Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Uh... name from the past! It worked for Chrysler so Ford copied it. BTW the Taurus and 500 were being produced at the same time ('05 and '06). Also, the Taurus was never a full size car. The 500 has done pretty well in the reliability department. Its biggest problem was the anemic engine and overly conservative looks. As others posters have mentioned where are you going to get over 250 HP+, decent FE, and tons of room for 21 - 22 K OTD. I'll tell you.... nowhere! The only problem is it will depreciate like crazy, but if you are keeping it over 6 - 7 years that shouldn't be as big a problem.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
maybe according to the EPA but exactly the opposite of what CR found in their recent test.
anybody over the age of 35 or 40 has likely spent a lot of time with something like the GM 3.8 - they only produced 25 million of them and maybe enough of them to iron out a few kinks. GM has historically put a ridiculous 'highway' gear in their cars so that 1) the car couldn't hold that gear on anything other than a billiard table and 2) it would do pretty well under those circumstances - highway FE. It remains a dinosaur however that has long since been surpassed in whatever criteria you might choose even by GMs own 3.6.
"maybe according to the EPA but exactly the opposite of what CR found in their recent test."
I saw the CR report, but the car they tested must have been a lemon, or the tester was smoking something. I have a 2008 Sable that gets close to or better than the EPA of 18 around town, and I just completed a trip of over 1000 miles in the rolling hills and mountains of NC, VA and PA ( routes 77, 81, 70) where I got between 28 and 29 mpg.
Other 2008 Taurus and Sable owners have reported similar results.
all FE results are relative to the driver and his/her habits - CR I believe has a set 195 mile test loop that includes some highway driving as well as 'city'. They reported 18 mpg overall where things like the Avalon got 21 and the 'relative' gas hog Azera even got 19. Don't know if the car was a 'lemon' (that might be reaching a bit) or the tester was 'smoking something' (that is reaching a bunch), but they noted specifically that while the engine now had better power that it was at the penalty of FE - relative to results those same folks got with the 3.0. High 20s on the highway, while good by most definitions, is not especially remarkable for these cars anymore
being a little hard on it? Just maybe? While I'll be the first to criticize both Ford and their engines, I also believe that there is substantial evidence that the era of 'junk Fords' has passed. The 500/Taurus has been at least 'average' in most quality/reliability ratings and the Fusion has been doing better than that. Ford's real problems are obviously financial IMO and as that effects new product development and improvement.
http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/EI/2007/Lexus/2- - - - 007.lexus.es%20350.20089384-E.jpg
The Avalon has the same engine/transmission combo as the ES350, and both cars have curb weights within 50 or 60 pounds of each other. How, then, is that particular ES350 getting 15.7 Avg MPG, according to the readout in the photo above. Even if they had timed five 1/4 mile runs, five 0-60 runs, and a few slalom runs the same day they took that photo, that's still under 3 miles of track testing.
It takes dozens of miles, at least, before the ECU can update the Avg fuel economy and display it on the LED. If the car is averaging MPG in the 15's, you'd think they were running it around a track at high RPM all day, given the fact that owners of these cars claim average MPG in the low/mid-20's. But they're not running this car around a track to see if they can get lap times close to a sports car. It's a floaty soft luxury car, not a TL-S or Evo.
My whole point is: Given the facts I've stated above, why should I trust this photo any less than CR, Motortrend, C&D, etc? It's easy to point out a source that happens to show numbers that we want people to see and believe. The only fuel economy numbers I take seriously anymore are the New EPA ratings. Many people have seen their real world numbers come very close to the EPA's New City/Hwy numbers.
Yep, must be a Lexus ES... :P
Fact is, the only test that really compares apples to apples is the the EPA test, although I would assume that manufacturers tune/gear their vehicles to optimize mileage in that particular format.
I perceive the problem with even the 'new and improved' EPA test that the manufacturers knowing what the test is, can rather easily optimize a car to perform well. It was certainly worse with the 70s vintage test that was done in a laboratory and really had zero real world applicability. GM has been doing this for years with the 3.8, a 'tall' highway gear that the poor ancient engine doesn't have a prayer of holding. On the other end of the spectrum , are some of the V8s, with these 'trick' DOD systems designed to shutoff some cylinders at lower 'highway' speeds that it too has no prayer of holding. Hence the reason why things like the 300C were the most overated FE wise (under the old system). It is so variable among different drivers and conditions - to me the only thing you can really trust is what you do yourself.
Place 3.6 with DI into Lucerne and detune it to produce around 290 hp and better FE. Also Make longer wheelbase version of Lucerne as well as use 3.6 without DI on entry level Lucernes
These type of things are why I don't really like the EPA numbers and prefer real driving numbers from real people even though it is true that such things do introduce a number of variables in the results as one poster pointed out. EPA numbers are good only as they are relative to each other and not any indication necessarily of what any given driver can expect because some cars will do better in the 'real world' than others- and it's been this way for almost 40 years.
The real question is how can we read the rest of your post with a straight face? Why wouldn't I recommend a car with best-in-class interior and cargo space, an engine with power and fuel economy competitive with others in the class, but at a price that, in the real world, is thousands less than the competition? For those looking for a big-car bargain, the Taurus is it.
I just recommended someone test drive a Taurus because of its Command Seating position (the shopper is a woman under 5' tall). Guess what? I didn't even crack a smile.
Here's one just for you, though.
The mainstream "junk" Ford Fusion has higher reliability ratings than the number 1 and 2 sedans in the country, the Camry and Accord.
If you haven't looked at Ford lately, look again.
Bias against a certain maker can cause one to miss out on a good thing.
It sure can. Three Hondas park in my driveway, and many in the immediate family have them too (3 Accords - '96, '02, '06; 2 Civics - '97 and '07; and an Odyssey - '05, between all of us). It doesn't mean I don't look at competitors' offerings. Sure, I feel like the car I drive now was a winner from the competition, back in '05 when I got my '06 Accord, but how can I be sure it will be next time I buy a car unless I drive some of the competition?
agrred - however, many of us (and possibly even this poster) will have such a bias - for a good reason - past experience. In my case, I'll never ever touch a Chrysler product ever again - even if they start selling everything they make at half price.
All reflective of some tranny problems I had (with a truck) and their refusal to stand behind their badly designed (IMO) product.
I have no doubt that the 'American' products are improving and although this may really be a function of older technologies they might use, or FTM that they simply spend more time building a car (more time for QC) - it should make no difference to the car buyer. He/She is entitled to the 'best' car possible for the least actual cost possible - if that happens to be a Ford product (or whoever) so be it. Just don't ever ask me to spend any of my money on a Chrysler!
actually no - I checked, the Average FE displayed updates every 8 seconds, so that at the beginning of a tank it will change very rapidly (almost like an 'instanteous' display and then obviously slow down substantially later in the tank. The Av also resets its FE display EVERY tank - something I rather it didn't but also a reason for low mileage displays (something also true for the ES?). If your contention here that CR is fibbing about the way they test for FE and are instead basing their 'results' on a 3 mile test drive as opposed to the 195 mile one they claim, what could possibly be their motivation? And BTW under the conditions of acceleration & slalom testing any of these cars including a Taurus/Avalon/ES would do very well to be getting 15.7 mpg as would a Honda Civic!
So... the verdict? I still would pick my Avalon over the Max by a slim margin. Although the Max is a better handler it still is a big heavy FWD car that suffers from the same set of problems as my Avalon. My Avalon feels faster (probably is by a few tenths) and is quieter on the road. The CVT is just plain weird, especially went stomping on it at around 55 and the engine hits redline and just stays there. The car continues to pull strong, but you are just waiting for a shift that never happens. However, there was a manual mode and I guess I could get used to it.
Having said all that, I am now anxiously awaiting the '09 Maxima. With more power and a much better interior it could serve as a replacement for my Av. Currently its a nice ride, built well, and there is nothing bad I can say about the VQ. Its a tick noiser than the 2 GR in my Av but at least it sounds good. Overall, MPG was a tad over 21 (per the computer) and included a mix of city/hwy driving and quite a few full throttle excursions.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
Especially interesting to hear they've quelled the torque steer. That was always said to be the bane of that entire generation of Alt/Max's.
When I drove the Max in '06 I drove the SL model and I think you are spot on it saying that the ride compares to the Av Touring. The SE model may be a tad too firm for my tastes. However, the ride was far from jarring or harsh. I wonder if the new Max will offer two suspension options like the current model? Who knows, with Nissan going back to the "4DSC" theme they may even offer something more sporty and tightened up than the current SE.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
I, for one, will believe Ford's claims once it shows me the same sort of reliabilties etc. LINE wide and probably as confirmed by some organization that is not in it for the money...
Does one really exist??
On another note a colleague had a Dodge Charger rental recently with the 2.7 V6.... it had so little power that he argued with me it was a 4cyl. It just makes me wonder why on Earth they even put that engine in that car. Must be for the fleets.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
But isn't that indeed what they DID say - something about the HP/acceleration compared to a 528 if I recall correctly., not to mention other claims about interior space etc - something that would technically be true if they were comparing the BMW to a minivan! The reason I mention Hyundai's ads specifically is that they (like these Ford claims) strain any reasonable definition of creditability and really just need to be laughed at. They both could use a new advertising agency.
Yeah, that a fact but a useless one just like when I say that I am taller than Chris Paul...
Hyundai used factual information in their comparisons, where as Ford is making a claim that is substantiated by what?
Depends on who is looking at the information. If you were a point guard in the NBA, then it would mean something. The Sonata and 528 are mid-size sedans, with a huge price gap between the two. Simply put...Hyundai simply said you can get a mid-sized sedan with more horsepower and more interior space than a 5-Series for MUCH less.
So...since you don't play in the NBA...you're right, the information is useless.
possibly only by improvements in a Mexican built sedan - who knows - only their advertising agency knows for sure.
That Hyundai should even mention a BMW anything, in any context, is a joke all by itself, is a mistake on Hyundai's part, and yes things like this are definitely a pet peeve of mine - anything (or anybody) pretending to be something it plainly isn't.
Here are the facts: Sonata / 528
Curb weight: 3458 / 3505
Horsepower: 234 / 230
Torque: 226 / 200
Max horsepower: 6000 / 6500 rpm
Max torque: 3500 / 2750 rpm
Okay...so the hp claim has been substantiated. Can it out accelerate a 528...good question. The 528 hits it's max torque quicker, but the Sonata reaches max hp quicker and has more torque, however...the Sonata is a tad bit lighter than the 528 too.
Now...let's talk about interior space...
Front head room: 40.1 / 37.7
Front shoulder room: 57.4 / 57.3
Front leg room: 43.7 / 41.5
Rear head room: 38.2 / 37
Rear shoulder room: 56.9 / 57.2
Rear leg room: 37.4 / 36
Luggage capacity: 16.3 / 14 cu. ft.
Once again, substantiated fact that the Sonata has more interior space than the 528...hands down!
Now...show me or tell me at what point Hyundai ever said they were trying to get one to believe that they were trying to sell something like a 528. Show me where it is said that Hyundai mentions a Soanta providing the performance of a 528. Show me where Hyundai states that the Sonata offers the driving dynamics of a 528 for much less. My friend, all that has been said is...more horsepower and more room than a 5-Series for much less. A 5-Series starts out around $44K (MSRP) and the Sonata starts out around $24K (MSRP). I guess a $20K difference DEFINITELY qualifies it as MUCH less as well.
Hyundai isn't pretending to be anything but a company that provides consumers with value based options that actually exceed what one might think a value based product should be about. It's okay to be peeved, simply because you've been brainwashed into believing that things MUST be a certain way or follow a certain order. Like I said before, Hyundai is breaking the mold of what an auto manufacturer is supposed to be...and it's making a lot of folks nervous.
Hyundai seems to be doing nothing but pretending these days, whether it be a be a Veracruz, Sonata, Azera, or even the 'never to be seen' Genesis, I'm not sure that they are not pretending to be a whole lot more than what they think. Maybe what they really need to do is find out what they can about the Azera as related to a 7 series or an LS etc. etc. As I said, a new advertising agency would certainly help IMO.
Wow...on one hand you give props on the Azera, but yet...you turn around and say Hyundai is a pretender. Pray tell, just what are they pretending? Is there increased success pretend? Is the whole "bang for buck" premise pretend? Is their improved quality ratings pretend? Please, tell me what it is they are pretending to be. I've had two Hyudai vehicles in the last 6 years, I put 105K miles on one in 4 years and I have around 50K miles on my current one in 2 years...neither have given me any problems or cost me any money outside of regular maintenance. I guess I'm pretending too, huh? You're funny.
Actually...the Azera has been rightfully compared to the likes of the Avalon and Maxima. However, the upcoming Genesis has been compared to the S-Class and 7-Series...remember? More room than either! It's just eating you up and you know what...I LOVE IT!!!
Oh yeah, we won't even mention the Veracruz comparo that was done against the Lexus RX...successfully I might add. Yeah...that's some serious pretending. :P