Model Year | 2016 | 2012 | |
Model | Chevrolet SS | Ford Fusion | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr Sedan | 4dr Sedan | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,916 mm | 2,728 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 4,966 mm | 4,841 mm | 0 mm |
Width | 1,897 mm | 1,834 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,471 mm | 1,445 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 1,813 kg | 1,490 kg | 0 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 71 L | 66 L | 5 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 983 mm | 983 mm | 0 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,501 mm | 1,458 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,453 mm | 1,372 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,074 mm | 1,074 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 965 mm | 960 mm | 5 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,499 mm | 1,435 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,473 mm | 1,354 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 1,008 mm | 942 mm | -941 mm |
Total Legroom | 2,083 mm (over 2 rows) | 2,017 mm (over 2 rows) | 0 mm |
Cargo Volume | 464 L | 467 L | -3 L |
2016 Chevrolet SS Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2015 | Despite its slightly more compact exterior, the Chevrolet SS has a roomier back seat than the Dodge Charger. Rear headroom is in unexpectedly short supply in the latter. The Chevrolet also has a couple more inches of rear hiproom, so three adults won't have to get quite as cozy in its back seat. Both cars have about 16 cubic feet of trunk space. A good amount, but you'll find as much in most midsize sedans. Unlike the Charger's, the SS's rear seat cannot fold to expand the trunk. But a pass-through in the center is far larger than most. see full Chevrolet SS review |
2016 Chevrolet SS Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
The front seats in the Chevrolet SS are comfortable. They also look like they'd provide generous lateral support, but don't, at least not for those of us who aren't built like linebackers. Thankfully the upper seat back features some synthetic suede trim, and this prevents sliding in hard turns. Still, a car with such high handling limits should have seats with much larger and more effective side bolsters--like those available in the Dodge Charger. see full Chevrolet SS review |
2016 Chevrolet SS Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2017 | 4dr Sedan 415-horsepower 6.2L V8 6-speed manual RWD |
Rear seat is functional and roomy. I'm 6'4" and with the drivers seat in my preferred postion there is still a decent amount of legroom behind. Overall much better than the Charger/Challenger. see full Chevrolet SS review |
2016 Chevrolet SS Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2017 | 4dr Sedan 415-horsepower 6.2L V8 6-speed manual RWD |
The front seat is just OK. Feels like a pretty flat bottom and fairly hard. Also, for a car with sporting pretentions there is surprisingly little side bolstering. see full Chevrolet SS review |
2012 Ford Fusion Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2013 | The front bucket seats fit my slightly overweight torso very well, with large bolsters for lateral support, a form-fitting shape, and headrests that don't jut too far forward. The Titanium's seats are the best of the bunch, with a little more padding and a little more bolstering. The rear seat doesn't seem as roomy as the official legroom specs of 44.3 + 38.3 inches. In the back seat of a VW Passat (42.4+39.1 inches), my knees aren't nearly as close to the front seat backs. Though those present denied it, I continue to wonder if the specs have been cheated like those for the new Escape. Passengers over six feet in height will find rear headroom in even shorter supply. But if you fit, the high-mounted, large, and well-shaped cushion is the most comfortable rear seat in the segment. see full Ford Fusion review |
2012 Ford Fusion Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2013 | 4dr Sedan 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD |
Being 6' 3" it can be hard to find a car where I have sufficient legroom & headroom. In the Fusion Hybrid there was lots of space, even with a sunroof. There are also padded surfaces where my left knee rests against the door and where my right leg rests against the center console. The Camry Hybrid was not comfortable. The doors are hard plastic and there was no soft place to rest my knee. The center console was also hard plastic. see full Ford Fusion review |
2013 | 4dr Sedan turbocharged 178hp 1.6L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Tons of legroom and passengers pleased with the accommodations. see full Ford Fusion review |
2011 | 4dr Sedan 240-horsepower 3.0L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
The front seats are very comfortable, and provide very adequate support for long trips. Side support isn't the very best for hard cornering though. see full Ford Fusion review |
2012 Ford Fusion Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2013 | 4dr Sedan 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD |
The door sills are very high which made it tough for me to get my size 13 shoes up and over when sitting behind a front seat that is all the way back. The door sills in the Camry were lower so while there was no more rear seat room than in the Fusion is was possible to get my feet out more easily. see full Ford Fusion review |
2013 | 4dr Sedan 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD |
You can see I'm really reaching here to find things that we didn't like about the Fusion Hybrid, but here's one more... There is a small step up in front of the front seats which made it hard to cross my legs like when traveling on road trips. see full Ford Fusion review |
2013 | 4dr Sedan turbocharged 178hp 1.6L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
The driver's seat was atrocious to get set - took forever (three drives over 2 days) with a zillion directions to move the seat - more adjustments does not mean more comfortable!! see full Ford Fusion review |