After rebadging the lackluster Five Hundred as a slightly-blingier-but-still-lackluster Taurus, Ford CEO Alan Mulally's still trying to recapture the magic. The Detroit News reports Big Al's talking about jacking-up the Taurus nameplate and sliding a new car under it in 2009. Speaking in Detroit yesterday, he hinted that a new new Taurus would arrive on the scene in the next "year or so." What's more "the new Taurus is the one we should have made originally" (you mean originally originally or later originally?). And then Mulally clammed-up, saying "I've probably said too much." The usual fictional unidentified "other company sources" told the DetN the new new Taurus would be built on the same platform as the existing one with totally new sheet metal, a new interior, better fuel economy and an optional EcoBoost engine. Viva la evolution!
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
The new Taurus is… the MKS? That would be a Bold Move indeed.
It was not long ago we were criticizing Ford for allowing the Taurus to rot away…Now they can’t leave it alone.
Everytime I read “EcoBoost” it screams: Can’t-get-out-of-it’s-own-way-but-saves-$9.63-in-gas.
Should have named it EcoSlammed or something.
wow – and you got a spy shot of the concept as well!
“everything old is new again”
Well I’m going to go against the conventional winds here and say that Ford is doing a VERY SMART THING by revamping the Taurus so soon.
Everything about the car is good for the target market with the sole exceptions of the sheet metal and the feel of certain interior components. If Ford makes it attractive, it will probably be a very strong competitor in the full-sized segment given that virtually every other model is just plain bulbous and ugly at this point.
As for the EcoBoost, I’m actually a very big fan of the idea behind it. I drove a 2000 Saab 900 convertible with a 4 cylinder turbo recently and that vehicle got over 34 mpg on the highway. I also drove a Park Avenue Ultra a couple months back that registered 32 mpg at a steady 70 mpg. If Ford manages to offer better fuel economy than the competition by a commendable margin, it will actually put this model back on the radar of a lot of prospective owners.
My only regret at this point is that I still believe the Taurus should have a variant sold as a ‘Volvo 260’. Throw in a strong warranty and a nice interior with Volvo seats, and it would put Volvo back on the map for the near-luxury buyer.
The Focus is crap (don’t get me started) but the product line-up for Ford is gradually starting to look far better. I just hope they can hold out over the rough patches ahead.
Ford is slowly building its reputation back with some good products. Once they finally ditch all the duds in the line-up (Focus WTF?), maybe they’ll actually pull off a recovery.
Mulally’s comments about the Taurus and their proven ability to build a decent sedan (Fusion) actually inspires me to consider re-investing in Ford stock.
Of course, not until this current “market correction” runs its course–I’ve caught too many falling knives to jump in now….
@Luther:
Every time I read “EcoBoost” it screams: Can’t-get-out-of-it’s-own-way-but-saves-$9.63-in-gas.
Should have named it EcoSlammed or something.
I liked it better when it was called Twinforce. Sounded much cooler.
Speculation is that the new car could appear at Chicago in three weeks.
I agree with Steven Lang…give Ford credit for recognizing the problem with this car and moving quickly to correct it.
Would we rather have Ford let the current one die while it uses hefty rebates and sales to rental car companies to keep the factories running?
Those are the practices that got Ford into trouble in the first place.
The Taurus is a very solid car undermined by boring styling. The platform is good, and far ahead of anything comparable from GM and Chrysler, and quite competitive with the Avalon/Camry. Restyle it, and improve the quality of some of the interior components, and the car is a winner.
As for EcoBoost – again, this is what Detroit needs. Ford is thinking out of the “V-8 box.” Several posters have been saying that Detroit needs to stop thinking that there is no substitute for cubic inches. EcoBoost offers better economy while maintaining performance…sounds like a win-win to me.
Ford is, for once, thinking ahead. Let’s give it some credit (while awaiting the actual product to see how Ford executes it).
Robert Farago: If (and it is a huge & giant if) Ford consistently makes money and starts to stabilize share—–would you consider a Ford Re-Birth Watch ?
You and Frank have often said (rightly so) that the demise of the Big 3 is one of the largest stories of our time—thus the deathwatch series. I believe if Ford is able to come off the mat—it will also be one of the largest corporate ressurection stories of our time and worthy of a “rebirth” series.
umterp85 :
Robert Farago: If (and it is a huge & giant if) Ford consistently makes money and starts to stabilize share—–would you consider a Ford Re-Birth Watch ?
Of course. The Deathwatches only exist as long as the companies we chronicle are on the critical list. Good luck to ALL of them.
Ford’s Ecoboost name for their 3.7L engine is pure genious. People are already excited about it offering “better” fuel economy. Even though the 3.5L version of the same engine in this chassis delivers equal fuel economy to the V8 in the Volvo S80 evolution of the same platform (15/22 in AWD). How will rammming more air and fuel into the combustion chamber improve that fuel economy?
As for the new Taurus, they better get rid of that Passat roof. I remain unconvinced the styling will be recognizably different from the current one. I remember them saying the same exact words before we got the current version. And with only 2 years between launches Ford would be hard pressed to release an entirely different roof structure. Fender, body panel, and grill mods would do little to differentiate it. And even if they did, do mainstream buyers under 65 want a ginormus car with seating for 5? I think the stlying is only part of the reason nobody’s buying.
what if it was this?
http://www.caradvice.com.au/3211/2008-ford-falcon-orion-interior-and-gt-exposed/
Guyincognito: “I think the stlying is only part of the reason nobody’s buying”
A worst in class marketing plan might be another !
Steven Lang: Ford is doing a VERY SMART THING by revamping the Taurus so soon.
The Five Hundred was introduced in the fall of 2004 as a 2005 model and was replaced after a short 2007 model year, by the much-improved but mildly face-lifted 2008 Taurus, which still used the same old sheet metal from the Five Hundred.
It’s been FOUR YEARS, so far, with the same tired old sheet metal. The revamp is hardly be described as coming “soon.” Given the slow sales of the Five Hundred and Taurus, it’s seriously overdue, though sadly, apparently not terribly urgent to Ford.
That said, some seriously new sheet metal, perhaps incorporating styling cues from the original Taurus and Sable, even on the same old Volvo chassis sure can’t hurt.
guyincognito:
And even if they did, do mainstream buyers under 65 want a ginormus car with seating for 5?
I am 30-something with three young kids and I want to drive a sedan, not a van or SUV or crossover. What choices do I have? Not many. Am I mainstream buyer? I think so.
I desperately need a full-size sedan that gracefully fits three car seats across and that isn’t designed for 65+ demographic. I hope the next generation Taurus delivers on that promise.
do mainstream buyers under 65 want a ginormus car with seating for 5? I think the stlying is only part of the reason nobody’s buying.
Good question. I think that’s where the problem with the 500/New Taurus is. I’d amend it to say ‘a ginormous non-luxury car…’ Maybe that’s a niche that’s dying or dead. If people want a reasonably priced sedan, they go for a smaller car like the Fusion, and if they want something roomier they go for a CUV or a small SUV or what have you. It’s not unknown for carmakers to develop a car for a niche that it turns out doesn’t exist.
Changing the Taurus again isn’t going to make that niche magically appear.
I desperately need a full-size sedan that gracefully fits three car seats across and that isn’t designed for 65+ demographic. I hope the next generation Taurus delivers on that promise.
It wouldn’t kill them to make an FR layout flagship too. I’m dying here!
With all the fuel savings that these new “Ecoboost” motors are promising, I see no reason why the North American market can’t return to some full-sized cars as an offset for declining minivan and SUV sales.
None of these glorified midsizers either, like the Camry, Accord, Impala, et al.
Matthew Danda :
I am 30-something with three young kids and I want to drive a sedan, not a van or SUV or crossover. What choices do I have? Not many. Am I mainstream buyer? I think so.
I recall that the Taur/able has 3 LATCH connectors in the 2nd row but only 53.6″ hip room back there – Panther still wins here with 58″. The average car seat is at about 18″ wide, and I’m guessing you’ve already done the math – it’s difficult to put 3 car seats across in most sedans.
If you define mainstream as buying an SUV, CUV, or minivan, I’m afraid that the automakers no longer consider you mainstream. I’m of the same demographics as you and got the minivan between kids #2 and #3, along with its 67″ 2nd row hip room and 3 LATCH connectors.
Styling is probably a minor shortcoming. Accord and Camry prove that. Anyway, there are lots of things to like about the Five Hundred’s design, and it will hold up well over the years. But perhaps a crease or accent could visually lower the beltline.
Mainly, Ford needs to do two things. First, ask potential buyers for their opinions. (The ugly 1996 redesign would not have been produced if Taurus owners had been consulted.) Get focus groups in early; let them try seats, controls, sight lines, transmission shifts. Listen to them.
Second, Ford should sweat the details, as it did with the 1986 Taurus. The Five Hundred wasn’t quite ready in 2005. It needed more low-end torque. There wasn’t enough sound deadening. Cramped footwells and cheap trim should have been avoided. Remember, it was supposed to be Ford’s flagship, not a taller Fairmont.
The platform is actually from the MKS. Still “D3” but think D3 v2.0. The body lines and greenhouse will be like the MKS, not the current Taurus.
It’s certainly not “overdue” for a refresh. We lived with the 2002 Camry for five model years. It just NEEDS a new exterior and interior. There’s a difference (and one just as applicable to the old Camry as to the current Taurus).
The SHO is supposed to return with this update as well (3.5 EcoBoost – I liked the name TwinForce better, too, but I understand the marketing reasons). There are also rumors that Ford’s first V6 hybrid application will be on the Taurus (quickly followed by the Edge), but that is completely unsubstantiated at this point.
The Explorer America with the 2.0L EcoBoost will be interesting… It will probably lack adequate low-end torque (even with a 6-speed automatic manual transmission) until Ford gets the HCCI mode running.
I’m glad Ford is serious about contending the larger end of the sedan market. For years now they have failed to be serious players in the small, medium and large sizes. Fusion finally came out and did a good job in the medium size, put small and large are not hitting on all cylinders right now.
The original Taurus had lots of nifty little features like dual visors and such which gave it a bunch of little oh, that’s nice touches for it’s day. Cost cutters took that stuff out with the various redesigns. The original Taurus was also on the leading edge of automotive design and certainly didn’t look like a poorly done up sizing of an old Passat design.
I look forward to the day when Ford has three great sedans on the market and strong trucks in both the small and large sizes. Right now Ford has a great large truck and a pig of a small truck.
Get ‘er right and get ‘er done!
RobertSD, hope you’re right about “D3 2.0” for the ’09 Taurus. I went to the MKS preview website and found its wheelbase of 112.9 inches exactly matches that for the current Taurus. The MKS interior looks nice; maybe Ford is finally “getting it” and that will enhance the forthcoming Taurus as well.