Topic: CD Article: 2008 Ford Taurus & Taurus X

[Autos_Editor]

Today's First Drive:

The new 2008 Taurus is "waaaaaay better than the former Five Hundred," reports Senior Editor, Paul Williams, mainly due to its new drivetrain.  The Taurus X is also a much improved Ford Freestyle, he says.  
   
   More...


Read the article | View the photos | All First Drives

[initial_D]

I wish Ford luck. Kinda re-badged two failed model and hoping for the best. The entry pricing is way too high, as compare to Camry and Accord. Of course, family pricing and 0% terms to follow shortly.

[Mrunderwood]

I just wanted to make a comment about so-called improved look of the new Taurus. Am I missing somthing? The Taurus X does have a improved look at the front but the Taurus front-end is just plain ugly (circa 1982). This is definately a step back in time for design. While Ford of Europe continues to inovate in terms of design and execution, Ford Motor Company in the US/Canada continue to produce lacklustre vehicles in every aspect. (Just look at the 2008 Ford Focus).

While GM and especially Saturn are trying to turn things around by giving us what we want, kind of, Ford will continue to fall behind. Ford has to do whatever it takes to win back buyers and that means just one thing. Fire the US designers at Ford take a leaf out of Ford of Europe's book.

[Frontier1]

I wish Ford luck. Kinda re-badged two failed model and hoping for the best. The entry pricing is way too high, as compare to Camry and Accord. Of course, family pricing and 0% terms to follow shortly.

 

But it's not competing against the Camry, Accord etc etc!  The Fusion does, and it's very well priced.  The Taurus will attract the older generation, like me

[Allen]

The new Taurus competes in the segment above the Camry/Accord, so how does the price compare to that segment?

It can't even compete with the Camray or Accord, are you trying to suggest that its going to compete against Lexus and Acura .. 

[mdxtasy]

The price actually looks very competitive....agreed that it's not an Accord/Camry/Altima contender.  Too big.  More like an Avalon or Hyundai Azera or Buick Lucerne sort of car. 

[MKII]

IMO consumers shopping the new Taurus would most likely cross shop the Impala, 300, Aura, Grand Prix, Avalon.

[Dante]

Very unremarkable vehicles from Ford, in line with their North American line-up. If Ford doesn't bring over new models from the other parts of the world (e.g. Europe), they will just continue to go downhill and then underground.

[ktm525]

Taurus X will be very interesting. I test drove the Frestyle and was impressed except for the lack of power and the weird CVT. As I understand it the Taurus AWD are essentially the Volvo S80's underpinnings. An AWD Taurus X fior $40k vs a Volvo X/C70 for $55? Hmmm. I'll take a look/drive. I ain't no brand snob.

[initial_D]

I wish Ford luck. Kinda re-badged two failed model and hoping for the best. The entry pricing is way too high, as compare to Camry and Accord. Of course, family pricing and 0% terms to follow shortly.

 

But it's not competing against the Camry, Accord etc etc!  The Fusion does, and it's very well priced.  The Taurus will attract the older generation, like me

Crown Vic replacement, it suppose to be, yes? That segment is dead. Why even bother.  People do cross shop those two cars when looking for 4 door & auto point-2-point transportation. What does Ford expect people to think when they bring back the Taurus name, which was a Camry/Accord target? 

Put engineering and marketing into one model that can sell in volume with no discount.

[PJungnitsch]

Agree on the styling issue. That 'Red, White and Bold' fellow (ironically a Brit) should stick to styling pickups and SUV's which IMO are good to excellent.

The cars (other than the Mustang) are at best adequate. It makes no sense to have such attractive designs on the other side of the Atlantic and such mediocre ones here.

Toyota's will sell in spite of their styling. Ford NA does not have that luxury and does not have time or money to pamper the ego of an uninspired designer.

If they go down it would be nice if it was giving it their best shot rather than 'they built bland or ugly cars right until the end'.

[Thinking Out Loud]

The original Taurus was a trace-and-replace of the original Audi 5000 in the mid 1980's.  Too expensive to reclad the Five Hundred in Audi A8 body panels I assume for 2007?

Not the first time in recent memory Ford was caught with their pants down - the all new Freestar gets launched and months later Chrysler rolls out the old Caravan with hideaway middle row seating and Ford is adrift in a wind(star) less ocean.  They passed on dual sliding doors, Chrysler nails them. 

The Five Hundred rolls out the door with a weak engine and front wheel drive in a pre-packed rentacar exterior and the Chrysler 300 is the renassance of original design, rear-wheel drive and cheap horsepower, with a TKO on Ford.

Ford's succcess at innovation so far has only been in revisiting it's past in the Mustang. 

[Mitlov]

It can't even compete with the Camray or Accord, are you trying to suggest that its going to compete against Lexus and Acura .. 

I think he's saying it competes against large FWD sedans such as the Toyota Avalon, Chevy Impala, and Hyundai Azera, against which it competes nicely.  The new Taurus is not a midsize car and thus does not compete against the Camry or Accord.  That's the Fusion's territory.

[Mitlov]

I wish Ford luck. Kinda re-badged two failed model and hoping for the best.

The Five Hundred failed, first and foremost, because Ford never really advertised it.  Besides, this is more than just a rebadged Five Hundred.  As the reviewer states,

But there may be a happy ending (for Ford and consumers) because the "new" "Taurus" is waaaaaay better than the former Five Hundred.

Engine, transmission, AWD system, sound deadening, and aesthetics are all improved.

[Cord]

According to Ford Canada literature, the Taurus' main competitors are Chrysler 300, Buick Lucerne, Chev Impala, Honda Accord, Hyundai Azera, Nissan Maxima, Toyota Avalon.

[Julie]

Re: "waaaay better"

Interesting. I had a Ford product (Focus) for 11 days and was very impressed with its handling, ergonomics, etc. The only thing I didn't like was a pretty cheap fit and finish in the trunk lid area, but this is not a major thing, and overall, I really liked this car.

I have always loved the styling and size of the Freestyle, so with these changes, I am looking forward to hearing more about its reliability in the coming years.

[initial_D]

I wish Ford luck. Kinda re-badged two failed model and hoping for the best.

The Five Hundred failed, first and foremost, because Ford never really advertised it.  Besides, this is more than just a rebadged Five Hundred.  As the reviewer states,

Easy to blame marketing, me thinks Ford missed the boat all-together. Shoppers are not as un-informative as they once were, they do research and shop around. The competitions have better offerings. Ford doesn't have a good rep nowadays, and the once loyal customers know better. 

[Mitlov]

Easy to blame marketing, me thinks Ford missed the boat all-together. Shoppers are not as un-informative as they once were, they do research and shop around. The competitions have better offerings. Ford doesn't have a good rep nowadays, and the once loyal customers know better. 

I'm really not sure that the Five Hundred was any worse than an Avalon or an Azera (and while it was down on power, it did have some advantages, including IIHS crash tests, fuel economy, and available AWD).  Frankly, I've never read a comparison test either way.  Do you know of any?

[initial_D]

Easy to blame marketing, me thinks Ford missed the boat all-together. Shoppers are not as un-informative as they once were, they do research and shop around. The competitions have better offerings. Ford doesn't have a good rep nowadays, and the once loyal customers know better. 

I'm really not sure that the Five Hundred was any worse than an Avalon or an Azera (and while it was down on power, it did have some advantages, including IIHS crash tests, fuel economy, and available AWD).  Frankly, I've never read a comparison test either way.  Do you know of any?

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=105147/pageNumber=1?synpartner=edmunds&pageurl=www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/105147/article.html

My dad had two Ford Taurus, My1986 and My1993. I am familiar with those 3.0L engines somewhat. The 86 Taurus got hit by an F150 while parked on the street, we got $3500 from the insurance company as a total loss settlemnt, 4 years old at that time, new price was $18,000. The My1993 Taurus was given away at 6 years old, 100,000KM to a friend. AC not working, all 4 engine mounts needs replacement, as were the front shocks, ... and the needed to fix list goes on and on. The car was mainly driven on highway, dad was in a small town at that time. Oh well, we learned.

Currently dad owns a 2000 Corolla and a 2002 I35 Sport, couldn't be happier. I sat inside the 500 once, very nicely done, but would I say it is up to the same level of refinement as the I35, or the Avalon, not really. Nice try tho. Now throwing in the factors of resale value, tired and old engine, yet to proven reliability (100,000+ KM), and the agony of unloading a domestic sedan at a reasonable price (to the seller), I would hesitate to recommend the 500 or Taurus to anybody I know.

[Mitlov]

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=105147/pageNumber=1?synpartner=edmunds&pageurl=www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/105147/article.html

Thanks.  It looks like their only major complaints were the engine and transmission, which have been replaced for the Taurus.  As for bland...well, it's a FWD large sedan, that's to be expected.  The 300 is the only one in the class to break that mold.