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

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

15791011

Comments

  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Haven't seen it, Mark, but maybe they were going after bird's eye maple, which even naturally is yellow?
  • savethelandsavetheland Posts: 671
    I saw new Sable yesterday on freeway. Looks wierd. Montego was much more elegant (and name was better too).
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Posts: 1,106
    The proof that these CVT transmissions are really good is yet to be proved by me.

    The proof to me is in how they drive . . and it's no contest!
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    on new Taurus was actually quiet positive in the September issue. Over 500 improvements have been done to this sedan and they are noticable. Cabin is very quiet to interior materials/fit/finish. They actually claim the Tuaurus "is back". Name familiarity has proven to be a big one for consumers/voters alike. I believe the name change will bring more people into the Ford showroom if not only to take a look at least. The 500 once had a great name but it was generations ago, most would not remember the 500 of yester year. I guess once again, only time will tell as to what the consumer thinks.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    I liked the Five Hundred... but when the Taurus was discontinued... I was shocked. Then I sat in a 2008 Taurus. I love it. My only gripe is the grille. It looks good on the Fusion, and the F-Series trucks, but not on this, and definitely NOT the Edge.

    I think they should have just called the Fusion, "Taurus,", renamed the Focus ,"Fusion" and called the Five Hundred, "500" (number is on badges, not words).

    Ford's got the hang, but they need an edge- like the Freestar. All it really needed was 2nd-row power windows, and a split third-row. Maybe headlamp washers.

    Oh, and TAURUS X is a ****** name. I hate it. Maybe 'Ford 500 Fantasy.'
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    I like the name. Says exactly what it is: a Taurus wagon with all wheel drive.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    Okay, but "Ford Taurus X" and a trim, "Ford Taurus X Limited All-Wheel Drive" sounds strange.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Point taken.
  • ronsmith38ronsmith38 Posts: 228
    Why not "Taurus 500"? (remember the Galaxy 500?) See post 293
  • It may be helpful to remember that someone at Ford named a son and a car Edsel, so 500 and the rebirth of the Taurus should come as no shock. The 500, excuse me, Five Hundred name was weak. Taurus is a bygone era which Ford should have left in the past IMHO. The new Taurus even looks like a Taurus as compared to the Five Hundred. Possibly the grill does this? Still, with some inherited Volvo technology, it is a compelling car.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    Good point.
  • I think what has happend to some companies is they listened to the automotive journals too much and are now getting re-introduced into the mainstream. Auomotive journals are always saying things like "this deserves a new name" as a new car. I think Honda and Toyota has shown what a name can do for a car for decades - civic,accord, corrola, camry... as long as you keep it up to date during mid cycle refreshes and when the cars are redisgned. Also, some cars are praised no matter what they do, while others are criticized for the same traits. For example, in recent years, toyotas and hondas have cheapened the interiors and have had more issues with squeeks and rattles. Especially honda, there is very little soft touch surfaces in any honda product, and interior gaps and panel alignment can be horrible. You hear about this a little from consumer magazines, but they don't get as critical as others. Where is the outrage?

    I have owned foreign until I just bought my 2008 Ford Taurus, and the fit and finish is better than any toyota or honda I drove, and looks and feels like a VW/Audi product in some respects. There are some shortcuts and issues, which cars in this price range all have. Some point out that the Taurus has no manual shift capabilites with its new 6 speed automatic. Well, others have the same issue (Accords never had it - not even the new 2008), so why is it just a Ford issue? How many people are out there manually shifting their automatics. (I had this in my previous 2 Audis and VW, but only used it to see what it was like, then never touched it again.)

    I think Ford is doing the right thing using he Taurus name, as long as they keep it up to date, and do mid cycle and totally new vehicles on the same rotation as the competitors. Otherwise, they will not be able to maintain the momentum they are building with recent offerings. Even Ford reliability ratings are up in consumer reports (the Lincoln MKZ/MKX which use the same engine/transmission/all wheel drive system as the Taurus is the second ranked overall in recent reliability ratings by consumer reports just behng the Lexus ES350, and the Ford fusion/Mecury Milan is not far behind that.)

    I am really shocked I bought a Ford, but this car reminds me of my Audi A6 V6 I owned from 1999-2002, with a relaxing drive and steering like it is on rails. The Parelli P6 tires can get noisy on concrete roads, but there is little difference, if any, betweem the 17s and 18s I drove. (I have the limited with the 18" chrome clad wheels and AWD).

    Everyone has a preference, and some may not like the understated interior of the Taurus, but it is consistent with my previous cars (Audi and VW). Plus, I just do not care for the silver and grey painted plastics that Honda, Toyota and Hyundai are using, as it looks and feels very cheap. Especially the radio cover in the Avalon. (I doubt you'd ever see that on a Lexus!)
  • dzier217, you have articulated some compelling points. I have not compared the Accord/Camry/Taurus as you have done will take your word. And yes, the Accord and Camry nameplates have been with us a while. But Ford abandoned the Taurus name and replaced it with the ill-conceived name, Five Hundred. Now, all of a sudden, the same car, with refinements, is a Taurus. I do not object to the Taurus name but let's face it: the new Taurus has borrowed safety technology from Volvo and the new powerplant is exciting. The former Taurus was staid and outdated by comparison. Ford has done much with the Five Hundred/2008 Taurus, but the name Taurus belies the advances which have been incorporated into the old name.

    As lacking as the name Five Hundred was, I would prefer that they kept it.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    I think you'll love your Taurus.

    I just hope that Ford continues to follow they Path they started with the Fusion and the Mustang. Each year there is improvements in the Fusion...(more standard equipment) and Mustang (more interior options, more wheel options).

    I think Ford is learning that you have to make things better constantly.

    Ford is even making improvements in the middle of the model year. For 2007 Fusions, Job 2 featured upgraded structure to get better IIHS crash scores.

    I think Alan M. is going to force Ford to do things in a new way. He has the clout and I think that every body that might have stood in his way got a "buy out" (Ford Speak for s***t canned).

    Mark
  • I will never look at or inquire about another ford taurus in my life!!!!!!!! One big pile of s--t!!!!!!!!!!1
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    Like anything in life, if you take care of it, it will take care of you. For example, other than regular parts (brakes, tires, fluids, oil, and gas), I can count all of my 2001 Taurus's problems on ONE hand.

    1) Transaxle seal
    2) Transaxle seal
    3) Tighten door handle
    4) Engine hose
    5) Replace rear springs.

    I will admit, though, neither my 2001 or 1999 Taurus were frugal with fuel. My 1999 got 13 MPG (empty, 50/50 highway/ city), and my 2001 only gets 20/23 city, highway, the latter being 95% highway. The former, 100% city.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    And I guess you are right. After several months of trying, the new Taurus sales are dismal. On the other hand, the new Accord has taken off the same month it was released.

    When is Ford going to admit that, as good as the Taurus might now be, people don't want to buy it? It is about as boring a car as anyone has put on the road in the past few years. No grill or engine change will fix the overall tepid aura it carries.
  • Lead article in latest edition of trade mag "Automotive News" is the suprisingly high number of dealers who are completely dumping Ford.
    Dusting off the Taurus/Sable names smacked of desperation. This car (like the 2000 and newer Monte Carlo) is a bit too large and Ford's deplorable habit, practiced thru the decades, of offering a new nameplate that is underpowered and lacking interior refinement (Escort, Tempo, Contour, Focus), is suicidal.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    OK... but it is in its first model year. People are typically hesitant to buy a first-year due to sketchy reliabilty.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    Ford is "dumping dealers" Ford is paying low volumn dealers to give up their franchise. Since it is Ford that is paying, I would count that as Ford Dumping dealers.

    Mark.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    It is NOT the first model year. It is the fourth, with some running changes and an engine upgrade--an engine already in use in other FoMoCo models without significant issues. Changing the name does not a new model make.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Posts: 490
    Gregg is right, the sales of the "New" Taurus/Sable are dismal. In fact, the "Old" Five Hundred/Montego outsold them by a fair percentage.

    So, Mulally's first "Bold" move is a failure. A dismal failure. What's next? I've read that he wants all Fords the world over to look alike and be basically the same. Ummm, and just what does that being to the party? I mean, who the h__l cares? Most Americans never get to Europe. This is another waste of money fiasco if u ask me. It might have worked with Boeing - I mean a tarmac is a tarmac whereever u go. But roads are different the workd over. Americans have different needs for their cars than Italians just based on the roads alone. Why make cars the same the world over? It dont make any sense.

    On the personal side, I think the Taurus/Sable might be the best family sedans out there right now. They're big inside and trunk, they ride and handle well, they've got good safety scores, the engine now is up to the task etc etc. Yet sales are down. Why? Here's a few guesses:
    * There are more men than just myself who wont buy a car named after a furry rodent whose claim to fame is it makes a nice neck wrap for riche women.
    * Americans are not as stupid as Ford marketing (and AM) think. We KNOW the Taurus is not "ALL NEW". To me the name change feels like a sleight-of-hand move designed to fool the consumer.
    * The new Accord is fabulous. Anyone who cross-shops is not likely to buy anything else. Unless the have to have AWD.
    * The Camry is ... well it's a Camry. And u can get a hybrid for not much more that gets over 30mpg.
    * The Subaru beats the Ford head-to-head.
    * If u want style and panache, you get a Chrysler 300.

    So who's going to buy the Ford? Again, I think the car is quite nice. The best in some ways. But still second rate overall.

    Lastly, Ford marketing is absolutely the WORST in the business. OK, back to wating for baseball games to begin.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    I disagree.
    You said the Accord is fabulous. How? And how does the Subaru beat it? Before he got a 2008 Taurus (a remarkable car), my brother had a Legacy (2006) that wouldn't stop blowing chunks. I think that the new Camry, the Chrysler, and the new/dead GM vans (to get the drift, but the Pontiac SV6 especially) look like hot dogs with bites taken out of them. I wonder how things would be looking now if they had called the US Fusion 'Taurus', called the Five Hundred 'Crown Victoria', ditched the current Crown Vic, and made the 2008 Focus a sedan (budget), a true station wagon (to compete with Subaru and VW), a coupe (to compete with Maxima, Accord, and CAMRY Solara, even the Yaris), and the hatchbacks. The two-door to compete with the VW Golf and come with more upfit options than a Scion(which, unfortunately, as we must remember, is a TOYOTA), and the four-door to compete with the Honda Fit and Dodge Caliber. If we were talking Toyota, I'd say ditch the Scion nameplate and make it Toyota-Scion xB or tC. That would be just like how Saab has Saab 9-3x or 9-7x, all different models. The Taurus' competitors all get okay mileage, so Ford should engineer a hybrid (like TOYOTA)... but, as for the return of the Taurus, its a nice car, as I remember from the 80's (a nice car for then) and possibly legendary. Afterall, its got the largest runk of any sedan sold in North America, and if I am correct, bigger then the Crown Vic (21.2 cubic feet vs 21) and in the world.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    The problem with Taurus is that peeps aren't going to pay 30k+ for the pleasure of owning a TAURUS!

    Still, until there is some advertising, its hard to tell.

    I just wish the car was more exciting. The 300 has lots of compromises. BUT ITS EXCITING!

    Remember, mediocrity breeds contempt.
  • Ford would have been wiser to retain the Montego name for the Mercury. (Maybe Crown 500 for the Ford) ;)
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Excuse me, jmn1...I totally understand the "I disagree" part, but what you say beyond that gets a bit obtuse. I do agree the 80's Taurus was legendary for it's time. But the big trunk on the the current one being a segue?

    You propose some reasonably rational changes that Ford could have done in the past (woulda, coulda, shoulda), but they didn't. Instead they did this conservative 500/Montego thing and then "let's make the decent-but-poor-selling 500 a Taurus" move (why not, it was worth a try?....the 2008 500 would have sold even WORSE than the dismal 2008 Taurus sales), but it didn't light any fires.

    Ford is f*****d, unless it can design ASAP some models like the 80's Taurus/Sable and Thunderbird, relevant to today. I sure don't know how to do that. Doesn't look like anyone at Ford USA does either (see Ford Europe for talent that should not have been kept under a bushel).
  • Hi, I have not participated in a while.

    I'm so curious as to the bas sales... This car has all the goods to compete. I think the style of both the taurus and sable are exiting, but the commercials i see reek of 'safety' and other boring stuff. I don't get it.

    This thing has 263 hp, its got chome on the SIDES, its got the largest rear seat, the largest trunk, the best price, and for those who need it AWD. What is so hard to sell?

    Sell it as exiting, because I think people should see that side of it. What do you think?
  • bobber1bobber1 Posts: 217
    It's premature to call Taurus sales lack luster. It's just the beginning of the 2008 sale year and sales have barely begun. Most of the professional reviews have universally been positive for this car and consumers just need to cross shop. That's what I did.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Sell it as exiting, because I think people should see that side of it. What do you think? First off, I think the typo is apropos. Lipstick on something that is boring to dumpy in profile doesn't make it exciting. Exiting is more like it.

    And to your point bobber, when a good car appeals to consumers, sales take off and it often gets in short supply fast. The 08 Taurus has been for sale since May, and this is nearly five months later. You call that barely begun?
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Posts: 490
    I get excited when I see the commercials with Jill Wagoner sitting in the backseat of the Montego, oops, Sable. Unfortunately, she is not optional equipment so the Mercury remains boring.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    Good point, all of you.
  • I find new Sable weird looking : from front (like bloated Milan), from side (like bloated Passat) and from back -because of white taillights. Montego was more elegant and name was more decent (who came up with name like “Sable” anyway?). In general proportions of both new Taurus and Sable are wrong – tall big cars, like someone took VW Passat pumped up. If it was lower and wider – it would have nice elegant proportions like Passat. While Passat’s proportions work for compact sedan it does not work for full size sedan.

    And interior - weird looking door panels, cheap black plastic center stack with flimsy buttons, weird looking gauges. What Ford designers smoke at work?
  • pnewbypnewby Posts: 277
    OK, if you take the fleet sales(esp. the rentals) out of all figures for both the 500 and the 2008 Taurus, how do those numbers compare? As for the all new claims, are the '08 Taurus (and X), and the '08 Sable not completely different than the last Taurii and Sables? I haven't seen the numbers, but at least I am glad Ford wants to lower rental sales. Other fleet sales are no as bad since they usually are kept for either several years or lots of miles. It is the rental sales that drive resale down since they are generally sold in 1-2 years with low mileage at a cheap price.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    The 500/Montego sales started out badly and drifted down from there. 2008 would have been a totally dismal year for them, for now they would not only have already been sold to most of the people to whom they appealed, but they were designs getting long in the tooth. Giving them new but recognizable names, new engines, and more sound deadening has probably helped, in the sense that Ford can continue to sell a car in some numbers--even though unimpressive--that would have been even harder to sell had they stayed with the 500 moniker.

    Now, if they could just get their act together and truly redesign the car to appeal to a wider audience, they might get somewhere. Toyota and Honda have shown that model cycles work best if they are limited to four or five years.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    Cna't fault you in that last statement.
  • There are more men than just myself who wont buy a car named after a furry rodent whose claim to fame is it makes a nice neck wrap for riche women.

    A Taurus is a rodent? Hmmmm.
  • Sell it as exiting, because I think people should see that side of it. What do you think?

    It's basically a Volvo . . . Volvo never appeared "exciting". The Taurus isn't marketed at the crowd who *should* be considering "excitement" as the main criterion for buying a car.
  • bobber1bobber1 Posts: 217
    Yeah the Toyota Avalon doesn't "excite" me either but it appears to be a great car that a lot of people like. The Taurus is very similar in targeting the same group of buyers.

    If you want exciting look at the Fusion or Mustang.
  • jmn1jmn1 Posts: 26
    Good point.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Posts: 490
    "A Taurus is a rodent? Hmmmm"

    Ummmm, I was referring to the other one. But you (hopefully) knew that. When is your next gig at a comedy club?
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    I am disappointed and surprised in the sales of the new Taurus and Rodent...oops, I mean Sable. However, in this case, I put the blame squarely on Ford's marketing and advertising efforts rather than the cars.

    These are da*n good cars! I have had several 500s as rentals. I also get Impalas and Camrys often. Last week, I had a new Taurus rental in Denver. The difference in power, quietness, and smoothness is night and day between the 500 and Taurus. Based on product attributes, there is no reason why the Taurus is not out-selling the Impala or any other car in it's class. Furthermore, I don't know why more people who buy Camrys aren't taking a look at how much more car they can get for the money. I think the Taurus meets or exceeds anything in its price/size class in just about every way.

    My local dealers are advertising SELs for $19,500. That is a screaming deal for this car, IMHO. I am not a marketing guy but it seems to me that Ford needs to put a full court press on getting butts in Taurus seats for a test-drive. When the Montego was introduced, Ford offered me $75 to take a test drive. I don't know what criteria they used in selecting names for the offer but maybe they should do that again with the Taurus. When I drove the Montego, I found it to be slow, lethargic, and lacking in NVH control. They no longer have those problems.

    In all the market segments in which Ford competes, I can't think of one where they have a more competitive entry.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Unfortunately, as good as the power, NVH control and room is with the Taurus, it is still not an attractive car. It is kind of bulbous, kind of lumpy, but mostly non-descript. It is the the one people walk right past at auto shows. Unfortunately, looks in cars (and people) often have more influence on getting chosen than more practical attributes.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    It is kind of bulbous, kind of lumpy, but mostly non-descript.

    You just described my first wife perfectly! I guess that description fits the Taurus pretty well, too. No, it is not a styling sensation. Other than the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger, most of the cars in this class are pretty non-descript.

    I would still like to see Ford make a much larger splash with marketing and advertising. This car is too good, despite it's looks, to be selling this slowly. The reinvention and reintroduction of America's favorite family car should have been of highest priority but it seems they are just sitting back with their heads up their butts.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    The sable is not a rodent duh, its more like a weasel.

    Sable

    Mark.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    Glad you cleared that up. Armed with the knowledge that it is more like a weasel, no doubt jeyhoe will run out and buy a Sable today. ;)
  • wayne21wayne21 Posts: 259
    My wife and I went to the Ford dealer with the intent of returning home in a Taurus. We were terribly disappointed. My wife says if it has 260 horses they are very tired horses. The car was underpowered. It reminds me of the 1981 1.4liter Plymouth Champ I bought when I graduated from college - I often had to slip the clutch to get it going (best I could afford). If the Taurus had a manual transmission I think the same could be true for it - slip the clutch to get it going. I also would not want to merge onto a busy interstate in this car. We also drove the 6 cylinder Fusion and found it to be a far better car than the Taurus, but it was loud and the inside looked really cheap with really cheap plastic. Almost bought one hoping undercoating would help with the noise, but realized undercoating would not help with the cheap interior.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    Wayne, a couple of question for you: Did you drive the FWD or AWD model? What is your current daily driver or with what are you comparing the Taurus from an acceleration standpoint?
  • bdymentbdyment Posts: 573
    Are you sure the dealer didn't put you into a 2007 Ford Five Hundred. It sounds as though the car you were driving has a CVT transmission. The 2008 Taurus has lots of go and the transmission is very positive. Either you were in the wrong model Ford or there was something really wrong with it.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 815
    Excellent point! I hadn't thought of that! It sure sounded like he was describing a 500 with CVT.

    The Taurus rental I drove was in Denver, where the altitude can impact performance. Still, it would break the tires loose on dry pavement from a standing start and it felt strong at all speeds.
  • Or maybe a 2007 Taurus!
This discussion has been closed.