What’s in a Name? Potential, but not much else.

[Blue Oval Guide]

Americans love a good comeback story.

 

2008 Ford Taurus X

 

BlueOvalNews.com, Don Gammill.

 

Hollywood has capitalized on this phenomenon for generations, and lately, the domestic auto industry seems intent on selling us the same tale.

 

Witness, for example, last week’s announcement of Ford’s plan to resurrect the just-discarded Taurus nameplate.

 

In an apparent attempt at rekindling the long-extinguished fire that drove the company to mid-sized sedan supremacy twenty years ago, Ford will now consign this once-proud moniker to the refreshed-for-‘08 version of its slow-selling Five Hundred sedan.

 

This is risky business, given that Ford’s 2005 decision to kill the Taurus centered on the fact that is was a “damaged brand,” spoiled beyond redemption by they company’s outright neglect in favor of a temporarily-profitable ride on the late-‘90’s SUV train. Generally unloved and relegated to mostly fleet business at fire-sale prices, the last vehicle to carry the Taurus name was essentially nothing more than a bland, outdated rental car.

 

It is therefore certainly a “bold move” to place this seemingly broken name on the capable but unexciting Ford Five Hundred, especially given the relatively mild exterior update the car just received (in profile, it’s virtually identical to last year’s model, and what Ford calls a substantial update is the equivalent of what most vehicle lines received every year in the 1950’s and 1960’s).

 

2008 Ford Taurus

 

Ford cites marketing data showing the abysmally low consumer awareness numbers for the Five Hundred sedan compared to a twice-as-high number for the now out-of-production Taurus. The company refers to the enormous brand equity (seven million cars total, half still on the road) that it “never should have walked away from,” and even mentions customer “letters, e-mails, and comments at dealerships” lamenting Ford’s decision to discontinue the Taurus name.

 

But what does the name Taurus really mean, anyway?

 

I believe it means two different things to two different groups of people, and that these conflicting views represent a fundamental crossroads for Ford Motor Company.

 

To the “true believers,” whom I would define as not only the Ford faithful, but as any car buyers wanting to see an American company build products competitive with the world’s best, it means a 1985 television commercial with Ford CEO Donald Peterson looking straight into the camera and confidently telling consumers that Ford had redefined the domestic sedan and that they should give it a try. Other Taurus imagery for these folks include a Car and Driver magazine cover picturing the original Taurus SHO under the words “America’s Best Sedan,” as well as an entire issue of Motor Trend magazine entitled “How Ford Became #1.” Don’t even mention a myriad of other news stories proclaiming that the Ford Taurus remained the best selling automobile in the nation, outpacing the Camry and Accord yet again.

 

To the other group, however, the thoughts evoked by the Taurus name are not so rosy. To these people, who are typically younger and largely unaware of the car’s former success, the Taurus seems under whelming and mediocre at best, unreliable and costly to own at worst. On the occasion of returning their Taurus rental car, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard friends and coworkers utter the phrase, “I’m so glad to be driving my Camry/Accord again!” Numb steering, unsupportive seats, and a generally low-rent driving experience all contribute to a definite impression a car has on potential buyers…and, in this case, it wasn’t a good one.

 

2008 Taurus logo.

 

In an admittedly abstract way, the two groups above signify two distinct courses of action Ford could take in developing and refining future mainstream sedan offerings.

 

The former group represents more of a “Go for it!” attitude…the same somewhat dangerous “big thinking” mentality that resulted in the game changing, paradigm-shifting original Taurus twenty years ago.

 

The latter group appears to characterize a subtler, more calculating direction for the company, likely resulting in a slow, quiet game of “catch-up” in the segment, costing the company much less money and side-stepping any major risks of spectacular failure that a go-for-broke effort would entail.

 

Regardless of Ford’s choice in the matter, the 2008 Five Hundred (now called Taurus) can only represent the latter. Whatever vehicle eventually replaces it will show Ford’s ultimate philosophical decision in the matter.

 

The fact is, no one – not Alan Mulally, not Mark Fields (not even Carlos Ghosn) – can go back in time and undo Ford’s previous 12 years worth of missteps. The current management can only play the cards they’re dealt, and that means managing the current crisis until new products can get online. And it seems that they have gotten at least one very important thing right: product is king, end of story.

 

Unfortunately, products don’t change overnight, and great automotive nameplates aren’t made great overnight…even if they happen to reside on the deck lid of a great product.

 

Ford would therefore seem to have made the best decision it could by rolling the dice and hanging a great-but-weakened name on a proficient but uninspiring car. Only time will tell, however, if this was actually a strategic decision to select a worthy name for a future spectacular car. Only after the current car's replacement emerges as a bona fide world-beater will the “true believers” be satisfied that the name Taurus was aptly applied.

 

While a news cycle’s worth of coverage in the mainstream media is likely worth the minimal cost of a name change, the best thing about this bold decision is what it means to the company and its faithful. All statistics aside, the Taurus represents something much greater in the whole of Ford’s Way Forward plan than a marketing ploy to increase sales: It reminds every Ford employee and every Ford enthusiast that their company might still be capable of delivering a grand slam home run in the bottom of the ninth.

 

The 2008 Taurus will undoubtedly be a good car, however by 1985 standards, the mid-sized Ford LTD (the Taurus’ universally-forgotten predecessor) was also a good car. Replacing that awkwardly angled box with an automotive revolution (both in design and quality) showed the automotive world that Ford was capable of building great cars, not just good ones.

 

The name doesn’t make the car…the car makes the car. For all practical purposes, the right name has been chosen (and placed on a competent vehicle). Hopefully, a not-too-far-off redesign will yield the right car to wear it.

[ford-boy]

This morning I asked my wife to give me whatever thought popped into her mind when I gave her the names of two different cars. First -- Taurus: she said, "just a car. Just a family car." No other images or words came to her, even though I pressed her. Then came Five Hundred: she said, "isn't that a sports car?" Had absolutely no idea what it really was. And its not like I haven't pointed it out to her on the road multiple times. To me the Ford universe came into better alignment with the name change.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Do people really care? Hundai/Kia are selling well,`even though their car names are decidedly strange. I'm not sure anyone outside the car-nut-forums really cares what the next Ford will be named. I think if Ford is attempting to connect to a healthy target audience, they should have chosen a name that was not known as a flop for my generation.

 

Honda and Toyota made a reputation on Accord, Camry etc. But where is the Tercel, the Ecco or the Del Sol. These were miss-steps, and the names were quietly retired. Even the Camry name was chosen to replace their previous, underwhelming midsized sedan.

 

I look at the 500 and it looks tired. Understated is good, if the car is low, the lines are simple and the design is unmistakenly American. The 500 looks like an S60 with bondo to remove the creases. Its the sheetmetal stupid.

 

So Ford decides NOT to change the sheet metal. They change the lights (like Camry gets every 2 years) and a grill insert. Didn't anyone tell them a billet grill was available after-market?

 

The Taurus X looks much better. The new grill and headlights compliment a car that, to me, is reminicent of road-cruising station wagons. I would have loved to see a little peep window on the roof-line step up. This should be marketed as a do-anything wagon, like the XC70. Naming the car after a car makes a lot of sense in this case.

[Scot T.]

I never understood the wisdom behind the separation between the Five Hundred and the Freestyle, all it seemed to do was to clutter the lineup and confuse people. Bottom line is that Freestyle was a Five Hundred Crossover Wagon. A couple of years ago, our travel group had Five Hundred and Freestyle rentals, and in a side by side comparison, the two used slightly different front styling and sheet metal, very inefficient on the part of Ford. What the heck was up with that, left hand not speaking to right hand? At the same time, the styling of both SCREAMED of classic Taurus (look at the 1986 vs 2008 pictures that headline this story!), so this consolidation and renaming is a very smart move by Ford. Taurus and Taurus X will help each other in boosting sales. :happy feet:

[g48150]

Jeez I wish the "staff" around here would get off their and actually have something to say.

 

Its bad enough some of us get labeled "grouches", but all this talk and no action isn't going to make us:

 

:bowdown:

 

Try coming up with something original, all this rehash is, heh, acting like what you're antagonizing.

[EMDEE]

The 500/now Taurus 'screams of the classic look of the 1986 Taurus????' What 1986 Taurus? Ford could only wish the 500 had a hint of the futuristic style of the 1986 Taurus and Sable. Nobody but nobody ever accused the first generation Taurus and Sable of being boring, conservative, dull, etc. But everybody and their brother in law used those adjectives to describe the 500. Remember how the 1986 Taurus was featured, unmodified except for dull paint, as the cop car of the future in the RoboCop movies? The Taurus design was years ahead of anything from Detroit or Japan and was matched only by the large Audi sedan of the era, which it obviously borrowed from. The Audi was released a bit ahead of its time and a lot of people thought it too futuristic. But it got people accustomed to the design so that when the Taurus appeared, their eyes were ready for it and it became the perfect, most timely design of the decade.

 

Here's hoping that Ford has a complete redesign for the new Taurus for the 2010 model year, a design that once again takes a leap into the automotive future without going over the edge. In the meantime, I suspect that the other improvements they've made to the 500/new Taurus will be sufficient to hold peoples interest. An all wheel drive, SHO version with at least 350 horsepower would go a long way toward rekindling the fire that once accompanied the name.

[silvrsvt]

Here's hoping that Ford has a complete redesign for the new Taurus for the 2010 model year, a design that once again takes a leap into the automotive future without going over the edge.

 

 

Personally, with the way the automotive market is these days, I don't think that is possible anymore. They need just to keep improving upon what they have and make the styling a bit more daring, without alienating the target customer.

[J-150]

I never understood the wisdom behind the separation between the Five Hundred and the Freestyle, all it seemed to do was to clutter the lineup and confuse people. Bottom line is that Freestyle was a Five Hundred Crossover Wagon. A couple of years ago, our travel group had Five Hundred and Freestyle rentals, and in a side by side comparison, the two used slightly different front styling and sheet metal, very inefficient on the part of Ford. What the heck was up with that, left hand not speaking to right hand? At the same time, the styling of both SCREAMED of classic Taurus (look at the 1986 vs 2008 pictures that headline this story!), so this consolidation and renaming is a very smart move by Ford. Taurus and Taurus X will help each other in boosting sales. :happy feet:

 

 

they wanted them to look different.

 

One was supposed to look like a car, and the other a CUV/SUV. Notice how the grill was not Ford car DNA... but Ford truck DNA? Styling cues from the Exploder and Escape?

[2005Explorer]

I thought this was a funny quote by Mark Fields when asked about using vehicle names from Ford's past...

 

Ford's Five Hundred will become Taurus for 2008, Freestyle Taurus X and the Mercury Montego Sable. So what of the Lincoln MKS slated to be assembled with those three at the company's Chicago plant?

 

No change there, as the naming move is designed to spark a sales spurt for the other three. It also puts an end to the edict that all new Ford cars start with the letter "F" and new Mercurys with "M."

 

"Names will no longer be hampered by those restraints," Fields said.

 

As for going back in history for names, Fields said it is safe to assume Pinto isn't going to come back--ever. No need to even ask about Edsel. :lol:

Edited February 14, 2007 by 2005Explorer

[EMDEE]

Personally, with the way the automotive market is these days, I don't think that is possible anymore. They need just to keep improving upon what they have and make the styling a bit more daring, without alienating the target customer.

I worry that you may be right, but we won't really know until someone tries to take another leap forward. Surely, every car company has models and drawings of what they think cars will look like in 2017 or 2022. If they aren't thinking that far ahead, they're already in trouble. I think the 1986 Taurus succeeded because Ford took a leap to what they expected to see in 1996 or so. And if you look at other cars from 1996, it seems they were pretty much on target. Whether they can do it again remains to be seen, but I'm encouraged by many of the design features on the Lincoln MKR, some of which haven't been seen on any car yet. Of course, a single concept car doesn't prove that every feature can be duplicated in a production vehicle. But let's not give up without trying. Ford has wasted far too much time worrying about scaring the existing customer base and consequently produced way too many boring, unimaginative designs, right at a time when many of the other players have been pushing the limits. Ford's existing customer base has been shrinking so badly that maybe it's time to stop worry about pleasing them or their clueless dealers.

[JW]

I never did understand the fascination some people had with the Taurus. Everyone I knew who had one looked upon it the way Gammill describes in his second group.

[bri719]

Taurus makes pretty good sense as a rename for the 500, and when folks see the name on the trunklid for '08 there should be little confusion or negative reaction. though I agree the car's lines could still be enhanced a bit (see: MKS, which looks awesome). but at least there's less sharing of sheet metal, which can't be a bad thing and is definitely one that many here like to complain about. yes I can always tell an Avalon is just a stretched / dressed up Camry, or a Lexus is a dressed up RAV-4, but most people can't. same should hold true for '08 Taurus and the MKS

 

I don't see as much benefit from renaming the Montego the Sable. and when I heard there was a "Taurus X" I raised an eyebrow, thinking it meant SEL, AWD, or performance version. then I realized it was the Freestyle, a vehicle I like but the name just doesn't work as well as the 500-Taurus name resurrection. getting rid of the Freestyle name had to be done, people still confuse it with Freestar - a minivan that hasn't been made in what, over 2 years? but I expect to see that there will be a law of diminishing returns in effect here.

 

at least the Ford = F and Mercury = M thing is long gone. it was getting ridiculous

Edited February 19, 2007 by bri719

[designeraccd]

Having owned 3 Taurus (Taurii??) + briefly a 500 AWD I find this renaming of young Mr. Mays bloated, last gen Audi/VW design quite interesting. The original Taurus (3L V6)was visually striking, but even then my wife's 4 cylinder Accord would easily out perform it by any measurement one could use. Jack Telnack's original Taurus was stunning, visually and adequate functionally plus comparable pricewise. So the car's "styling" really vaulted it above anything else out there at the time. This is far from the case with the 500/Taurus of 07/08.

 

The 500 I had was, to me, only impressive during bad Winter weather. With its very capable AWD the car was exceptionally good then, but under normal driving it was a total snooozurr and ate gas; the car was traded after @ 5-6 months for a Mazda 3S which lasted @ 8 months and was then traded for my latest '05 Accord EX, V6 coupe. Looks wise the Accord is ok, but certainly not striking like the early Taurus, but dynamically the car is only let down by the o.e. tires.

 

Would I rather have another Ford? Yes...IF they had a product that at least MATCHED the Accord, but to me that certainly isn't the 500...oops, Taurus '08. I hope Ford's new management finds a "star" like Jack Telnack was who can create a stunning new design; without that Ford will continue its dive. Product, DESIREABLE product is everything...look at the 64 1/2 Mustang and original Taurus for historical proof. DFO

Edited February 25, 2007 by designeraccd