Misteredog

The Sable does have LED tail lights, and they really look good when lit up. I don't especially care for the clear tail lights on the Sable though, especially on darker coloured cars, they look pretty good on silver cars though. I really like the styling of the D3 cars, it is extremely simple and understated and reminds me alot of some earlier Volvos, though more aerodynamic as well as the original Taurus and to a certain extent early '50s sedans. Ford just needs to advertise them and market them properly,selling safety isn't enough, they need to highlight their practicality and efficiency, cross promote them with Ikea, or Home Depot, show four sumo wrestlers going for a golf outing, real estate agents with yard signs in the trunk, driving clients around... Use some humour to sell them, like VW has done, the cars may not be sexy but they're by no means ugly. And they are practical, make people feel good about that.

I want one, same colour, hold the sunroof.

It was CLK 63 AMG Black-Series, a 500 hp monster with approximately the same stopping distance, and overall weight as the AWD Taurus. But there wasn't any nosedive! There's virtually no nosedive in my '05 Montego either, but Motorweek complained about it in their Taurus review. I wonder if Ford remodulated the braking on the '08 Taurus to alleviate the premature rear brake pad wear on the earlier models (35K on my Montego, covered by Ford) ? It would no doubt be far cheaper than upgrading the rear pads and calipers and switching to ventilated rear rotors.

The brake feel and performance on my Montego has been exceptional, indeed I have to be gentle with the brakes to avoid getting rear-ended. There is also much less nosediving on hard braking than almost any other car I've driven, and I think that's why the rear brakes are wearing out early, the way the brakes are balanced they're doing a much larger share of the braking work than on most cars. The rear rotors are ovesized, but hey probably should be vented and have come with oversized pads too, but that's alot more money.

There's been a problem with premature wear of the rear brakes (just had my pads replaced at 35K) due to sticking and swelling of the rear pads. The rear rotors are also a bit thin and if you don't replace the pads as soon as the chirping starts it can get really pricey as the rotors will be shot too, I learned that lesson on another car I had once. Ford did issue a recall on the rear brakes a couple of weeks ago, I don't know if they changed the pad material or not though, I alos don't know it they made any changes on the new Taurus' brakes/

Unfortunately shaving 1000 lbs. off the Edge and retaining its current level of safety, comfort, amenities, and capabilities would likely result in car that costs about $100 more for every pound saved

Baltic(Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland) or Balkan ( Serbia, Croatia, Macedonia, Kosovo, etc.)? I'm not bashing anyone, just trying to avoid housepainting

Maybe, or maybe he's just being observant. RedStars' signature is a logo for the Serbian soccer team Crvena Zvezda. Slavic languages generall do not use the definite or indefinite article, and RedStar dropped the indefinite article in his sentence, as my Polish and Russian speaking grandmother always did when speaking. Therefor it is reasonable to assume that RedStar may well not be a native English speaker but rather a native Serbian speaker. Or Nick may just have been brutally expressing is disagreement with RedStars' opinion.

Three things: 1) The stated tow ratings for the Freestyle/Taurus X is 2000 lbs. versus 1000 lbs. for the FiveHundred/Taurus. 2) The Freestyle/Taurus X differs substantially from the sedan versions behind the B pillar, this may or may not result in significant structural diffrences that affect towing ability. 3) The target market for the cars is different,most sedans don't have substantial tow rating, or towing isn't recommended, all of the Taurus X's competition has hiigher stated tow ratings. Duh.

Just curious, but what problems have you had with your CX-9?

A push button start would be useful if it was combined with the keypad entry system. You could just forget about your keys completely :D

I still can't figure out why Mazda has no plans to build the 3 in North America given that their capacity is so stretched, and why the don't make the 2.0 litre available on the hatch version of the 3. Unfortunately theis doesn't surpise me, Mazda had a hit a the NAIAS 3 years ago with the MX-Micro Sport and we didn't get that either.

Is anyone able to explain why the tow rating of the Taurus X is a mere 2000 lbs.? The drivetrain is the same as the Edge which has a 3500 lb. tow rating, it is based on the D3 chassis which is derived from the Volvo P2 platform and the vehicles boit on that platform are rated at a minimum of 3300 lbs. towing. The Taurus X's principal rivals, the Subaru Legacy and Outback wagons and the Tribeca, as well as the Toyota Highlander, Honda Pilot, Saturn Outlook, Mazda CX-9, Chrysler Pacifica etc. all have tow ratings of 3000 to 4500 lbs., with most being rated at 3500 lbs. the same is true for most minivans. The Taurus X looks like a wimp in comparison, I think that even some people who may not be serioulsy considering using their vehicles for towing will see the low tow rating and feeling that the Taurus X is less sturdy will move on. Is the low tow rating on the Taurus X legitimate, or is Ford just being overly conservative and lowballing the rating hoping to doge warranty costs, protect Explorer sales, or both?

But the post for the billboard weren't that near the highway, they were behind a fence, on the Ford property adjacent to a parking lot. I don't see any negligence on the part of Ford for placement or designof the billboard, only on the part of the unfortunate driver of the car wrapped around the billboards support for driving at excessive speeds. Slow down people! You don't do that kind of damage to a car when driving at reasonable speeds. Torrence Avenue isn't a freeway in fornt of CAP.

The Impla sells, or leases, at any rate, as well as it does because GM are practically giving them away. I've seen offers locally with lower lease prices than you can get on a Focus, let alone a Fusion, FiveHundred, Taurus, or even Chevy's own Malibu.

I've rather liked Ford interiors better than those of most competitors in the same price range. They almost always seem to fit me better. The main exception was the Mazda derived Escort of 1997-2002, the seats were too low and the ergonomics were just a bit off. In most GMs and many Chryslers and Toyotas the seats seem too low but GM quality has improved markedly and probably caught up to Ford in most cases, Nissan interiors have been inconsistent in both ergonomics and quality over the last few years. My biggest gripes regarding car interiors are Honda's, Honda gets consistently praised inthe press for the quality of their interiors and their superior ergonomics but they couldn't do a better job of making their passenger cars more uncomfortable for me if they sent their engineers over to measure me and and build them NOT to fit me. I get a feling that they're using a 13 year old Japanese girl as their baseline for measurements. Honda's trucks and minivans aren't too bad though.

It seems the price quoted for the 2007 model was for the 4x4 and for the 2008 the FWD version.

Regarding modern diesel costs Johan de Nysschen of Audi of America estimated a premium based on just the cost of the engine and associated emission equipment of "four and a half thousand dollars, just to break even". source:Autoline Detroit, Johann de Nysschen interview.

At least the tachometer is standard on all models. Otherwise, ugghh:(

For a while I've had this nagging suspicion that if you searched through the hard dives on most of these auto critics laptops you'd find a file called the "Decline and Fall ot the Ford Motor Company". I think the only way Ford could please them would be to go out of business, it would be the top business story of thee last hundred years, they'd sell their book and be millionaires, some of them probably daydream about who would be cast as Bill Ford in the HBO miniseries. Pathetic.

It's more than that, ALL current Volvos and all that are in development are built on platforms shared with Ford or Mazda. Ther is also a great deal of engine sharing,e.g. lower spec Volvos in Europe use Ford's 4 cylinder engines and the new Mondeo usess Volvo's T5 in its top spec. Separating the 2 companies at this point would be a real nightmare. It would make some big corporate law firms on both sides of the atlantic a hell of alot of money though:(

Ford used to be in the home appliance and consumer electronics business. Remember Philco? It was a Ford subsidiary inthe 60s and 70s. Also, Frigidaire was part of GM, Kelvinator fridges were part of Nash, later AMC, and I think HotPoint was a subsidiary of Chrysler.

Why isn't there a Volvo/Mazda/Auto Alliance plant being built in the US, Canada, or Mexico for the C1 and EUCD cars? Why is the Volvo C30 available in the states with only the 2.5 turbo, which is not exactly a fuel miser. Why...?

I'd vote for a Flex like vehicle built off the Focus platform to compete with the Chevy HHR and the PT Cruiser. Ford is really missing the boat if they think that anyone needing a small cargo capable vehicle will just settle for an Escape. The Escape their likely to choose is the Ford stores door, and it's down the road to another dealership that has something that actually meets their needs.

The Canadian market Taurus includes AdvanceTrak as standard equipment, several other models also offer standard stability or traction control when it is optional stateside. DRLs are standard, by law, in Canada, engine block heaters are available, a number of differences but they add up.