2010 Ford Taurus



  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Actually, a car can be excellent in reliability but not be "recommended" by CR for other reasons (lousy acceleration, lacking certain safety equipment, etc).
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Most Ford vehicles have brakes that feel slightly mushy. Doesn't affect stopping power, just feel. Switching to stainless steel brake lines can help. I notice it but it doesn't bother me.
  • keithm1keithm1 Member Posts: 22
    I purchased my SHO about a month ago. So far it's worked fine. I traded an '08 Sable. The Taurus has a much firmer suspension(SHO)It's much faster, with actually better mileage.You do need to use premium gas to get the "full" performance. The Sable did have better rear seat room, probably due to the higher roof line. The "Blis" warning system works fine, though I think if the light flashed it would get your attention better, especially in bright light. The Adaptive Cruise is great. It matches the car in front of you. Slows you down, then speeds you back up. There are 2 issues I've really seen. One is the headrests..They pretty much touch the back of your head. My partner didn't like it at first, but is now used to it. There have been complaints from some reviewers about it. Give yourself a little time. You get used to it pretty quick, it's really not that bad. The other is the lower seat back. I found it protruded somewhat into my lower back. Playing with the lumbar control seems to have cured that problem. I will say that after testing several cars.. I was down to the Pontiac G8 GXP,Cadillac CTS(premium) & the SHO. The CTS seats were without a doubt the most comfortable I ever sat in. I really like firm seats & these definately were "firm". The GXP had the performance I truely wanted.
    The Pontiac G8 GXP was my real choice, however I couldn't find any that weren't used as drag racers by "coked" out sales managers. Trust me I couldn't find any within 300 miles of me(New Hampshire)That had less than 5500K on them. It's true, the sales managers got them as their "own" demos & beat the crap out of them! If there had been any with low mileage(less than 500)The GXP would have been my final choice. I guess I could have done without all the "techno" goodies or the 25+ highway mph of the Taurus, but I think overall I made a damn good choice getting the SHO. It really gets compliments. People don't seem to know what it is!I guess there really ARE a lot of people out there who don't read auto magazines! :)
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    I did see my first 2010 Taurus today, the only one at a ford dealership. It was weekend hours so no oportunity to sit in or drive. Initial impressions: very much more modern sheetmetal styling, not nearly as big as expected when I stood next to it, the rear end really comes up very high. Couldn't tell much about the interior but concerned that the "flowing center console" might crimp the space for the driver's R leg/foot. The console widens as it comes back and there doesn't seem much room for the R leg to drift to the right when using cruise control or at rest. Is this a problem for 2010 owners? Overall much improved car. Sticker was something in the 34K range which is over my head. I am thinking of subsidizing it by renting out space in the trunk to a tribe of gypsies.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    We have had our SEL awd for about two months. It'd cinnamon metallic with light stone interior. Everyone who has seen it is impressed. We avoided the 255/45/19 tires and have a better ride, but had to give up some items, but nothing important.It is a wonderful highway cruiser and gets better mileage than expected. As far as seating room in the front, it is true that the console is big. But unless you are huge or really fat, there shouldn't be a problem. We also did not order a sunroof and enjoy the head room. The Sync lady came on last night while driving and asking me if I wanted weather, turn-by-turn directions, or vehicle health report or cancel. Since I haven't set up Sync yet, I said cancel. The best value of the Taurus line is the SEL. Get leather and Sync with back up warning, and you have a nicely equipped vehicle at a decent price. We paid $28,700 with Costco pricing, early order rebate, standard rebate, and 0% financing for 36 months. What a deal for a sweet car.
  • surrfurtomsurrfurtom Member Posts: 122
    One of the best ideas I ever got from my father-in-law was adding those stick on 2" parabolic mirrors to my R/L outside door mirrors. Once you get used to them you feel handicapped when you drive a car without them when it comes to blind spots. One glance tells you if there is anything in your blind spot. They help in parallel parking too because you can easily see the curb distance without adjusting mirrors. About $3 for two.
  • Or adjust your side mirrors so that you have no blind spot. There is no need to see the side of your own car when you look in the side mirror. What you need to see is the other car and other lane.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Try explaining that to the "modders" that went nuts and retro-fitted the new BLIS mirrors to their pre-2010 Edges. I [half] joked that my Edge didn't have any blind spots because I adjust my mirrors correctly and I always glance over my shoulder before changing lanes. They were trying to justify the mod claiming it was for safety instead of just installing a neat toy. To hear some of them talk it's a wonder I make it home without crashing because I don't have aftermarket HIDs and BLIS mirrors. Of course it's easy for me to recognize rationalization because I was a master at it for a long time.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Or adjust your side mirrors so that you have no blind spot. There is no need to see the side of your own car when you look in the side mirror. What you need to see is the other car and other lane.

    I've found in more than one car (my own daily commuter, for one) that the mirrors don't adjust far enough "out" for me to not see any of the car. I'm 6'5" and sit upright, but with the seat all the way back.
  • Ok, got me there.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Well, I'm not trying to be snide at all - its just something that vertical overachievers notice from time to time. :)

    Overall, I agree with your argument. In my '06 Accord, I have no problem; its mirror range is plenty broad enough. The only two cars I've driven (out of probably 20 in my life) that I couldn't adjust perfectly were my '96 Accord sedan and my girlfriend's old Saturn SC1.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    I have been an occasional poster in this forum largely because I am very satisfied with my 2000 Sable and figured to stay with a good thing. My posts, however, have lamented: (1) weight, (2) gadgetry, (3) cost and (4) fuel economy of the 2010 non-SHO taurus. Rebuttals have been civilized and credible. I finally realized that I was looking in the wrong place. I am still stuck on the notion of a midsized sedan which represents good value. The larger taurus is neither midsized nor a good value for me. My best alternative so far (don't laugh too loud) is the Mazda 3i series. Comparing the base 3i to the base SE (2010 models) the mazda is about $8500 less, about 1000 pounds less, has a thrifty 4 cylinder engine which still gets to 60 only one second behind the SE, has a five speed auto which can be manually shifted (no paddles, a shifter!), and sports FE of 25/33. The nice thing about the 3i series is that you can effectively choose a minimalist base model or gussie it up with all the options. The more features, the wider the spread between the Taurus and the Mazda cost-wise.
    Even though it is listed as a compact, the interior dimensions are not hugely different.
    I know the comparison will be panned as apples and oranges and I admit they are different animals. The Mazda 3 series is what the pre-2008 Tauruses and Sables were mid-sized, great value, working-man's car for about $20K. Actually the base 3I is in the 18K range. They are universally described as being more athletic and fun to drive than the non-SHO Taurus. I really don't care that much about performance outside the 0-75 mph range or electronic wizardry so I have redirected my gaze, downward and seem to have found a better match.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    You should take a look at the new Focus which I think is debuting next year. It's based on the Euro focus and should get better fuel mileage than the 3i (just a guess based on recent performance) and look a lot better, too.
  • poodog13poodog13 Member Posts: 320
    I'd buy the Mazda6 as a mid-size, but the Mazda3 is a roller skate (tiny). I recommended it as an option to my single, 20-something sister in law a year ago only to actually get in the thing and realize that at 5'9'', it was far to small for her.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    I would have thought that the 3i would be cramped given that the 3i is listed as a "compact" car, not even a midsized. However (go figure) the 3i matches the 2010 Taurus ( categorized as a large car) in front headroom and legroom and in rear headroom.
    The Taurus has much more shoulder room (3" difference) but I wonder how the flowing center console crimps the drivers body position to the left effectively reducing the shoulder room advantage.
    Isn't it startling how close the interior dimensions of a compact and large can converge?
    Re: the ford focus. I did consider that but drum rear brakes, no tele/tilt/, lesser fuel economy, generally agreed that focus has less "feel and performance", and its lame duck status (to be discontiued after 2010) give me pause.
  • Why wouldn't you consider the Fusion? The Volkswagen CC 4 cylinder? The Suzuki Kizashi? Subaru Legacy? Even the 4 cylinder 2010 Lacrosse? They are all more compact than your Sable but with at least as much interior space. That way, you are not jumping all the way down from a full-size (at least on the outside) to a compact.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    I did look at the Fusion but the cost for similar base models is about $6500-7000 more. At least I think I found the base Fusion, a 2.5L I4 with about 30 more HP than the 3i (but almost 2 seconds slower to 60 mph?). The fusion has a 6 speed while the mazda is 5 speed. Again it is remarkable but the interior dimensions of the Fusion and the 3i are almost identical (from edmunds data) except for shoulder room. The Fusion has fog lights which I consider decoration and it has "leather seats" which seemed strange for the base model. I prefer cloth. Maybe it is "leatherette" like my Sable. The only thing I would miss on the 3i is cruise control (which isn't even optional on that model). Mazda is 400 pounds lighter and thus 3-4 mpg better, and it does have the option of manual shifting the automatic.
    I expect I am more of a minimalist than most car buyers, wanting a basic, reliable, comfortable means of transportation that will get me to speed promptly and be quiet on the road.
    I think the VW is quite more expensive (didn't research b/o their reliability issues and the new model risks). Subaru is a player. I'll take a look at the LaCrosse but expect it will be more expensive than the Fusion.
    At this point in my search the Mazda seems to offer remarkable value for $18-19K. Surprisingly most of the car magazines rate it as very satisfying with respect to performance, most ranking it as best in class. I like Honda Civic but very noisy on the road even when new (tire and road noise).
    Thanks for your suggestions. I'll keep an open mind and continue to mull options. I hope to squeeze another 30K miles out of the Sable (now @ 140,000 miles without any issues which amazes me). I do have confidence in Ford products based on that experience and other reviews.
    I'll lurk on this forum but don't want to monopolize or change the topic which is the Taurus. My summary is that the Taurus is a very good car but no longer a value for my money.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I expect I am more of a minimalist than most car buyers, wanting a basic, reliable, comfortable means of transportation that will get me to speed promptly and be quiet on the road.

    Interesting; because those virtues aren't Mazda-like at all. Mazda's are more visceral than the quiet appliance you describe. Mazdas are louder and ride rougher than "basic, reliable, comfortable" transportation. They're also a lot of fun to drive.

    It sounds like you'd be more suited to something with a quieter interior and a softer ride. The Hyundai Elantra and Toyota Corolla come to mind for your situation, but the Taurus is also quiet and comfortable, but by no means basic.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    Mazda 3's are reliable and provide a truly basic model for as little as $15.5K. Even the top of the line model with the 2.5 engine and all amenities comes in under 25K. I am looking at the low middle probably.
    You may well be right about the comfort. Sports suspensions are tuned to give feedback about the road. Feedback is fine but I don't want to feel and hear every dimple in the road. NVH also is an issue. Hondas, as an example, are notorious for road noise despite their otherwise excellent reviews
    Coming from a family of Lincoln buyers I don't want the floaty "land yacht" feeling that the older Lincolns provided. Maybe the Mazda 3 will come in somewhere in between. Between 0 and 75 mph (the world I live in) the Mazda's are graded performance wise at the top for 4 cylinder sedan. The Mazdaspeed variants are racer boy cars, not my cup of tea. As a former BMW and Toyota Supra owner I wouldn't mind good steering feedback and good brakes (both rated high in Mazda and criticized in the Taurus). You are right though if the ride seems harsh and noisy the marriage will be called off. Given the remarkable pricing of the Mazda line I might even look into the cost of softening the ride (aftermarket) before I call the caterer to cancel. Thanks.
  • mikemartinmikemartin Member Posts: 205
    Consumer Reports came out and gave a less than stellar review of the "new" Taurus in this month's magazine.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    So which part of the toaster did they not like? Was it the heat setting or did the toast not pop up high enough? :P
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    Go back to Consumer's report on the Taurus and count up the number of positive comments and then the negatives. Something not quite right with the evaluation. i guess they were not happy about the reduced rear seat area (which is still very good) and the other good stuff didn't matter too much.. And of course, the frumpy look of the Avalon and its old dash with all its plastic aluminum didn't count either. I drove the Lacrosse and knocked my knee twice getting out. The awd Lacrosse is under-powered. The Azera bangs over bumps and its seats don't adjust enough. But then, each to his own taste. I go out and drive them all; then i make my decision. My priorities are not necessarily those of CR which places no value on looks.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    The new Taurus is a car I still can't make my mind up on. I think it's a good idea to look at things like CR or JDP on reliability, but then you're right - drive your finalists and make up your own mind.
  • Yes, it is a definite improvement. However, I wish it either had trimmer overhangs, a longer wheelbase, or (when you subtract the trunk) more interior space than many mid-size cars (Accord, Sonata, Lacrosse). They did a great job of revising it, but who ever signed off on the proportions of the 2005 Five Hundred consigned Ford to have to work with oddly proportioned architecture for years to come. Bottom line, it is good...it could have been so much better.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I think they may have been limited by some of the Volvo parameters the car is based on?
  • No, I don't think so. The equivalent Volvos aren't nearly as tall, and let's remember that the Flex (with front overhang still too long) has something like a 117" wheelbase. It would not have been difficult to lengthen the 500 wheelbase while keeping the length more or less the same.
  • alman08alman08 Member Posts: 282
    OK... just wrote Ford another letter concerning the interior of the new Taurus. It's a very nice car and now, however, what's going on with that cheaply painted plastic on the console? Did they buy that from the same supplier which make plastic (and I meant ugly plastic) painted interior door panel for the Cameros?
    #@%#!&^#! :mad:
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Alman08, if you actually own the vehicle, you should have several opportunities to provide feedback. Most manufactures (Ford included) send surveys after a month and 3- or 6- months, I cant remember which. At the same time, you have JD Powers and Consumer Reports soliciting information from owners.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    What exactly do you expect them to say about it? And if it was that terrible - why did you buy it?

    I don't understand people that buy vehicles and then complain about things that they clearly knew or could have know before they purchased.

    Ford knows exactly what they did with the console - it was a conscious decision. It could be better but I don't think it's that bad, either.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    You are exaggerating.
  • jlcjlc Member Posts: 30
    Hey guys, I have about 4k miles on the car. About 1.6k city and 2.4k hyw.(75mph)
    average 26mph todate. Love the car, the ride is quiet and comfortable. Love the massaging seats, sync, blis, heated front & rear seats, rain sencing wipers etc. I did a lot of research and found this car to be a winner. I was considering the LaCrosse but the A & C pillars were a sight problem. I would recommend it to anyone.

  • alman08alman08 Member Posts: 282
    nope... I did not say I bought the vehicle. :shades:
    Have yet to hear back from Ford, but usually it'd take about a week, and Ford is very good at wanting to hear from the public.
    I too don't understand people that buy cars and then complain about things that would bother them to begin with. :surprise:
    And I also don't understand why people assume too much from reading a clear message. :P
  • alman08alman08 Member Posts: 282
    I don't think I am, and I know you like yours very much. However, if Ford is wanting to move up market with this Taurus, they'll have to pay extra attention to details like that. Let's leave cheaply made American cars to GM to handle now (and they're catching up too)
  • alman08alman08 Member Posts: 282
    just go to Ford website and you can contact Ford anytime if you have concerns about their company, vehicles, and the website, and you don't even need to own a Ford. (and I do own one)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    A - based on other owner and media reviews I think you're exaggerating. If you want to see a cheap plastic console go find a Lincoln LS.

    B - I don't understand why someone who doesn't own the vehicle would take the time to write to Ford to complain about something they don't like. Especially a personal preference issue.
  • alman08alman08 Member Posts: 282
    Used to respect your opinion on Ford's products, akirby, however, from reading your posts like these just made me think that you're no more than just a Ford fan who cannot acept constructive criticism. One good thing about Ford (the current Ford) is that they do want to hear criticism, good or bad. Many personal preference issue will reflect in model year facelift, and that's part of the reason why a good company would want to hear what customers have to say about their products. And it seems to me that you're on this board just constantly trying to defend Ford, doesn't matter if it's good or bad.
    My letter to Ford was all based on my opinion and I did not have to care what other media or reviews have to say about any product.
    I will end this discussion now since I'm not here to argue will anyone. I have nothing to gain from it.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I wasn't defending Ford - I was just saying that they know they have a black plastic console (as opposed to wood or aluminum) and I don't think Ford is interested in every customer's personal opinion, especially when it doesn't match the majority of other reviewers' opinion.

    But if it makes you feel better, go for it.
  • Karen_SKaren_S Member Posts: 5,092
    New Taurus owners, please post your thoughts on the head restraints here.

    New Head Restraints – Safety, Torture, or Both?
  • alman08alman08 Member Posts: 282
    although I said that I was going to end the discussion, I would like to add this...
    Exactly my point...Ford is better off using black plastic on the console instead of that painted color plastic (glossy color paint to fake alum?... come on, man!)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Maybe Kuzack will have the product designers call you and get your signoff on all future center console designs........
  • was that sarcasm? :P
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Me? Sarcasm? Nah........ :blush:
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Member Posts: 574
    3.5L EcoBoost Turbocharged DOHC V-6 (Ford Taurus SHO) also found in several other FoMoCo products including the Ford Flex.

    Congratulations Ford!
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    I recently read in a comparo that the Accura side radar system sets off radar detectors in neighboring cars. Does anyone know whether this is true of the BLIS system?
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Assuming the BLIS system in the Taurus is the same as Volvo uses it is all done with cameras not radar so no won't set off detectors.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    An official site confirms that it is radar based as are the adaptive cruise control and the early collision warning system. So there are radar beams all over the car: front and side. It is a question of what band the system uses and whether it is the same band as the common radar guns that the police and detectors use.

    BLISTM (Blind Spot Information System) with Cross Traffic Alert can help provide extra confidence to drivers in parking lots by alerting drivers sooner of nearby traffic while backing out. It uses two multiple beam radar modules, which are packaged in the rear quarter panels. The radar detects moving objects within a 65-foot range from either side of the vehicle. The radar identifies when a vehicle enters the defined blind spot zone and illuminates an indicator light on the corresponding side-view mirror providing a warning that a vehicle is approaching. An audible alert is sounded as well.
  • podpod Member Posts: 176
    I was very surprised when using the Edmunds pricing algorithm, a 2010 BMW 328i can be had for $32,385. This includes none of the very expensive option packages (glad to have the option of a "stripped down" car). The price, however, puts the 328i at roughly $1200 more than the "stripped" (i.e. no options) 2010 Limited (non-AWD, non-SHO) Taurus. There is a $1000 "special discount" on the Limited which expires 1/4/10 which makes the difference $2200 at present.
    I am quite surprised that the prices are so close. Some will say "apples and oranges" but I would say "Cortland vs. McIntosh". I would go for the BMW were I ready to buy a sedan at this time. Are others surprised?
    The price "creep" on the Taurus over the past few years is significant. The SHO is an all new ballgame but the other Taurus models have become slowly more expensive primarily due to the inclusion of what were once "options" as standard equipment among other improvements. The basic powertrain and engine haven't changed very much for two years or so.
    The principal reservation about all BMW 3 series is the low profile (run flat) tires which are noisy and cause a very firm ride. The four year free maintenance program is a nice offset however.
    Off topic, I admit, but fodder for discusssion as this forum slows down.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Good luck finding a stripped-down 328. They're located next to the pot of gold at the end of any rainbow.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    You will never be able to find a base 3 series. I don't even think most dealers would let you order one without a large non-refundable deposit. They don't want to be stuck with an albatross like that on the lot if you back out.

    Then you have RWD, on RFTs no less which are horrible in the snow, vs FWD so if you are in a snow state you have to get snow tires for the BMW. You might be able to make it without snows on the Taurus as long as you only get moderate snow fall.

    Then there is of course the fact that the Taurus is over a foot longer and three inches wider. Its compact vs full size is it any wonder that their pricing is similar but luxury brand vs non-luxury brand. The top or near top of the line non-luxury large car has always bumped into the pricing of a luxury compact or mid-sized car.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The closest comparison to a 328i would be a Fusion Sport, not a Taurus. Apples and oranges indeed.
Sign In or Register to comment.