Howdy, Stranger!

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

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

2010 Ford Taurus



  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    I was a bit of a smart-aleck in my original post to you so I will try to be more constructive.

    You might want to try reclining the seatback a bit. While the head restraints only go up and down, you might find them less obtrusive with the seat reclined a bit. The first time I experienced this design was in a rental Flex. For about 1/2 hour I hated them. As I got more used to them, I found them extremely comfortable and secure feeling.

    We have a 2008 Taurus with the older generation head restraints and a 2010 MKS with the new design. My wife and I both strongly prefer the new design. As Gregg mentioned, I sometimes rest my head against the restraint while driving and find it quite comfortable.

    As for mileage, both our FWD Taurus and AWD MKS easily meet or exceed the EPA ratings - particularly on the highway. My commute is a combination of country roads, freeways and city. The Taurus averages around 23-24 under those conditions and the MKS is around 22. Pure highway cruising with the Taurus is in the high 20s or even 30 and the MKS is in the mid 20s, depending on wind, traffic and speed. I see no reason why your Taurus mileage wouldn't be in that ballpark.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Another note on mileage: most companies (unlike Suzuki) average out the mileage obtained with the various wheel sizes offered on any model. Car and Driver did a test using the same wheels (but in different sizes (15" to 19")--and same brand of tires but in progressively lower profiles to fit the bigger rims--on a VW Golf, and found a significant drop in mpg with the larger rims. Also, acceleration is slightly slower with the bigger wheels as well. People don't realize how much heavier a 20" wheel is than even a 17" or 18". People are buying the big wheels for looks, but there are more penalties associated with them than just the high replacement cost (and harsher ride and greater road noise).
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    edited April 2010
    Also make sure you reset the computer MPG.

    The headrests are the result of a new whiplash protection requirement and all new vehicles have similar ones although Ford's seem to be more aggressive (and safer). You have to recline the seats and adjust them up a bit and they're not so bad.
  • ronsmith38ronsmith38 Posts: 228
    Totally agree with resetting the mpg computer. Suppose one has driven 1000 miles without resetting, and is showing 20 mpg, then drives another 100 miles getting 25 mpg. The mpg computer will show about 20.4 mpg in this case. {1000 mi/20 mpg = 50 gal. gas used. 100 mi/25 mpg = 4 gal gas used. (1000+100)/(50+4) = 20.37 mpg}
    So always reset the computer prior to measuring mpg.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    I was playing around with my head restraints last night and realized what many of you already have pointed out.

    If you raise the head restraint, there is more clearance between them and your head. Since they slope forward at the top, people who are uncomfortable might want to raise them up so the top of the restaint is above your head.

    I still prefer them as low as they go with my head just brushing the restraint but, clearly, others may differ.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    Anyone who is used to driving in an upright position and/or resting their head back on the head restraint will have problems if they don't adjust the seatback to recline more.

    The one in the Edge bothered me at first, especially on long trips. But I just drove almost 4 hours from Pigeon Forge, TN back to Atlanta with no problems.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Posts: 468
    I did what others are suggesting: recline the back a little and raise the headrests a little. I have no problems that way. As for mileage- reset the mileage computer, find some freeway of at least 30 miles and set your cruise to 65. If you cannot achieve 28-9 mpg under those conditions, something is wrong. Our awd sel is heavier than yours and we get that mileage. Also, the final gear ratio. varies from 2.77 to 3.39 depending on model. Logic indicates this will have an effect on mileage.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,703
    I don't own a Taurus, but I can tell you that I have sat in numerous cars where the headrest is snug up against my head and I like the support, yet my wife sits in the same seat and feels that the headrest is pushing her chin into her chest...tilting the seatback, for her, only causes lower back strain because the seat angle is now uncomfortable...but she knows she doesn't like the headrest in about 10 seconds...
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Posts: 468
    The brakes on my 2010 Taurus feel mushy and the pedal goes down more than I am used compared to other vehicles, like my Freestyle which has excellent feel. My dealer says all is normal. What do other owners think? I will appreciate your feedback.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    Yes, it's normal and I've heard the same thing about the Freestyle brakes. Ford brakes are usually a bit mushy but it doesn't affect performance at all. Switching to stainless steel brake lines can help.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,703
    odd because when I had a 1965 Mustang (yeah, LONG time ago) with one of the few with front disc brakes, it had the best brakes on any vehicle I have ever owned...there was about 1/8 inch of play in the pedal, no power brakes, but those discs grabbed immediately and stopped on a dime...I would just rest the ball of my foot on the pedal and come to a stop...and the pedal was rock solid once contact was made...they don't make them like that anymore, but I loved those brakes...
  • podpod Posts: 176
    Does anyone know or have a source for the month-by-month and year-to-date sales figures on the 2010 Taurus? I haven't been able to find a Ford breakdown by model list. Thank you.
  • freezedfreezed Posts: 14
    A quick google search reveals that sales figures for FMC can be found at

    Hope this helps!
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 11,077
    A reporter for a major newspaper is looking for a new Taurus buyer who used to own a Lincoln vehicle. If you just purchased a new Ford Taurus, please send your daytime phone number to [email protected] by June 14.

    Chintan Talati
    Corporate Communications


    Need help navigating? [email protected] - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • podpod Posts: 176
    Thanks for the citation, For anyone interested YTD Taurus sales are double that of last year: roughly 30,000 vs. 15,000. I would say that is a very successful launch of the new model.
  • dwightexdwightex Posts: 19
    I sit on a foam pad because of this problem and the fact that the seat is contoured in an unusual way. I am 5'9". With the foam pad, no back problems and increased visibility. My wife thinks that I look like a dork.
  • wjtinatlwjtinatl Posts: 50
    Just spent 200 miles from San Francisco to Reno in a 2010 Taurus Limited, courtesy of National Rent a Car. Great room, decent power, fuel economy (24.5 up the Sierra's) and a huge trunk. But the ride is very choppy and every ripple comes through. I'm guessing the Limited's 19" Goodyear RS-A's are the culprit but would like to hear from some SEL owners with the standard 18's. I really want to like this car but found the ride inferior to a Fusion SEL with the 18's it comes with. I'd imagine the SHO with 20's would be worse. Any input from SEL owners?
  • jlcjlc Posts: 30
    Just completed a 3100 mile trip in Taurus Limited. Average speed 70 mph. Average mpg 27. Ride very comfortable and I make sure tire pressure is 32 psi as recommended, also no head restraint problem.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Posts: 468
    I have a AWD SEL with the 235/55/18 tires. I gave up some chrome and features on the Limited because I found its ride too thumpy. The SEL rides better and the Michelin tires are a little quieter than the Goodyear. However, there is still a little choppiness in the ride which seems to have improved now that I have miles on the car. Also, I lowered the tire pressure to 30 from 32. The sacrifice in mileage is negligible and no handling problems. But the ride is a lot more civilized. Most recommended tire pressures these days have more to do with small increases in mpg than anything else. Also, I have added some chrome pieces to my SEL and it looks great and is unique.
  • berriberri Posts: 9,931
    Regardless of which model, the Taurus is a bit sportier suspension geared more toward handling. If you want a quiet, soft ride a La Crosse or Avalon may be a better choice. If you don't mind a bit firmer ride for better handling then go with an 18" Taurus. All 3 of these are nice rides really.
  • beer4704beer4704 Posts: 46
    Quick question, please. does anyone know if you can can get Navi on SEL? Or do you have to get Limited version?
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    If you want a Limited with Nav but want the 18 inch wheels, you could see if the dealer would be willing to swap the wheels/tires with an SEL. Of course, you would be giving up the chrome clad wheels that are standard on the Limited.

    As others have mentioned, the 2010 Taurus is intentionally firmer than the 2008s and 2009s - also a bit firmer than the LaCross or Avalon. Having said that, the Goodyear RS-As have always seemed like an odd choice to me. They are a bit harsher and noisier than I would like on a car of this type.
  • c2c35c2c35 Posts: 37
    I've read allot of these messages that everyone has written. Is anyone happy overall with there taurus? Did everybody forget how to have fun due to all of the years of being forced to dive generic cars that had to sacrifice power and style for a small forien jobbie to save on gas. I'll tell ya what I had an 05' 500 ltd awd that i loved but unfortunately got in a bad accident in. That car actually saved my life w/o a scratch! It was unreal! The 2010 taurus SEL that I bought is absoultly unreal! I do have the 19" front wheel drive, paddle shifters wit, leather with the option red paint w/ all the toys (exept nav) I wanted an sports car but at the same time a family car. To be honest I do miss the awd but i'm having a ball with this car! If anyone feels the same please let me know!!! It's about time that Ford gives us this absolutly fun toy!

  • bruneau1bruneau1 Posts: 468
    We are very happy with our SEL. It was a bargain and is extremely good looking and have received many compliments, even from very young people. The mileage is better than the quoted numbers. I use Mequire's Ultimate Detailer and it never leaves the garage unless it looks perfect. Back to the tire issue. it is ironic and stupid on Ford's part to give the base model the best ride and noise levels. When one pays more, one should get better not just more stuff.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Ford will apparently never figure out the appeal of the original Taurus. They certainly have improved the looks and gotten it a bit more power--since it went through its "500" iteration. Still, it is too damn heavy and what is the deal with wheelbase to length that makes for these truly long overhangs? Don't get me wrong, I think it is a good car. But it is not yet a standout. Unless you get the Ecoboost, the standard engine combined with the fat body, makes it the slowest amongst the competition. And even though Ford has made great strides with NVH (yeah!), it is still not anywhere near the quietest, smoothest car in its class. What it really does have going in spades is quality. I give Ford a lot of credit for rising to the top of those ratings.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    Slowest among the competition? Please elaborate.

    As for the overhangs, etc. I think that's the limitations of the D3 platform. Should be fixed for good with the next gen D4. Some suggest the CD3 platform will be stretched to replace the D3.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    I will take the risk of getting some disagreement from owners of the 2010 Taurus - and Allen.

    The 2008 and 2009 "500" looking Taurus' were homely as h*ll, and most will agree on that. However, they had more room inside, were lighter and quicker than the 2010, and they had a more compliant ride. Yes, the 2010 looks better and has better interior materials but I do not like what was lost with the 2010.

    As for looks, I can't quite come to grips with the crease in the rear fender, the busy "C" pillar, and the blocky rear end. Frankly, I think the Chrysler 300 does "blocky" a lot better with more cohesion and, of course, a better length to wheelbase ratio. The Buick LaCrosse has some fussy details, too, like the stupid chrome blips on the hood and the sweepy line down the side but overall I find the looks of the Buick far more compelling than the Taurus.

    Regarding smoothness and quietness: While the Taurus is a bit firmer than some, I think it is at or near the top of its price class in terms of a quiet ride - particularly an SEL with the 18" tires. The fleet queens Impala, 300 and Charger do not come close in the NVH department.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    No disagreement from me except on the looks, which I really like. I think they purposely went a little overboard in an attempt to distance the 2010 from the old model.

    It will be interesting to see what the new platform brings.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    The 2008-9 Taurus isn't bad looking, but against a 2010 Taurus it happens to look incredibly dated, inside and out. Be that as it may, it was a screaming deal when they sold for those two years and are a fantastic cruiser still.
Sign In or Register to comment.