Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
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
http://www.freep.com/article/20091006/BUSINESS0102/91006049/1319/Taurus-sees-hig- h-demand-in-Calif
It's too early to tell how long it will last, but it's certainly off to a great start all things considered.
I am betting my money (25 cents, to be exact) on my view, but I am hoping your view wins...
Most of the attention understandably has gone to the SHO and some of the electronic gadgets on the upper level tauruses.
But, assuming that most SE buyers aren't interested in or can't afford the gizmoes and gadgets, how has the powertrain, engine, suspension, braking, steering, seating, power and fuel economy changed from SE2009 to SE2010.
Well, considering SE Taurus models are fleet-only, I'd say its a moot point. That said, fuel economy numbers are officially unchanged, as is engine output, but given the weight gain, I'd expect small penalties to both at best. As far as handling/ride/seating, that's probably so subjective you should simply test drive!
Seriously, twin turbo V6s have been around since at least the late 80s. That Ford is so max hyping such an old technology is sad more than anything else.
And no, I do not own, or plan to own in the near future, a Ford, lest I be accused of being biased or even working for them. I drive an import 30+ mpg 4-cylinder. :shades:
The game changer will be the 2.0L Ecoboost that will give 4 cylinder fuel economy with V6 power. It will debut next year in the new Explorer.
I can't think of any off the top of my head.
The combination of the technologies in the kind of volume Ford will pump out is what has changed.
Audi has had direct injection Turbo engines for a while but not many of them were twin turbo, none of them ran on regular gas and none of them were made in the massive Volume ford is going to be making ecoboost engines in.
I understand that RWD is an superior setup in terms of overall performance, but this is mostly true only under conditions of extreme acceleration (off the line or turning while accelerating). Given that this type of driving is typically ill-advised in normal traffic conditions, I'll take the trade-off in performance to be able to get around reliably in the winter.
I don't know because the ecoboost Taurus is AWD, not FWD and it can send 100% of the torque to the rear wheels if necessary.
To answer your question though it is for packaging and economic reasons. You could never build a business case for the SHO unless it was based on the regular Taurus platform.
You said twin turbo V6s have been around since the late 80s I said name one. You failed.
Off the top of my head the Maserati Bi-Turbo was around in the 80s and everything else was single turbo.
You had plenty of turbo SAABs but again single turbo only and 4 cylinders. The 911 was single turbo until the mid 90s.
The first somewhat mass market Twin Turbo V6 I can think of was the Dodge Stealth RT Turbo/Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4. They first came out in 1990 and got about 290 hp out of a 3.0 liter twin turbo V6 and AWD. They got that engine up to 320 hp by 1997. Power and features stayed the same till the model was discontinued around 2001. It was a heavy beast though with nearly 3,800 lbs of curb weight. That turns out to be about 400 lbs lighter then a SHO Taurus that has more power, granted out of a somewhat larger engine, can seat four or five comfortably and gets better mileage. Mileage on the 3000GT is 16/22 according to the new test and the SHO is 17/25.
3000GT Taurus SHO
As for it being bloated compared to other sedans with similar equipment and features it weighs about the same.
2010 SHO Vs. A6 3.2 A6 4.2 and M45X
Those cars are all smaller by seven to ten inches, all have less horse power and only one gets better mileage. They all weigh within 200 lbs of a SHO.
Are you sure GM is gaining RETAIL market share?
As far as marketshare, GM is gaining overall share because they are dumping Chevy Impalas, Malibus and Cobalts all over the rental car companies, more than the Koreans.
Ford is gaining retail marketshare because they have a better business plan and are using (19) "Whiz kids" (PhD's) to analyze pricing models and have already yielded $1.9 Billion in net sales increase in the first half of this year alone. I expect Ford to post a real surprise profit for Q3 next week.
Also, consider the following improvements to Ford products that will drive increase retail marketshare:
- F150 trucks - (2) new V8 engines - 5.0 and 6.2 by Q2
- 2011 SuperDuty trucks with new 6.2 V8 and 6.7 Ford Diesel, plus 6-speed trans
- Mustang gets 3.5 V6 and 5.0 V8 with 400 HP in Q2
- Transit Connect small commercial van with electric in 2010
- Fiesta "B" segment small car - over 50,000 interested buyers already
- 2.0L I4 EcoBoost engine (250HP) with 6-speed dual-dry clutch trans
- Upgraded Edge, MKX CUVs by Q2 and awesome new Explorer by yearend
- All new Focus in late 2010 with electric in 2011
- 3.5 V6 EcoBoost in F150 by yearend with superior 24+ MPG (400ft-lbs torque)
- and a few surprises....
GM is not sitting on its heels. The number of new products--just here, coming and proposed--is a long list. They are more focused as well, having dispensed with Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer, Saab, and Opel. Chevy's 2010 Equinox has leapfrogged the very good Escape (roomier, quieter, more economical, better styled). Chevrolet has a bew subcompact and full-size sedans coming, and the already good Malibu will be replaced again in 2012. GMC is revamping things. The Buick Enclave and 2010 Lacrosse are great vehicles in their segments, and the coming Regal will be even better. Cadillac already has rear drive platforms and is expanding their RWD offerings by several more models, including one to compete with the BMW 3 series. The new FWD-based SRX is selling very well.
The world has changed. Every manufacturer will have to scramble and improve each and every year, or they will eventually fail. Those who issue a new model here and there (Volvo, Saab, Suzuki, Chrysler, etc.) are struggling more. The high end marques are losing market share as well. Meanwhile, companies like Kia, Hyundai and Subaru quietly increase their market share even in this recession.
Practically everything on the market these days is a good car...practically all the crap is gone. But being good is no longer enough. Ford knows that now. But GM does too. They have no more illusions that dumping cars in fleets will help them solve their problems. Consequently, we are going to see a lot of game-changing stuff, from surprising places at times. It will be even more fun for buyers.
I didn't mention anything about the GM 60 day return policy and honestly haven't read the details of the program. I wouldn't even try to debate if it is a scam or not because I don't know anything about it. I haven't bothered to read any of the details.
Maybe you should take a look at what I was talking about, Fleet sales and rental dumping, and see if has anything to do with what you wrote about.
Maybe I should ask you how my cell phone can pay for itself free. now that sounds like a scam
Examples of such "advances" I could live without include but are not limited to:
1) BLIS (I have a neck that rotates and rearview mirrors)
2) Superintense exotic gas headlights (the old one were just fine and much less expensive). These new lamps often are alimed improperly and blind on-coming drivers.
3) Headlights that point around the corner as you turn. Again I use my neck and eyes. The more moving parts a car has the more potential for expensive repairs.
4) Adaptive cruise control. So even less attention can be paid to the changes occuring before you? What's next? Autopilot?
5) Fog lights. These do absolutely nothing to enhance forward vision in fog or rain (check it out, it's true) and are simply a decoration that some think says "sporty", I say stupid. Turn them off except when rain or fog so others will not have to deal with all the lumens.
6) Exotic Sound Systems. Give me the basic under $500 system. A car is not a concert hall and the acoustics are very compromised by the small space. Make the Levinson and other systems optional as an upgrade. I don't care about MP3, iPod or Blackberry connections, make them optional.
7) Larger tires. Nowadays the trend is toward 19" and 20" tires and wheels. Paying more for a more punishing ride. Leave these to the true sport cars or the pimp cars. Now a set of tires costs >$800. 16 or 17" just fine for me.
8) motorized drivers' (and passengers' seats). Probably $900 and 160 pounds of unnecessary junk. If you are so lazy you can pull a lever to adjust position, you are pathetic. As an option=okay. Don't ask me to pay for it.
9) Power trunk opening or closing. Again how lazy are you?
10) Navigation systems and touch screens that print incoming phone calls. How many ways do you want to be distracted?
11) Elegant, soft touch interiors with pretty buttons. It's a fricking car not a living room. I drive it from place to place I don't live in it. I'll put the money into my house.
12) Shifting paddles on Steering wheel. In most cars this is a form of delusion that you are a good driver and the car is a sportscar that would benefit from a few milliseconds faster shifts. Just more to break.
And, lest I be thought a complete curmudgeon, let me suggest a feature I would like to see. A rain sensor that closes all ports if no one is in the car (windows, moonroof). I can turn on the wipers if I need them but I can't close up the car if a sudden storm comes around when I am on the back nine.
You will not be surpirsed to find that I am from New England and I am thrifty. Not the norm but not alone either (I hope).
pod: I see your point, but I think there comes a point where it becomes cheaper to manufacture if options become standard...back in the 60s and 70s, there was a time when power steering, power brakes and air conditioning were optional, but as time progressed, they became standard items because a vast majority of buyers wanted them...plus, as Honda and Toyota were growing in the 80s and 90s, it was them who made just a few packages (example: Accord DX, LX, EX) where ease of manufacture was the norm for them...DX was relatively stripped, LX was moderately equipped for most, and EX had all the bells and whistles...
I think at one time someone figured it out that GM could make something like 1.5 million variations of a given model (or maybe all models combined) by adding or subtracting an option here or there...
Out of your entire list, I agree with most except Xenon headlights (wish I had them, properly adjusted, of course), motorized seats (set 'em once and forget 'em, but gives short folks like me the ability to alter any angle, "average" settings simply do not fit me)...and, one item you omitted...adjustable pedals...we have them on our Crown Vic and Ram 1500, and it is nice not to have the steering wheel in our chest so we can reach the pedals...if you are of average height or taller, you would not understand, but if you are short, movable pedals (3 inches of movement) are better than round tires and wheels...
I jest
But if I may, I'd like to reply to some of your points...
1.) BLIS: It isn't to replace looking over your shoulder, it's there to do what it said; alert you to a car in your blind spot. I've looked over my shoulder and not seen right away a car in the blind spot. At 70 MPH, I don't want to spend 2-3 seconds looking the opposite direction that my car is moving, and BLIS would provide an extra set of eyes.
2.) High-Intensity Headlamps: They're brighter, and when properly adjusted, provide a wider spray of light without blinding people. They are more expensive to replace, however.
3.) Adaptive Headlamps: Your neck and eyes can't shine light into a turn. Do you drive with a flashlight? As someone who turns left into a dark, hard-to-see wooded driveway everytime I drop off my girlfriend, I'd welcome the feature. I don't take that many curvy roads at night though, so maybe I'm more interested in cornering lamps than adaptive ones. I dunno...
4.) Adaptive Cruise: I agree. If traffic is such that you can't maintain a speed with normal cruise, you should be using your foot anyway.
5.) Fog Lamps: Great when used properly (I've used them in my parents '08 Taurus). When dark, and driving on their road (on the beach) used with parking lamps or low beams, they're great, because they shine the light from a much lower place on the front of the car, preventing glare from the cloud.
6.) Great Sound-Systems: Make 'em optional. Not everybody wants to listen to talk or AM radio; give me good sound if I'm already paying $20k+
7.) Larger Tires: On the Taurus, it looks silly with anything smaller than 17 or 18. It's simply too large.
8.) Power Seats: My grandmother is 74, 5'1", and struggles to reach the lever between her legs to pull the seat UP the track to a more forward positon. I don't have a problem with it.
9.)Power openings: Never really seen these much on a car, but in a van, power doors and hatch are great when your hands are full, especially in the rain.
10.) Navigation: The Ford system is voice-guided, and reads your messages to you. You can even place a call with it and never have your hands leave the wheel.
11.) Nice Interior: See the second photo I posted. If you don't expect a nice interior for your $30,000 car, well, you should. I expect good tactile quality from my television remote, I sure expect it from my car. Why not?
12.) It's not to make it shift faster; its to make it driver-controlled. Great for engine braking, etc, and it doesn't even require removing your hands from the high quality steering wheel.
Not trying to pick a fight, but rather explain the other side of why people find these features handy. Personally, I drive two midsize, middle-trim-level 4-cylinder cars. My folks have an 08 Taurus SEL with Sync, Leather, Convenience Package, Sirius SatRad that I helped them find and purchase.
TheGrad
I'm 6'5" and get it. I'd love to be able to slide them back further so that I could actually stretch my legs a bit.
160 lbs for power seats are you serious? Try like 10 lbs tops. How much do you think that little electric motor weighs? Everything else is the same as the manual seats. All the tracks still have to be there but the power seats give you more adjustment typically and the controls are lighter. Two or three little buttons weight less then three or four large levers and knobs. The whole driver seat weighs 50 or 60 lbs even with all the air bags and heating elements in them.
Graduate: I disagree about the blind spot. The correct positioning of the side mirrors should show none of your car in the side mirror when your head is vertical. A tilt to the right should then show the slightest bit of the car and a tilt to the left likewise. This eliminates the blind spot and also prevents the lights of trailing vehicles from adding to the eye load when in the neutral position. It is not a shoulder turn (that's why the mirrors are there); it is a head tilt. A shoulder turn helps confirm the mirrors info but doesn't involve the mirrors and when set this way is unnecessary (I do it from instinct and habit).
What does the BLIS system do in stop and go traffic? It just seems unnecessary to me and if it is integrated into a greater safety logic algorithm it may be a disaster if (in a few years) there is a wandering ground or some wire pinched outside the harness.
I agree that many of the points are simply a matter of taste and subjective. I want the lightest simplest car c/w safety and economy.
I do also disagree about the fog lights. Except when crawling slowly along an unlit country road (as you describe) they shed no useful light. At twenty mph you are outrunning them. I did engage in a long discussion about this here in the edmunds forums (probably under lights or accessories) more than a year ago and most agreed. Indeed some argued they are for other cars to see you better in the fog--others argued that special colored lights were optimal. Most agreed that they were simply sporty decorations under most driving conditions. In most states it is against the law to have them on unless it is raining or foggy.
Thank you gentlemen for the opportunity to engage in a discussion about these points. I am a minimalist and did look at the Graduate's little red car with some longing....not enough...but still.
We can agree to disagree about BLIS. I feel it has merit if only for two long-shot reasons:
1.) I'm 6'5", and can't adjust my mirrors perfectly in all cars. I have no problem in most, but in my '96 Accord, I reach the edge of the adjustment level just before I have them right. I still see a bit of car.
2.) Vehicles in the mirror aren't necessarily moving at your speed. I've looked in my mirrors, saw nothing, only to lookover my shoulder and prepare to merge when I see a motorcycle in my blind spot. Apparently, he was managing to stay out of view as I adjusted myself to check whether or not the lane was clear. It's only been one instance, but while it rattled me, I bet he or she on the bike needed new underwear!
I agree about the foglamps in general, but they do have their place for a select few. I would want to pay for them here in Birmingham.
Thanks for some great talking points here!
TG
Exactly - using your mirrors (properly adjusted) and glancing over your shoulder means you have no blind spot.
I think BLIS is fine as an added safety measure - for those times when you forget to glance over your shoulder or you don't like having your mirrors adjusted that way. But I do not see it as a necessity or a huge safety improvement.
There is a button on the dash to turn it off if you are getting a lot of false negatives in stop and go bumper to bumper traffic. It will pick up motorcycles and it does pick up a car a couple of car lengths before it enters your blind spot.
With the size of the pillars in modern cars and the currently in style coupe like rear profile the back C pillar in a sedan can be quite large. One of the worst offenders of this is the new Lexus IS models. Go drive one of those and check out the enormous blind spot. Just backing one up is difficult with the huge rear pillars and enormous bangle butt trunk.
I don't think Lexus offers a BLISS type system on that car but they do offer a backup camera and you need one.
A 1999 or 2000 S80 or XC70 could be a very troublesome scary car.
A 2005 or 2006 S80 or XC70 was usually fine.
A 2007 of either one are great cars.
The 2010s and up are fantastic too.
Both of these issues have been corrected and should not impact the 2010 Taurus or 2010 MKS.