Topic: 2010 Ford Taurus SHO; Day 1

[robarakira]

saw my first '10 Taurus the other day.  It had a 'Budget' sticker on the back bumper....

[dasiuyan]

In both SHO and Genesis V8 case, you are getting a very comprehensive, high-end luxury feature set not a luxury car. The feature set is just a part of a luxury car IMO.

Other than luxury features, what else makes up for a luxury car?

Power, quietness, smoothness, ease of ingress / egress, space, comfort.

I would add materials quality (in/out), attention to finishing details (in/out), brand equity, buy/service experience, craftsmanship...

Warranty too? Usually "Luxury Brand" offer 4 years/80000-100000km bumper to bumper. Acura CSX, twin bro of Honda Civic, has 1year/20000km extra warranty.
If it is a Ford and a turbo charged engine, I would like to have the extra year/km warranty on it. Like some of us have said, if it is a Lincoin, no one would complain about the pricing. Sometimes a brand has too much burden after so many year in the industry, especially with reintroducing a well known icon?

By the way, good job for Ford to make the SHO (100 more HP and lb-ft) to have almost the same fuel consumption as regular AWD Taurus (thou it takes premium fuel). I just hope internal direct ejected engine with turbo would be a reliable engine choice, not just Ford, also for VW/Audi and others too. Hope the cost of maintenance of such an engine would not be significant higher than "tradition" engine. Anyone know what is Ford's ecoboost engine maintenance schedule? Require synthetic oil?

[greengs]

Consumer Reports

I think it's remarkable that Mazda comes in nearly last in brand perception.  Is there something that the mass-market "knows" that enthusiasts don't?  (Mazda got a 13 for brand perception; the top three were Toyota at 196, Ford at 141, and Honda at 135).

Mazda is not very popular in USA.  They have a reputation of being among the least reliable of Japanese brands and their cars used to rust out after 2 or 3 yrs on the roads.  It will take a few years for them to change those perceptions.

[Dante]

Consumer Reports

According to that report, Mitsubishi has better brand perception in the US than Infiniti and Mazda? I would have never thought of that.

I know Mitsu are in general highly appreciated by the owners, especially for their reliability, but just the same they are highly discounted by the rest of the public (vast majority).

[toolatecrew]

[quoteOne huge annoyance are the headlights, which are barely useful. Ford may as well have just taped two flashlights on the front of the car and called it a day. At first I thought it was due to dirty lenses but after a wash I had the same problem. The bulbs simply do not produce enough light. On dark country roads I can barely tell the lights are on and in the city forget it; I expected much better at this price.[/quote] frpom Day 3

This IMO is inexcusable. Its made all the worse by the fact that the majority of test drives are made in the daytime. There is a very good chance some poor sucker buys one of these 50K beasys only to find lut a week later that the headlights are inadequate. Cars priced far lass like the Mazda 3 or my GTI come with very good bi xenon headlamps. Its one of my wifes favorite features of the GTI that is makes her feel safe at night becuase she can see.

A big fast car like that shouldn't be outrunning its headlamps.

[ArticSteve]

I think it's remarkable that Mazda comes in nearly last in brand perception.  Is there something that the mass-market "knows" that enthusiasts don't?   (Mazda got a 13 for brand perception; the top three were Toyota at 196, Ford at 141, and Honda at 135).

Advertising budgets.

[inco]

"This IMO is inexcusable. Its made all the worse by the fact that the majority of test drives are made in the daytime. There is a very good chance some poor sucker buys one of these 50K beasys only to find lut a week later that the headlights are inadequate. Cars priced far lass like the Mazda 3 or my GTI come with very good bi xenon headlamps. Its one of my wifes favorite features of the GTI that is makes her feel safe at night becuase she can see.

A big fast car like that shouldn't be outrunning its headlamps."

Sad that this is what they are offering. It's supposed to be an image car right? Well the image, or lack thereof in this case is not only tarnished, but not too bright on Ford's part. Did not look, but can they be upgraded Wing?

[wing]

Nope

[bert]

My lights seemed dim initially but had the aim lowered and they are OK at highway speeds.  However FORD Canada screwed up by not offering xenons on their halo car! In the US the xenons are standard on the SHO.

 In this price range, xenons should be standard (and for most makes they are).

[Benhaze]

My lights seemed dim initially but had the aim lowered and they are OK at highway speeds.  However FORD Canada screwed up by not offering xenons on their halo car! In the US the xenons are standard on the SHO.

 In this price range, xenons should be standard (and for most makes they are).

The one I drove was a US car and didn't have Xenon lights. I know the sales literature states HIDs are std but I don't know it it was implemented as a running change or if it is a misprint. But I can attest the headlamps do a really poor job. I'm used to the Xenons on my car and it is a feature very high on my list for my next car.

[versys chris]

Well, I can't hold back any longer and have to share my 2 cents. I can't believe that anyone is still using the outdated Canadian Fuel Economy charts and then seems surprise when they don't reflect the true fuel consumption. Why we even bother doing it in Canada is beyond me. Now wait, I work for the government too, so it is a keep people in government positions.

Anyway, my point is, that the USA EPA has at least updated their test method and I have found that their numbers much more closely resemble what our cars and trucks guzzle. I know some other writers on Canadian driver have started quoting this source and I would encourage others to follow until Ottawa wakes up and gets with the program. On the EPA site the Taurus is rated at 13.8 litres city and 9.4 highway. That is much closer to what was observed in this test. Besides the fact that fuel economy is calculated in the lab, under ideal conditions and not in the winter time. So this context should also be added to a test.

Thanks for giving me the time.

Versys Chris

[redwing780]

A new SHO was parked next to my 09 G37xS sedan recently.  I honestly could not believe how HUGE the SHO was compared to my car, particularly viewing the 2 from the rear.  I rarely carry anything more than groceries and a gym bag, but perhaps others might need the kind of...um...hauling capacity the SHO offers. I think the fuel economy indicates the cost of driving around that capacity on a daily basis.  I'll keep my G, thanks.