johnnyb82

Either drivers today are not as bad as people think or all of this safety stuff that people seem to think is for sissies is actually working: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b6/UsFatalAutoAccidentRates.png

They could have, you know, just stuck with the Freestyle (not changed its name to Taurus X (huh?)), actually advertised it and improved it. If they had, I'd bet it would be doing better than the Flex and at less cost to Ford.

I actually have a Taurus X (really my wife's car). I find the second row to be MORE comfortable than the front row, which is rather strange.

I do not think it is just about being fat. I am 6ft3 and am by no means heavy, but I have noticed that the leg room is a bit snug in D3 vehicles. I fit, but it just feels cramped. Sometimes it is perception. We don't need 8ft and 9ft high ceilings, but it sure feels nicer to have them.

How is the MKX well differentiated from the Edge again?

Ford really seems to be pushing form over function lately considering the Fiesta and Taurus. Being somewhat claustrophobic, I rather Ford emphasis maximizing passenger space within a given package, but how much better the Taurus is selling shows me how most people disagree.

Define "giants"? 2 inches can be significant.

While Motor Trend might be unfair, I think it is a fair criticism that the back seats have surprisingly little room for such a large car.

I thought the conventional wisdom was that the market leader (still Camry I believe) should never acknowledge its competition in commercials no matter how strong the competition is. Toyota is showing insecurity and weakness here.

There is this new Toyota Camry commercial that I keep seeing where they brag about a Motortrend comparison where the Camry came out on top. My recollection is that the Fusion came in second. Yet this commercial seems to make it seem that the Fusion came in 6 and/or put particular emphasis on the Fusion not being as good. Are they talking about a different comparo?

That's the kind of philosophy that led to getting rid of the Taurus name.

Even if you care little about protecting bad drivers, you ignore my point about those who are not bad drivers being protected. And besides the point, no one is a perfect driver and even the best drivers make mistakes.

I think the 30-40K people who die each year is reason enough to strive for safer vehicles and not settle with current technology. It is hard to imagine when driving comes with no risk, but I see little reason to believe that cars cannot be safer. Some of these deaths are due to bad drivers, drinking, etc., but many could have been avoided through safer vehicles. Even if you think it is always due to bad driving, keep in mind that many die due to no fault of their own because the other driver is drunk, stupid, distracted or because they are riding with someone who is (think children).

Is it possible that is it not so much that Mercury attracts different kinds of people but rather than it attracts different would be Ford buyers? The product mix is far different, so of course the average Mercury buyer is going to be different than the average Ford buyer. Also, the focus has been on attracting women. So much so that Mercury has become a "woman's car brand." Women are happy to drive men's cars. Vice versa doesn't work out as well.

Such small back seat room for such a large car.