Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2010 Ford Taurus

1235717

Comments

  • I've driven the 2010 Taurus, and while it's okay, it's no true sporting sedan, at least not in front wheel drive config.

    It really is truly heavy, with a motor and brakes that are not exactly well suited given the hefty weight.

    You're not going to find any front wheel drive car that qualifies as a sports car, whether a coupe or sedan in my book. The laws of physics and engineering don't allow it, nor does real life experience.

    I find that the exterior look of the new Taurus is no worse, but no better, either, than many of its competitors (better than some, worse than a select few).

    The interior is decent, but why did Ford have to put that huge swath of faux carbon fiber on the passenger side dash, along with a cheapish looking 'Taurus' badge?

    At any rate, I'm now seeing the SE version of this showing up advertised at just over 25k, and the SEL version just over 27k.

    Mind you, this is while production AND deliveries are very low, because of an initial quality glitch on the production line.

    When production ramps up, and the cash for clunkers mess has faded from memory and the aftermath from markets, there should be some serious room for negotiation on these, especially the all goodied up versions.

    The 3.5 Liter Duratec does not do this car justice. It's far from silky, it's far from the competition, and the hanging transmission does it no favors, either.

    There are also very credible statements, from Ford fans themselves, that the 19" wheel version has some awfully harsh impacts, which is particularly galling since this has an important mission of being a stable and smooth highway cruiser (one rung up from the Fusion).

    I said the same thing about the Genesis; the ride quality doesn't cut the mustard in that car. I like the interior,the exterior is about the best we can expect in this era of blandness and copycat-ism, but the ride in the Genesis is way too busy, with way too many inputs inefficiently processed by the apparently flawed suspension at once.
  • The Accord is now a full-size car.

    NO WAY!!! My mother just bought a new Accord, and there is no way that it is anything more than a mid-size. If it were a full size, she would have never bought it as she doesn't want a car that big. Just throwing out a statement doesn't make it true.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    there is no way that it is anything more than a mid-size.

    According to the EPA, an Accord with moonroof is a mid-size while the Accord without the moonroof is a full-size. Makes no sense but that's how the formula works.

    I don't think anyone thinks of the Accord as a full-size car though - it clearly competes with other mid-sized vehicles.
  • there is no way that it is anything more than a mid-size.

    =============================================

    According to the EPA, the Accord has more passenger volume than the new Taurus:
    2009 Honda Accord
    Size Class: Large Cars
    Drive: Front-Wheel Drive
    Gas Guzzler: no
    Passenger Volume: 106 ft3 (4D)


    The new Taurus checks in at 102 ft3 of passenger volume.

    Of course you don't have to take my word or the EPA's, Edmund's says the same thing:
    Accord 1st - Taurus 2nd
  • The EPA also includes trunk space in its qualification, a large car starting at 120cu.ft. The Accord's is 14cu ft. Taurus has had the largest trunk of any passenger car in its previous iteration. I assume it still does?

    The Taurus is 203" long. The Accord is 194" long.
  • The Accord's is 14cu ft. Taurus has had the largest trunk of any passenger car in its previous iteration. I assume it still does?

    ========================

    Yes - it is still true. The Taurus has a very large trunk @ 20 cu.ft.

    =======================

    I was talking with a friend of mine last night about the new Taurus and he didn't realize that Ford had renamed the "500" a Taurus and re-designed it for 2010. He was still envisioning the former Taurus as much of mainstream America does.

    image">
  • I went to Gwinnett Place Ford today to look at the 2010 Taurus. Next to the standard factory sticker, on an SEL with leather, they had their own sticker that said "adjusted market value" $2500.(it was $5000 on the SHO which brought that up to close to $50000)According to my research on here, and other sites, the consensus is that the new Taurus is a little over priced as it is and now, by reverting back to the tactics that helped get dealers in trouble in the first place, all they do is drive away potential buyers like me. Times are bad for the auto industry and still, some dealers just don't get it.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    Gwinnett Place Ford sucks in so many ways. They are not representative of the average Ford dealer. I do agree there are far too many bad dealers out there though. Unfortunately there is almost nothing that Ford can do because of state auto franchise laws.
  • "adjusted market value" $2500.(it was $5000 on the SHO which brought that up to close to $50000)

    Insane: Why not just get a Genesis 4.6L for $10k less, in that case. Or an Acura RL, or Lexus GS350, or 535i, or MKS, or....

    Its a shame.
  • LOL.

    Isn't it great when you can tell Gwinnet to sit and spin, and just go buy a better car for 20k (or more) or less?

    What a bunch of morons.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,670
    I agree with the poster(s) who think that $35K for a "Blue Oval" car may simply be too much...I believe akirby said to check out the car, not the symbol (forgive me is I misquote), but there still comes a point where many buyers, IMO, simply will NOT spend $35K with something that says Ford or Chevrolet on it...maybe that is truly stupid, but Ford and Chevy built their reputations in the last 50 years or so on being an economical, family type car...now, they price their cars (we'll forget about Gwinnett Place Ford, as being dumber than a rock) so that they run up against reputations of cars that have the IMAGE of being better...

    By the time you add on tax (almost $2,500 @ 7%), title, and extended warranty (which I do, so it would be part of the cost of MY car, maybe not yours) we are slowly approaching $40K for a Ford...

    I know they will sell some, and I do appreciate Ford trying to move upmarket, but I just agree with those who think that a simple Ford family sedan at $35-40K out the door just won't fly...credit Ford's own 50 year ad campaign of family sedans at reasonable prices (Galaxies, LTDs, Crown Vics, etc) at being the anchor around their own ankles now...and for Lincoln to top $50K, I am afraid to even go there, as I think that is even more absurd...

    But what do I know???...we will wait and see...
  • I agree with the poster(s) who think that $35K for a "Blue Oval" car may simply be too much...I believe akirby said to check out the car, not the symbol (forgive me is I misquote), but there still comes a point where many buyers, IMO, simply will NOT spend $35K with something that says Ford or Chevrolet on it...maybe that is truly stupid, but Ford and Chevy built their reputations in the last 50 years or so on being an economical, family type car...now, they price their cars (we'll forget about Gwinnett Place Ford, as being dumber than a rock) so that they run up against reputations of cars that have the IMAGE of being better...

    So buy a Taurus SEL and not a limited production SHO...pricing is in line with the suggested prices for the 5 year old design Avalon. The whole comparing the top to the bottom is a silly argument. The people that are worried about paying too much for a high end vehicle from Ford or GM won't be getting that model anyway. They will be looking for the vinyl seats and hand crank windows.

    I know they will sell some, and I do appreciate Ford trying to move upmarket, but I just agree with those who think that a simple Ford family sedan at $35-40K out the door just won't fly

    I don't think Ford does either, or Toyota, or Honda, or really anyone but Volkswagen. This is why there is a Fusion, Camry, and Accord.
  • So buy a Taurus SEL and not a limited production SHO...pricing is in line with the suggested prices for the 5 year old design Avalon...

    ================================================

    I agree the SEL without a lot of options is priced reasonably, but maybe due to production glitches, mostly Limiteds and SHOs are currently available in my area.

    An FWD SEL is well-equipped at $28K and doesn't need to be optioned up at all for most buyers. The Limiteds in my area are $33K-$37K and not worth the extra $$ to many buyers.

    Time will tell how successful Ford is with their strategy of taking the Taurus "up-market". Advertising has been minimal in the Midwest so the consumer still has the pre-2008 Taurus in mind. Not helpful when trying to change market segments.
  • dturrdturr Posts: 70
    If Ford has such faith in its product and pricing why are there no lease deals, why not copy GM and offer a money back deal. My personal view is that the depreciation on these cars will be massive.
    There is also a problem somewhere? why are there no cars at the dealers?
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    Most car companies got burned on subsidized leases so what you're seeing now is really the true cost of leasing based on expected used car values.

    Ford doesn't have to offer a 60 day money back guarantee like GM. And they're betting they don't have to offer huge cash incentives or subsidized leases to sell cars, even if they end up selling a few less than they would have otherwise. In the long run it will help depreciation and improve future profitability.

    Stock is low in general because of cash for clunkers and the fact that Ford cut back on production volumes earlier in the year. The 2010 Taurus is just now shipping so they haven't had time to build up dealer inventory.
  • Ford is going to see the biggest drop in YoY sales for the 4th Quarter of this year of any domestic automaker - and that's saying a lot.

    Their pricing (high), dealership inflexibility and the end of CFC are going to kneecap them.

    Wait. Watch. Learn.

    By the way, we are about to re-enter deep recession territory now that governments worldwide have to withdraw stimulus spending. It's simply not sustainable.

    Look out below.
  • I'm thinking by November 2011 you will be able to pick up a 2010 Taurus Limited that stickered for $35000 for about 17 or 18 plus tax. Any bets?
  • By the way, we are about to re-enter deep recession territory now that governments worldwide have to withdraw stimulus spending. It's simply not sustainable.

    =========================================

    This is off topic but the stimulus spending and easy money from the Fed are on-going and will be for some time to come. By next year at this time, your statement will be largely correct but for now it is not.

    ========================================

    I'm thinking by November 2011 you will be able to pick up a 2010 Taurus Limited that stickered for $35000 for about 17 or 18 plus tax. Any bets?

    ========================================

    That is a very safe bet. You're looking over 2 years out. I'm thinking a low mileage, $29K sticker, 2010 SEL will be available for $21K in Sept 2010. I'd be VERY interested in that vehicle at that price.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    It's real easy to make predictions that are 3, 6, 12 or 24 months out because nobody ever comes back to follow up on them.

    Ford was doing well before CFC. I see no reason to think that will change in 4th Quarter. In fact Ford increased production volume for the last half of the year based on first quarter performance (and that was before CFC).
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    I predict that a 2 year old 2010 Taurus that sold for $29,000 will be selling used for $28,000.

    See how easy that is?
  • It's real easy to make predictions that are 3, 6, 12 or 24 months out because nobody ever comes back to follow up on them.

    ==============================================

    I can follow up on them right now. Go to edmunds.com Used Cars, enter a 2008 or 2009 Taurus with the trim, options and mileage desired. Hit enter.

    You now know what the value of this car will be in 12 or 24 months. I've been researching cars this way (using NADA before computers) for over 30 years now.

    It is a very accurate method of projecting "Future Market Value".
  • euphoniumeuphonium Great Northwest, West of the Cascades.Posts: 3,324
    I've been researching cars this way (using NADA before computers) for over 30 years now.

    Great. Now what car have you finally decided to buy? ;)
  • Such predictions are usually pretty silly. Anyway, if all that matters is resale value or future prices, than we should just forget the whole thing and buy Toyotas and Hondas instead of something we want and like.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    And I bet 2 years ago if you predicted the resale value of a large SUV it would have been a LOT higher than it actually was last year at this time.

    This is not the same Taurus - it's a much better car all the way around. Ford's reputation has greatly improved the last 2 years and the current management regime has shown that it's not going to repeat the mistakes of the last decade (overproduction, poor quality, big incentives).

    I'm not saying it will be #1 in resale value but to assume it will be just as bad as in the past is simply ignoring the changes that have taken place recently.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,670
    Maybe my memory of the last 50 years is faulty, but aside from Corvette, how many other Big 3, UAW-made cars, DIDN'T depreciate at least 30-50% (a broad range, I realize) within 2 years, and many of them within one year???

    I appreciate your optimism, but you seem to be basing your opinion on the "fact" that the new Taurus is "well designed and better made", which BTW, I don't dispute...but will a (FINALLY) well made Big 3 car really slow its depreciation???...obviously, for the truth we must wait and see, but when you have a 40-plus year track record of "value dropping like a rock", to see this one as any different takes a truckload of faith, which, when considering Big 3 products, I simply do not have...

    Within 2 years, and probably within 1 year, a $32K Taurus will be offered a trade-in value of $16-18K, and will retail for a few grand more, if you're lucky...

    OTOH, I do hope that YOU are correct...
  • The average depreciation rate for ANY car at the END of 2 years is about 48% - let's just call it half.

    Why would a new Ford product fare significantly better in a worsening economy?

    And unlike what you're saying, the "new" Taurus has the exact same engine, drivetrain and platform/chassis as the "old" Taurus. The basically restyled the sheet metal, made changes to the interior, and added a turbocharger option (for a lot more money of course).
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    It has totally new sheetmetal and a totally new interior plus tons of new features including massaging seats, adaptive cruise control, BLIS and a manumatic with paddles. Yes, it has the same drivetrain if you don't count the 365 hp SHO.

    Put the old Taurus and new Taurus side by side and see whether people think it's new or not. Geez.........
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,674
    you seem to be basing your opinion on the "fact" that the new Taurus is "well designed and better made", which BTW, I don't dispute...but will a (FINALLY) well made Big 3 car really slow its depreciation???...obviously, for the truth we must wait and see, but when you have a 40-plus year track record of "value dropping like a rock", to see this one as any different takes a truckload of faith, which, when considering Big 3 products, I simply do not have...

    But what caused these vehicles to have horrible depreciation?

    Poor designs - they made cars that simply weren't desirable and couldn't compete with the imports

    Poor reliability

    Overproduction - they thought it was better to keep the factories running even if there was no retail market for the vehicles

    Rental fleet dumping - caused by overproduction. Too many rentals caused a glut of young high mileage cars on the used market

    Huge rebates - also a result of overproduction. When you build more cars than people want to buy that's the only way to get rid of them.

    The reason I am optimistic is that Ford has addressed all of these problems over the last 2 years. They're cutting production instead of overproducing, dumping into rental fleets and putting huge incentives on the hood. Reliability is at an all-time high and equal to Toyota and Honda in most cases. And the designs are finally competitive.

    That said, the full sized car market is not exactly growing so who knows what will really happen but I think Ford and the Taurus are in a much better position than they've ever been.
  • berriberri Posts: 4,159
    Since we're playing - I' m in. I'll guess a Taurus listed at $29K will go out the door new this spring at a little under $24-25K. That's around 8% off sticker and another $2K or so in incentives, etc. There might also be some special option bundling to lower it the equivalent of another $500 or so if its sales are slow. I think a used one will run a $1,000 to $1500 more than the current model used Taurus/500 because its a much nicer car. The $32K+ models will have greater hits though because thats up into near luxury and CUV territory. If gas goes back up around $4 then all bets are off because large cars will join trucks in taking big hits.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,670
    I think you have great insight as to how things may have changed...that said, to expect depreciation of a car, esp a Big 3 car, despite your insightful analysis, to change the pattern of almost half a century of experience is, IMO, beyond wishful thinking...

    This car isn't THAT different from many of the cars of the last decades to imply that the world will suddenly see it any differently except that it is another product made by Ford, no more, no less...

    Your optimism is appreciated, and certainly a breath of fresh air, but the Taurus, IMO, will not change anything for Ford on the depreciation "schedule"...like virtually all Big 3 cars before it, its value will drop like a stone, greatly in the first year, and probably by 50% in its second year...hard to change a reputation of 50 years with one car that is, hopefully, made extremely well...
Sign In or Register to comment.