08 Taurus Review in USA Today

[kyle]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/review...nterstitialskip

 

While I generally enjoy Mr. Healy's commentary and layout I felt that this missed the point.

 

The headlines sound great-then you read half the article before he mentions anything that he really likes and those are put forth in bullet points.

 

Can't say much about the seats-but he sounds like he prefers the 500 over the new chrome cladded Taurus. I don't agree with him at all there-the Taurus is a much nicer product, especially in person.

 

And for the money-along with the Taurus X-a hell of a deal.

[FordBuyer]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/review...nterstitialskip

 

While I generally enjoy Mr. Healy's commentary and layout I felt that this missed the point.

 

The headlines sound great-then you read half the article before he mentions anything that he really likes and those are put forth in bullet points.

 

Can't say much about the seats-but he sounds like he prefers the 500 over the new chrome cladded Taurus. I don't agree with him at all there-the Taurus is a much nicer product, especially in person.

 

And for the money-along with the Taurus X-a hell of a deal.

 

 

This was a hatchet job plain and simple. His review stunk. He didn't even hardly mention the engine which is the big news for the new Taurus. And the poke about the chrome was uncalled for. The new Taurus has very little chrome if you go with the alloy wheels. Only other chrome is on the front of course and a little chrome vent on fender that looks nice. Then he says something about the Avalon being better choice glossing over its horrible quality record and very tepid styling. The Avalon looks like a Nash Ambassador. He seemed to want to focus on what he personally didn't like and glossed over the strong points. You could read between the lines and could tell he was looking at it with Toyota eyes.

[RichardJensen]

Bellyaching about chrome over plastic--as though chrome over pig-iron and pot-metal was somehow more 'genuine'.

 

Chrome was NEVER solid chrome. Heck, I'll bet the chrome on the Fusion's gills is thicker than the chrome they used to put on Cadillac bumpers.

Edited August 17, 2007 by RichardJensen

[Michael Reynolds]

What is the Taurus' target demographic? I think once that can be answered truthfully one should be able to recognize who this car is aimed at. I'd love to see a sporty version but what would that do to the bulk of the vehicles sales if the ride were more punishing?

[timmm55]

Hatchet Job? I dunno.

 

•It has optional all-wheel drive. If you just want a nice, big car, get a Toyota Avalon or Buick Lucerne. But if you want one that will perform well in bad weather, your choices are Taurus and some Chrysler products. Others are sized down or priced up from Taurus.

 

•It has no-hassle usability. Climb in, turn the key, drive. Open the trunk and pour in a month's worth of groceries without evicting soccer and golf gear. Pack kids three-across in back, flip down the optional DVD screen to pre-empt "are-we-there-yets," and drive in peace. Nail the gas and go, bad weather or good.

 

•It's bargain-priced by today's standards. With every factory-installed option, it's a tick under $34,000.

 

As part of converting the Five Hundred to the born-again Taurus, Ford admirably upped the oomph a whopping 30% to 263 horsepower while boosting fuel economy, too, and replaced the CVT with a more palatable six-speed automatic.

 

•It's full size, which you don't find much in a family sedan. Very pleasant to have the extra room, especially because it's in a package that's relatively trim outside. You don't feel as if you're piloting the Queen Mary.

 

Ford brags that Taurus is the safest sedan, based on top crash-test scores from the federal National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the private Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The IIHS "Top Safety Pick" rating applies only if the Taurus has optional stability control, though. The nearly identical Mercury Sable gets the same rating. (IMHO just make it standard)

 

 

•The styling on the Five Hundred that looked titillatingly Audi-ish, on the Taurus at least has that same attractive silhouette.

 

You need size and traction. You don't care for thrills behind the wheel; your blood pressure and heart rate are high enough already. Your idea of automotive excellence involves a quiet interior and predictable overall behavior. It's never occurred to you to seek pleasure by sitting in, looking at or fooling with your car.

 

Step right up. Taurus could be your new best friend.

 

Doesn't sound that negative to me, other than complaining about the plasti-chrome (which everyone uses anyway), and conservative driving dynamics (but it's designed for conservative families). The same could be said of the aformentioned Lucerne and Avalon. Sounds like what it is: a well priced, safe, roomy, comfortable, well powered....family sedan.

[Anthony]

Finally saw one today. It was white. Maybe it was the color, but the grille looked very out of place on the car. Styling is a matter of opinion, but I was not impressed. That being said, I did like the front end of the 500 better in person. It seemed to match the car better.

[SVT_MAN]

I have seen Taurii in black and they look a lot better than in white. The weird thing is, the Fusion looks great in white, but I dislike them in silver. Funny. That's the only thing I don't like about the chrome grilles. They only look good in certain colors.

[atomcat68]

I don't think the article was a hatchet job. It sounds like he just said that the car was nice, but it wasn't for him.

[waymondospiff]

I found his comments on the ride a bit odd. He was very clear saying he felt the harsh stuff too much yet it wasn't firm enough during handling. I haven't driven the Taurus/Sable with the revised tuning yet, but I always felt the Volvo chassis had a great ride-handling trade-off on the 500. I would expect it only to get better with the Taurus. Maybe Healy & I have different opinions.

 

But in the end, no matter how well the Taurus handles, it is a family car. It out Camrys the Camry - it's larger, more comfortable, safer, and has even less offensive styling, unless you have chromaphobia, apparently. And to that point, Healy's ending wraps it up very, very well: if you don't want to THINK about your car, the Taurus could be your new best friend.

 

Scott

[MKII]

Finally saw one today. It was white. Maybe it was the color, but the grille looked very out of place on the car. Styling is a matter of opinion, but I was not impressed. That being said, I did like the front end of the 500 better in person. It seemed to match the car better.

 

Agree, the 3 bar looks very nice on the Taurus-X, but not on the sedan, too Tempo-ish looking. When I saw the Taurus on the lot beside the FiveHundred, the Taurus looks like a cheaper car.

[FordBuyer]

Agree, the 3 bar looks very nice on the Taurus-X, but not on the sedan, too Tempo-ish looking. When I saw the Taurus on the lot beside the FiveHundred, the Taurus looks like a cheaper car.

 

Wow.....poor Ford. Whatever way it goes it gets criticized. For three years I have constantly heard about how the 500 needed a more distinctive, "bolder" front end. So Ford gets bolder and gives Taurus the new three bar look that has won praise on the Fusion. Now I see number of posters saying new three bar front end does not look as good as more tepid 500. Unbelievable. You may not like it, but it at least makes a bolder statement coming at you like Fusion and Edge. You know it's a Ford and it stands out in crowd of other vehicles. Enough said.

[Traveler]

Saw one again today, this time in a crystal blue color. With the new headlights, chrome grille and fender vents, it looks a bit more upscale than the Five-Hundred IMO. The two things I cannot get past are the taillights (ugly to me...I'm sorry) and the fact that the rear 3/4 view (aside from the taillights) looks just like another Five-Hundred which looked to tall and stubby to begin with. Then by fate I suppose, I saw a fairly new Crown Vic in the same color and honestly admired it more. Yeah, call me kooky. The Taurus just looks too out of proportion in the greenhouse and the too short rear deck.

 

I must say that I just frankly love the 300 and Charger respectfully in design and how they target a slightly different audience. Saw a black SRT-8 300C and MAN...I couldn't take my eyes off the car. Its gorgeous and I've sat in one before. The SRT seats are nothing short of amazing in look and comfort. Granted the dash strokers will complain about the 300 being rather spartan, but I still prefer the 300 for elegance in class design (maybe replace the egg-crate grille) and the Charger for a sedan meets coupe appearance that adds sportiness to the family sedan picture.

 

I really want to like the Taurus and from the rear doors forward, I do but its just not a car I think I'd want. Give me a choice between a loaded up 300C versus a loaded up Taurus...and I'd still take the Chrysler. Sorry. Now the Fusion in its class beats the snot out of Sebring, seven ways to Sunday. Personally, I think the Fusion is the prettiest Ford sedan currently on sale to the public. I like the dimensions, the front end, the greenhouse, etc. The only minor gripes I have with the Fusion is a rather plain dash and the chrome trim taillights just never have completely won me over.

[96 Pony]

Saw one again today, this time in a crystal blue color. With the new headlights, chrome grille and fender vents, it looks a bit more upscale than the Five-Hundred IMO. The two things I cannot get past are the taillights (ugly to me...I'm sorry) and the fact that the rear 3/4 view (aside from the taillights) looks just like another Five-Hundred which looked to tall and stubby to begin with. Then by fate I suppose, I saw a fairly new Crown Vic in the same color and honestly admired it more. Yeah, call me kooky. The Taurus just looks too out of proportion in the greenhouse and the too short rear deck.

 

I must say that I just frankly love the 300 and Charger respectfully in design and how they target a slightly different audience. Saw a black SRT-8 300C and MAN...I couldn't take my eyes off the car. Its gorgeous and I've sat in one before. The SRT seats are nothing short of amazing in look and comfort. Granted the dash strokers will complain about the 300 being rather spartan, but I still prefer the 300 for elegance in class design (maybe replace the egg-crate grille) and the Charger for a sedan meets coupe appearance that adds sportiness to the family sedan picture.

 

I really want to like the Taurus and from the rear doors forward, I do but its just not a car I think I'd want. Give me a choice between a loaded up 300C versus a loaded up Taurus...and I'd still take the Chrysler. Sorry. Now the Fusion in its class beats the snot out of Sebring, seven ways to Sunday. Personally, I think the Fusion is the prettiest Ford sedan currently on sale to the public. I like the dimensions, the front end, the greenhouse, etc. The only minor gripes I have with the Fusion is a rather plain dash and the chrome trim taillights just never have completely won me over.

 

That's pretty much exactly how I feel.

 

The article seems pretty fair to me. Yea he pointed out a few shortcomings but beyond that it seemed pretty positive.

 

Ford did a great job upgrading from the Five Hundred and it is definitely the competition now in the Avalon/Camry/Impala class of cars and should do well.

 

But that said I agree - if I had to choose between a Taurus or an LS unfortunately it would still be a Chrysler. Ford isn't there yet in tackling that market, which is a little different than the Taurus market anyway. But the Fusion and Taurus show that Ford is slowly working their way back into once again being a competitor in the car market.

[MKII]

This is an opinion from a British business man that had a Taurus SEL rental while in Boston.

 

todayi landed down in Boston, i picked up a new Ford taurus SEL.

 

my fellow engineer also on the trip made the first comment about our black taurus, the boot lid didn't make a 'thunk' sound so the first thing that he said was 'that sounds like a cheap car', sitting inside didn't fare any better, some of the plastics inside the car are terrible, the fake wood trim is a joke, the shiney plastics inside the car really let the interior down. the fit and finish (especially the fake wood trim) is terrible, i didn't even have to touch the plastics around the gearbox to hard to make them rattle. the black wire that goes into the rear view mirror is a after thought, and vanity mirror on the sun visor looks very cheap, it looks like it was stuck on with glue. power seems good from the 3.5L v6 once you gets the revs up. refinement is above average, to much suspension noise though, and on our particular car we hear from very strange knocking sound from the front suspension when going over large pot holes. handling is ok, i expected the car to be floaty with very alittle feed back, thats exactly what the taurus is -except that soft suspension isn't actually that good at socking up the bumps! shutlines could be better, boot lid definitely not sitting square..

 

i didn't want to rant about a US Ford car, but Ford really needs to up the game if its going to compete with nissan and honda in the states.

Edited August 20, 2007 by MKII

[silvrsvt]

i didn't want to rant about a US Ford car, but Ford really needs to up the game if its going to compete with nissan and honda in the states.

 

I think thats what excactly your doing...

 

Anyways...to be a counterpoint to your posting, I have a friend who owns a Ford 500 and her mom has a Maxima and she told me repeatly that the 500 sounds like a much more solid car then the Maxima when it comes to closing the doors and build quality.

[RichardJensen]

This is an opinion from a British business man that had a Taurus SEL rental while in Boston.

 

todayi landed down in Boston, i picked up a new Ford taurus SEL.

Uh huh. Why don't you go find an Avalon and then get back to me, hmm?

[kpc655]

I was in the states about 3 weeks ago and had a taurus rental from Avis...total POS. handled like a pig and had no power. However i'm reserving final judgement till i get to drive one thats not in a rental fleet as rental cars are typically the cheaper models and pretty well thrashed. i know i enjoy ragging on them.

 

My mother just leased a new MKZ over a 3 series and an A4..she thought it handled better and had better creature comforts (A/C seats, navigation etc.)...i'm psyched to see and drive it despite the fact that i was pulling for an A4...actually i was pulling for an RS4, but oh well. thats not exactly the same target demographic.

[2000SableWagon]

I was in the states about 3 weeks ago and had a taurus rental from Avis...total POS. handled like a pig and had no power. However i'm reserving final judgement till i get to drive one thats not in a rental fleet as rental cars are typically the cheaper models and pretty well thrashed. i know i enjoy ragging on them.

 

My mother just leased a new MKZ over a 3 series and an A4..she thought it handled better and had better creature comforts (A/C seats, navigation etc.)...i'm psyched to see and drive it despite the fact that i was pulling for an A4...actually i was pulling for an RS4, but oh well. thats not exactly the same target demographic.

 

Sounds to me like you had 06 Taurus with Vulcan 6 hamster engine (150HPish). The 08 is a completely new and bigger car with 263HP 3.5L Duratec.

[ptsweeper]

I have an '07 Freestlye and the fit and finish are fantastic. The only real beef I have is with the air circulation, and that was my fault for not gettting the optional rear comfort package (I got the car in Feb. when it was cold). The car is solid as a rock. I seriously doubt the new Taurus will be any different. I should know soon if it is rental fleets.

 

I was a little disappointed in the style, though. I really wish they would have taken another year and come out with Best of Class in every catagory. Seems like that is the case with the engine.

[wescoent]

I have an '07 Freestlye and the fit and finish are fantastic. The only real beef I have is with the air circulation, and that was my fault for not gettting the optional rear comfort package (I got the car in Feb. when it was cold). The car is solid as a rock. I seriously doubt the new Taurus will be any different. I should know soon if it is rental fleets.

 

I was a little disappointed in the style, though. I really wish they would have taken another year and come out with Best of Class in every catagory. Seems like that is the case with the engine.

 

How is the Taurus NOT best in class? I think it's easily the best vehicle in the large sedan class right now.

[RichardJensen]

Ford really needs to up the game if its going to compete with nissan and honda in the states.

Do you have any idea how much a Taurus SEL such as you describe costs?

[FordBuyer]

Ford really needs to up the game if its going to compete with nissan and honda in the states.

 

 

In what way does a new Taurus not compete with a Camry or an Accord? Please show me where it doesn't. The Taurus has good power, is very quiet and refined, great visibility, great price, roomy as hell, nice interior and features, AWD if desired, 6 speed trans, very good fuel mileage for its size, and it's a handsome vehicle with an edgier front end. I may be a Ford homey, but objectively I don't see where a Taurus needs to "measure" up to an Accord or Camry in any way. In my view, Fusion is competitive with Accord and Camry, and Taurus is even more competitive with Camry and Accord, and beats the Avalon which is below quality car that is ugly to boot. And that is stated OBJECTIVELY. Btw, Avalon sales are horrible.

 

As for reviewers, I really think that many go into review with negative view and only begrudgingly give any positives. For some reason, I can read between the lines and pick up on this quite early in review. They have agenda and word review to give their negative slant. For example, I'm biased against GM products, and biased towards Ford products. What I like most about Ford products are their upright driver position...I can always get comfortable in any Ford product I have driven. So from the start I feel positive towards Ford product and any negatives are never a deal breaker for me because I love the driving position. I have owned a Mustang before, and I bought it over a Camaro primarily because in Camaro you feel like you are sitting under a kitchen table peering out and in a Mustang you are more upright and so much more comfortable which is important to me. So already I'm happy with Mustang and against Camaro no matter what else it can do better.

 

The dude in USA Today gave himsellf away as soon as he complained about Taurus seats and comfort. If you don't feel comfortable as you enter and sit in car, then you know where review is going. If I sit in Focus I feel fine from the start and if I sit in a Malibu, Cavalier, I'm not comfortable and not happy, and not much else is going to please me and even if it is superior it will be grudging approval. I can always tell when person doesn't like Fords and nothing will change their mind just like I hate GM driving positions. I have never sat in any GM product where I felt comfortable no matter how much I change the seat. I will bet you the new Camaro gives you that same tunnel effect just as the old one did when looking through front windshield. I hate that.

[regfootball]

what drew me to fords were the better seating positions. my 500 has nice firm seats and they remain comfy on long drives, but i really wish they had more lateral support and were less flat, though. i think the flat seats help you get in and out of the car easy.

[silvrsvt]

The answer to both questions is: The blue oval on the grille. Ford may have a great car, but has done nothing in the public eye to fix it's image.

 

 

How is Ford going to do that overnight? Thats the problem...they have their past working against them

[Michael Reynolds]

How is Ford going to do that overnight? Thats the problem...they have their past working against them

 

I really don't think its that. American cars have a stigma, that in some cases is not deserved.