Taurus X: It seems Ford hasn't advertised it much.

[Ovaltine]

Hey Ford Marketing staff:

 

Take a look at THIS small article in the most recent U.S. News and World Report.

 

Maybe it's time to invest a few more $$$ marketing the Taurus/Sable line again?!?!?

 

-Ovaltine

 

 

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whi...out-ford-x.html

 

Lobbyist Z Is All About Ford X

 

March 06, 2008 11:17 PM

 

Ford's global lobbying chief, Ziad Ojakli, is fast becoming the Washington area's biggest salesman for the new Taurus X wagon. Z, as he's called, gets a new car about every year and just took delivery of the wagon. "I love it," he gushes about his titanium green model. And so does nearly everybody he runs into, especially at his kids' school, who asks: What's that? Seems Ford hasn't advertised it much. "Many people here have never seen one," he says.

 

So now Z carries a stash of brochures about the X to hand out. "People are always asking about it. They love the third row of seats."

[igor]

I agree --- read my review: http://www.autosavant.net/2008/02/2008-for...s-x-review.html

 

the car is just great.

 

Igor

[FordBuyer]

I agree --- read my review: http://www.autosavant.net/2008/02/2008-for...s-x-review.html

 

the car is just great.

 

Igor

 

Where is Jim Farley on this? With a new Taurus coming out next year, Ford needs to push the present Taurus and Taurus X to make it more known. I see Ford is pushing a crashed Taurus at NY Auto Show. The major theme with Taurus seems to be safety which is fine, but other attributes of the vehicle need to be pushed. It's very quick with its 3.5 liter V6, can be had in AWD form, very roomy, great visibility out for driver, command position, easy to get into and out of, pampers passenger, priced competitively, and nice list of features including Sync. I would go so far as to call it best in class. To get ready for next Taurus, Ford needs to showcase its other attributes which are considerable. Come on Jim Farley...let's do the job marketing these two vehicles.

[lfeg]

Just try to find one at a dealer around here. Not only do they not advertise them, they do not show them. If you want to sell a product you have to let the potential customers out there know that it exists, and have it available for them to look at, touch, and buy. If a well known burger & fast food chain advertised their quarter pounder when it came out as well as Ford has advertised the whole Five Hundred/Freestyle/Taurus/Taurus X conglomeration that burger would have been pulled from the menu in 180 days.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

I "sold" one to a co-worker a while back. He came to me for some buying advice about a replacement for his old gen 1 Honda Odyssey and I pointed him at the Taurus X after he told me what he was looking for in a vehicle. It came down to the Taurus X and the GMC Acadia and while he was kind of ambivalent on which to choose, his wife said that she liked the Taurus X better because it felt smaller when driving and parking it, but had "about as much room inside" as the lambdas do. He was really impressed with it and didn't understand why Ford didn't advertise it.

 

Its a real shame about what they've done with that particular vehicle. The Freestyle wasn't bad at all, granted, it was a bit underpowered with the D30/CVT combo. More advertising would have definitely moved more units of them. The Taurus X is a big upgrade over the freestyle and, given how unknown the Freestyle was, they could have really pounded the market with advertising on that to compete with the Lambdas and other three row competition. Back in the day, the Taurus wagon was reasonably popular. This vehicle could easily have been the spiritual and market successor to it. Instead, its been quietly relegated to second tier product status, rarely graces lots, doesn't get advertised, and just adds complication to the production lines in Chicago. Heck, if they are so dead set against selling the darned things, why bother producing them in the first place? I mean, we all know that its going to get canned when the explorer comes up for its next major remodel. Ford can be so infuriating sometimes.

[J-150]

it was a bit underpowered with the D30/CVT combo.

 

 

I will continue to disagree with this.

 

the person that buys this vehicle isn't necessarily interested in race-car performance. Just look at wagons and minivans in general.

 

the car accelerates very well. the CVT has the magic button under the throttle that testers don't know about. What is it? When pushing the pedal all the way down the car goes to 3000-3500 rpm. Push it a little more and a button under the pedal gets actuated. Takes the car to 5500 rpm and it screams down the highway. It's a physical "click" you can feel (the button is also visible if you bend down and have a look under there). This takes the car to WOT that the CVT normally will not do for fuel efficiency reasons.

 

I have one. A 2007 Limited. It will go 100mph more stable than just about any other vehicle in its price range. Truthfully I've not had it any faster than that due to road/traffic conditions. For all intents and purposes, it will keep up with any car in its' price range (and its faster than a V6 300, Magnum and Charger) In fact, just last night, I smoked a Sunfire GT that thought he's try to cut off the old man in the wagon.

 

 

Also, the 5.4 F150 (which I also have) is always being bashed for being sluggish. The 4.6 is even worse. Doesn't seem to stop it from selling 600k units per year.

 

Power is not the end-all, be-all.

[LoveTaurus]

Yeah! They made the Taurus quiet like a Lexus and not telling the people!

[ZanatWork]

I've yet to see a single ad for this car, despite all the positive press it's gotten.

 

I know the Flex is expected to kill the "X", but a simple ad with the testimonies of the various publications would have been easy, honest, and maybe gotten these beasts off lots sooner.

[BORG]

I don't think the problem with the D30 was lack of power. It was a very course drivetrain so if you desire a pleasent and smooth driving experience, you didn't dare push the thing. The new D35 is a different animal altogether, a bit more power and a lot more class.

 

Personally, with the exception of the now outdated Ford interior, the Taurus/Taurus X/Sable are very attractive looking cars, particularly when outfitted with the right color and wheel combos. I see them so rarely that when I do, I'm astonished by their presence (the vertical glass-like sheetmetal and bright detailing). They really are good examples of modern design that highlight percision finishing.

 

The last time I drove the cars was when they were still the 500/Montego and I loved the chasis but loathed the engine. They were somewhat poor on the NVH factor, but they have addressed those problems in the 2008 update. I'm sure they are great all-around vehicles now. Wold I buy one? Maybe, but they still look misproportioned .

[old_fairmont_wagon]

By a bit underpowered, I mean that to achieve the level of performance desired by much of the buying public, the engine must be operated in a way that makes it somewhat less than quiet and refined. The D30 was more than capable of moving the vehicle along, but it had to be reved onto its torque and HP peaks more often to achieve that performance. The D35, however, has a broader torque band and can achieve similar torque numbers lower in the rpm range, resulting in sounding less strained to the driver and passengers.

 

I'm perfectly aware that engines that are half the size of what are in most vehicles will propel the cars down the road and even get them to the speed limit. They will have to work their tails off doing so and will sound strained in the process. For a vehicle of that price range, the engine was not properly sized to provide the level of refinement expected in that market. If Ford had had the level of flexibility in that plant to do so, they should have used the Essex 4.2L V6 and a sourced transmission instead of the D30/CVT combo. The essex 4.2L achieves the same amount of torque as the D30 does at peak at half the RPM. It also achieves within 3% of the peak HP at a similar RPM. Its nature was much better suited to the task and, while not being a particularly NVH friendly engine, it would have been no worse than a screaming D30, and, while loafing at part throttle, would have been just as good. IT would not, however, have been as gas friendly. But, since they never pushed that as an attribute of the freestyle, in hind site, that couldn't have been a consideration in its non-use. It wasn't used for the simple fact that it provided more torque than the CVT could reliably handle. They didn't want to find a transmission that would have worked for the 4.2L and provide AWD capabilites for the vehicle (all first gen D3s that were AWD used the CVT tranny AFAIK). And, let me say for the record, I am NOT a fan of the 4.2L essex V6. It is a passable base truck engine for the late 90s and early 2000s, but, its time has come and gone. However, at the time, it was the best engine available for that application IMHO. Also, yes, it is a 90 degree engine, however, due to it being an OHV engine, it is compact enough to have fit in the engine bay with just a unique intake setup. Changing those rear plugs would have been more difficult than in the Freestar, however.

[J-150]

By a bit underpowered, I mean that to achieve the level of performance desired by much of the buying public, the engine must be operated in a way that makes it somewhat less than quiet and refined. The D30 was more than capable of moving the vehicle along, but it had to be reved onto its torque and HP peaks more often to achieve that performance. The D35, however, has a broader torque band and can achieve similar torque numbers lower in the rpm range, resulting in sounding less strained to the driver and passengers.

 

I'm perfectly aware that engines that are half the size of what are in most vehicles will propel the cars down the road and even get them to the speed limit. They will have to work their tails off doing so and will sound strained in the process. For a vehicle of that price range, the engine was not properly sized to provide the level of refinement expected in that market. If Ford had had the level of flexibility in that plant to do so, they should have used the Essex 4.2L V6 and a sourced transmission instead of the D30/CVT combo. The essex 4.2L achieves the same amount of torque as the D30 does at peak at half the RPM. It also achieves within 3% of the peak HP at a similar RPM. Its nature was much better suited to the task and, while not being a particularly NVH friendly engine, it would have been no worse than a screaming D30, and, while loafing at part throttle, would have been just as good. IT would not, however, have been as gas friendly. But, since they never pushed that as an attribute of the freestyle, in hind site, that couldn't have been a consideration in its non-use. It wasn't used for the simple fact that it provided more torque than the CVT could reliably handle. They didn't want to find a transmission that would have worked for the 4.2L and provide AWD capabilites for the vehicle (all first gen D3s that were AWD used the CVT tranny AFAIK). And, let me say for the record, I am NOT a fan of the 4.2L essex V6. It is a passable base truck engine for the late 90s and early 2000s, but, its time has come and gone. However, at the time, it was the best engine available for that application IMHO. Also, yes, it is a 90 degree engine, however, due to it being an OHV engine, it is compact enough to have fit in the engine bay with just a unique intake setup. Changing those rear plugs would have been more difficult than in the Freestar, however.

 

 

 

Excellent points Fairmont, but having a Freebie myself, I can tell you in everyday driving the 3.0 CVT works very well.

 

The CVT is very smooth. Smoother than any Ford auto tranny I own currently or have owned in the past. The engine is not as thrashy as people claim it to be.

 

 

As much as the 4.2 is torquey, it is still based off that lemon of a 3.8

[J-150]

I don't think the problem with the D30 was lack of power. It was a very course drivetrain so if you desire a pleasent and smooth driving experience, you didn't dare push the thing. The new D35 is a different animal altogether, a bit more power and a lot more class.

 

Personally, with the exception of the now outdated Ford interior, the Taurus/Taurus X/Sable are very attractive looking cars, particularly when outfitted with the right color and wheel combos. I see them so rarely that when I do, I'm astonished by their presence (the vertical glass-like sheetmetal and bright detailing). They really are good examples of modern design that highlight percision finishing.

 

The last time I drove the cars was when they were still the 500/Montego and I loved the chasis but loathed the engine. They were somewhat poor on the NVH factor, but they have addressed those problems in the 2008 update. I'm sure they are great all-around vehicles now. Wold I buy one? Maybe, but they still look misproportioned .

 

 

IDK, maybe it's because I have a Limited. There is so much noise insulation I can't hear this noise from the engine that some hear.

[J-150]

I've yet to see a single ad for this car, despite all the positive press it's gotten.

 

I know the Flex is expected to kill the "X", but a simple ad with the testimonies of the various publications would have been easy, honest, and maybe gotten these beasts off lots sooner.

 

 

I'll tell ya Zanary, go to a Freestyle forum. What you'll hear is an absolute love-in but current owners.. People that have them love them to death. Seems its the auto reviewers that hate them so much.

[Tango_28]

We discovered our 07 Freestyle by accidents, but we really like it alot.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Having ridden in a 500 with the 6AT/D30 combo, I didn't find it to be slow from the passenger seat. Having driven the escape with its D30/4AT combo, I didn't find the engine to be impressive from a power standpoint, though, the tranny there isn't very good. It was more than enough for the vehicle, to be true, but, it didn't leave me awed by its performance. Given the weight of the Freestyle, and comparing it to its competition, it does have a poorer power to weight ration than its contemporaries that were considered competitive with it. That's underpowered from a marketing perspective. In real life, I'm sure it goes along just fine.

 

Realistically, the power to weight ration on the FWD freestyle isn't that far off of what we have with our 2002 Caravan Sport SWB with its 3.3L v6 and 4AT (more torque, less HP). I don't find that vehicle to be underpowered (though, passing vehicles at extra-legal highway speeds can be a bit of a workout). So, what I'm saying is that I'm not disagreeing with you on practicality. I'm disagreeing with you on marketing terms.

[EBV8]

Surprisingly, I see a ton of them out here (San Luis Obispo, CA) despite this area being more of a GM stronghold. Both Freestyle and X seem to sell well, and I'm also starting to see a lot of Fusions and Edges. Two years ago it was rare to see Fords here at all...

Edited March 18, 2008 by EBV8

[Tango_28]

One best part owning a Freestyle is the mileage, In the summertime I have gotten 32mpg. It gets better mpg than our 2000 Mazda MPV and it's has AWD.

[White99GT]

The essex 4.2L achieves the same amount of torque as the D30 does at peak at half the RPM. It also achieves within 3% of the peak HP at a similar RPM. Its nature was much better suited to the task and, while not being a particularly NVH friendly engine, it would have been no worse than a screaming D30, and, while loafing at part throttle, would have been just as good.

 

The D30 never even thought about having NVH as poor as the 4.2s. The D30 is a smooth engine that sounds raspy, he 4.2 is a rough running engine that sounds even worse.

[Noah Harbinger]

Just try to find one at a dealer around here. Not only do they not advertise them, they do not show them. If you want to sell a product you have to let the potential customers out there know that it exists, and have it available for them to look at, touch, and buy. If a well known burger & fast food chain advertised their quarter pounder when it came out as well as Ford has advertised the whole Five Hundred/Freestyle/Taurus/Taurus X conglomeration that burger would have been pulled from the menu in 180 days.

 

Wow... I did the local dealer search. There are 4 TaurusX's in the nearest 5 dealerships. That's pretty bad.

[6-cylinder]

Add me to the list of "have the Freestyle and love it." My wife drives a 2006 Limited. I firmly believe THE issue with testers is the CVT. You simply have to get used to the way it behaves. It takes a week or two to understand how the thing works and then you say, "Oh, I get it." Driving it is almost like having your accelerator hooked to the tranny instead of the engine.

 

I'm interested to learn about the "super secret button" under the pedal. Now I've got to find a reason to borrow the car!

 

If you want a freeway cruiser, I've never driven a better one. It is absolutely rock solid and smooth at 70-80 mph. I could drive it all day like that ... and get at least 25 mpg.

[battyr]

Ford must be making good money on low sales, or they would be 1. Advertising, or 2. killing production. For some reason they must be afraid that advertising would steal sales away from some other product that makes more profit. What, I don't know? Maybe the Crown Vic? T-rex does not look good enough to steal sales from the GM CUVs, so wait for he Flex and advertise it. Ford will make big bucks off the Flex. I buy a T-rex without advertising and save a lot of money.

[LarryQW]

Ford will make big bucks off the Flex. I buy a T-rex without advertising and save a lot of money.

 

That's exactly my thought, and explains why I just bought a Taurus X Limited.

 

I looked very carefully at the Flex details and noted it had almost all the same features and dimensions as the Taurus X, except it was a little bigger and longer on the outside. Yet when I priced it, it came in over $4K more. And I suspect I won't get the discounts like I get with the Taurus X either. I bought the T-X Limited loaded (Nav, DVD, Aux air, Satellite Radio,...) for about $30.5K.

 

It's got lots of room for my family, the plethora of modern electronics and sensors are competitive with an AWACS plane. SYNC pulls it all together simply. I get up to 28 MPG on flat highways, 25 MPG on rolling hills. The power is excellent. The responsive handling is superb. It's very quiet.

 

The only thing that put me off was the cheap plastic interior, and imperfect design. For instance, they should have put the Nav screen up higher. However, the wood and chrome accents do help a little. The door panels and arm rests have a very nice feel and decor. I suspect others are also put off by the family-wagon look which I actually like. Although when next to my family Sable wagon, the T-X looks like a giant. My Sable's wheels look like they're toys.

 

In any case, I also just can't understand why Ford doesn't advertise such a star vehicle. Maybe they figure if they only sell 3K/month by word of mouth, it's not attractive to consumers and heavy advertising may be more money down the drain. They're saving their advertising bucks to steer customers the expensive Flex, that will have a lot more profit for them. And the T-X will be left for sale to the smarter customers. :-)

[J-150]

I'm interested to learn about the "super secret button" under the pedal. Now I've got to find a reason to borrow the car!

 

 

 

HAHAHAHA!!!! Isn't it great to find out about these little things in the cars you own?

 

Send me a PM to let me know what you think once you hit the magic button. You'll be asking why no one told you sooner. Heck, my dealer (who is pretty savvy about these things) didn't know until I told him.

[Edstock]

HAHAHAHA!!!! Isn't it great to find out about these little things in the cars you own?

 

Send me a PM to let me know what you think once you hit the magic button. You'll be asking why no one told you sooner. Heck, my dealer (who is pretty savvy about these things) didn't know until I told him.

 

Makes you wonder how many reviewers might not have known about it, and if the car isn't equipped with a tach, or one of the electronic vehicle analyzers, if the button isn't mashed down, you might not know there's more performance . . . .

[J-150]

Makes you wonder how many reviewers might not have known about it, and if the car isn't equipped with a tach, or one of the electronic vehicle analyzers, if the button isn't mashed down, you might not know there's more performance . . . .

 

 

It's not listed at all in the owners manual or any sales literature. And this is only with the CVT to replicate aggresive downshift at higher speeds. 6AT obviously can get to WOT on its' own.

 

All of these people that thought WOT was 3000 rpm would of course think the car was weak in the passing department.