rsgnome

what the hell sort of name is "Cruze" anyway? I have visions of shit(literally) when i see the name. One of the few time I actually watched Televison.. an ad came on for this unfortunately named vehicle... bunch of old ppl in a nursing home that couldn't hear the TV they were watching. C'mon really GM? If I were in the market for a new vehicle, the "Crud" would be nowhere on my list... thanks solely to this commercial.

just fyi Brady, you list the engine size as 3.5L at the end of the article. Very nicely written, I really in joy reading your reviews. thank you! :-)

gah! what the hell?! Mazda had a good thing goin until they introduced the current Mazda3 with that abortion of a front end... someone needs to slap some sense into them!

It is not bad for what it is. works pretty well with the flow of the new front and rear design.

Lipstick on a pig...

what are you talking about? they already are extinct in most trucks.

I test drove a 2.5/6M last year. It left me with the impression that Ford is trying to phase out the Manual tranny in the Escape. Not only is it limited to the bare bones models... The clutch was about as firm as a wet noodle. It gave you absolutely no feed back as to where the clutch engagement point was. I took this thing around about 10 miles and I was never able to shift it smoothly. It also grinded going into gears, which I found odd for a brand new vehicle. I am sure the Automatic models are much better thought out, but I have to say I was very disappointed with the manual transmission.

It is the same engine... iirc, Ford redesigned the heads to a SOHC setup in 1998. It was initially used in the explorer, then eventually migrated to the Ranger in 2000.

So, supposedly, there is going to be 4 new powertrains. What about Transmission choices? Is Ford going to keep the manual on the base 4 cylinder... or will it make its way into the V6 and TF 4 Cylinder as well?

Very well said Blackhorse! Happy 4th of July everyone :D

That's not entirely true. Ford began work on this revision of the Taurus/500 before the 500 came to market. However, I do see your point in as far as this: Ford has taken heavy criticisms over the 500's shortcomings, and it is apparent that Ford has gone to a lot of work to address these issues. There is a lot of buzz going around about the new Taurus, a majority of it very positive. I think that while Ford is not out of the woods yet, they are taking the necessary steps to ensure their survival. I'm very interested to see what Ford does with the Taurus for the 6th generation. To the topic at hand: I think they all look like very nice evolutions of the current vehicles. The Milan doesn't look like it has changed much. I'm not liking the tailights on the Fusion. The current models' taillights look much better IMO. The MKZ looks stunning! The MKR grille works quite nicely. Those tailights suit the vehicle much better. If these pictures look as similar to the real thing, as Igor has stated, I will feel very optimistic abouts Ford's future prospects.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...photopanel..2.* More of Edmunds usual dribble... however, for an edmunds review of a Ford product, it is upbeat. I do agree with their blasting of the radio faceplate... but I have a hard time buying that the Taurus goes 0-60 in 8 seconds... the 500 was supposedly rated at 8 seconds. Can anyone confirm this?

That looks really sharp! The exterior is orgasmic in that darker colour. :o

I think you're on to something. The Taurus does have many strengths over its safety ratings. It is possible, that Ford is simply keeping those strengths in reserve for future advertisements. But, given Ford's track record, I'm not so sure that this is the case. Only time will tell I suppose.

I really like that. Good job! :thumb: