2009 Nissan Armada vs. 2012 Ford Fusion
To start off, 2012 Ford Fusion is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Nissan Armada. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Nissan Armada would be higher. At 5,552 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Nissan Armada is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Ford Fusion weights approximately 127 kg more than 2009 Nissan Armada.
Because 2009 Nissan Armada is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2009 Nissan Armada. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Ford Fusion, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Nissan Armada | 2012 Ford Fusion | |
| Make | Nissan | Ford |
| Model | Armada | Fusion |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5552 cc | 2500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 317 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline / Electric Hybrid |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 8 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1560 kg | 1687 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 4841 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 1834 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1970 mm | 1445 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3140 mm | 2728 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 13.1 L/100km | 6.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 19.6 L/100km | 5.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 106 L | 66 L |
