What Are Your Thoughts on the Return of the Taurus/Sable?

barnstormer64 · October 2007

Now, most perspective buyers know that car as being underpowered and uncompetitive, when in reality it is not.

And never really WAS, either.

People just don't know how to drive one, that's all.

bobber1 · October 2007

I don't have any problem with the Taurus looks. The interior is really sweet. Nice car and I'm confident sales will improve with the new engine and drivetrain.

thegraduate · October 2007

In a class of 250-270hp V6 engines, 203 was relatively underpowered. It's the reason the Amanti went from 195 to 260+. The Buick Lucerne is still underpowered in V6 form due to its ancient 3800 with less than 200 horses. The Ford was near the back of the pack in power with the old 3.0L.

Sure, it had enough beans to be safe, but it wasn't competitive with the majority of the class. Shoot, the cheaper Impala had a 230+ engine, with available 303hp V8; Ford needed to at least match that with its top engine. When you add power AND economy, its a win-win, as in Ford's case.

mschmal · October 2007

Front end is good. I especially love the headlights on the Sable with standard projector style headlamps.

Its the tail lights that bother me, they just seem to busy.

Also the Taurus looks completely different than anything else on the road. The Passet similarities are now pretty vague. The Avalon on the other hand looks like a Camry.

One thing I don't like is the 2 tone interiors. I especially hate the Fake yellow plastic that is suppose to pass for wood on the Sables. It looks like something from a kids play set.

I just can't understand why Ford is afraid of offering an All black interior. That is all we sell really on the Mustang and its descently popular on the Fusion and the Edge.

Pretty much all Nissans offer a Charcoal or black interior.

Maybe its just to sporty looking for the old folkes at Ford design.

Mark.
Mark

[Deleted User] · October 2007

I don't have any problem with the Taurus looks. The interior is really sweet. Nice car and I'm confident sales will improve with the new engine and drivetrain.

Well, it is good someone is confident. However, the 2008 Taurus has been on sale since last summer, and the numbers have not picked up yet. Oftentimes, you will see an immediate spike in sales with redesigns. Taurus can't seem to pull that off, even after months of availability.

I sure don't know much, but it still seems to me it has to be the bulbous sort of tippy look that a new grill and tail lights could not address.

thegraduate · October 2007

With that "tippy" look comes a seating position close to that of vans and SUVs, without the mileage penalty. That is what was appealing to my grandmother. She can't climb up into an SUV easily, and getting in her Accord is getting harder daily. The Taurus was close to my aunt's Odyssey, which is a good thing to her, heightwise (she's 5'1" and 72 years old).

[Deleted User] · October 2007

Well of course. But if people bought cars for rational reasons, there would be relatively few SUVs and CUVs on the road, and a lot more minivans!

thegraduate · October 2007

AMen to that.

My grandmother has her first dime though, so looking at the Taurus is a sensible thing to do!

bobber1 · October 2007

Just a point of clarification. I am 40 with 3 small children, so we are a young family and not an older one. We do own a Honda Odyssey and it definitely sits higher than the Ford Taurus.

For us we liked the combination of safety, space, economy, and price with the Ford Taurus. The exterior styling is average, but that is probably #10 on the list of things that are important to us. The interior is good and it's a nice car to drive. Throw in the fact it's an American brand; why not buy it if you're looking for the things we are?

Some people will bring up resale and reliability, but every car I've driven has been driven to at least 150,000 miles so that argument is mute for me. JD Powers is saying Ford is making more reliable vehicles and I've got a brother with a Ford Ranger with 260,000 trouble free miles, so I'm not afraid to gamble with a new Taurus.

barnstormer64 · October 2007

In a class of 250-270hp V6 engines, 203 was relatively underpowered

In a class where 200hp is plenty (when paired with an awesome transmission like the CVT), the other engines are simply over-powered. Especially since nobody uses the power. :P

Given that the new 3.5L hasn't helped sales (seems to have hurt it, actually), I can't say that power is what people were after.

On the other hand, if I ever see a new "powerful Taurus", I'll be sure to outrun it, just to demonstrate that it's the DRIVER that matters, not the engine.

99% of those buying that vehicle don't know what to do with the 200hp it has, much less 240+ hp

bobber1 · October 2007

Yeah but 99% of the buyers will go with the bigger engine if they can get similar mileage. Nice try, but I don't think you'll get too far barking up that tree.

thegraduate · October 2007

Lucky for buyers, mileage improved with the 30% power increase.

barnstormer64 · October 2007

Unfortunately, they lost the smoothness of the CVT . . . at least the OPTION to get a CVT on the vehicle.

[Deleted User] · October 2007

Bottom line, it's a good buy for those who actually see a car for what it is: an appliance. It's an even better buy if you wait for certified used. However, it's a dud in the marketplace and will remain so until they dump the dumpiness.

jmn1 · October 2007

The Taurus is still good in my book. The RAV-4 needs work, however. If only America's favorite SUV were more reliable, but, lost its 16-year best sales status to the Honda CR-V.

thegraduate · October 2007

I'm still confused about where the RAV is coming from in this convo?

mschmal · October 2007

Is an example of how Toyota can sell loads of vehicles based on their name alone. The Corolla is another.

The RAV4 is a packaging nightmare compared to the CRV and the Nissan Rogue. Toyota gets away with this cause people give Toyota the "benefit of the doubt"

My question is what has Toyota done lately to continue to deserve this "benefit of the doubt"

Mark

[Deleted User] · October 2007

Regardless of whether it is deserved or not, Toyota has established a reputation that sells cars. If their products do not continue to measure up, over time people will gravitate to other manufacturers (you can fool all of the people some of the time, but not all of the time...). Sort of like when Chevrolet sat on top of the world back in the day, even though the mom, apple pie and Chevrolet stuff was largely undeserved. Of course now Chevy is clawing its way back...and doing a better job of it than Ford seems to be able to figure out right now.

By the way, you can get a fuel efficent 268 hp RAV4, which smacks the hell out of the power offered by the Rogue and CRV. Seems people like that combination of fuel efficiency and remarkable power. Explains some of the Avalon's success too...better fuel efficiency than a 4 cylinder Fusion out of 268 hp, not to mention a well-trimmed, well-optioned interior and full-size room in a package smaller than the Taurus.

If Toyota did anything wrong, it was by expanding too fast and allowing their stellar quality to sink on some models. My money is betting that they fix these obvious flaws soon. They didn't kick [non-permissible content removed] with Chevy and Ford by being stupid. Of course other manufacturers who once had the tiger by the tail (e.g., Ford) got really stupid. Toyota could do that too. I just wouldn't bet on it.

barnstormer64 · October 2007

Seems people like that combination of fuel efficiency and remarkable power.

If oil prices keep going up, these folks are gonna wish that the car manufacturers had re-engineered SMALLER engines to get even MORE fuel efficiency, rather than "wasting" the re-design to get more (unneeded) power and only a bit more fuel efficiency.

But what should I care? As the oil prices go up, so does my salary!

[Deleted User] · November 2007

Diesels are coming, diesels are coming! Modern European diesels are clean, powerful and fuel efficient. With oil moving above $100 a barrel, you are going to see more of those, plugin hybrids, electric cars, and turbo-supercharged small 4's coming to market. The Taurus could pick up sales, dumpy body or not, by offering a unique powertrain. After all, not too many cars look as bad as a Prius, but the darn thing sells.

barnstormer64 · November 2007

Diesels are coming, diesels are coming

Just what we need . . . . more black-smoke belching vehicles. :P

barnstormer64 · November 2007

After all, not too many cars look as bad as a Prius, but the darn thing sells.

Only to idiots, IMO . . . the things don't make sense economically at all.

[Deleted User] · November 2007

The new Mercedes diesel engine, also used in the Grand Cherokee, belches no smoke, is clean, doesn't have the old "diesel rattle," and has better power/torque and mileage than the comparable gas engine. What's not to like? Audi, BMW, Ford, etc. all have clean diesels now, and will soon bring them here. The new Honda Accord will soon offer a clean diesel here. These diesels will be salable in all 50 states. Some modern gas engines are not clean enough to be sold in all 50.

Sure, diesels are not a panacea. They are more expensive, and diesel fuel is as well. But an honest 45-50 mpg from a roomy sedan offsets some of that. The point is, more choices is a good thing, when gas supplies are tight. Soon enough, plugin hybrid diesels should top 100 mpg. Some years ago, Mercury was going to do a diesel hybrid. Ford dropped that ball, as they have with so many others.

[Deleted User] · November 2007

October 2006 sales were bad for Ford. They had by then fully dumped the 2006-07 last run Taurus fleet machines. The Edge was being sold and the "new" Expedition was out as well. The Fusion had a yeer under its belt already. And sales for this October? Down another 16.4%. Nice going, guys. At least Mercury went up for a change, but that poor little division (with less than half the sales of GM's struggling Pontiac division) has nowhere to go other than up (or out).

Hey, think maybe that 08 Focus thing will turn it around??

jeyhoe · November 2007

"Hey, think maybe that 08 Focus thing will turn it around?? "

Only if they recapture all the good feelings from the past and rename it the 'Pinto'.

Ford says their sales are down because they've reduced their fleet sales! How long are they going to use this excuse??? Wait'll the new Malibu starts to canibalize Taurus and Fusion sales. The Malibu is SOOOO much better than the Fusion inside and out.

So, I guess the brilliant idea of renaming the 2 blandmobiles STILL isn't working out for Mr Mulally? Well, maybe he shouldda asked ME.

Review of the NEW 2008 Edge is out. Edmunds likes it EXCEPT THE BRAKES STILL SUCK.

Oh, Ford just started another round of buyouts. Anyone with an ounce of talent better line up for this one cause a large percentage of Chrysler employees are going to be knocking on GM's door as well. Last chance for a job in the auto industry. Unless u speak Korean or Chinese.

After the latest group of Ford workers leaves, they'll miss the introduction of the new Great Ford Hope - the station wagon/minivan/crossover/stupidly named Ford Flex. Why, that'll save the company won't it? Another answer to a question no one was asking. Find a '63 Falcon station wagon and you dont have to wait for a Flex-mobile.

And as for Mercury - when you're selling squat, you've no where to go but up.

barnstormer64 · November 2007

The new Mercedes diesel engine, also used in the Grand Cherokee, belches no smoke, is clean, doesn't have the old "diesel rattle," and has better power/torque and mileage than the comparable gas engine. What's not to like?

Besides the fact it's a Mercedes?

barnstormer64 · November 2007

Sure, diesels are not a panacea. They are more expensive, and diesel fuel is as well. But an honest 45-50 mpg from a roomy sedan offsets some of that. The point is, more choices is a good thing, when gas supplies are tight.

But unless the total cost of ownership is less, then it's a bit pointless to get one. That's the problem with the Prius. Just get a Corolla with the 4-cylinder and stick-shift, instead. Unless you just wanna sound like a golf cart at city-driving speeds, that is.

[Deleted User] · November 2007

Well of course. But the point is with petroleum prices going through the roof and supply questions and speculation driving costs up, the cost equation is going to change. If you can get more miles from fewer gallons with gas going above $4, $5, $6 per gallon, you will see the $1,000 to $2,000 initial purchase penalty for the diesel version over the gas engine amortized more quickly. In addition, there is the unfactored payback of using less resources to get from point A to point B in the same relative comfort.

Hybrids remain questionable in that regard of course. Making the batteries and their disposal may currently be harder on the environment than driving the straight gas version. And until we stop using food sources for E85, that intelligence of that industry remains questionable.

mschmal · November 2007

Twin Force.

http://www.autosavant.net/search?q=twin+force

Scroll down.

Mark.

ronsmith38 · November 2007

Should not the 2008 Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable have a separate discussion group in the sedan forums since they are completely different from the previous versions?

thegraduate · November 2007

I believe this thread sort-of functions as that discussion at this point.

brucelinc · November 2007

I have said that I thought the new Taurus was a screaming value. I just put my money where my mouth is and bought a 2008 SEL to replace my wife's 2001 Taurus. She will be the daily driver of the new one.

We spent a lot of time comparing and test driving the Taurus and the Fusion. At first, my wife liked the Fusion better because it is sportier and of similar size to her old Taurus. I have had 4 cyl Fusions as rentals and thought the 4 cyl was rough, noisy, and underpowered. The V6 Fusion is a whole different animal and we were both impressed with it. I really liked the crisp handling and the ride is very good.

Before driving a new Taurus, my wife thought it was too big and an "old man's car." After driving it back to back with a Fusion, however, she came to the same realization that I did. In terms of ride, quiet, performance, feel, and general refinement, the Taurus seems like $10,000 more car. We also drove a 2007 Ford 500 since they are nearly giving them away. The Taurus feels like $10,000 more car than a 500, too, IMO.

Anyway, if you can get past the bulbous, homely exterior, I still think the Taurus is the most competitive product in Ford's lineup and meets or beats any competitor in it's price level. Less than 20 grand buys a heck of a car.

thegraduate · November 2007

Would you mind posting in the prices paid forum for the Taurus, letting us know what you paid?

csmith99 · November 2007

I have purchased 3 new cars in the past 4 years. Most recently traded an 07 Camry LE 4 for an 07 Ford 500 SEL 6.
1-Saftey, 5 stars in all tests.
2-Comfort
3-Size (interior and trunk) and the high view of the road.
4-Camry 07 4 cyln has issues with the transmission that i tried to get resolved 4 x. Also has issues with noise when i rolled the back windows down slightly (no SR)

The other car I still own is a Camry and is excellent, too bad they didn't live up to their own stds with the 07, although it is a nice looking car. Happy I made the change to Ford and I hope others see the value in this pratical vehicle.

bobber1 · November 2007

The Fusion is a nice looking car and well put together. If you have more than one kid however; you want as much room as possible and when you throw that in the equation the new Taurus is an easy choice. Plus it scores great in safety ratings, plus it's really quiet, plus it's reasonably priced. Okay it's not the most graceful looking car from the outside, but it makes up for it in practicality.

I've had my SEL for over a month now and love it. I think it has an almost European feel and very solid on the road. One of the surprise pleasures for me is the Auto climate control system. Whisper quiet and you never have to fiddle with the knobs once you set it to a temperature you like.

I agree it's one heck of a car for the money.

jimmy2x · November 2007

Have owned many Fords over the years with pretty good luck. Was at the dealership a month or so ago with my company car and took the time to see the new Taurus. In all honesty, while the inside was comfortable if a bit plain, the exterior is just pitiful (just my opinion).

I learned the hard way years ago to never buy ANY car strictly based upon common sense and dollar value. If I can't stand the look of it at 1st glance (at least enough to think "nice car") in a month I'd hate it.

The new Taurus may well be a good running car and good value - but the exterior design will continue to kill sales.

juxto · November 2007

Could not agree with you more, jimmy2x. My father bought a new Taurus in 2001. He said it reminded him of a flathead ford he had owned in the 50s and his only beef was it didn't have an 8 track player. He is now 80 years old and is shopping for a new car (has almost 40k miles on his taurus). I took him to look at the taurus and he says it reminds him of that old flathead ford he had, but thought the 2008 taurus was an "old man's car" and wondered why ford doesn't round the front ends like the other manufacturers.

brucelinc · November 2007

You gotta love an 80 year old man who won't drive an "old man's car!" I hope I feel the same way when I am his age!

It comes down to priorities. I fully understand why lots of people would resist the Taurus because of it's looks. That is a real shame for Ford because there is no other segment of the market where they have a model as competitive as the Taurus based on criteria other than exterior appearance. I would go so far as to say it is best in class in many areas - room, ride, quiet, overall feel, value.

It is kind of like the plain chubby girl in high school who was smart, could cook, had great personality and a heart of gold - but never got asked to the dance.

thegraduate · November 2007

It is kind of like the plain chubby girl in high school who was smart, could cook, had great personality and a heart of gold - but never got asked to the dance.

With rebates now, you might say that she's made herself cheap so other guys will crank her up!

brucelinc · November 2007

Yes, and those other guys will come to find out the plain chubby gal can be a lot more entertaining than they expected! She wants to be loved and will give a lot of love in return!

Seriously, I don't think the Taurus body lines are so bad - it is just so blasted tall compared to other sedans. The roofline is about 5-6 inches higher than most and it makes the car look less sleek. On the upside, the seating position and ease of entry/exit make this car more user-friendly than many others.

barnstormer64 · November 2007

, I don't think the Taurus body lines are so bad - it is just so blasted tall compared to other sedans

That's one of its VIRTUES.

[Deleted User] · November 2007

The lines aren't bad, but they are plain...some would even say dowdy. A tall sedan does not have to look plain. SUVs are all tall. They don't necessarily look shorter than they are (like the Taurus does) just because they are tall. Nothing dowdy about the Rolls Royce, and that sure is tall. The Avalon is tall, but doesn't look nearly as ill-proportioned as the Taurus/500.

Ford could have done a better job with the height. They have already done better with the MKS. The MKS would have been even better had they chopped a couple inches off the front overhang and added it to the wheelbaxe instead. The diminuitive wheelbase on the Taurus empasizes the tall, tippy look. Without increasing the length an iota, they could have added at least a couple more inches to the wheelbase. In sum, with a few tweaks on the proportions, and a healthy dose of interesting style and it could have been a winner, rather than an also-ran.

autowrite · November 2007

I love my 2002 Odyssey. I just put in a rebuild transmission at 180K kms (1st time); but the vehicle is soooo comfortable compared to anything I owned before and has that zip. My dealer does extras at 'no charge'.
Who said Honda & Toyota pay less than USA. No, they pay more to the factory floor, to keep their employees happy & keep them from going over to the BIG3; without a union.
My previous vehicle was a 1992 Taurus, long-stoke. Lasted 276K kms. But, had brake problems, rear fender rust, 3 wiper motors, 2 turn sign counsols, 2 door motors goine. I traded it when the power brakes disappeared.
A firend is looking to buy either a Prius or a 2008 Taurus. Will the Prius start in sub-aero winter weather for many times in the Canadian winter, parked outside. He currently has a 2000 Taurus SEL. Maybe I should tell hime to keep it as he has had no problems in 230K kms.
Tell me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Fusion & Edge based on the Mazda6?
The biggest seller in Canada is the Honda Civic. I don't know what the biggest seller is the USA, but I don't think it's the Fusion as someone montioned that works for a Ford dealer.
It's interesting that the Infinitis are great vehciles along with the Hondas but the Nissans don't do well even thoought Infiniti is really a Nissan with more accessories and power. Maybe the French Renault people who own Nissan have something to do with it.

brucelinc · November 2007

The Avalon is tall, but doesn't look nearly as ill-proportioned as the Taurus/500.

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The Avalon is about the last car in the world I would call stylish. It's WB is a couple of inches shorter than a Taurus and it is a couple of inches lower but it looks every bit as ungainly, if not more so, to my eye. The Charger has better overall proportions but it has a face that only a mother could love. I think the Buick Lucerne is about the best looking full-sized car. The Impala isn't bad, either. I loved the Chrysler 300 when it first was introduced but it has not aged that well.

Opinions of styling are like butts - everybody has one. In any case, I have already conceded that few will buy a Taurus based on it's striking beauty.

[Deleted User] · November 2007

I wouldn't call the Avalon stylish either. My point was the Avalon doesn't look nearly as tippy and bulbous as the Taurus. Tall cars can be drawn any number of ways. The first generation Avalon was plain to awful looking, but sold on Toyota reputation and value for the money. The second was bigger, roomier and even more ungainly looking than the first. But it was roomy, pushing the sides almost upright to get every interior inch.

The current generation actually has some style by comparison, even if it isn't your cup of tea (it's not mine either). Anyway, in the opinion of the marketplace, it's not doing too badly. Of course Toyota has been able to sell frumpy cars. (Ford didn;t have the reputation to be able to do the same.) Thank God Toyota is now including some styling too! In another couple generations, you might actually like the Avalon.

barnstormer64 · November 2007

A tall sedan does not have to look plain.

I suppose not. But what's wrong with plain? (After all, the Camry was pretty plain).

Nothing wrong with plain, IMO. In fact, I suspect it helps keep the car off the "got to steal" list, and thus insurance rates are kept lower on it.

jmn1 · November 2007

OK, as I haven't posted in a while;

1) The current generation Camry looks about as bad as can be. It reminds me of a hot dog looking at the front end (the current generation Chrysler 300 and last GM vans, but especially the Pontiac Montana SV6, also).
2) I would not by any means say I love it, but the look of the Taurus looks nice, like a dubbed-up Lincoln Town Car or something.
3) I was waiting for an appointment today when I looked down and saw my own 2001 Taurus. In gold, the lines were still looking like I bought it yesterday, but it is eight years old (November 2000). I saw a gold Five Hundred and a gold Montego side-by-side today. Both looked aged, and gold is one of the better colors for aging.
4) The Five Hundred was a good if not great car in all aspects (except engine performance, which was its main fault). I was impressed by the interior spacde and comfort of the cloth seats. I felt as if the components would hold up well.
5) Being the 'fat girl' in the school isn't necessarily a bad thing. They tend to be more understanding of others, like the Taurus. The Taurus was designed well inside and out, in my opinion, unlike the Camry and the Accord.
6) The fact that the 2008 Taurus has all-wheel-drive might knock the Legacy/Outback off their pedestals. For the record, both the Legacy and Outback are only midsized, but still compare due to their 'luxury' and all-wheel-drive. Additionally, the Legacy was the quote-on-quote 'sportier' one and was closer to the ground. The Outback was more 'rugged' quote-on-quote. It was higher off the ground, being more suitable for off-roading, even though, with either choice, I'd rent a Jeep. For 2008, Subaru has made the Legacy sedan-only, and the Outback wagon-only.
7) In 2005, when the Five Hundred went on sale, Ford's idea was for it to be the company flagship (luxury car), not to replace the Crown Victoria. The Crown Victoria was still the full-size.
8) I read somewhere that out of 100 New York Taxicabs, 92 or 93 of them are Ford Crown Victorias. Another 2-3 out of the 100 are Toyota Sienna minivans, another 1-2 are Chevrolet Impalas, and another 1-2 are Ford Escape Hybrids. The rest are something else.
9) Ford Crown Victorias are approximately 99.7% bulltproof. I realize that the Five Hundred/Taurus and Montego/Sable are rated the safest full-size cars on the market, but they are not proven like the Crown Victoria.
10) Out of every 100 ambulances, 96 of them are mounted on a Ford E-Series chassis. This means that if you had to be rushed to a hospital via ambulance, you have a 96% chance of being taken there by a Ford Ford's doing something right, with the numbers of taxis and ambulances that are Fords. Not to mention the Super Duty superiority.
11) In my opinion, Ford should redesign the Crown Victoria, keep it as a full-size sedan for large families and travelers police cars and taxis, keep the Taurus for something to compete against the Subaru Legacy/ Outback and for smaller familes, the Fusion for, say, college people, and the Focus for the fuel-conscious and sporty. May as well redesign the Ranger while they're at it and make a 'SuperCrew' or 'Double Cab' or something with doors like a sedan. The nameplate is familiar, being around for a such a long time.
12) Happy Thanksgiving!

[Deleted User] · November 2007

The Taurus looks like a dubbed up Lincoln Town Car? On which planet?

Yes, everyone has an opinion. This is the first time I have seen the Legacy (a compact) compared with a Taurus (behemoth). First time I've seen the new Focus called "sporty," first time I've seen the Fusion family sedan described as college kid material. Ford obviously makes some good products (trucks, Mustang, etc.), but say goodby the Crown Vic and Ranger.

The current generation Camry has style, swoops, curves and lines that previous Camrys never had. It is either love it or hate it, whereas the previous generation was more like the 500...just there. Toyota is moving toward a look many people don't like, but a lot do. It is defining the brand, something Ford needs to do. How they ever thought the grill on the new Focus bears any resemblance to the Fusion or Taurus or Edge is beyond me.

Now the 09 F150 grill looks like a previous generation Tundra. So they have the Superduty grill, the F150 grill, the Expedition grill which is yet a whole other theme, the three bar grill, the two bar grill, the Mustang grill, the Escape grill. Despite Ford going for a more unified look, the more they seem to come up with differnent looks. Reminds me of the many current Lincoln grills (MKX. MKZ, Navi, Mark LT, Town Car). What is a Lincoln supposed to look like? Remeber when Fords really looked like Fords?

barnstormer64 · November 2007

The problem with the Crown Vic is that it drives like a boat. Not so, the Five Hundred (err, new Taurus)

brucelinc · November 2007

Last spring, when we first heard that the 500 was going to be improved and be called "Taurus," I applauded the idea of the name change because of it's familiarity. I mistakenly assumed that Ford would make a huge marketing splash to re-introduce the "new" Taurus and promote all of it's great features. Instead, we have had a couple of lame ads and some big rebates.

Like anyone with a new car, my wife and I have been showing ours to our friends and family. It is obvious to me that NO ONE KNOWS THIS CAR EXISTS! Tons of comments like: "Is THAT a Taurus?" "That doesn't look like a Taurus." "I didn't know that was a Taurus." "Do they still make the Taurus?"

We took some friends out to dinner this weekend and they rode in the back seat. HUSBAND: "WOW, this is like riding in a limosine!" WIFE: This car is so quiet and smooth, it doesn't even feel like we are moving." They currently drive a Pontiac Bonneville and I think I could have sold them a Taurus on the spot!

My point is, why the H*LL is Ford keeping this car a secret? Most of us agree that the styling is not gonna sell it so why don't they promote its real virtues?

What Are Your Thoughts on the Return of the Taurus/Sable?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles