Find Reviews by Make:
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
Just brilliant….
Next in the imaginary comparison contest –
The Taurus v Lexus – which one can tread water longer.
This is better then those GM ad in which they describe how the Malibu and Cobalt get such great mileage compared to Honda’s.
Ford doesn’t get it.
This ad makes the ridiculous “Lincoln=spaceship” ads bearable.
lol…..someone remind Alan Mulally that Ford owns a brand called Lincoln.
SHO base = $37,000
MKS base = $40,800
MKZ base = $34,000
I was waiting for them to tell me that the Taurus would beat the dragster to 100MPH as well.
Good god that was lame, pathetic and insulting to the intelligence. On many levels.
It’s the kind of rhetoric I don’t even care to refute and counter-argue, it’s not worthy of it.
Dear Ford,
OK. Now can we simply drive the cars down the road at 70 MPH and perform a db test?
Thank you,
DEZ
This is almost as laughable as the ad where the SHOW, if traveling at 55MPH can pass an Audi going 50 MPH. That is the same ad where Ford forgets to call the S.H.O. by it’s proper name and instead call it the Taurus SHOW.
One area where Acura still dominates- UGLINESS!
Ironically, Ford’s target buyer for the Taurus probably doesn’t care about noise, since he can simply turn off his hearing aid.
baaron :
August 30th, 2009 at 11:47 am
Ford doesn’t get it.
This ad makes the ridiculous “Lincoln=spaceship” ads bearable.
It’s called “advertising,” dude…it’s supposed to be BS. Ever seen the “own the sky” ad for Infiniti? Right, like you’re really going to OWN the firmament if you drop 50 large on that car.
Or the one for BMW where the 335 is gliding down the clear plastic corkscrew highway in the sky? Yeah, OK, guys. Or the one where they shoot an Acura through a bottle of booze like a bullet? Sure, that’ll work.
File ’em all under “creative license”. Personally, I liked the Lincoln ad, though it may be becuause I’m a Bowie fan.
How is it ridiculous? If they measured both cars with the same equipment at the same time the Taurus really is quieter. I’d have preferred if they showed the test using a rush hour freeway or rough stretch of road instead, but I suppose that doesn’t have as much drama for the cameras.
Slateslate. –
SEL Taurus $27k
Base MKS $40k
SHO Taurus $38k
EcoBoost MKS $50k
that seems like a big enough differentiation to me.
As I get older and drive a greater variety of vehicles – and since the time that I’ve acquired a decibel meter – I feel more and more that these side-by-side decibel tests are totally lame.
What’s equally important are the frequencies of the sounds, not just the amplitudes. For myself, high-pitched squeaks and rattles really grate on my ears, and those are easiest to isolate and address. Mid-level roars register as a lack of sealing and insulation from road noise. On the other hand, I’m more tolerant of a low-frequency hum while I’m driving; I perceive it as a refinement in the engine’s exhaust tuning, and I don’t think I’m unique in that perception.
It’s all very subjective, of course, but as someone pointed out a few weeks ago when we discussed 1965’s ads touting “Ford is quieter than a $16,000(!) Rolls-Royce,” it’s a point of pride for the buyers of these vehicles (and to some degree, Ford’s engineers). Whatever it is, it does show a conscientious attention to detail, and it’s probably no accident that Ford and its product line – while not perfect – is definitely the strongest among what we used to call “the Big 3.”
Wasn’t it Lexus that came out with the foam filled A pillar for quietness technology?
Dear Ford,
OK. Now can we simply drive the cars down the road at 70 MPH and perform a db test? DrivnEZ
FreedMike, this ad isn’t going for “creative license”, it’s going for “creative science”, and it’s a load worthy of an F-450. If Ford could stage that stupidity, they surely could’ve done what DrivnEZ requested, and that test would be far more meaningful. Provided the following is true, Acura should jump all over this ad and make the one Ford should have.
Will Lyman voiceover (I’m sure BMW won’t mind):
While the Taurus may insulate you from the noise of a jet engine, we prefer a more civilized standard. At all legal road speeds, the Acura RL offers superior interior sound levels than the Ford Taurus. When you’re done racing jet powered dragsters, stop by your Acura dealer to experience a new level of comfort.
How is it ridiculous?
It’s just as ridiculous as Ford asserting that they have a better truck because it can drive through a dry creek bed at 25 MPH…or that an F-150 can stop an airplane (even though if you watch the ad, there is clear evidence that the plane is stopping by it’s own brakes).
It’s as ridiculous as a bunch of men hypermiling a Fusion to see how far it can go on a tank of gas (assuming Ford didn’t cheat).
They are not real world ads. They are complete fallacys. There is no ‘truth’ in the ads.
could anybody explain to me how they came up with a 5% difference in sound level ? Maybe I’m wrong but according to their measurements (102 dB ,99.4 dB ) sound level in Acura RL is 1.82 higher than in ford taurus .
@ toasty:
I don’t think consumers are as interested in facts as they are in what facts mean to them. It’s easy to be blase about a sound meter sitting on the front seat of a Taurus, but having the car stay quiet as a rocket goes off nearby makes an impression.
Yeah, I agree, it’s silly, but what the heck – nobody said advertising needs to be like an investigative report.
@ FreedMike:
I understand what you’re saying, but what means more to a consumer: interior road noise while driving the car, or interior road noise while parked next to a dragster?
Ford set the ad up like an investigative report, which is why it’s being judged against that standard. When it so obviously falls on its face as such, it’s Ford’s fault.
Bridge2Far is right… It is very smart comparing your new car to one of the ugliest things ever made.
Most buyers consider Acura to be quality “almost” luxury cars. Most buyers don’t know that they are really stupid looking.. This ad kills two birds with one stone… It says.. “Hey, look, this new Ford is better built that that car you think is a luxury car… and hey, did you notice how ugly that Acura is?
@citro: Decibels are a logarithmic measurement, not a linear one.
Thus, depending upon the point you are referring to on the decibel scale, a difference of a particular number of decibels will not have the same fractional relationship to the reference (original) decibel level.
@citro
Because the decibel scale is logarithmic not linear scale.
All advertising is ridiculous – how is a BMW driving a suspended glass road any better that this? Or any cigarette or soda advertising for that matter?
As for the car comparison – the proof of the Taurus’s viability will be in the sales numbers and it’s too early to make a judgment on the 2010 model – let’s review in 6 months. But we do know the RL is sales flop.
As for the small numeric difference in the dB ratings – keep in mind that the dB scale is logarithmic not linear so a small amount does matter.
@ FreedMike:
I understand what you’re saying, but what means more to a consumer: interior road noise while driving the car, or interior road noise while parked next to a dragster?
Ford set the ad up like an investigative report, which is why it’s being judged against that standard. When it so obviously falls on its face as such, it’s Ford’s fault.
Hit the nail on the head.
Know little about the 2010 Taurus. My Acura RL is a very good car, but there is an issue with excessive road noise penetrating the cabin.
I hardly ever park beside a jet-powered dragster. The comparison is unlikely to motivate me to consider a Taurus.
It would have been cool if at the end the dragster shot off and scorched both of the cars.
The info-nerd neglected to mention if the Acura’s Active Sound system was engaged (uses the stereo to generate opposing sound waves for a 10db reduction in noise.)
Ford did a lot of this kind of advertising in the 1960s and 70s, and it worked well for them back then.
The point, BTW, isn’t to try and steal customers from the RL. Heck, the RL doesn’t have enough customers to try and steal in the first place! The point is to try and steal customers from the Impala, Avalon and whatever Buick will be selling next year.
I’m not crazy about this ad, but name me any great auto advertising at the moment. At least this one has a definable point: “The Taurus is really quiet inside, quiet enough to compare favorably to cars almost twice its price.” I’ll take that over the what-this-car-says-about-you crap most advertising seems to be going for these days.
@Mark45
I know that . a 3 dB increase means twice much volume intensity but in the ad they claimed that in Acura is being 5% louder than in taurus when in fact being almost 2 times louder.
I hope the Ford engineers aren’t as stupid as the marketing people.
A few years back I remember getting a small postcard-size chart at a Honda dealership. The front side was a chart comparing the Accord with about 6 competitor mid-size sedans (Altima, Camry, Passat, etc) arranged in columns; the back side was the Civic with about 6 competitor small cars (Corolla, Sentra, Focus, etc). The card listed purchase price and model at the top, then estimated cost of gas, maintenance, insurance, repairs, and resale value. In nearly every category the Honda models were superior to the competition.
When Ford hands out similar cards at their dealerships, I will find a Ford I want to buy. Until then, good luck spending millions on ads that are at best exaggerations on irrelevant criteria, or at worst intellectually dishonest.
This is actually a very smart and savy ad. The ad is intended for people 40 and under. I suspect Ford will use another set of ads for older drivers. Wheter you like Ford or not it is clear the marketing strategy is a fresh approach at a demographic that Ford or any auto company wants desperatly. In this commericial they are targeting college educated and above who might still be associating Ford with the rental market. Notice the age of the person in the commercial, notice his clothes and hairstyle, Ford wants Yuppies to reconsider the car. Most people who drive an Acura or Lexsus do so for a number of reasons, sound reduction one of them. Will the ad work? It depends on what you consider success. At the very least what they have done is to put the Taurus on the radar screen of a demographic that would not have given the vehicle a second look before this years redesign. Look for Ford to continue to use Facebook , Twitter and Youtube for their word of mouth campaignfor the Taurus. By the way, it seems to be working as it has us discussing it. My bet is that if the car is a good as they say it is, ads like this will do well for them. Time will tell.
BTW, a lot of replies about the new Taurus seem to greatly inflate the price. As someone may have pointed out earlier, the MSRP is in the mid-$20s for the base (SE) version, and it’s hardly a stripper.
We just speced one to replace one of our company cars, and the bid was in the low $20s. Granted, that was fleet pricing, but it’s usually not that much better than the deal that you or I could get. What’s also interesting is that Ford doesn’t seem to de-content the Taurus for fleet, as GM does with the Impala (sans side airbags).
I don’t particularly enjoy driving my current company-assigned Taurus (a 2002 with over 100,000 miles) as much as my own cars – the seats are horrible – so I’m hoping that the confort level of this new one is much improved. Lord knows I’ll look forward to having an auxillary input for the iPod/iPhone, and I think that the seating position is much improved. But the fact of the matter is, it’s also not as painful as a hot needle in the eye…and you can’t beat the low operating costs.
@ grobby2:
Is there any reason the ad wouldn’t have appealed to the same target audience if they’d used a relevant test? In your opinion, the ad is “targeting college educated and above [buyers]”, yet the major objections here are directly aimed at the ridiculous test portrayed. Maybe logic isn’t covered in college curriculum anymore.
Ford has some decent offerings, and if they want to close any perception gap, they need to show why they have better vehicles, not better jet powered dragster close observation chambers.
I dunno. The two people I know with RLs would never have cross-shopped Pudgie the Whale the Taurus.
This is an advertisement. Driving down the road at 70mph is boring. A rocket powered dragster is not boring. Stupid perhaps, but not boring.
Bottom line is, the Taurus is quieter than the Acura.
Would have been cooler to have the dragster shoot off and leave a cloud of fire and smoke, then have the Acura come out of the smoke with its tires smoking as well, unscathed. Now that’s a realistic ad. (I drive an Accord, and I fully believe that could happen…)
dkulmacz, you assume a lot. Incorrectly, in my case. Ford set themselves up for criticism with the very nature of the ad (see above).
I didn’t pick the sound metric I found most relevant; I picked a sound metric that is relevant. If Ford wants to play the science/performance game, they need to perform relevant tests. Ford could’ve had it both ways; play with the jet engine test, then give some road test data. With its jet test, Ford seems to be picking a diversion from the real world, not me.
Bottom line, this ad means very little to anyone that gives it any thought, and Ford needs to be smarter if they want to turn the tide.
From caranddriver.com:
2005 Acura RL (“short take” test of facelifted 2009 model didn’t include sound figures):
idle: 44
full throttle: 74
70 mph cruise: 69
2010 Taurus Limited:
41/73/68
2010 Taurus SHO:
47/73/70
And, for giggles (from the same comparo as the 2005 RL):
2006 Lexus GS430:
38/69/63
My guess is that Ford picked the noisiest “luxury” car they could get their hands on.
And no one’s suggesting they are trying to poach Acura shoppers. The ad is aspirational — trying to appeal to people that can’t afford an Acura but like the idea that a Taurus is just as good.
The “new” Taurus will bomb, even in low volume – it’s a reworked last gen; same platform and a lot of other parts, with much less interior room (headroom, hip room, leg room) and a smaller trunk, for a lot more $$$.
The New York Times, which is a softy compared to most other publications, just review the 2010 Taurus, and said “meh.”
This car is 30k+ decently equipped.
Meh.
Ford just can’t seem to get this segment right, since 1986, that is…
“The two people I know with RLs would never have cross-shopped Pudgie the Whale the Taurus.”
Which misses the point of the ad entirely. Ford doesn’t expect anyone to cross-shop the RL and the Taurus.
This is one really hard to understand (read take) group.
It’s as if nobody understands marketing.
Is no wonder that none ever ran a major marketing program and was successful?
I test drove a SHO last week.
Now I test driven a ridiculous amount of cars.
NEVER once did we get asked while sitting at red lights about the car we were in.
Ever.
Now believe this oh great naysayers…we got 2 in one test drive while at red lights.
So bad mouth this car all you want, it’s pretty nice.
And fast.
And quiet.
And if there is anybody in this sad group that would pay the same for the Genesis and others in its so called class, god bless.
This car will be had this fall for around 36K.
It’s your money and it’s your call.
But until you drive this car, its difficult reading your rants.
If you know of a car with this power, AWD and space…give it up so we all know what the hell you are comparing it to.
At least Ford has a plan.
P71_CrownVic
“They are not real world ads. They are complete fallacys. There is no ‘truth’ in the ads”
Its these statements that drive me to the liquor cabinet early. And reading the above and other such is making this trip occur earlier and earlier each day.
PLEASE.
Tell us exactly which part of the ad was false.
And why Ford should be held to THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ADVERTISING while no one else is.
Its advertising!
It’s where they try to get us to buy things we don’t need!
Get over it!
Hyundai Sonata Limited vs. BMW 525i
This Hyundai ad is just as ridiculous. Period.
I have a new Acura and to be frank, it is just like my old 1995 Ford Escort only with Bluetooth and heated seats.
Owned an Acura – in the early days. Great car. Wouldn’t touch one now that they’ve evidently been mega-Bangled.
At least Ford has a plan.
Yeah…produce the most boring, bland appliances on the planet.
Wow…they are almost there.
From all the comments, I think that the ad was successful because it made you all pay attention to the Taurus. Wouldn’t you rather have a Ford?
Good God, for a second I thought this was a joke.
Is Ford really that uncreative? This is the 60s-mid 70s Ford LTD “quieter than a Rolls Royce” ad all over again…except that ad didn’t suck because it actually compared a CHEAP Ford to a hyper-expensive Roller.
Not to mention we normally compare the MKS to the Acura RL. Product overlap rears its ugly head again.
NO ONE and I mean NO ONE is crosshopping an RL with a SHO.
PERIOD.
OK, guys, then here’s the question: is a Taurus quiet compared to far more expensive cars?
Answer: yes, it is.
Car and Driver just did a comparison test of five luxury sedans costing $55,000 – $60,000 in last month’s edition. Here’s how it came out:
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/application/cae0140b576f6c49c3079f7e58051818.pdf
Audi A6
41
78
72
BMW 535
42
76
68
Infiniti M45
51
75
71
Jaguar XF
42
74
69
Mercedes-Benz E350
41
72
69
Now, let’s look at the Taurus Limited’s numbers:
41
73
68
Quietest at idle, second quietest (only bested by the Mercedes) at WOT, tied for quietest with the BMW @ 70 mph.
Wow, they made a quiet car! And it costs a crapload less than any of the cars in this comparison! Man, what a bunch of losers those Ford guys are!
Oh, but it gets better. Let’s now talk about the much-maligned SHO – you know, the car that’s too big and fat to get out of its way, won’t handle worth a darn, and so forth. How does IT compare performance wise to the $50,000 + performance sedans in this test?
Taurus SHO, $43,280:
0-60 – 5.2 (tied with BMW 535 for first place)
0-100 – 12.8 (First place; BMW 535 is second)
1/4 mile – 13.7 @ 103 (First place; BMW is second)
Roadholding: .84 G (Tied for 3rd with Infiniti and Mercedes)
Braking, 70-0: 174 ft (tied with Jaguar XF)
Oh, and about those oh-so-nasty performance numbers: the BMW, the only car that could keep up with that lousy SHO, was a six-speed. And – more evidence that Ford clearly has its head up its ass- the SHO is the only AWD car besides the Audi in this test, and it STILL cleaned up performance-wise.
Wow, Ford made a car that can run with BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Jaguar and Infiniti? What a bunch of losers those Blue Oval Boyz are! I mean, I’m sure they compared it to the Acura because it’s the weakest midsize luxury sedan around, right?
Folks, I have personally driven every car in that luxury car comparison test save the new Mercedes. There isn’t a single one of them that I – or any other car lover with an IQ higher than Forrest Gump’s, for that matter – would be ecstatic to drive every day. And here we have a FORD that’ll run with these cars for a lot less money?
And people on this board think this car’s a loser? Hell, that car is a borderline MIRACLE for the money, particularly from an American brand.
P71_CrownVic :
August 30th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
@ FreedMike:
I understand what you’re saying, but what means more to a consumer: interior road noise while driving the car, or interior road noise while parked next to a dragster?
Ford set the ad up like an investigative report, which is why it’s being judged against that standard. When it so obviously falls on its face as such, it’s Ford’s fault.
Hit the nail on the head.
Hey, P71, check the numbers I posted above. Still think the SHO is a POS?
P71_CrownVic
“They are not real world ads. They are complete fallacys. There is no ‘truth’ in the ads”
You’re so right, Crown Vic…maybe BMW, Audi, Mercedes-Benz, Jaguar and Infiniti could all run “truthful” advertising about how their $60,000 luxury sedans all got their asses kicked in a drag race…by a Taurus.
And, frankly, the only way a Crown Vic could keep up with that Taurus SHO is with a JATO rocket strapped to the roof. Care to volunteer?
Freedmike – I doubt there will be a line forming to buy the Taurus for 33k (average price of one on dealer lots), let alone 38k (limited with leather); and I won’t even mention the obscene prices for the SHO (now pronounced ‘show’ by Ford).
Face it – the “new” Taurus looks different, sheet metal wise, but is largely a carryover of the 2009 rental fleet car:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/automobiles/autoreviews/30AUTO.html?hpw
And no one – NO ONE – will be cross shopping the Taurus against the cars you have listed above, especially as the Taurus creeps towards a ridiculous 50k in price.
I see 30% off MSRP in the Taurus’s not too distant future.
http://thewheeldeal.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/08/06/big-bull-2010-ford-taurus-limited/
@Freedmike:
Taurus SHO, $43,280:
0-60 – 5.2 (tied with BMW 535 for first place)
0-100 – 12.8 (First place; BMW 535 is second)
1/4 mile – 13.7 @ 103 (First place; BMW is second)
Roadholding: .84 G (Tied for 3rd with Infiniti and Mercedes)
Braking, 70-0: 174 ft (tied with Jaguar XF)
_________________________________________________
Road test stats don’t always tell the whole story. I could just as easily play the numbers game to make the SHO’s performance look average.
Sticking with Car and Driver road tests (I can post links if anyone doubts these numbers)…
Pontiac G8 GXP, $40,000:
0-60: 4.7
0-100: 11.4
1/4 mile: 13.3 @ 109
Road holding: .85g
Braking 70-0: 156ft
Pontiac G8 GT, $32,845:
0-60: 5.2
0-100: 12.7
1/4 mile: 13.8 @ 104
Road holding: .84g
Braking 70-0: 163ft
Dodge Charger SRT8, $41,420:
0-60: 4.8
0-100: 11.2
1/4 mile: 13.2 @ 109
Road holding: .90g
Braking 70-0: 168ft
Hyundai Genesis 4.6L (Long-term test car), $42,050:
0-60: 5.3
0-100: 12.7
1/4 mile: 13.8 @104
Road holding: .84g
Braking 70-0: 164ft
And, here’s the observed fuel economy from each test:
SHO: 16mpg
G8 GXP: 14mpg
G8 GT: 16mpg
Charger SRT8: 14mpg
Genesis 4.6L: 21mpg (long-term test) and 19mpg (original road test)
_______________________
Just before anyone brings it up: yes, if for some reason, you 100% absolutely need AWD, then I guess the SHO is the best way to go.
i like the Taurus. the only thing i don’t like is the massive ride height, but i’d probably take one over an RL.
personally, i hate car adverts that directly compare their cars with another. Ford Australia did a much better job of comparing the Fairmont Ghia to European offerings a few years ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBg9_iUFRHw
their new adverts a bit lame tho
Ajla – The two Pontiacs are dead, and the Charger has a plastic-fantastic interior combined with Dodge reliability.
The real comparison is between the SHO and the Genesis, and that is a good one. Both are premium products coming from a mainstream brand, both stretch the amount one might think about paying from a car from said brand, with performance, price, and interior space being close enough to call it a draw between the two.
With the Hyundai you get a longer warranty, and with the SHO you get AWD (whether you need it or not, it does add value), heating and cooling on both front seats plus heating on the rear, a better bluetooth/Nav setup, massaging seats, and blind spot monitoring.
Given that these cars are so close why is it that everyone pans the SHO but lauds the Hyundai?
NulloModo
I really like the Genesis and came mighty close to getting one.
I instead got the MKS for the same money, 41K, with tons more stuff.
But it really came down to the AWD.
This blog is always panning the front/rear AWD systems, but I will take it in a heartbeat over nothing.
Look…many of us not only need but LIKE AWD systems and think stability control works better with it.
So not only does the SHO outperform these others, it, it offers more than others.
Maybe I missed something, but I thought this thread was about the linked advertisement, and much less about the car. At least, it is for me. I don’t have a grudge against Ford. Slap any two makes in the ad and I’d still call it Bertel Schmitt because the premise is ridiculous.
A few members have posted useful data that supports Ford’s claim, so why didn’t Ford include that in the ad? Give me the flash & jazz of the dragster, but please squeeze in a few seconds of useful, real life information. I don’t think that’s asking too much, and it sure isn’t bashing the Taurus to expect that data when the ad is clearly aimed in that direction.
Lincoln is to Ford as Acura is to Honda – damaged brands with confused messages.
ajla :
August 31st, 2009 at 2:17 am
@Freedmike:
Road test stats don’t always tell the whole story. I could just as easily play the numbers game to make the SHO’s performance look average.
I’m sure that subjectively, a $60,000 BMW is going to feel different than a $40,000 Taurus, or a Pontiac G8. But in the real world, people live on budgets, and the fact is that the Taurus can run with a car that’s $20,000 more, and do so without feeling like a Neon.
That’s a pretty remarkable achievement as far as I’m concerned.
NulloModo :
August 31st, 2009 at 7:01 am
Ajla – The two Pontiacs are dead, and the Charger has a plastic-fantastic interior combined with Dodge reliability.
The real comparison is between the SHO and the Genesis, and that is a good one. Both are premium products coming from a mainstream brand, both stretch the amount one might think about paying from a car from said brand, with performance, price, and interior space being close enough to call it a draw between the two.
With the Hyundai you get a longer warranty, and with the SHO you get AWD (whether you need it or not, it does add value), heating and cooling on both front seats plus heating on the rear, a better bluetooth/Nav setup, massaging seats, and blind spot monitoring.
Given that these cars are so close why is it that everyone pans the SHO but lauds the Hyundai?
Because the Hyundai isn’t American. There are people who are simply convinced that American cars – ANY American car – must suck. And some DO suck. But not this one.
ohsnapback :
August 31st, 2009 at 2:02 am
Freedmike – I doubt there will be a line forming to buy the Taurus for 33k (average price of one on dealer lots), let alone 38k (limited with leather); and I won’t even mention the obscene prices for the SHO (now pronounced ’show’ by Ford).
Face it – the “new” Taurus looks different, sheet metal wise, but is largely a carryover…
True, but when was the platform for the current Porsche 911 introduced? I guarantee you this: nobody, including me, cares that the 911 is riding on a 10-year-old design that’s been given a couple of styling refreshes. Why? Because it’s a great car.
Based on what I see from the new Taurus, I think it might be a great car too. And while it’s not going to sell in Camry/Accord numbers, it’ll sell respectably.
toasty: A few members have posted useful data that supports Ford’s claim, so why didn’t Ford include that in the ad?
Because it’s a one-minute ad competing with lots of other ads (not to mention the network or cable program, plus screaming children and/or a chattering spouse) for attention, and rattling off a bunch of numbers is a sure-fire way to lose viewers’ attention.
You are viewing the ad in a vacuum. Thus, you are focusing exclusively on it, and picking apart every detail. This is NOT the way this ad will be viewed in the real world. Some snappy graphics and easily understood visuals are what’s important here, and this ad delivers.
The numbers support the ad’s claim, as has been shown by other posters. If people want to look up that information, they can do so on their own (and if they do, Ford has thus scored a major victory in getting this car on potential buyers’ radar).
Ford needs to kill the “Taurus = dull, cheap rental car” image that is this car’s biggest burden, and it has to break through the clutter that is out there to do so. Rattling off a bunch of numbers between scenes of Desperate Housewives or The Amazing Race is not the way to do this.
paulie :
August 31st, 2009 at 8:19 am
Look…many of us not only need but LIKE AWD systems and think stability control works better with it.
So not only does the SHO outperform these others, it, it offers more than others.
Agreed 100% on AWD – I live in Denver, and while it doesn’t snow as much as people think it does here, we do get frequent 3-6 inch snowstorms that make driving a major pain in the ass. That’s not an issue with a FWD economy car or family sedan, but it sure as hell is with a 300-hp performance car without AWD. I see people in Mustangs and RWD BMWs playing car hockey all the time during the winter here.
I also don’t see what the beef is about the MKS. I drove one, and while it’s no back-road felon like a 3-series BMW, it’s no slouch to drive fast. I loved the interior. As soon as my local dealer gets one in with the turbo, I’m going to try it out again.
@NulloModo:
Given that these cars are so close why is it that everyone pans the SHO but lauds the Hyundai?
Speaking only for myself, I do not like the 2010 SHO because I don’t believe it is a faithful interpretation of the nameplate. A SHO and a Hyundai Genesis should not be comparable.
The 2010 SHO is a big, comfortable, quiet, relatively quick, inoffensively styled $40K executive car. If Ford called it “Taurus Limited with Ecoboost” I wouldn’t have a big problem. However, I think a vehicle wearing the “SHO” badge should be a dedicated sports sedan.
It doesn’t need to be Lexus quiet and offer tons of luxury options.
If Ford made an AWD Fusion “SHO” for around $31K with the 3.5L Ecoboost, Recaro seats, an aluminum hood and trunk, Brembo brakes, and at least an optional manual transmission- then they’d have the right idea.
Even if Ford didn’t want to go the mid-size route, at $39K-$45K, I was hoping the 2010 SHO would give the similarly priced G8 GXP a run for its money performance-wise. Overall, I’m disappointed in what Ford delivered.
With Hyundai, they market the Genesis as a straight-out RWD luxury car without sporting pretensions. That is basically what they sell. So there is no reason to complain.
alja: If Ford made an AWD Fusion “SHO” for around $31K with the 3.5L Ecoboost, Recaro seats, an aluminum hood and trunk, Brembo brakes, and at least an optional manual transmission- then they’d have the right idea.
I think we can agree on that one. Anyone at Ford listening…?
alja: Even if Ford didn’t want to go the mid-size route, at $39K-$45K, I was hoping the 2010 SHO would give the similarly priced G8 GXP a run for its money performance-wise. Overall, I’m disappointed in what Ford delivered.
Only problem is that the GXP is going away, and never made much of a splash when it was here. Whatever the GXP had, not very many people wanted it.
you 100% absolutely need AWD, then I guess the SHO is the best way to go.
IE:
You don’t know how to drive and shouldn’t be on the road.
The SHO would be something worth taking a look at if it had RWD. The V6 under the hood is somewhat forgivable but the FWD-based AWD system is not. That turns the car into another anonymous jellybean.
@geeber:
Only problem is that the GXP is going away, and never made much of a splash when it was here. Whatever the GXP had, not very many people wanted it.
I’m obviously biased, seeing how I’m a Pontiac fan and a G8 owner, but IMO the G8 GXP wasn’t around nearly long enough to know if it had a market or not.
Really I don’t think the G8 in general was around long enough to know if it had legs. Pontiac dealers gouged potential customers early on, marketing was poor, GM upped the price too much for the 2009 model year (for no good reason), Chrysler put huge rebates on Chargers, and GM killed the brand as sales started to creep up.
But, G8 discussion is a whole different post.
ajla,
The bottom line is that the G8 and GXP are gone. The majority of customers don’t care why they are gone; they just know that they cannot buy one, and that the Pontiac brand is going the way of Studebaker.
Using it as a benchmark for the Taurus SHO is similar to comparing the Studebaker Avanti to the Ford Thunderbird in January 1964.
P71_CrownVic :
August 30th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
At least Ford has a plan.
Yeah…produce the most boring, bland appliances on the planet.
Wow…they are almost there.
The vast majority of drivers want that type of vehicle. As long as the vehicle is reliable, a company can sell a lot of cars like this and become successful. Companies are in business to make money. It’s pretty hard to make money selling cars that don’t appeal to the majority of buyers.
ajla :
August 31st, 2009 at 11:18 am
@NulloModo:
Given that these cars are so close why is it that everyone pans the SHO but lauds the Hyundai?
Speaking only for myself, I do not like the 2010 SHO because I don’t believe it is a faithful interpretation of the nameplate. A SHO and a Hyundai Genesis should not be comparable.
The 2010 SHO is a big, comfortable, quiet, relatively quick, inoffensively styled $40K executive car. If Ford called it “Taurus Limited with Ecoboost” I wouldn’t have a big problem. However, I think a vehicle wearing the “SHO” badge should be a dedicated sports sedan.
Point taken, but I think that depends on what market the “sports sedan” plays in. Is it a compact, ala BMW 3-series or Infiniti G, or a mid-size, ala BMW 5-series or Mercedes E-Class?
Size-wise, the Taurus slots in as a midsize/large car (and always has), so it’s comparable to others in its class, not a compact sedan. It can’t be an M3 fighter – it’s too big. Then again, neither is the BMW in the Taurus’ size class.
Therefore…the benchmark for sports sedans of this size is the BMW 535, and the Taurus beats it or ties it in every acceleration test, and will give it a serious run on a back road. And it’ll do the job for 20 grand less, and with more cargo and passenger room to boot.
I’d say that shows a fair amount of “dedication.” :)
P71_CrownVic :
August 31st, 2009 at 11:44 am
you 100% absolutely need AWD, then I guess the SHO is the best way to go.
IE:
You don’t know how to drive and shouldn’t be on the road.
Are you just trolling this board looking for people to flame you?
@ geeber:
The clip is 1:28, not a minute.
“The Taurus is quieter on the road, too.”
Below, cite the Car & Driver test in a caption.
Yeah, that’d take a lot of time and effort to include in the script. No numbers to be rattled off. Add the above to that ad, and I’d have no problem with it. If Ford wants to change some minds, it’ll take more than “[s]ome snappy graphics and easily understood visuals”. Adding some meat to the sizzle isn’t hard; Ford had all of the ingredients, but still missed the mark.
Are you just trolling this board looking for people to flame you?
Then explain to me Mikey…explain to me…a person who drove a V8, RWD car with high-performance tires (90% tread gone), no traction control, and no locking diff through MANY Minnesota winters without being stuck ONCE…why I need AWD?
AWD is simply a crutch that people use to mask their deficient driving skills.
Simply put…if you cannot handle driving a modern day RWD car with modern day tires in the snow…then you shouldn’t be behind the wheel.