Howdy, Stranger!

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





2010 Ford Taurus

prigglypriggly Posts: 642
Anyone know anything about the new upcoming 2010 Ford Taurus, especially if there is to be an SHO variant?
«13456717

Comments

  • I read online that they are going to offer a new engine called eco-boost, and the new Taurus is going to have a SHO option. The new pictures shows a vast improvement over the 2009 Taurus with the inside looking very Accord like. I will definitely consider one when I buy my next car.
  • gmhellmangmhellman Posts: 121
    I have been a GM man most of my life. The one ford that I had bought was a 1990 Ford Ranger that burst into flames in a parking lot, turned out the hole in the firewall for the main wiring harness was still rough metal and did not have the protective barrier on it. Ford then tried to blame me when my ins company went to them for a reimbursement. I swore that I would never buy Ford again. This vehicle is so beautifal and so fulll on new technology that I am considering it for my next car. I own a 1994 olds 09 with 600000 miles on it. But, I am going to need a replacement soon, stuff is beginning to fall apart. I can't wait to sit in it and take it for a test drive. I am really interested in the ecoboost motor.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    Wow! Good looking! This Taurus really has the chance to bring Ford back just like the original did in the late 1980's. The styling is all there, much better looking outside and in compared to most of it's competition. And especially better looking than both the Accord and Camry. Hope the interior materials are at least on par with those 2. And let's it hope it drives as good as it looks!
  • Both the Ford Taurus and Buick LaCrosse have done fantastic redesign this year. Can't wait to try them both out. I am comparing Taurus and LaCrosse A. Because there will be no Sable and B. The Current Chevy Impala is not close to this at all. Great job Ford!
  • With the new lower roof line, will the high "command seating" be gone, along with the easy entry and superior visibility?
  • I would expect the "Command Seating" will be retained. Entry and exit ease will not be a problem either.

    Visibility WILL be compromised. They've gone to a quasi-300C profile with a higher beltline. The look is sharp but outward visibility would have to be reduced to a degree. Only time behind the wheel will tell how much.

    This is a vast improvement over the current model any way you slice it.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,422
    The roofline is not significantly lower...like the Lincoln MKS, they restyled the same architecture to make it look less dumpy/dowdy. It is still a tall sedan.
  • asdf9asdf9 Posts: 26
    It's about time ford! Instead of your junk Ford Taurus X and the Ford 500, you should of built this first. Then you might not be in the financial disaster your facing now. Who ever designed it you should buy them a house. I like the look, the rear of the car I will have to get used too but it definitely is a start. But $25,995 MSRP? See that is why I bought a Subaru. My all wheel drive will still beat the car in gas mileage. I expect 18/28 for that Taurus.

    And when the Crown Victoria police interceptor is retired, expect to see this Taurus with big 18 inch black wheels, a lightbar and siren driving around perhaps your town. That big 20 cubic feet trunk, 202 inch length and Horsepower like the Crown Victoria screams, "FLEET SALES."
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,724
    Ford is just fine financially assuming the economy doesn't get any worse. Don't confuse Ford with GM and Chrysler.
  • samnoesamnoe Posts: 731
    Yeah, I agree. And if Ford would build this Taurus in the first place they would be in trouble anyway. I mean, everyone suffers these days, including the Japanese manufacturers. So don't blame Ford. "It's the economy, stupid!"

    I think that all Fords have too big steering wheels. And all American cars, for that matter, The Imports have better designed steering wheels, smaller, and better integrated controls than Ford's design.

    Also the Taurus, and many recent Ford designs, have too busy dashboards with too many similar buttons. Recent Honda/Acura's does the same and they get a lot of critics. Remember, the simpler the better. More dials than buttons. And the buttons/dials should be big! Take the Toyota Highlander for an example. How beautiful interior!

    I also don't like the fonts (typefaces) Ford is using on their buttons and especially their gauges. But that is my personal taste.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    But $25,995 MSRP? See that is why I bought a Subaru. My all wheel drive will still beat the car in gas mileage. I expect 18/28 for that Taurus.

    Those things have nothing to do with each other. Did you buy the Subaru because of the price, the all-wheel drive, or the gas mileage? There's no competitor for the Taurus from Subaru.

    Maybe it was happy hour? :blush:

    1.) The price is fully competitive with other full-size sedans on the market with this level of equipment.

    2.) The best Subaru on the market won't match the power/fuel economy balance that the Taurus has, thanks to its AWD. The closest economy comes from the Impreza AWD (20/27 vs. Taurus at 18/28) but is compact, and is down by 93 horsepower from the current Taurus.
  • richt5richt5 Posts: 43
    I like the looks of the new Taurus , but think its really over priced. I know its a big car , much bigger than the original Taurus. But the original car sold very well because of its value ( a lot of car for the money). Edmunds lists pricing starting at $32k and SHO version is said to start about $38k. There are too many really good proven cars-- entry level luxury type in this price range. A local Ford/Mercery dealer here in Florida is selling new crown vics/ Mercury Marquis for $17700 . A full sized car and better rear wheel drive. I know this is real old technology , but these cars go 200000 miles or more. What Im trying to show is how out of line the 2010 Taurus pricing is. Pricing at base of 23k- 25k would be more in line. I dont think Ford will sell many at its present offering. Too bad Its really a nice car. I almost think edmunds maybe wrong in its pricing.But they are usually right.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    What's out of line is your info. The 2010 Taurus will start at $25,995, last I checked.

    Edmunds got it wrong this time! :)
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,422
    The Taurus pricing structure is right in line with other large cars. It is a bargain compared to the Buick Lucerne for example, but it offers better, more updated tech and features. The original Taurus was what the Fusion is now, and Ford doesn't need two Fusions.

    People will be able in this market to pick up a well-equipped new Taurus for low to mid 20s. And the SHO is a bargain as well for any sedan with 365 hp. Makes me wonder why people would pay the extra for the Lincoln MKS.

    The Crown Vics (reliable as they may be) are so cheap because they are moving them out, because the tooling was paid for back in the dark ages, and because they are such old tech..solid rear axle, not particularly quiet, shuddery-juddery structure, inferior safety (no stability control, fewer airbags). Not to mention they are ugly and inefficient (huge overhangs with a relatively tight back seat), have huge seam gaps and cheapo interiors. On resale, they are worthless.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,724
    This does open the door for the MKS to move a little further upmarket, although I'm not sure what more they can do on the current platform.

    It also points out that you don't need a Mercury model in between the Ford and Lincoln vehicles.
  • People will be able in this market to pick up a well-equipped new Taurus for low to mid 20s. And the SHO is a bargain as well for any sedan with 365 hp. Makes me wonder why people would pay the extra for the Lincoln MKS.

    The SHO and Ecoboost MKS have some things in common but there are important differences, too. The SHO will be positioned as a sportier, high performance model with firmer suspension, small spoiler, and sportier interior than the Taurus Limited model. OTOH, the Ecoboost package in the MKS really adds nothing particularly sporty to the base MKS - other than a lot more power. You can get an optional "appearance" package on the Ecoboost MKS that adds some sporty doo-dads but otherwise it is more luxury biased rather than sports sedan.

    If I were in the market for just a base MKS, I would certainly have to give the Taurus Limited some consideration, though.
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Posts: 792
    Look at it this way: The Taurus is an MKS wiith a $15,000 discount because the Lincoln emblems are not present.

    The Taurus is a large vehicle, so it should be compared with other large vehicles (Lucerne, DTS, S-Class, 7-Series, Genesis, Avalon, LS, and so forth). People who do not need a large vehicle will save money and save gas with one of the numerous mid-sized vehicle choices (Fusion, Camry, Accord, 6, 5-Series, C-Class, Altima/Maxima, Malibu/G6/Aura/9-3, LaCrosse, CTS, Passat, and on and on).
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Posts: 468
    I think the pricing of the 2010 Taurus is appropriate. However, i am dismayed to see that they will put 45v tires on the Limited. that means the best ride and noise levels are on the SE and SEL where not all the desirable equipment is available. Kind of stupid. i would prefer the SEL because of the 55h series tires, but it has a one CD base player. If you want the Sony outfit, you must buy the unpleasant tires. I guess they figure you need a more powerful stereo to compensate for the increased road noise!!!
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,724
    Most dealers will swap them for you. You should wait and test drive both just to be safe - there might not be as much difference as you're expecting.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,676
    Taurus at the Atlanta Auto Show today...looks impressive, esp next to the 2009 Taurus, which I drove as a loaner car and was mildly impressed with it...the 2010 was roped off on a pedestal, we could look but not touch or sit...is there a direct LIncoln version of the 2010, or will the MKS continue to look like the 2009 Taurus???
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Um, the MKS is the version of the 2010 Taurus I believe.

    Sing with me! One of these things is not like the other...

    image
    image
    image
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,422
    The photos show that the MKS bears a lot more relationship with the 2010 Taurus than the 2009 Taurus. However, it is too bad that the proportions and shapes and lines of the MKS are not actually more like the 2010 Taurus. The MKS added to the front overhang and deleted some cabin space, and for what? It is not an outstanding design--though it is better than the 2009 Taurus/Montego, It is not as balanced and fresh as the 2010 Taurus. They were stuck with it, as it was far along in development, before Ford realized the depth of the trouble they were in. It is selling ok for what it is, and thank goodness Lincoln at least has this model to market now. Hopefully, more innovative stuff, like the Concept C (even if you hate it, it is a new direction and shows real creativity) is in the pipeline...cuz the MKS doesn't have any long-term staying power.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,724
    Yep - the only thing they had time to change on the MKS was the nose. I expect a mid cycle refresh to clean up the rest like they did on the Taurus. But I wouldn't expect it to look just like the Taurus body. In fact I'm sure it won't share ANY sheetmetal. Now when's the last time you could have predicted that about a Lincoln sharing a Ford platform?
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,422
    You have to go back to the Crown Vic and Town Car. The TC got its own wheelbase, body panels, interior...even a different windshield. About time Ford-Lincoln returns to that sort of differentiation. Good to see.
  • fdcapt2fdcapt2 Posts: 122
    :) I've been doing lots of research on the SHO, as well as the Limited. They seem to be well designed cars, and the interior is very nice. I'm having a tough time thinking about what I might miss on my '06 Passat V6. This car has everything, and then some. Prior to 2003, all my cars were either Ford or Mercury products. I really don't have many complaints on the VW, or the car before it, a '03 Acura TL. I always preached buy American, and now it looks like I might do just that, again. Anyone with some input, feel free to give me your thoughts. Thanks.....

    John
  • bobgwtwbobgwtw Posts: 187
    I understand your position. Tha last American car I owned was a 73 Pontiac Grand Am. Swore I'd never buy another Big 3 product after my many expensive problems with it; and the crappiest service I've ever experienced. There's been 15 new cars since that time, all Japanese; & they've all run 150 - 200,000 miles without a problem.

    That said, I'm looking forward to seriously evaluating the 10 Fusion & Taurus, Lincoln MKZ; & the New Buick Lacrosse - If GM is still around. Timing is right for me; the 06 Avalon is coming up on 150,000 in a couple of months & if any of these cars are as good as they appear to be I might just give the big 2 - forget Chrysler - another chance.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,422
    Why not buy American? The cars are just as good and the prices are often better.Sure, American cars were crappier in the 1970s (30 to 40 years ago...how is that relevant now?), and even into the 1980s and early 1990s. But there is no reason to believe you will have a better experience buyiing a Mazda6 over a Fusion or an ES350 over a 2010 LaCrosse. The 2010 Taurus should be a reliable winner as well.
  • kirby2010kirby2010 Posts: 136
    I am definitely looking forward to checking out the new SHO. I sold my '94 SHO in 2001 w/108K miles. I really liked that car. Unfortunately there was not much else around that was American made that would compare. So I bought a 2001 Audi A6 2.7T w/6-speed. I'm holding on to the Audi until I can drive the SHO. If its as good as the write-ups seem to suggest I'll buy American again.
  • bobgwtwbobgwtw Posts: 187
    That's exactly why I"m willing to give them a close look this time. I drive 40-50,000 miles a year; and a car is just another business expense to me. It has to be safe, dependable, comfortable, economical - which includes purchase price, operating expense & depreciation cost- as well as reasonably enjoyable to drive on all kinds of roads. Brand is immaterial to me; & in the last 30 years or so the foreign Mfrs. especially the Japanese, have simply done a better job of meeting my needs.
«13456717
Sign In or Register to comment.