2010 Ford Taurus



  • ronsmith38ronsmith38 Member Posts: 228
    I see the 2009 Taurus is no longer listed in the car lineup on the Ford Cars home page.
  • jlcjlc Member Posts: 30
    I am looking at both cars but can't make up my mind. I have driven both. I thought the Traus SEL had a firmer ride and more tire noise? The buick was an CX. I was impressed with the interior of both, but the Lacrosse seemed to have a roomier feel. Any other feed back would be appreciated.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    What tires were on the Taurus? The standard 235/55/18 or the optional 255/45/19.? The latter are stiffer and noisier. We have ordered a SEL with the standard tires. Drove a Limited with the 19" and found the ride too thumpy.
  • mevander1mevander1 Member Posts: 43
    The pricing on the SHO is too high in my opinion, as well as a decently equiped non SHO model. Ford had the chance for a home run here. The Taurus will depreciate vs top German models of smaller size.
  • jlcjlc Member Posts: 30
    It had the 235/55's. But the sales gal said they just got the car. Makes me wonder if anybody check the tire presures? Thanks for the infoe.
  • jlcjlc Member Posts: 30
    I agree with you on the pricing for the SHO and non SHO, BUT I think you maybe able to deal or, it will defienetly put it out of reach for a lot of folks and up against a lot of imports.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    A Taurus SEL with optional Leather, Sync (Single CD, but with USB who needs it? :)), 263hp and 18" Aluminum Wheels lists for $30,090, including Destination Charges.

    The most similar-in-price Avalon, what seems to be the benchmark here, that I could find on Toyota's site is an Avalon XL, cloth interior, 6CD, 16" Alloys. I'm in a 35--- zip code.

    Base $27,945
    Options $1,139
    Manuf, Delv, Proc & Hndlg $775
    Subtotal $29,859
    Dealer Fees $416
    Total $30,275

    Plus, you have to be seen driving the thing. The Avalon arguably has the better powertrain, but the Taurus has it all over the Avalon with style. Does the average driver of these two particular vehicles care which is quicker to 60 and gets better mileage (even though that is so close its anybody's game to me), or which looks better? Feel free to answer!

    Sorry, the pictures of the Avalon XL with the 16" wheels were tough to come by. These are the more expensive model's wheels.
  • mikemartinmikemartin Member Posts: 205
    I agree with you that the Avalon has a superior powertrain (especially motor) to the Taurus. I'd also argue that the Avalon has a superior ride, having driven both, and better fit and finish on the dash and other interior trim.

    Not only that, but the Hyundai Genesis, which has a base model option list that is way better than that of the Taurus, is a superior offering to the Taurus.

    If Ford thinks exterior sheet metal styling alone is going to trump quality and true refinement of the competitors, I think they've underestimated the intelligence of buyers in this segment.

    Also, the last gen Taurus actually has more interior room, a better ride, IMO, and the same motor and other important 'parts' as the "new" Taurus (both derived from the Volvo D3 platform) and is about 50% the price for a 18 month old, gently used one.
  • no_biasno_bias Member Posts: 1
    Kernick, what type of car do you drive? Why is 40k such a huge price tag to you? Have you actually taken an in person look at the SHO? I have. The Taurus is no longer "your grandmothers car." It's a real head turner. I usually research my next vehicle 3 to 6 months ahead of buying. I have driven this car. It was nicely put together. It has everything that I could want, except a heated steering wheel ( really cold, bad winters here). While researching vehicles with certain equipment the SHO easily filled the wish list. Nothing came close to filling the list at this price tag. If you have any bargaining skills to add to rebates, incentives, A-plan, etc., the vehicle drops below this price (up to 7,000). Most of the post I've read that down grade the SHO in comparison to other vehicles (mostly the foreign cars) don't consider what your getting dollar for dollar. Most of the foreign cars at the same price that out perform the SHO (in certain categories, NOT ALL) are stripped down. Start adding equipment and you will find that the price and weight goes up. This car does great in every category (interior quietness, space, comfort, style, speed, equipment, and price). Most cars lose that oomph after 80 mph. NOT THE SHO. I have driven this car at 70 mph, punched the gas and got to 120 mph in just a few seconds, before having to slow down due to traffic. I have no idea what the top speed of this car is. Always too much traffic during test drive times to find out. This year Ford has a vehicle in every category, to suit anyones taste or needs; I must say that each vehicle is also pretty sharp. I think you need to make a list of things you want in a car, and then go drive them. I think you will change your mind. I have tested a lot of cars, and the only car that came close to the SHO in most of the categories in the SAME price range was the Buick LaCrosse. But, you HAVE TO take the smaller, less powerful, engine (255 hp) to get AWD. Extremely disappointing in performance. I keep my options open down to the time of signing. If you know of a better vehicle in all those categories in the SAME price range please let me know. I would love to check it out.
  • mikemartinmikemartin Member Posts: 205
    "why is 40k such a huge price tag to you?"


    What universe do you live in where a bread and butter family sedan is anything but expensive at 40k?

    The 2010, completely redesigned Mercedes E-Class 350 can be had for 47k nicely equipped, and it's an outstanding car recalling MB solidity of the 80s, and there are plenty of cars as large and comfy as the Taurus for the low 20s.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The E350 only has 268 hp - why are you comparing it to a 365 hp Taurus SHO? The 263 HP Taurus starts at $27K and is still at least $10K cheaper than the E350 nicely equipped.

    For a true comparison you need to select the E550 4matic (AWD) and 382 hp. It STARTS at $60K.

    And I wouldn't be surprised if the Taurus was bigger than the E class to boot.

    Try comparing apples to apples next time.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    This is an enthusiasts magazine and the audience may be quite different than the standard car buyer. The nonSHO tauruses are pretty much a known item, carrying over most of the 2009 basics. The SHO is a totally new breed. I wonder how many people will hold back the first year to see the track record (resale value wise and repair wise) especially given the economy. The old saw about not buying a car in its first year of existence might see a slow start and then a gradual acceptance as the performance and reliability data come in. Granted it will take more than a year to set resale values. Hopefully there will be a significant change in the way tauruses have depreciated in the past. On the other hand, enthusiasts are willing to take the gamble given the very newness of this new powerful machine.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    NASCAR Mike was making light of the fact that $40K is a lot of money for most American sedan buyers. The comparison was not a direct one.

    Ford has a winner with the new Taurus but it is priced too high. Most nicely equipped offerings are $32K-$33K or about 10% above where they should be.

    We all know that someone who plunks down $32K today for a well equipped SEL will have a $22K car 6 months from now. The Asian and European makes will depreciate half that much in the same timeframe.

    I may be interested in a $19K 2010 Taurus with 10,000 miles on it next fall though.
    ;) They'll be plenty around for under $20K soon.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The new Taurus is a desirable car that's not being overproduced and isn't being dumped into rental fleets. You can't predict depreciation based on past vehicles.

    People who say the new Taurus is overpriced simply have no idea how much a new car costs or what the competition offers. The new Taurus isn't a bargain, but go compare it to imports of similar SIZE and features - it's priced competitively.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I agree on price. I spec'd out an Avalon XL with cloth and little 16" wheels. It was more expensive sticker wise a paddle-shift Taurus SEL with leather, Sync, and a popular option package. Wasn't rolling on funny looking tiny wheels either.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Exactly. I think some people just like to complain or simply haven't priced the competition lately.

    Or they want to buy one and can't.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    Right akirby - we have no idea how much a car costs.

    A used 2010 Toyota Avalon will be worth $27K next year and the comparable Ford Taurus will be worth $19K.

    Facts are facts. Your opinion that past depreciation doesn't predict future depreciation is what Detroit has been praying for for 25 years. It hasn't helped yet.
  • ronsmith38ronsmith38 Member Posts: 228
    A used 2010 Toyota Avalon will be worth $27K next year and the comparable Ford Taurus will be worth $19K
    May be true, but not many of us buy a car one year and get rid of it the next. For those of us who keep a car for eight or ten years the depreciation is of little concern.
    In fact I pay a property tax annually on the value of my vehicles. So, in this case, faster depreciation may be a plus.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The point you're totally missing (on purpose?) is that Ford has changed the things that caused poor resale value in the past. Reliability is no longer an issue. They're no longer overproducing and putting huge rebates on the hood of new cars or dumping cars into rental fleets.

    I don't know what the resale value will be on a 2010 Taurus - and neither do you. We'll just have to wait and see.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    I won't argue with you on re-sale value. Of course for people who keep their cars 10 years, re-sale value is no concern.

    Ford put a decent body on and interior in the 2010 Taurus. Everything "under the skin" is the same as 2009. Used 2009 Ford Taurus' with 15,000 miles on the clock are available for half of sticker price today. I'm glad I didn't buy one for $34K last year when I can get one today for $17K. ;)

    I've taken a bath on used Ford's I've traded in. Used Honda's were a much better story.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    And the 2009 models were boring and had big discounts to move them. If you parked a 2009 and 2010 side by side only a handfull of automotive enthusiasts would know they used the same platform. They're totally different, inside and out. Even the front clip was modified to handle the SHO engine output.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    Not everything under the skin is exactly the same. The suspension has been improved, the engine made more responsive, the transmission programming improved, much more sound insulation, stiffining and reinforcing of the body. This is called refinement. I hate road noise and Hondas have plenty of that. Besides, the new Taurus makes a visual impact which i like. Nobody even notices another boring Honda with good resale value.
  • Resale value is overblown. You have to compare what you actually paid when you bought the car (not "sticker") to what you get when you sell it. Yes, Hondas generally command higher resale, but also usually cost more when first bought (commanding prices closer to sticker). When you compare a five year old Ford to a five year old Toyota, the Ford buyer is still often money ahead because of the huge discounts on the front end. If Ford can command prices closer to list on the 2010 Taurus, then resale will be higher as well. If discounts and rebates grow, resale will drop. It is more or less supply and demand.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    To each his own, but don't get me wrong. The '10 Taurus is a good car - no question there. I just wish they would price a well-equipped Limited under $30K and not $35K where Lexus lurks with their ES350.

    I understand Ford is trying to take the Taurus up-market but they went a bit too far. At the high end they are very close to Lincoln type pricing.

    Maybe that's their goal. Eliminate Merc.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The plan is to move Ford upmarket and then move Lincoln even further upmarket. But the Lincoln piece is still under development, so there's more overlap now between the Taurus and MKS than Ford intends long term. It's a temporary situation.

    The Taurus Limited is a MUCH bigger car than the ES350 and has more features. Why shouldn't it be priced the same? What does the Lexus have that makes it worth $5K more than a Taurus Limited?

    I'm so sick and tired of people saying that the Taurus is overpriced just because it's a Ford. Look at the car and not the badge.
  • colloquorcolloquor Member Posts: 482
    The 3.5L EcoBoost V6 is a nice, and most highly likely, reliable engine. But, smooth it is not, compared to many of the Asian V6 counterparts. When one spends $30K to $40K on a car, you expect a refined and smooth engine. This is where the Honda and Toyota V6 engines shine, and even the Hyundai 3.8L V6 is a smooth one, albeit less refined than either the Honda or Toyota. The 3.5L EcoBoost has a certain harsh nature through the full RPM range that the others' do not, and yes, I've driven all of the aforementioned vehicle/engine combos. And, I won't even discuss the refined and smooth nature of the BMW I6 engine.

    I really wish Ford the best on this, as compared to Chrysler and GM, they're on a roll with good products in each market segment.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    Look at the car and not the badge.


    Bingo! That Blue Oval is a tough sell when you move up-market. For decades Ford has been an entry level brand. That image will take time to change.

    The new Fusion is a better buy than than the new Taurus. For $22K I can get an I4 Fusion with the options I want. Hard to justify a Taurus from my end but many others may have more means than myself. ;)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Isn't Toyota also an "entry level" brand? Have you priced an Avalon lately? That is the Taurus' direct competition, not the ES350.

    The Avalon STARTS at $28,695. A fully loaded FWD model is $38,985.

    The Taurus starts at $25,995. A fully loaded FWD model is $38,580.

    Please explain to me how the Taurus is overpriced when it's cheaper and better than the Avalon?
  • mikemartinmikemartin Member Posts: 205
    The 2010 Taurus is too expensive, period.

    Looks like the Ford salespeople and PR people have taken notice of this thread.

    Instead of arguing, just pile on that incentive cash, nice and deep, like you know you're going to have to. ;)
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    People aren't likely to spend around $40K on any Ford or Chevy sedan, probably not an an Accord or Camry either. That's too close to Audi, Acura and Lexus pricing which carries a better prestige image and better depreciation. In fact, luxury sales are down so there are some great deals on them right now. Good timing Ford!

    Ford always messes up initial pricing (maybe too big of egos in Dearborn) and ends up having to incentivize heavily which screws over the initial buyers. Wait 6 months on this one and you'll probably save a bundle. Someday Ford may learn how to market. They should be aggresively pricing these new vehicles like the new GM is doing against the import brand competition. Get people into the dealerships and cars first, then down the road they can price more closely.

    I hope Detroit has improved on turbocharging. I remember Mopar getting into this in the 80's I believe. I had a few rentals with it and it sucked. Driving was like spooling up a jet engine but without the guts. Way too much lag time and too abrupt when it did kick in.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    $1,000 Drive the Difference Retail Bonus Customer Cash available on select 2010 models. Offer can be applied toward purchase amount or can be paid to the customer towards covering up to 3 months payments.


    FoMoCo is already offering $1,000 off the new Taurus in my area. By winter will it be $2,000? $3,000 off in the spring of 2010?

    I believe the 2010 actual transaction prices for the Taurus will be 10% under sticker to get some of this BIG iron moved.

    I congratulate Ford on going it alone (sans TARP funding) and they deserve a shot at our business. Three years ago when Ford was finalizing the design of this vehicle, it's weight was not a big concern. It is now. A base dry weight of over 4,000 pounds. An SHO at almost 4,400 pounds. 17 city mpg doesn't cut it. The car is 10% too heavy and 10% too expensive.

    A new Avalon is on the horizon. If Ford can't get some people to switch to the Blue Oval quickly, the new Taurus will not turn the tide.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Let me repeat since some of you apparently can't read:

    The Avalon STARTS at $28,695. A fully loaded FWD model is $38,985.

    The Taurus starts at $25,995. A fully loaded FWD model is $38,580.

    Please provide examples of similar and similarly equipped vehicles that are cheaper.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    ...and Toyota doesn't really move a lot of Avalon sales either. Buick already tried moving a large car in this price range, the Lucerne and it was a bust. I think Ford overpriced the new Lincoln MKS based on the Taurus as well.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    Yes - I learned to read writing my thesis at Yale.

    Yes - Clearly Ford is giving away the Taurus. It's worth thousands more and most people would gladly pay $40K to drive it.

    Yes - The Chevy Impala is much cheaper, offers full-size room and gets better mileage.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    You make a good point, fair or not, more people will probably cross shop the Taurus with the Impala rather than Avalon, so it will be hard to get more than a few grand extra over a Fusion or similar car.

    I think Taurus has two issues:

    1.From a marketing perspective, it doesn't really give you that much more than a mid sized car. A little extra "usable" interior space and a large trunk. For $35K + you can get more space all around in a Highlander or similar crossover and similar mileage. They are going to have to find a way to sell well equiped Taurus in the mid to high twenties, and that likely mean lots of incentives and deals down the road.

    2. From a production and accounting standpoint you can't really compare it to Avalon. That car is just a modified (stretched) Camry made on the same production lines and plant, so Toyota doesn't need volume, just a few people that want a bit more car than a Camry and are willing to pay dearly for that. However, the Taurus (and sister MKS) have a dedicated plant and don't share much with other Fords, so they need more volume to cover the much higher fixed costs involved. They are not likely to get a big price premium, so again, look for lots of incentives and marketing offers down the road.

    The sad thing is that Ford is probably scaring off potential buyers when the Taurus reviews all talk about pricing in the 30's. That's just too high for most family car shoppers when you see ads for cars like the Camry LE at under $20K, and they are well equipped too. When you get over $30K most families start looking at a CUV unfortunately and I think that's why Lucerne was a flop.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    However, the Taurus (and sister MKS) have a dedicated plant and don't share much with other Fords, so they need more volume to cover the much higher fixed costs involved.

    Wow - so much misinformation.

    The Taurus and MKS share the D3 platform with the Ford Flex, Lincoln MKT and upcoming 2011 Ford Explorer. That is 5 vehicles, one plant. And the platform originally came from Volvo, so if there is any economy of scale/reuse in the platform the advantage goes to the Taurus.

    You can get a nicely equipped Taurus for around $27K so stop throwing around the $40K figure.

    It also has a lot of luxury features that the others do not - adaptive cruise, massaging seats, etc.

    As for sales, we'll just have to wait and see, won't we?
  • freezedfreezed Member Posts: 14
    Depends what you call "nicely equipped". Searched the largest 2 local dealers closest to me. I think an SEL w/ SYNC and NAV is what I would call "nicely equipped". Cheapest I found is $32,845. Wow. That's a lot of money for a Taurus. For 60 months, 10% down, 6% you are looking around $550 a month payment. Maybe they are hoping people will come on the lot looking at the Taurus and finding that the Fusion is actually more bang/buck. I think this car in the same problem as the Flex. Good car, good styling, nice equipment, solidly made. Too expensive for most people who would actually consider the Blue Oval brand.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    We have an awd SEL on the train from Chicago. It has leather and the features we consider important. Cost? $29, 700 and 0% financing. And we not paying for things we don't want.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    We have an awd SEL on the train from Chicago. It has leather and the features we consider important. Cost? $29, 700 and 0% financing. And we not paying for things we don't want.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    I am a Sable (Taurus) owner who considers my 2000 Sable Premium (all needed accessories including sunroof, power everything, climate control, 27 mpg average) to have been a great value @20K. Last year 2009 top of the line Sables were available (no Nav, no sync, no massaging chairs, no electronic nannies,...) after discounts and specials at about 25K if you know how to haggle.
    It was already large enough to carry 5 adults comfortably with a huge trunk.
    Why does the new Taurus cost $5K more. I didn't need a bigger, heavier car. 18" or 19 inch wheels are a costly addition (tires=>$200 each) which give a ropugher ride. I don't care about sync and massages and other stupid accessories (I'm over sixty y.o. and find the radio sufficient).
    I am looking at the 2010 Subaru Legacy and find it fits better with my needs and has AWD thrown in. For 25K I can get a nicley equipped one (to my taste). I regard the value of my Sable to be exceptional. At present pricing I do not consider the Taurus to be a value. It may be cost competitive with other large cars but the taurus used to be a midsixed bargain. Now it is a large car priced like many other large cars.
    I would [predict that many former Taurus/Sable owners are going to be looking at the Fusion (in house) and at lots of other larger midsized alternatives. The taurus has become Ford's avalon or Ford's buick. Why the obsession with larger size and so many gadgets the car weighs 4200#?
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    The Taurus and MKS share the D3 platform with the Ford Flex, Lincoln MKT and upcoming 2011 Ford Explorer. That is 5 vehicles, one plant. And the platform originally came from Volvo, so if there is any economy of scale/reuse in the platform the advantage goes to the Taurus

    All of those cars together probably don't have the volume of Camry and its offshoots Venza and Avalon.

    You can get a nicely equipped Taurus for around $27K so stop throwing around the $40K figure

    I've been talking 30's not $40K. 40K is more like the SHO which is a low volume car.

    I'm not putting down Ford products, just pointing to their apparent ineptitude at initial marketing and pricing. Seems to me they went through this same episode with the Edge when it first came out. I think Ford is making good progress on product, but marketing and pricing still lags. Their other challenge is the UAW/CAW. If they don't get the same concessions as GM, and adding the BK advantages GM got, I can see Studebaker all over again down the road. The union killed that company. Shorter term though, Ford looks strong.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    Granted. The Taurus is a big car- perhaps too big to be a volume seller like the Fusion. But it goes down the freeway better than any comparably priced sedan. i chose it because I like its looks, color (cinnamon metallic) , comfort, quiet, and general refinement. It's no hot rod and a Fusion is certainly more agile, but not nearly as good for a trip, In a few years, large, heavy cars like the Taurus will be gone. In the meantime, I will polish mine and enjoy it.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    So basically everyone is complaining that they can't buy a new Taurus for the same rock bottom, huge rebate, fleet queen pricing as the 2005 Taurus.

    In other words, you're looking for a bargain and Taurus ain't it. Too bad. Ford won't get profitable giving away cars. If you want a bargain go buy a Kia.

    The Taurus looks to be the best car Ford has produced in a long time. It's not perfect but the complaints are minor at best. It is priced in line with similar vehicles from other manufacturers - period. They don't need to sell 200K a year either. Ford would rather have 4 vehicles on shared platforms that sell 100K than one that sells 400K. That's what got them into this mess - relying on one or two high volume models and ignoring the rest.

    I'm sure Ford would rather sell 50K Tauri at a small profit than 200K at a loss.
  • etcarrolletcarroll Member Posts: 87
    Mods -

    Can the SHO get its own thread, it would clear up some confusion in this thread. I don't think some folks understand when you throw out the $40k figure you're talking the SHO variation of the Taurus.

    Then, you get trolls who intentionally blur the difference between reg. Taurus and SHO version.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    Please explain to me how the Taurus is overpriced when it's cheaper and better than the Avalon?
    that's an easy one - despite that the current Av is coming up on 5 years old, there is still no Ford product that is even in the same state as the Av, never mind the same zip code. It all starts under the hood and goes from there. Your 'better' contention is typical Ford fanboy PR garbage. The 2010 Taurus is a nicely restyled 09 Taurus (which couldn't have been any worse) with nothing more than a crappy substandard engine that they had to turbo so that they could put too many HP where it doesn't belong..
    Other than that, they're getting better, I suppose. Not difficult when you've been down so long .... ;)
  • puffin1puffin1 Member Posts: 276
    27 k for a Taurus. I wouldn't spend that. You can buy a Camray SE V6 at that price. :shades: No Fix Or Repair Daily for me.
    Ford is doing well in Europe,but won't send their best cars over here. :lemon:
  • puffin1puffin1 Member Posts: 276
    thesis, anti thesis, equal synthesis,but you are a :shades: under grad wanting to pay 40 k for a ford
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    ...is that I might well be driving a 2010 Taurus soon. I like the car. It's roomy, attractive and has more than adequate power.

    The rarefied air that Ford is attempting to broach in one fell swoop is very tough in today's market. The game plan looked pretty good two years ago. Today it is a nearly impossible sell in most of the U.S. and that's not likely to change in the next 6 to 12 months.

    There are Ford dealerships near me with Taurus Limiteds priced at $36K-$37K and SHOs at $42K-$43K. That is a sedan league Ford has NEVER been in and they're trying to get in under the worst possible economic conditions.

    Personal preference notwithstanding - a very nice SEL is available for $28K but that's the low end of the range. Most new Taurus models fall between $30K-$34K MSRP as they sit today. The car may well be worth it but times are tough and Ford has not proven itself in this price range.

    That said, I do expect to be able to locate a low mileage, used SEL next fall for $21K-$22K. At that price I'll be buying.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    That's a good price bruneau - especially with Leather and AWD! Stickers at $31,240 so you're getting $1,500 off sticker AND 0%; you're really buying the car for about $27,000.

    Don't give up on the Taurus people! Deals like bruneau's will be available!
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    17 city mpg doesn't cut it.

    Does it cut it in the Mazda 6? Or the even smaller Chevy Malibu? Its down 2 mpg on the best of the midsize cometition, yet offers more space and a WHOLE lot more power, not to mention AWD. Not nitpicking here, but let's get a little more serious. Both of those are excellent choices, are an entire step down in "class" yet get similar mileage.
Sign In or Register to comment.