Back in '89, the Chevrolet Lumina arrived to take on America's sweetheart: the Ford Taurus. The swoopy-shaped FoMoCo four-door kicked the Lumina's butt seven ways to Sunday. The Taurus continued to crush The Official Car of Disney World– until Dearborn's astrological automobile hit the skids, knocked off its perch by Toyota's handiwork. The Taurus slid into fleet-only sales, replaced by the lackluster Five Hundred. Meanwhile, Chevy replaced the Lumina with the Impala and walked away from the full-sized Ford. And now Ford's back with the resuscitated Ford Taurus. Gentlemen, Ford or Chevy? Place your bets!
Introducing, in the Bow Tie corner, a genuine best seller! For real!. At the turn of the last century, Chevy took the dubya-bodied Lumina, haphazardly re-skinned it and slapped the famous Impala logo on the grille. Seven years later, after a few tweaks and a cleaner profile, the Impala has become GM's best selling passenger car (fleet sales notwithstanding). Year-to-date to June, The General's sold some 144,451 Impalas.
Though it never grabbed headlines like the so fresh, so clean Chrysler 300, the wrong-wheel drive Impala quietly raked in the greenbacks for a cash-deprived General Motors. And if you (conveniently) overlook the acres of American-made Camcords, the Lumina-cum-Impala is still the best selling domestic car on the market. It's even had a bit of a bounce of late, as Chevy-loyal SUV refugees succumb to the Impala's frugal and capacious charms.
Once you jettison the "parking lots filled with refrigerator-white fleet bodies" slam to the base unit and drop the "torque steer monster" insults to the SS variant, the Chevrolet Impala emerges as one of the most popular full-size sedans. And why not? Forget the dull styling, lousy road manners and crude materials, and you'll find a comfy ride with several trim levels sporting mad value-added skills. Like, awesome.
And now, presenting, in the blue corner, the fairly competent but totally uncool Ford Five Hundred! Bred from a meticulously cost-engineered, well-aged Volvo platform, wearing the most generic lines this side of a Levittown township, sporting a boring name and cursed with an overburdened powertrain and a silly-ass transmission, the five bills Ford designed to restore luster to The Blue Oval didn't.
The Five Hundred has rarely sold over 10k units a month. Considering the startup costs of a new platform and a thoroughly modernized Chi-town facility, that's gotta hurt. Months after launch, production was lowered to meet demand. Sales in 2006 barely crested 84k, some 70 percent below the Impala's sales for the same period.
So while Ford struggles, GM's laughing all the way to the bank; their sedan from the Tone Lōc school of thought is a money-making sleeper. Yes but– the Impala ain't no beancounted wild thang. The W-body is primed to get knocked off its high horse. Cue the Rocky training sequence, as the Five Hundred pumps iron to become… the fifth generation Taurus!
The pride of FoMoCo's Chicago plant is ready with a dollop of new sheetmetal, a Volvo-bashing marketing strategy (America's safest car!), a larger and more refined Duratec six-banger and one unforgettable name. All of the Five Hundred's shortcomings are addressed (if not entirely cured) in the mildly updated, mildly appealing 2008 Ford Taurus.
Ford's bullish about the model's brand heritage, but there are plenty who hate the Taurus. Memories of exploding head gaskets and grenaded transaxles fade slowly. Some go the other way: SHO-ing the sedan some love for the design revelation that saved Ford's bacon. Odds are most Americans recognize the name and will listen to Dearborn's elevator-pitch before making up their minds.
Truth to tell, there's not much chance that the Five Hundred redux will take the market by storm. Still, The Glass House Gang deserves some credit for finally realizing that constant evolution is the way Fordward- even if the move was motivated more by financial constraints than strategic sagacity.
Anyway, how could the Taurus not improve Ford's sales disparity with the Impala? Put another way, Ford has a two out three shot of making a bigger score with the Five Hundred's replacement just by name alone. Look out Impala: the Ford vs. Chevy battle is about to begin, again.
Unfortunately, this match is not likely to be as well-attended as the epic battles of days gone by. Years of customer indifference to half-assed redesigns and the smell of fleet sales spirit (not to mention the constant action over at Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia and Nissan) have emptied the stands.
Both Ford and Chevrolet will have to work a lot harder to recapture the public imagination. How about a title bout between a full-fledged rear-wheel motivated Impala and a sharp-looking, smooth-riding, Mustang-based Ford Galaxie?
For now, both combatants are losers, desperately clawing for respect among those who currently start (and finish) their sedan search at their local transplant dealer. Ford vs. Chevy. Someone will win, but does anyone really care?
Days of Thunder, baby! Where’s Cole Trickle when you need him?
Ford showed a 500 concept that was a lot closer in styling and panache to the Chrysler 300. Alas, what appeared in showrooms was as dull as dishwater.
Can either of these cars rise above rental-car status?
Mr. Mehta made full and complete use of his thesaurus for this write up! Well done, well done! But, alas, as MX5bob said implied, who cares?
If the 500 never was and the Taurus was introduced in this trim from the git go, I really think it would have done adequately. Although few if any noticed the 500 I think they will notice having not noticed this supposed Taurus and move on. Its unfortunate too, because its actually a good car.
I might be in the minority (the numbers prove it) but I have to say the 500 looked pretty classy, a dignified daily driver. I don’t think the Taurus name fits the product very well and is too tarnished with the Everycar brand history. The Impala just doesn’t do it for me, but as the driver of a milquetoast 2001 Lumina I’ve got provenly poor taste (I blame the wife). I like what Ford has been doing lately and I hope they can turn things around behind the snazzy Fusion and popular Escape… with any luck, Detroit wins either way as GM and Ford start producing desirable cars.
Both Ford and Chevrolet will have to work a lot harder to re-capture the public imagination. How about a title bout between a full-fledged rear-wheel motivated Impala and a sharp-looking, smooth-riding, Mustang-based Ford Galaxie?
Therein lies the crux of the argument. It won’t be a real Ford vs. Chevy matchup until they start building American cars again.
I feel Ford is, at this point, grasping at straws. What cachet does the Taurus moniker have? If you’ve driven one lately, not much. Sure, when it was introduced, it was a groundbreaking design and package. But true to form, Ford let it languish.
My grandparents had a 1st-gen Sable and it was a very good car: comfortable, adequately powerful, and stylish. They took that car on many trips all over the country without major problems though around 90K miles, the water pump failed and the seat belt warning chime would not turn off.
When my grandmother wanted to replace it, she bought a 1995 Sable and remarked that it wasn’t as nice as her first. And it wasn’t. The plastics were cheap, the seats uncomfortable, fit and finish was laughable. The 3.0 engine was a lame dog– forget passing when there were 4 butts in seats.
Now she has a 2004 Taurus because she just needs basic transportation and that’s just barely what it is. It’s an SES and has the cheapest interior this side of a Chrysler. The transmission takes forever to shift (for that extra smoothness) that you have to floor it to accelerate decently. At 28,000 miles, the A/C has developed a leak, the fuel gauge reads 3/4 full when there’s a full tank, the blower motor has gone twice.
Ford, there’s a reason we stopped buying Tauruses and if you think you’ll sell on name recognition, you’re crazy.
Did you just say Thang?
The new Taurus is a step in the right direction. I dont know what else to say…. Hopefully they did not add torque steer to this Thang.
Nice story, Sajeev!
But, I am a little disappointed, I was expecting a “comparison” review where you would really put these two evergreen nameplates head on against each other. I am sure you can lay your hands on these two chariots if you turn on (up) your charm and show up at your loacal Ford and Chevy dealers? So, c’me on, drive these two against each other and let’s have the results!
Too little too late.
Day late and a dollar short.
The new fuel regs bill that just passed the Senate is sure to kill the Detroit 3 if made into law. I think the new standards kick in in 2012? It takes 5 years to develop a new powertrain. They needed to start yesterday.
Ooops. Switched into Deathwatch mode there. Sorry.
86er: will it be a real Ford vs. Chevy matchup when the cars are Australian? Because if you’re talking about RWD, then they’ll be engineered in Oz, and built by Canucks, just like the next-generation Impala. Sorry to say, the Camry/Accord are probably way more American (designed, engineered, and manufactured–at least partially). Someone needs to write a story about how the only “American” cars still being made by the domestics are full-size trucks, SUV’s, a couple sports cars (Mustang, Vette, Viper), and a couple of Cadillacs.
I thought the picture was of my long-ago-sold late-198x black … Tempo! This car has got to be better than the picture…& I hate those horizontal grill slats!
About those quality complaints, I don’t have any. My 1996 Sable has 200+K miles, drips a little oil now but never had a problem. My 2000 Sable has 135k & is running perfect like the first. DOHC 4 valve engine is the one to have.
86er: will it be a real Ford vs. Chevy matchup when the cars are Australian? Because if you’re talking about RWD, then they’ll be engineered in Oz, and built by Canucks, just like the next-generation Impala. Sorry to say, the Camry/Accord are probably way more American (designed, engineered, and manufactured–at least partially). Someone needs to write a story about how the only “American” cars still being made by the domestics are full-size trucks, SUV’s, a couple sports cars (Mustang, Vette, Viper), and a couple of Cadillacs.
We’re not in disagreement here. I know all that, but an American car doesn’t have to built there, catch my drift?
Ford would probably have better chances if they would wrap the 427 concept sheetmetal over their Panther platform, add a slightly better tuned v8 (after all, they squeezed 300 horses out of the same engine for the Marauder, so we know it can be done)
Or just about any other V8 they have laying around, it’s not like they have to stretch their production capacity because the explorers/expeditions are flying off the lots.
But I recognize changing the name of the fff500 to Taurus is less costly, even though I wonder what good can come out of it. When I see a Taurus on the road, I don’t think “wow, this was really innovative 15 years ago!”.
The Ford Taurus looks like its going to be a good car. But like all Ford products, it’s going to get neglected. We’ll be stuck with the same Ford Taurus with the same 3.5L Duratech and basic body styling for 6 years. Sure they’ll offer slight changes. The first year they’ll probably offer a couple new colors of paint, and maybe reposition a cup holder. Year 2 and 3 they’ll “refreshen” the car with a slight change in tail lights, head lights, and grill, oh my! By year 4, its about time Ford added a new trim, like SLS, or GLS or any random configuration of letters that 99% of the people have no idea what they stand for. For the new trim they’ll offer you a bunch of extras that will once again prompt TTAC to write an article questioning why you would ever buy a Mercury. Year 5, they’ll reposition the cup holder again. Year 6, slash and burn pricing, and finally a new Taurus which probably will still use the same Duratech 3.5L.
For Ford to win, it will have to keep the Taurus fresh (Was the Taurus ever fresh??)and make constant material changes every 2 or 3 years. Otherwise, mark my words, we’ll still be looking at the same exact car 6 years from now.
I was at my Ford dealer this week for an oil change on my 2005 Mustang and saw the new Taurus. A real improvement over the 500 in both performance, looks (sans the fusion-like rear light casings / covers which cheapen the overall classy look), and some of the interior materials.
I have not driven the new Taurus yet—but I think there is no reason to believe the drivetrain changes won’t greatly improve performance (the 500 was a pretty low bar).
The $1M dollar question is—will this help Ford ?
Well, Ford’s goal is to stabilize share–which means by definition they need to keep their current customers. I think the Taurus gives Ford a better chance of doing this than the 500.
In current form—I also think the Taurus is a better overall value proposition than the Impala. I agree, however, with Sanjeev that the “new” Taurus will not woo Camry, Avalon, or Accord buyers unless they are swayed by the safety story an/or AWD.
Last Ford needs to rack up a couple more years of outstanding quality before perception changes ( I do expect the Taurus to be “red dot” in Consumer Reports).
Hrrmmm Hyundai Azera for $35k CAD or a Ford Taurus for $32k… the power is the same, the Ford is a little better looking, Freedom Ford here in Edmonton has spectacular service and the Ford’s going to be discounted pretty well in about 6 months… ya know, I think I’ll take the Ford, oh don’t get me wrong that Azera might look good, drive smooth and be priced in the same range but when I’m done with my car, I’d like to be able to sell it for more than $5k, and Hyundai hasn’t exactly gotten that reputation yet. Oh don’t get me wrong, a Taurus will have poor resale value too but it’ll sure be better than the Hyundai. As for the Chevy… well I just hate GM, I don’t see myself ever owning another GM their reputation is worse than Hyundai.
I’ve driven one of these and it’s actually quite a compelling product. Interior is better and more comfortable than an Impala, it rides better and the steering is tighter.
This, along with the Fusion and F-series give Ford pretty good coverage of the 2 largest segments.
It’s a shame they still flog other turdmobiles like the US-Spec Focus and the underwhelming Escape.
Basic Comparison
Ford Taurus:
Engine: 3.5L V6 DOHC Advanced Variable Cam Timing
Power: 263HP 249 LB/Torque
Tranny: 6 Speed Auto
MPG: 18/28 Front Wheel Drive
Starting Price SEL: $23,245
Chevy Impala:
Engine: 3.5L (SOHC? Anyone know?) V6 VVT
Power: 211HP 214 LB/Torque
Tranny: 4 Speed Auto….
MPG: 18/29
Starting Price LS: $21,940
The Impala looks like it would be a great car… if it was 1995. At least on Paper, the Taurus base model v. base model blows away the Impala.
For $4000 more than the base Taurus you can get the Impala LTZ with:
Engine: 3.9L V6 VVT
Power: 233HP 240 LB/Torque
Tranny: 4 Speed Auto….
MPG: 17/25
Starting Price LTZ: $27,515
(Not impressed)
Hyundai is already starting to carry a higher resale than most Ford and Chevy models in quite a few areas. You can bet if Ford files everything will hold its value better too. That’s one thing you won’t have to worry about with Hyundai – they are making profits each quarter.
Engine: 3.5L (SOHC? Anyone know?) V6 VVT
The impala with 3.5 and 3.9 are pushrod engines. Both are a feat of engineering where the VVT is done inside the crank case. GM hates OHC designs…
3.5:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_High_Value_engine#LZE
3.9:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_High_Value_engine#LZ9
In GM speak, “high value” means cheap. If Toyota can rub 268 hp (and more importantly 250 lb/ft torque) with their 3.5, the output of both those engines are a little lacking.
tms1999
I believe the new Ford 3.5 is DOHC 4 valve per cylinder.
I have noticed that the Toy 3.5 you noted is delivering better mpg in road tests than the old 3.0 & 3.3.
Your translation of GM speak sounds dead on to me. GM’s two valvers have a reputation for being frugal but the better “new school” engines are spanking them on power and economy. Those antiques should have disappeared long ago.
Orian:
“Hyundai is already starting to carry a higher resale than most Ford and Chevy models in quite a few areas”
Orion—do you have a link for this data to support your comment—I’d be interested to access it.
I have a question isn’t the Impala’s 3.5 & 3.9 V6 a bored out slightly updated version of the 3.1 that came out in the early 80’s. Or is this an all new design and I’m just confused?
In person and on paper, the new Taurus is a superior car to the 500 and Impala. The real challenge is getting people into the showroom.
I disagree with RGS920, however: I think Ford has learned their lesson with respect to letting their bread & butter products rot on the vine. Even internally, the employees have catchphrases for that practice such as “release and abandon” and “Crown Vic it.” Even the clueless have to know it was that practice burned them in the past, and I highly doubt that kind of indifference is allowed with the new management (meaning: those that stayed and those that came on board to clean up the mess.)
Another thought: If the resurrection of the Taurus is indeed ‘Mulally’s baby’ then it is reasonable to assume that it is going to be on his radar. I’ll bet that the people in charge of managing it’s current and future development will handle it as if their careers depend on it…
A thought on the choice of picture, which is a Taurus parked outside of J.R. Ewing’s house.
What would J.R. drive? Not a Taurus, nor an Impala in their current Volvo based and Accord look-alike guises, respectively.
“I have a question isn’t the Impala’s 3.5 & 3.9 V6 a bored out slightly updated version of the 3.1 that came out in the early 80’s. Or is this an all new design and I’m just confused?”
Yeah, the 3.5 and 3.9 are basically an update of the old 3.1/3.4 V6s. If I understand right, it’s a fairly thorough redesign, not a slight one, but it’s not an all-new design. tms1999’s links have more info (scroll up to the top).
tms1999: Comparing the power output of Toyota’s 3.5 OHC engine to GM’s 3.5 OHV isn’t entirely fair. An OHC engine has less rotational mass, which allows for more power. A better comparison to Toyota’s 3.5 would be GM’s 3.6 “high-feature” OHC engine, which produces between 250 and 275 hp.
tms1999 . . .
263HP/249ft-lbs versus 268HP/250ft-lbs is ‘a little lacking’?
I’d say VERY little lacking.
That difference is hardly worth the mention, unless somehow one Toyota ft-lb is somehow worth more . . .
To put the sales numbers in perspective, only 69K of the more than 140K sales of the Impala this year are to retail customers (see http://www.fleet-central.com/af/t_pop_pdf.cfm?action=stat&link=http://www.fleet-central.com/af/stats2007/cars_web.pdf ). Sadly, that does indeed make Impala the best selling domestic, but represents a mere fraction of Camry, Accord and Altima (177K,156K and 107K respectively). For what it’s worth,Ford 500 retail sales are at a pathetic 18K.
GM’s mid-appliance standing improves considerably when one aggregates in sister ships Monte Carlo, LaCrosse and Grand Prix (a mid-year total of approximately 100K confused retail customers and UAW family members).
Of course, parsing the units into three brands and four body styles means less profit for GM than the Japanese competition ekes out from their apparently more desirable generics. The solution seems clear: adopt Chrysler’s brilliant approach to the Neon, and simply sell a Chevrolet Impala, Buick Impala and Pontiac Impala.
Sajeev did NOT pass go and went straight to Tone Loc. Why do I think you will wind up teaching a writing course in a style not unlike Alec Baldwin in Glengary Glen Ross? “ABC folks….ALWAYS BE CATCH-PHRASING if you want the spizzarkle!”
The 08 Taurus is finally what it should have been in 2003, a decent albeit ordinary car. The lumina- oops (I mean Impala) is also ordinary but is a polished turd in terms of drivetrain.
Ford wins on getting the point. GM wins on keeping GM buyers buying GM. They both lose because both Ford and GM are still bringing a NERF bat to a knife fight.
The original Taurus was a fantastic car. I was knocked out by the ride and handling.
Ford rested on its laurels, and still made a decent Taurus. When there were distant rumblings of transmission failure, I chalked that up to customers not reading “Cars for Dummies”. Still , a great car for those of us in the unwashed masses.
I see Impalas on the road today, and they are driven by geriatric gentlemen who are obviously in their “last car”. I think , or fantasize, that they are retired GM assembly line workers, else they’d be driving something else much more reliable(such as a Ford or Toyota).
Iron wolf 144,000 plus ytd?Man thats a lot of old folks and retired assembly line workers.
Face it folks GM has a winner with the Impala,numbers don’t lie.Seems that Ford now wants a piece of the action.
Why not?
I don’t care how wonderfull the Camry is percieved to be.
Looks mean a lot, IMHO,shared by many, the latest version of the Camry is but ass ugly.
If Ford and GM can beat Toyota on looks alone, again why not?
Mikey, you can ignore the Camry’s perception at your own peril. Looks must be subjective, because there were FIFTY THOUSAND Camrys sold last month. The Impala can only dream of those numbers.
GM most certainly DOES NOT have a winner. Not with 54% fleet sales against the Camry’s 7.7% and the Accord’s 4.9%. Not with the Camcords more than doubling the Impala’s retail sales. Not at all.
@sid vicious:
The new fuel regs bill that just passed the Senate is sure to kill the Detroit 3 if made into law. I think the new standards kick in in 2012? It takes 5 years to develop a new powertrain. They needed to start yesterday.
You’ve got to be kidding me. 35 MPG average by 2035?? If Detroit can’t make that goal, they deserve to die. Congress ought to raise the average to 60 MPG by 2035.
Could someone make sense of this for me. Wouldn’t Rear Wheel drive make sense for both of these guys? Some designs from down under for GM. Hummm maybe this is the vehicle to introduce Holdens new mount.
And Ford, you guys know how to do the RWD IRS thing pretty well.
Or maybe AWD for both.
Ford like Chrysler will soon be “toast” so why worry about it, Ford has no future imho.
Redbarchetta:
June 22nd, 2007 at 4:15 pm
I have a question isn’t the Impala’s 3.5 & 3.9 V6 a bored out slightly updated version of the 3.1 that came out in the early 80’s. Or is this an all new design and I’m just confused?
http://members.shaw.ca/betterthanyoutoo/60degreetree/60degreetree.htm
@dkulmacz
I was comparing the numbers of the Impala drivetrain vs the Toyota v6 3.5.
The bigger Chevy engine can’t match the smaller Toyota engine. And the 3.5 is even worse.
(I agree, the High Feature 3.6 v6 looks better. It certainly has been perceived so by GM as it was only available for Cadillac and Buick. Now it is founding its way downmarket to the lambda suvs, the Aura XR, some pontiac, and soon a malibu if I remember correctly.)
The Taurus 3.5, on the other hand seems better equipped on paper to sustain the comparison. It has very similar numbers indeed.
I read somewhere else that it did not show as much “refinement” as the reviewer expected. I just don’t remember where I read that.
I’ll keep in mind that in a Taurus, Camry, Impala, the NVH when the tach is tickling the red line is pretty irrelevant. Those family cars are tuned to be driven under 2,500 RPM 98% of the time, and in those conditions I bet none of them is significantly better.
The Taurus has a much better looking sheetmetal (for those who thought the previous gen Passat was a very elegant car) than the Impala (which the last refresh has been made to look like a Cobalt)
I never understood all the venom about the Ford Five Hundred (and Freestyle). I like the vehicles and the ideas behind them. Ford was giving us a roomy alternative (with AWD available) to SUVs and CUVs before gas went bonkers. They rank well in Consumers Reports reliability, too. Two years down the line, we see some significant improvements to the models too. It sounds to me that Ford is doing what we asked/hoped-for.
We have plenty of low, raked, cramped, car styles already to choose from. Can’t we have a large, roomy, tall sedan with a 20+ cubic foot trunk? Please?
And I like the grill of the Ford Five Hundred better then the Taurus. That fat chrome three-bar thing such is going to become a shiny morgue for the bug-world.
People have wierd affections for their cars. I see people all the time who miss the Taurus “we have had 3, they are great cars.” I can show them the Fusion, but it doesn’t do it for those people. Having the Taurus name back will be a good thing for those loyal customers.
P.S. We got our 1st 08 Sable in. Looks cleaner, slightly updated interior (chrome rings on the buttons), drives much nicer with the new engine, but still not fast. FWD, 265hp and still gets 18/28 mileage.
I have put in quite a few miles (rentals) in both the Impala and the Five Hundred (New Taurus Rev 0). To me the Ford is clearly a much better car in ride, handling, comfort, space utilitization, etc.. In a rational world the New Taurus would outsell the Impala easily.
Ford is still a messed up company in many ways, but their Volvo-Fords are pretty good vehicles for the price they actually sell for, especially 1-2 year old used ones!
Hello everyone, thanks for reading. There are so many good points mentioned and I want to comment on a few of these wonderful comments. I mean that, you guys and gals are the finest commentators I’ve seen on the Internet.
Days of Thunder, baby! Where’s Cole Trickle when you need him?
ejacobs: maybe I should have taken the stock car angle, not the boxing references. But I can’t remember if the 1st-gen Taurus in Days of Thunder won that street race or not.
Can either of these cars rise above rental-car status?
MX5bob: Considering my last rental was a Camry (the guy at the Hertz counter said it was a Taurus in the parking spot) and they seem to be in every rental lot at the airport, sure why not?
Although few if any noticed the 500 I think they will notice having not noticed this supposed Taurus and move on. It’s unfortunate too, because it’s actually a good car.
Guyincognito: too bad “good enough” is only acceptable for Toyota these days, no?
I might be in the minority (the numbers prove it) but I have to say the 500 looked pretty classy, a dignified daily driver…the Impala just doesn’t do it for me, but as the driver of a milquetoast 2001 Lumina I’ve got provenly poor taste (I blame the wife).
Kazoomaloo: well if ’01 Lumina drivers read this site, I guess we should be nicer to the 500…but we won’t. :-)
Therein lies the crux of the argument. It won’t be a real Ford vs. Chevy matchup until they start building American cars again.
86er: Amen to that!
Ford, there’s a reason we stopped buying Tauruses and if you think you’ll sell on name recognition, you’re crazy.
Factotum: the new one has nothing on the remarkable styling of your old 1st-gen Sable (that car was trick), but its still worth looking at because the hardware is finally class-competitive. (I like the 3.5 Dura-torque I sampled in the Lincoln-Mazda thingies)
I am sure you can lay your hands on these two chariots if you turn on (up) your charm and show up at your local Ford and Chevy dealers? So, c’mon on, drive these two against each other and let’s have the results!
Tsofting: we haven’t done comparo tests before (little hard without press cars) since a back-to-back evaluation is rather difficult when you can’t park one car next to the other. But at the least, you’ll have a Taurus review published soon enough.
Ford would probably have better chances if they would wrap the 427 concept sheetmetal over their Panther platform, add a slightly better tuned v8…
Tms1999: you just had to bring up the 427, hmm? Be still my beating heart, seeing that concept made me 16 again and I was staring at my ’65 Ford Galaxie. That and the 2002 Continental were the American sedans Ford was supposed to build.
For the new trim they’ll offer you a bunch of extras that will once again prompt TTAC to write an article questioning why you would ever buy a Mercury.
RGS920: you never know, that insane turbo-V6 in the Lincoln MKS might make it over to a Taurus SHO with all-wheel drive. And then TTAC might very well say 1989 is here again the Blue Oval is back.
I have not driven the new Taurus yet—but I think there is no reason to believe the drivetrain changes won’t greatly improve performance (the 500 was a pretty low bar).
Umterp85: it better drive, um…better. The 500 had decent road manners (cough, Volvo) for something so tall and huge, it just lacked a gutsy engine. The 6-speed was always nice for a sedan, and after my time in the 3.5L Lincolns I expect the Taurus will perform nicely. Nicely provided you don’t set foot in a V6 Honda Accord.
Sajeev did NOT pass go and went straight to Tone Loc.
Socsndaisy: oh yes he just did! But that’s what happens when W-bodies start slappin’…from doin’ the fleet thaaaang.
The Taurus 3.5, on the other hand seems better equipped on paper to sustain the comparison. It has very similar numbers indeed. I read somewhere else that it did not show as much “refinement” as the reviewer expected. I just don’t remember where I read that.
Tms1999: the 3.5 Duratec is nice, Ford engineers did a great job, but the motor came out too late to save the 500/Montego. There’s no shortage of torque below 3000rpm, decent high-revving power and it runs on regular. May not be as smoother at 6000rpm as the imported V6s, but you don’t need to rev the thing so much in the first place to get authoritative acceleration. But if you really want a smooth engine, don’t consider a V6…they all pale in comparison to the current V8 offerings.
By far the most interesting & original comparison i’ve ever read.
Not to throw water on the fire, but with the possibility of gas shortages that are one Katrina away, V8’s and RWD as investements for future platforms are unlikely (or just plain ill-advised). Which leads to a question: What’s the largest 4-banger around, and wouldn’t a properly designed 4 cyl (since a 4 has lower friction due to fewer moving/sliding parts), in the 3.0-3.5L range be more efficient than an equivalent V6. Yes, I understand that there are NVH issues, but maybe that can be solved by good engineering. I guess what I’m asking is “where does a 4 cyl displacement reach the point of diminishing returns regarding power vs. efficency?” I point to the Nissan 2.5I4 as an example; 175HP/180lbs-ft, and fairly smooth as reported by customers…
The largest four cylinder in recent memory was the 3.0 used in the Porsche 944 and later in the 968. Gas mileage wasn’t exactly stellar in that application (15/24). Granted, it was a sports car, but if you detune it for a more pedestrian application, how much of an improvement in mileage can you realistically expect?
The problem with the Five Hundred is it a design looking for a customer. Ford tried to do it the cheapo way – they had a Volvo platform, and they forced a sedan onto it.
I love my Panthers, (being a repeat buyer), but hate the new Sable. I’m sure on paper it is a great car, but all I see driving the Five Hundred/Taurus are old guys, just like the Grand Marquis.
The Taurus has the problem of competing in the “nerd car” market – the kind of risk adverse people who would buy something like a new Taurus will more likely get a Honda or a Toyota because that is what Consumer Reports says, plus their fellow nerd compatriots say as well.
At least the Grand Marquis is different, interesting, and is proven bulletproof. Everyone knows the Panther is classic Detroit iron, while everyone knows the Five Hundred is pretend Detroit iron riding on a 2nd hand Volvo design.
I’d take an Impala if nothing else because I know at least GM tried – Ford sold out and deferred to Volvo for an ugly car.
If Ford felt the need to drop the Taurus name why didn’t they go with Galaxie? Those of us old enough to remember the 60s know where the 500 moniker came from – it was a trim level on both Fairlanes and Galaxies. Naming a car after a trim level makes little sense.
I suspect most buyers of large family sedans are old enough to remember the Galaxie, even if they never owned one themselves. The name has some history, just like Impala does.
The AWD option makes sense to me, as many urban SUV drivers are attracted by superior traction on snowy roads. It’s AWD for people who’d never consider a Subaru.
Ford did the right thing – took a well engineered Volvo and offered it as the 500, a well engineered Mazda 6 and offered it as the Fusion. The designs are world-class competitive.
Anyone who ever drove a Lumina probably would never again try a GM car.
Impala still does not have adequate sheetmetal fit, or paint quality, or interior build quality (GM’s new full size trucks do).
I know a salesman who used to get a new Taurus every year. His company is large, and bought a lot of them. The build quality deteriorated badly in the 2002 and after time frame, so they switched to Impalas.
The first Impalas they got were better, now he says they are failing all over the place. My friend is warning me never buy an Impala.
My brother has his own sales business, and he always bought new Cadillacs about every 80-100,000 miles, or every 2-3 years.
He says the last one he has is the worst ever, the dealer is blaming him saying it is his fault he did not buy the extended warranty, and he says he will never buy GM again.
I think with GM, their effort is too little too late. Maybe Ford can make it.
Sorry but I’m not buying into the “Detroit needs rear wheel drive sedans to compete with the Asians” argument. The Chrysler 300’s appeal was due in large part to it’s unique styling, not its rwd platform. Tell me please, why is it the camcord juggernaut sells nearly a million vehicles a year with nary a rear driven wheel in site?
well , if i loved good cars as such i would never have a glance towards detroit products, If i was patriot of america, I wouldn`t look towards detroit anyway. because there are no more domestic products left. So why should I, being a patriot make a Sherlock holmes like research and browse through thousands of pages of car editorials to see if the domestic one is really domesti, or just domesticated by burning a recognizable omen on the hood, like blue oval.You put up with bad boys, because they are your offsprings, why care?I ain`t Soros fund either.
I think the Freestyle is a perfect fit for my needs and will seriously consider one after 5-7 years of CVT trasmission reliablity data is available.
well , if i loved good cars as such i would never have a glance towards detroit products, If i was patriot of america, I wouldn`t look towards detroit anyway. because there are no more domestic products left.
I drive a Crown Victoria and a Dakota. They’re domestic.
‘Nuff said.
Looks like a blinged up Tempo.
You know, I never saw it before, but after the comments here, I can’t avoid thinking about the Tempo influence when I see the new Taurus front end.
I don’t believe that’s a good thing…
Our company was buying the previous gen Taurus for our fleet use, then recently switched to Impalas. I wonder if we’ll go back to the new Taurus so I get to experience misery in all of its variants.
The 500 was a decent, but utterly forgettable car. In addition, Ford didn’t market the car after its introduction. How many ads did YOU see for the 500(other than dealers stackin’ ’em deep and sellin’ ’em cheap)? Ford left the 500(and the Freestyle)to whither on the vine while it pushed F150’s and Exploditions.
As this site shows, cars are aspirational products. We want to be SEEN in our cars and want people to know us by what we drive. While this is not true for everyone, it’s true enough across a broad spectrum to hold value.
In the case of the 500, it was a dull, slow sedan that was aimed a the Crown Vic’s demographic, and guess what? They continued to buy CV’s. The anemic engine and boring looks didn’t help. Let’s face it, Grandpa’s had 3 CV’s already; he aint’ switchin’ to any newfangled FWD car. Not when he can have his V-8, thankyouverymuch.
Families go for SUV’s and minivans, so the traditional roomy 6-passenger car is out for them. At least it was, until gas went to $3/gallon.
With a new face and a decent powerplant, the Taurus is competitive. The question for Ford is whether they will be willing to market and update the car as needed to keep it on the radar.
The Big 2.3314 all face the same problems of trying to sell too many different versions of the same car. Ford has it a little better with only Ford and Mercury, but they’re in a deep fianacial hole, and they need to keep pushing trucks to keep the lights on.
Most importantly, Ford and GM have to overcome 30 years of bad product, poor service, and comsumer perceptions to try to lure shoppers back the their stores.
Fact is, most of us here at TTAC won’t even consider a domestic brand due to the horrors we’ve had and the stories we hear from our friends. Consumers have flocked to the CamCords because of engineering and value, and they aren’t coming back. Ford and GM face a decade of hard work to build products that convince us that they’re serious about engineering, value, and long-term reliability. It will take at least that long for the word to get around. Marketing won’t convince us, only the testimonials of our friends and family that their Taurus/Impala/300 is the most reliable, well-engineered car they’ve ever owned. Only then will the vast buying public darken the doors of their local domestic dealer.
When I grew up. my dad was a “Ford Man” for 30 years (at least until the local Ford Dealer screwed him), as was his father before him. He wouldn’t even consider GM.
Do you hear ANYONE say that anymore about Ford, Chevy, Chrysler, etc.?
My wife will proudly tell you that she’s a Honda (Wo)Man; she won’t look at anything else. That’s because our Honda products have all been insanely good. Toyota? Hmmmmm, maybe. Hyundai? When they prove themselves. Domestics? Never, EVER.
THAT is the battle the domestics face. They’ve lost a generation (or two) of buyers who won’t even consider their products, good, bad, or indifferent. Until they make compelling products that hold up for the long haul, they’re toast.
I don’t think they have enough time.
Zarba, interesting comments. I own 2 CV’s – a 95 and an 02 and would agree 100% that there is no way I would even consider replacing these proven dependable vehicles with something like a 500. Lots of fun poked at the dinasour CV’s but they are a proven commodity in my book and more economical to own than the casual observer might think.
My considerations for eventual replacement would not include any of the big 2.8 products so I also agree with your viewpoint of buyers lost to the domestics. Too many dealer skirmishes and nickel/diming of reasonable service claims, too great depreciation, poor design/material choice and moderate overall quality sure don’t point me in that direction.
“Ford would probably have better chances if they would wrap the 427 concept sheetmetal over their Panther platform, add a slightly better tuned v8 (after all, they squeezed 300 horses out of the same engine for the Marauder, so we know it can be done)”
Indeed.
“Ford wins on getting the point. GM wins on keeping GM buyers buying GM. They both lose because both Ford and GM are still bringing a NERF bat to a knife fight. ”
LOL!
“Could someone make sense of this for me. Wouldn’t Rear Wheel drive make sense for both of these guys? Some designs from down under for GM. Hummm maybe this is the vehicle to introduce Holdens new mount.
And Ford, you guys know how to do the RWD IRS thing pretty well.
Or maybe AWD for both. ”
American RWD iron is one of the last niche markets the domestics still have or could have a deathgrip of like fullsize trucks. Unfortunately, for years they’ve chosen to build essentially imitation Japanese FWD cars which are exactly what these are perceived as. Ford is the only one who has continued to make a fullsize traditional American sedan but has allowed it to wither on the vine and now dumped it in favor of Taurus. Chrysler woke up and realized this and has been selling LX platforms like hotcakes love it or hate it since 2005. GM cashed in the 1996 Impala nameplate slapping it on a reskinned Lumina and have milked it just about dry.
I’m not saying the domestics should try and compete in this market, but do it with a Malibu, and an actual MID-sized Taurus.
The Panthers already have everything that Ford is desperately trying to SELL to consumers with advertising, ecomony, safety, ride, durability, but they just don’t want to sell them.
Hmmm….what was the point of the article- buy japanese?
there was no comparison between the two badges!
look around..japanese quality is below what it was.
i love my impala. zero defects in 40,000 miles.
had a ford once – they still make a lousy transmission.