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

15681011

Comments

  • izaclown1izaclown1 Member Posts: 118
    Car = weasel. :blush: Or is it the salesman???
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    More like a weasel? I thought that described the people you had to deal with to buy one. :P
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    I have driven the new Taurus and Sable several times. Your comments about power have nothing to do with reality.
  • icescorticescort Member Posts: 12
    Bringing back a familiar name is a good start.I did not understand ford's logic in throwing out all the brand equity and name recognition they had spent so many YEARS creating!NOW they need to dedicate some people(who are hopefully,dedicated!)to concern themselves with NOTHING other than Taurus.Honda and Toyota do this with their car lines,dedicate staff to nothing but those lines.Ford marketing, for their car lines, has been hideous.I use that word because I don't know any polite words that are stronger.I only hope that they begin to understand and value their products and customers again. I also hope that Ford can relearn the importance of "marketing push" AFTER a car line has been launched! I could say more but it would sound like bitching! I have Ford stock. I read. I observe the market.I see things that upset me.I don't understand why others do not see it.
  • wayne21wayne21 Member Posts: 259
    We drove the 2008 Taurus FWD - not a Five Hundred. In fact, we went back two days ago and drove a different Taurus and it confirmed out feeling of being underpowered. We currently have a 4 cyl accord, but are tired of transmission problems -2 in 80,000 miles, but it has plenty of power. Dirty little secret Honda has is bad transmissions (google: honda transmission problems and you will see it has been going on for years and they've had class action suits). We thought of Toyota (never owned one), but on google I learned they have a history of engine sludge problems (with class action suits) and the new 6 cyl Camrys have transmission problems. Want something nice for wife's 50th birthday and will keep hunting. It won't be a Taurus, but we may take a look at the new Malibu.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    That is really weird. The 08 Taurua is not slow and certainly not slow off the line. It is also very quiet. Something else is going on here.
  • wayne21wayne21 Member Posts: 259
    Gregg - my opinion is just what I observed. Others may feel differently. The Taurus is very quiet (the Fusion is not). When driving the Taurus I also felt like I was steering a pontoon boat - much like my father-in-law's 2002 Taurus. (His 2002 is a better car than the 2008 - IMHO.) We really wanted a Ford. We had a 1995 Escort LX that our teenage boys desperately tried to beat, but could not. It was like a Timex - it took a beating and kept on running. It was a fabulous car. But the Taurus is not for us. This evening I went to Autoblog and learned that Ford actually sold more Five Hundreds in Sept of 07 than they sold Tauruses (or Tauri) in Sept 2008. As for the power autoblog's writer says:

    While the new 3.5L V6 producing 263 HP is a big improvement over the Five-Hundred's 3.0L V6, especially matched with Ford's 6-speed automatic, the engine is not the jewel that many have made it out to be. First of all, it's difficult to tell all of those horses are present and accounted for. The Taurus has a damped throttle and power delivery always feels muted, as if the driver is always being protected from the inertia of acceleration. While the Taurus will get up and go when the pedal is mashed, it clearly prefers a more measured approach for getting from Point A to Point B. Secondly, this powerplant is not a smooth operator like some V6 engines with which we've become particularly smitten.

    And it could be that we probably just are not pedal mashers. If we were, I'd buy a Mustang GT like my brother owns, but I wouldn't put a supercharger on it. We're just a couple of 50 year olds looking for a solid car that performs well, gets decent mileage and is safe. We don't really even care about the resale as we usually give our "old" cars away. The safety is what us look at the Taurus in the first place.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    I see. That makes sense. Manufacturers set up throttle tip-in differently for different cars. Some consequently take avery light touch or the car suddenly lurches forward. Sometimes they do that to create the illusion of more power than the car actually has. Others are more like the Taurus, which allows easy, even leisurely take-offs (which can promote better mileage).

    If you like more spunk from almost no pedal movement, I can see where the Taurus is not for you. For myself, I get used to whatever tip-in setup the vehicle has, and then I don't notice it anymore. I drove a new Jaguar, for example, that seemed too ready to spin the tires, but it was only a problem a short while.

    Anyway, as much as a car costs, you should get one you are comfortable with. And I certainly don't want to sound like I am a big fan of Ford's execution of the Taurus. My main objection to it is that it looks fat/clumsy/uninspired.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Thanks for the further explanation, Wayne. I am still a bit surprised by your findings but I certainly respect your opinion.

    The Taurus written about by Autoblog was an AWD model, and while I have not driven an AWD Taurus, I definitely found AWD 500s to be much slower than the FWD models. The same is true of AWD Lincoln MKZs vs. the FWD version. In an earlier drive of a FWD Taurus Autoblog said:

    The extra sixty horsepower that comes with the new 3.5L Duratec now motivates the Taurus in a manner more befitting its position at the top of Ford's sedan lineup (ignoring the geriatric Crown Vic). Stepping on the gas now brings a prompt but much quieter response from the engine room.

    Throttle tip-in does make a huge difference in "feel" as Gregg says. I found the Taurus to feel very natural in that regard but obviously others can disagree.

    In any case, the Taurus is apparently not for you. The Malibu does look great and the 3.6 engine is getting great reviews. It might be just what you are looking for.
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Member Posts: 468
    Wayne, are you saying the 4 cyl Toyota has more power than the new Taurus engine? If you are, I question your judgment. Don't buy it if you don't like it, but please don't make absurd comments.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    How many of those 500s sales were retail instead of fleet?
  • desertrat5desertrat5 Member Posts: 85
    Wayne
    We acquired a new Limited AWD about a month ago. My first impression based on a test drive was the same as your wife -where did all of the horse power go. Then we drove another with over 2000 miles on the car and it was a totally different experience. It isn't a hot rod - don't get me wrong. But there are horses alive under the hood.

    Our own Taurus started out the same way - sluggish. We made a round trip between Colorado Springs and Denver three weeks ago and the poor car struggled to keep up with traffic going up Monument Hill. The 6 speed was downshifting all the way to 3rd and maybe even 2nd. Last week end we did the same trip again. The car had another 300 miles on it and it easily kept up with traffic without having to resort to grabbing lots of gears in the hunt for torque.

    Taurus in my mind has always been an unpretentious honest car. It doesn't pretend to be something it isn't. It is a comfortable, roomie, four door transportation device. And because it offers AWD, it really satisfied our requirements.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "Want something nice for wife's 50th birthday and will keep hunting. It won't be a Taurus, but we may take a look at the new Malibu. "

    New Malibu looks great.

    If u want to stay in the Ford family, here's a thought - find an '06 Lincoln LS. They're maybe the best car Ford has ever made, or will ever make. Used one probably cheaper than a new 500/taurus whatever. Has a Jaguar V8 and rides and handles like a Bimmer. Also, 5 star crash rating all round.

    Just MHO.
  • desertrat5desertrat5 Member Posts: 85
    A car that will give you great responsiveness with fast throttle tip-in as well as steering turn-in is the Infinity G35. We drove the G35X AWD and it was the most instantaneous vehicle I have ever driven - brakes, throttle, and steering. Even more so than our daughters Honda S2000.
  • jmn1jmn1 Member Posts: 26
    You're comparing a Taurus to a SPORT LUXURY sedan and to a ROADSTER. Of course it'll be slower. I sat in a Malibu at a press event and the door handle came out!
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    I don't think that was the only disconnect...
  • bobber1bobber1 Member Posts: 217
    The manual for the new Taurus also states it has an adaptive transmission that takes a while to learn the habits of it's driver. That could easily explain poor early shifting and the feeling of low horsepower.

    It's not a Mustang, but it's got good snap.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    If u want to stay in the Ford family, here's a thought - find an '06 Lincoln LS. They're maybe the best car Ford has ever made, or will ever make.

    Yes, and isn't that a kick in the butt! That is the reason I am still driving an LS. I want to stay in the Ford family and they have had nothing that fit my needs like the LS. I have been waiting for 2 years for the introduction of the MKS and for what? I will be going from a sophisticated RWD chassis with one of the smoothest V8s on the planet to a Taurus based, V6, FWD or AWD semi-appliance.

    To be fair, however, the Taurus does blow away the LS in interior room and trunk space. The new Taurus is just as quiet and rides well, too. I would prefer a Taurus to Lincoln's own MKZ.

    Watch for GM's push on the Malibu. They will show Ford how the Taurus should have been promoted.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    Of course the Malibu has another advantage beside the superior marketing program: it is a very attractive design.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Yes, the Malibu is a beautiful design and vastly superior to the last generation. I agree that the Taurus will not attract buyers with its looks. That is more reason why Ford needs to shake things up a bit by promoting it's virtues other than looks. A Blandmobile sure isn't going to sell itself.

    Someone on another site suggested Ford place a Taurus in every mall in America so people could see it. That would at least show that there is a new Taurus but I doubt if its looks would sell it. I would like to see every owner of a 2000 - 2005 Taurus or Sable offered dinner for two at their favorite restaurant just for taking a test drive in a new one.
  • jmn1jmn1 Member Posts: 26
    I think the new Taurus is an excellent design, but, it is not perfect. I like it more than the first impressions of the new Malibu. (I thought the Malibu was MID-sized).
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    The Malibu is mid-sized. The Taurus used to be mid-sized, and from some angles still looks mid-sized...even though it is full-sized. The Malibu has a sleeker, more expensive look than the Taurus. From some views, it is reminiscient of the VW Phaeton. Regardless, it is not fat-looking (with the plain-to ungainly proportions) of the 500/Taurus. But the Taurus does offer more room by being more bulbous. Had Ford used some of its design talent better, they could have produced a roomy shape without dialing in so much awkwardness of stance. Look at the prevous generation of the Toyota Avalon. Roomy as a Buick, but no one would call it a pretty car. The current iteration, while even more roomy, is less awkward looking.

    Designers can make cars both roomy and proportionally attractive. They just did not achieve that with the 500/Taurus. It will be interesting to see the interior volunes on the Lincoln MKS. It is completely based on the Taurus, but it doesn't look anywhere near as dumpy.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    I guess, in a Toyota Camry kind of way.

    image

    image

    My problem with the Malibu is that Chevy just seems to be trying to build a better Camary. But what they don't seem to address is why anyone who wants a Camary wouldn't just buy a Camary. Well I guess the Malibu is cheaper.

    Mark.
  • juxtojuxto Member Posts: 16
    I've been following this post and finally have to put in my two cents. I think GM copying the Camry may actually be an excellent idea. Ford should probably do something similar. Ford has lost BILLIONS over the past ten years. (GM has, too, but I‘ll limit this to Ford.) They spent the last 20 years moving factories out of the US, claiming they can’t make money paying American wages. Toyota has spent the last 20 years (or more) building more than a dozen plants in the US - paying American wages. Ford (and GM) has/have lost BILLIONS and Toyota has made BILLIONS (as has Honda in the USA). Perhaps it isn’t the labor costs, but leadership. While reducing labor costs I would bet few, if any, corporate execs lost their jobs. Typically, they get very large annual bonuses. Bonuses for LOSING money!! Hmmmm. One would think the executives making large salaries and bonuses would have had the sense to ask: What is Toyota (or Honda) doing that we are not? Why are the consumers buying their cars and not ours? and similar such questions. But instead, they kept producing crap and watching their market shares diminish. Finally, GM got the point. Copy Toyota! Congratulations GM. If we have no leadership at GM (or Ford) then perhaps we can copy someone who has leadership and is successful. I am in my 50s and wanted to buy an American car made in America. I test drove a Taurus, but shortened my test drive as I thought the car lacked power - if it has 260 hp and 240 lbs of torque some of that must be stored in the trunk. And for those wondering whatever became of the East German women’s Olympic weightlifting team - I would guess they now work for Ford in the design department and are responsible for the appearance of the Taurus. Wake up or lose it all Ford.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "And for those wondering whatever became of the East German women’s Olympic weightlifting team - I would guess they now work for Ford in the design department and are responsible for the appearance of the Taurus. Wake up or lose it all Ford."

    3.9, 4.1, 2.7, 4.0, 3.2 and the Russian judge says 6.0 !!

    Whoa, tough crowd.

    Personally, I dont see any relationship between the Camry and the Malibu. The view pictured here is only slightly simlar. The rear view and the interiors are dramatically different. The grilles part company too in a head on view. I'm hoping the Malibu is a good vehicle, just for domestic sake. GM needs all big hits.

    Oh! One more thing, Ford engines seem to be 'tight' when new. I know my LS seemed more sluggish when I test drove it than it became after several thousand miles.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    This post is very in accurate.

    First, Toyota, Honda, etc. are not paying American wages. In fact anyone familar with the Auto industry knows that Ford and GM pay over $20 more per hour for labor than Toyota and Honda do in their American factorys.

    2nd, Toyota and Honda do not have the legacy costs that GM and Ford have. Both companies have to pay millions per year in retire health benefits.

    3rd. The Japanese government artificially keeps the Yen trading low against the $. This makes it cheaper for Japanses companies to ship components here and for American to buy Japanese built cars. Given the Japan companies a $4,000 to $12,000 advantage per vehicle!

    http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/us-automakers-complain-yen-misaligned/stor- y.aspx?guid=%7BEEF38E52-5095-4EF7-A534-A2B8907F7366%7D

    Ford is NOT moving production over seas. Ford has not opened a foreign factory in AGES. The only US sold FLMs not built here are Edge/MKX, and Panther Sedans (Crwn Vic, GMQ, TC) which are built in Canada and Fusion/Milan/MKZ which are built in Mexico.

    Ford is closing factories and this is a result of loss of Market Share AND being more effecient at the remaining factories.

    Mark.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    Actually, according to Consumer Reports, Toyota should start copying Ford.

    The Ford Fusion is the MOST RELIABLE mid-size sedan in this country and the Toyota Camry V6 is one of the lease reliable.

    The Ford F-150 (V6) is the most reliable fullsize pick-up and the Tundra is one of the least.

    Don't give up on Ford or underestimate their ability to "out toyota" Toyota. They did it before with the original Taurus. The Fusion is a HUGE hit and so is the EDGE and NEW ESCAPE!

    I work at a large Ford Dealer in NJ we are not on a main highway but are part of a dealer group with a good reputation. (Try to find a Toyota dealer with a good rep)

    At my dealer, we are turning Edges in less than 20 days!!! and the same with the new Escape!!!

    That is so amazing that it is almost impossible to believe.

    Mark
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    It is good that you are so enthusiastic about the products you sell. They are good products. However, "huge hit" could be perceived as an overstatement.

    The Fusion is far from the top mid-size seller. The F150 is losing market share. The "New Escape" is clearly the old Escape with running improvements, and some different lines in the sheetmetal. Unlike when Toyota for example updates the RAV4 (each generation starts with new architecture), the "new" Escape has all ther same underpinnings, mount points, much the same glass, etc. I commend Ford for actually doing more for a change than the usual new grill/new rear styling and interior modifications, but they still don't get what Honda and Toyota have known for a long time about how to sustain heavy sales of a product.

    Ford could use a huge hit like the original Taurus, the Mustang, or the original Explorer or like the F150. But somehow the Fusion had to really struggle to outsell the old Malibu, which was clearly an inferior car. Getting away from tons of fleet sales is a good thing, but then you begin to see where Ford really stands in the market.

    A lot of it is that the suits at Ford don't get why their market share keeps shrinking. If they did, they would not have pinned hopes for salvaging the 500 by putting in a better engine and different grill and changing the name. It's not a car that most people would ever walk across the street to give a second look. Ditto the 08 Focus. Yes, it looks better than whst came before, but it looks too much still like the design issued in 1999 with some lipstick and filigree. Plus, they eliminated the hatchback just as hatchbacks are beginning to catch on again.

    BTW, both Canada and Mexico are not the US, and the wage scales there are different. Ford and the UAW created this mess together, what with $78/hour packages and job banks.

    The Edge is a good start, but where are the new iterations and new models for other niches? Toyota may be stalling momentarily in its relentless march, but Hyundai has Ford adn Toyota's backs. VW and Audi both are reinventing themselves and have too many new models coming to even keep track of.

    Ford just has to get it together to be fast and first, or it will never be a major player again. What have they been doing? Well, trying to unload Jaguar and Land Rover for one thing. It remains to be seen whether that works out for them. It must be clear to some of the suits that they really don't know how to re-make a marque into a winner. After all, they invested untold billions in Jaguar, improved the quality, the products and their reliability. Sales as we all know have tanked. They can't sustain Jaguar with the XK8, and the Edge isn't going to save Ford's passenger car business.

    I don't know the answers, but it is clear that Ford does not either. What are they even DOING with old things like the Ranger, the Crown Victoria, the Explorer, the Sport Trac? Where's the innovation in the latest Expedition? Where is their city car? Yes, I know, all coming, all coming. It's very telling that the suits thought that the US needed its own dull designs and that the stellar European Fords would not work here. What's so damnable is that people got paid really big bucks to screw up so badly. Let's see, 2004, the Year of the Car...sheesh.
  • wayne21wayne21 Member Posts: 259
    What is the Ford approach? My wife and I are retired teachers and I think they are copying the education model. We had a teacher in Orlando write an editorial a few years ago saying she couldn't teach the kids to read because she didn't have enough computers (never the fault of us teachers). When the kids can't read and right or find their own state or country on a map - u raise taxes and build new schools and tell people "it's for the kids". Unfortuntately for Ford, they are not a government entity and if they are inept or lose money for any reason they can't raise taxes to subsidize Ford "for the automotive buyers". It's a competetive world and building the same thing that failed year after year will not result in success this year.
  • savethelandsavetheland Member Posts: 671
    If USA continues move toward socialism at the current rate I will not be surprised if Ford asks tax payers to foot its bills very soon. There are a lot of examples that it already happening, like recent “Dream Act” to colledge educate childrens of illegal immigrants at our expense, bail out failed home owner or socialized health care which pretty soon will become a reality because everybody (except of taxpayers) wants it.
  • wayne21wayne21 Member Posts: 259
    Although we really wanted a taurus and the backup car was the fusion we opted to buy neither of these. I had never been in a hyundai, but drove a sonata over the weekend. I found it to be a better car than the taurus or fusion and on par with our accord. We would have bought an accord, but after having transmission problems and learning that this has been an issue for honda for years we opted not to do that. Really wanted to buy a car made by union workers, but will buy a sonata.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    Good for you. There is a reason Hyundai is growing so fast. Supporting American manufacturers simply because they are American (or union) got us into this mess in the first place. I'd like to see American cars at the top of the heap, but they won't get there with slogans and false patriotism. Build the best and buyers will follow.
  • bobber1bobber1 Member Posts: 217
    You know somehow I don't think you'll find a similar thought process in Japan, Germany, or Korea.....

    I agree with some of your thoughts, but most recent quality rating have the American stuff on par with their competitors.

    And by the way I do own a Ford and a Honda, so I own both.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    With a few exceptions, like Americans, citizens of other countries are patriotic and root for the home team. Even the old East German Trabant had a certain following that was not simply a result of being coerced.

    There are American vehicles on a par with anything else in terms of quality, and that's good. But that quality came as a result of some people realizing that they could get a better product elsewhere, and so they did.

    Now, American manufacturers are fighting to get their reputations back. There is good quality out there...and there are still models with serious quality problems. It goes beyond quality of course. Features, engine choices, mileage, resale are a few of the other things people look at.

    The Taurus offers one engine. Competitors provide a choice of two or three. Why didn't they continue to offer the 3.0 liter and the gearing setup for those who want better mileage? Why doesn't the Fusion offer a sport suspension or a version with the 3.5 liter (which is becoming standard for the class anyway)?

    You can get a decent and reliable ride with the Fusion. However, some people won't buy the Fusion, because unlike its competition, it does not offer traction control. Ford also skimped on sound deadening for the Fusion. The prop rod issue has been beaten to death. The point is that you can have stellar quality, but if you don't offer the features of the competition, you lose sales anyway.

    I have owned more American iron than any other kind, but after 27 vehicles, I have also owned stuff from Honda, Subaru, Toyota, Mazda, Isuzu, VW, and Audi. Everything I have owned since the late 80's has been completely reliable, except for one really awful Oldsmobile, and minor irritations with a Mazda.

    I would love for example to buy a new Ranger. I owned three of them and every one gave me great service, one to 177,000 miles when I sold it to a neighbor who continued to use it for years. Unfortunately, Ford doesn't make a new Ranger. They are selling an old one for new offering the same stuff my 98 had.
  • jmn1jmn1 Member Posts: 26
    The Ranger, in my opinion, is good. I think Ford should make a crew cab, but don't try to tell me the stuff about the Explorer Sport Trac.

    Here is a link to what I am picturing:

    http://www.carpages.co.uk/ford/ford-ranger-08-08-05.asp

    I also think that they should ditch the two-door Supercab, because, I don't see why anyone would want it. In my opinion, Ford should make a Crew Cab and a Crew Cab extended (like the Dodge Ram Mega Cab) for more cab room, but have the Super Cab for guys who don't want to spend so much on their truck.

    As for the Taurus, I think it looks cool as it is very comfortable and spacious. Comparing specs between the Five Hundred and Freestar minivan, the Five Hundred had 129 cubic feet of cargo space, and the Freestar, 130.5. But, for 08, the Taurus contends with four other new players: the NEW 08 Honda Accord, the NEW O8 Subuaru Outback/Legacy (Outback= off-road station wagon, Legacy= all-wheel drive sport sedan) , the Toyota Camry, and the new Chevy Malibu. I have yet to sit in a Malibu. I don't overly care for Subaru, I had a 92 Silverado that blew chunks, so I will never buy a Chevy (not necessarily a GM) again, the Camry was nice, but I have brand loyalty to Ford.

    And what about the Taurus X, people?
  • izaclown1izaclown1 Member Posts: 118
    "The Ranger, in my opinion, is good. I think Ford should make a crew cab, but don't try to tell me the stuff about the Explorer Sport Trac."

    I looked at the Expo vs. F150. No comparison! F150 lot less money bigger engine and bigger towing capability. But, I digress...
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    Toyota does the min. necessary to produce a profitable vehicle.

    The 08 Corolla will be largely a reskin and the Civic will still have better powertrain and dynamics.

    The Rav4? You obviously haven't opened up the back of a Rav lately if you belive that this is a "best effort" The spare tire is STILL mounted to the hatch and the hatch still swings out to the passenger side. That might be great in right drive Japan but in the US it opens to the curb/sidewalk and creates a barrier. Plus the weight of the tire is annoying. That is so 1990.

    (imagine paralle parking and you can't open the back hatch cause it will swing into the car behind yours.)

    Mark.
  • jmn1jmn1 Member Posts: 26
    OK, if I HAD to have a swing-out, I would make it so it opened toward the street, making a barrier for kids and stuff to not go in the street. I would also have a release (similar to the 2000-2004 Isuzu Trooper to get it to shut, but for opening it 180 degrees.

    I still think that the Taurus is a good family sedan, but, I'm not seeing your point.
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    It does open toward the street in Japan and other Right hand drive countries. Toyota apparently doesn't think enough of US consumers to put a minor change in for cars headed to the US.

    My point is that people seem to assume that Toyota is some kind of charity out to make the "best" cars in the world. In reality, Toyota does not make the "best" in class in any segment it compets in.

    Toyota makes the auto equivalent of Vanilla ice cream.

    Mark
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    Which is the most popular ice cream. Can't fault Toyota for having a formula that sells. It's not easy to come up with good vanilla. I think Ford tried that route with the 500/Taurua, but instead they totally missed the mark.
  • jmn1jmn1 Member Posts: 26
    Ok, I get it.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I think Ford would have nailed it if they had put a decent powertrain in that car the first time. Now, most perspective buyers know that car as being underpowered and uncompetitive, when in reality it is not.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Why is the RAV4 in this discussion again? I missed that one apparently.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    IMHO, Ford would have missed the mark whether they had offered the 3.0 or the 3.5. The car is not just plain. It has awkward proportions. From some angles, it looks fat and dumpy. It looks like an old man's car. I saw it at several auto shows, and almost no one gathered around to look at it. I don't know how Ford managed to take the Audi design genre and remove all the grace from it, but they did.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    If the Ford lost sales from the fact that it is plain (it is a conservative design) then any Camry from the last 20 years would have sold about 9 cars.

    It's conservative, yes. I still haven't found something about it that would keep me from buying it like I have on the Altima (16 year-old's Altezza taillamps) or Camry (wart on its nose, looks too puffy). It's a clean design.

    Truthfully, if its target audience (the old Taurus/Crown Vic crowd) cared so much about exterior design, why does the slab-sided yawn-box Avalon sell so well? Why do I see loads of rounded LeSabres loading the roadways?

    People aren't looking for an "exciting, groundbreaking" design in their large cars most of the time. Those type of designs get dated quickly, like the 300 has to me.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    Agree with all that you say...except you miss my point. I did NOT say the 500/Taurus' problem was that it is plain.

    Its problem is that it is worse than plain. It is both anonymous and odd-looking. The slab sided Avalon sells so well because the current iteration, definitely not groundbreaking or exciting, is tasteful and looks like understated luxury. There is nothing luxurious looking about the Taurus, but it is ostensibly competing in a group of cars that purport to offer a bit more than your average Sonata.

    But the plain jane Sonata look is less off-putting than that of the Taurus. It just doesn't hang together as a either plain car or an understated aspirational car. Even the blue hair crowd, so enamored of Buicks, isn't flocking to the thing.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I guess the very odd-looking (to me) head and taillamps are more awkward to me than anything is on the Taurus.

    image
    image
    image
    image

    To me, the Taurus is actually the classier looking car. The Avalon just comes off as awkward.

    I'm not knocking you for your view, just presenting mine. Thanks for actually having a decent conversation as opposed to beating me in the head with your views (a common occurance here these days!)
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    I don't seem to have your head in close enough proximity to beat on. ;)

    Well of course some people will like (or not like) any styling out there. But I think the marketplace has spoken on the Taurus/500. I don't have a big problem with the headlights or tail lights. Its the way the whole thing comes together. The side view and 3/4 rear view especially don't flow well. The rear window is clumsily drawn and placed. The wheelbase looks too short for the height of the car and the long front and rear overhangs. The interior isn't a standout in any way. Like I said, plain is one thing, but adding awkward to anonymous is a real skill! It isn't the attention grabber like the truly awful Pontiac Aztec for example, but it does have vestiges of that: plain shapes drawn less balanced than they easily could have been.

    Anyway, you like it. Most people don't. Consequently, Ford is not going to be able to market good numbers of Tauri until they do more than mess around with the front and back. It is the MIDDLE that crosses it off most people's list.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The best part of the car is that it offers full size room and (finally) decent V6 power for 4-cylinder midsize money.

    I'm not pricing them for myself, but instead my grandmother. A front-wheel drive SEL model is looking to be $22k AFTER all fees, taxes, and destination. That's Accord LX/Camry LE money.

    I see what you mean by the tall but not long look, makes it kind of tipsy looking. But, at the heart of it is a very good car (not OUTSTANDING) at an even better price. It makes a very good value propsition, if more people knew it had the upgraded engine and interior trim over the 500 I think it'd sell marginally better.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    OK, I can agree with that.
This discussion has been closed.