudder and rattle your teeth intermittently on the 1-2 upshift. It felt like somebody kicked you in the back. It’s a common problem with 13 2.0 Fusions and they didn’t fix it till the 2015 model year.

 

[Matt M PA]

Yes..."solid"...that's the word I as looking for. For me, (and your mileage may vary) the Taurus felt more solid.

 

[rubydist]

the 13+ fusion/mkz are fine automobiles. quiet, smooth, good power with the ecoboost motor, handle well, etc. the 2.0 ecoboost does not have as much upside potential as the 3.5 ecoboost, but it still has potential.

the only thing I really don't like about these cars is that the way the tires fit in the fender openings - its pretty close, which means when you are driving in the slush in the winter that the crap tends to build up between the tire and the fender and after a while the tires are rubbing on the built-up slush/ice crap.

 

[johnnyrauder]

thanks for the feed back i think ill keep serching for a sho

 

['14SHO]

I also would avoid a 13 with it being the first year of that design. I failed to mention myself and my fiancé have a 14 titanium that I really do like. I dislike the fact that the transmission has no dipstick, so when I swapped the fluid at 59k miles a couple weeks ago I had to just measure what came out and put the same amount back in. Then there a small plug on the side that you can verify that the fluid is just to that point. It’s been a reliable car and I love the seats at the titanium trim. Very comfortable.

 

[tech10002]

the 13+ fusion/mkz are fine automobiles. quiet, smooth, good power with the ecoboost motor, handle well, etc. the 2.0 ecoboost does not have as much upside potential as the 3.5 ecoboost, but it still has potential.

the only thing I really don't like about these cars is that the way the tires fit in the fender openings - its pretty close, which means when you are driving in the slush in the winter that the crap tends to build up between the tire and the fender and after a while the tires are rubbing on the built-up slush/ice crap.

We loved our 13 except for the transmission. Really hated to see it go. It was a quiet, comfortable, relatively quick car and it got great mileage. The transmission shifting just got so bad we couldn’t take it anymore, and the intermittent nature and multiple dealers inability to fix it was maddening. Only a small number of 13s and 14s have the faulty transmissions, so if you’re considering one, take it out for an hour or so to give the issue time to crop up.

They’re really nice looking cars, too. I think the earlier ones were better looking that the current model. My wife named her Ruby. Lol

 

[limited02]

Definitely a tad bit slower than the SHO, in reports from mags and owners alike. Still fun to drive and has features that the SHO will never have, like CCD.

Correct, but that's where the '13+ Lincoln MKS comes in.

 

[johnnyrauder]

i would be open to a MKS also hard to find with the turbo

 

[rubydist]

actually, iirc most of the MKS were built w/ the EcoBoost motors.

 

[johnnyrauder]

yes, im only saying there hard to come by at all.