RichardJensen Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Armada, the aggregate NHTSA & IIHS ratings favor the Taurus. If you want to pretend that the IIHS ratings don't exist, that's fine. However they do, and no family car has scored, aggregate, as well on BOTH panels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 (edited) Armada, the aggregate NHTSA & IIHS ratings favor the Taurus. If you want to pretend that the IIHS ratings don't exist, that's fine. However they do, and no family car has scored, aggregate, as well on BOTH panels. Ok, so let's say based on that neither car is safer than the other using the TWO sources cited, then how does one justify labeling one over the other the "safest car in America"? Why shouldn't Taurus have to exceed ALL others in EVERY category from BOTH sources to meet the motto of "Safest Car in America"? Edited June 7, 2007 by Armada Master Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Alright, hypothetically, let's remove "Panther" from the facts I stated and insert...say...."Avalon" instead. Does that make Ford's flawed "Safest car in America" campaign more palatable? - does the Avalon get the "TOP safety pick" from IIHS? (NOPE) - does the Avalon have AWD? (NOPE) - does Avalon get Good score for driver's foot/leg protection from IIHS? (NOPE, gets acceptable - DESPITE using knee airbag) - does Avalon get Good from IIHS for Rear end collision? (no it gets POOR) - does the Avalon have lower than 10% chance of rollover (per NHTSA)? (NOPE - 11%) The only place where Avalon scores above the Taurus is Driver;'s pelvis protection in side collision (IIHS) where Avalon gets G and Taurus gets A. Both Taurus and Avalon get A for driver's torso protection and safety cage structure (IIHS) in side impact. Hmm ... Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Ok, so let's say based on that neither car is safer than the other using the TWO sources cited, then how does one justify labeling one over the other the "safest car in America"? Taurus is 1% more likely to rollover. Contrast the better scores for the Taurus vs. the Crown Vic on the IIHS website, and the difference between the two on the IIHS website is far greater than the difference between the two on the NHTSA site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Potential buyers test driving the Grand Marquis and 2008 Sable are probably going to go with better equipped Sable. That will leave the Grand Marquis with an even higher percentage ging to daily rentals, it's over 40% now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 - does the Avalon get the "TOP safety pick" from IIHS? (NOPE)- does the Avalon have AWD? (NOPE) - does Avalon get Good score for driver's foot/leg protection from IIHS? (NOPE, gets acceptable - DESPITE using knee airbag) - does Avalon get Good from IIHS for Rear end collision? (no it gets POOR) - does the Avalon have lower than 10% chance of rollover (per NHTSA)? (NOPE - 11%) The only place where Avalon scores above the Taurus is Driver;'s pelvis protection in side collision (IIHS) where Avalon gets G and Taurus gets A. Both Taurus and Avalon get A for driver's torso protection and safety cage structure (IIHS) in side impact. Hmm ... Igor Well...ya got me....switching Panther with Avalon as a hypothetical was a bad idea. Hypothetical-lyDefinition: 1. involving ideas or possibilities: existing as or involving something that exists as an unproven idea, theory, or possibility the hypothetical existence of a Loch Ness monster 2. assumed for sake of argument: assumed or proposed for further investigation The question is purely hypothetical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 I don't think it's a bad idea for Ford to advertise the Taurus in this way. Even if there are other vehicles that are more or less its equal, it's still "the safest". It kind of reminds me about all of the 100,000 mile warrantys now, with everybody calling it their own version of the best: "America's Best Warranty", "The Best Coverage in America", "The Top Warranty". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Taurus is 1% more likely to rollover. Contrast the better scores for the Taurus vs. the Crown Vic on the IIHS website, and the difference between the two on the IIHS website is far greater than the difference between the two on the NHTSA site. Panther rates better on NHTSA, Taurus rates better on IIHS, perhaps Taurus rates better adding up the two, but THAT starts roaming off into that "grey" area as far as I'm concerned. All that aside: Why shouldn't Taurus have to exceed ALL others in EVERY category from BOTH sources to meet the motto of "Safest Car in America"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 There is nothing wrong with using this tag line to market the car, because they can back up the claim even if one wants to argue a percent here or a percent there. It goes very well with the other tage line, "The perfect family car." If Ford was trying to market a Pinto or a Bronco II using this tag line, then I would say, yes, they are lying (actually lying would be an understatement). Why can't some of you just face the fact that the new Taurus really is going to be a great car? I might be wrong, but with the right kind of marketing (and this kind is spot on) the new Taurus and it's cousins could prove to be very successful. They fixed the major issues with the 500, put a name on it that people know, and came up with very good MPG ratings even though power was improved substantially. I don't see how anyone could be down on this car other then styling and face it...it is a large family car...not a sports car. With fuel prices at all time highs and people still needing a vehicle with room...I think it is going to do fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Why can't some of you just face the fact that the new Taurus really is going to be a great car? I might be wrong, but with the right kind of marketing (and this kind is spot on) the new Taurus and it's cousins could prove to be very successful. They fixed the major issues with the 500, put a name on it that people know, and came up with very good MPG ratings even though power was improved substantially. I don't see how anyone could be down on this car other then styling and face it...it is a large family car...not a sports car. With fuel prices at all time highs and people still needing a vehicle with room...I think it is going to do fine. Speaking of the right kind of marketing.... This vehicle is ALREADY on sale. Why isn't there any marketing now??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.