ANTAUS Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 LINK-Edmunds.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 we're not yet convinced it's the flagship sedan Ford hopes Americans will aspire to. Fffft, and what sedan is? The Camry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 And another thing. THERE WAS A 2007 TAURUS. THERE WAS A 2008 TAURUS. DUH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Fffft, and what sedan is? The Camry? Duh!! --- I'd say ANTAUS' descripiton of them being afraid to admit they liked it accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 It was wishy washy...and summed up in the end. "We like this, we like this, alot of this, alot of that...BUT...we don't know how it's going to do, so we aren afraid to say something good incase it fails it'll make us look bad". And then..."We're not entirely convinced that an extensive makeover of a largely carry-over chassis and powertrain can pull that off,".... OH yeah, like Camry and Accord aren't riding on decade old platforms, who are we kidding? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 just a bunch of pro-Toyota fan boys hoping that all 3 Detroit makers would go under. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morgande Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I agree. Edmunds doesn't 'not' like the car, but they nitpick at a few things here and there just for the purposes of doing so. In the end, they try to praise it without praising it, in a way that affords them a get of of jail free card if car doesn't do well in the market. Only time will tell with respect to sales. I wish there was a second optional powertrain to fill the gap between standard 3.5L and the Ecoboost. A 100 hp jump and over 100 lbft of torque is a HUGE difference. Would be nice if they had something with around 260-275 lb-ft of rotational energy available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Why were they hell bent on comparing this vehicle to an Accord. Yes, the Accord is a large car (if you get it without a moonroof), but the Taurus eclipses the Accord in nearly every single dimension. Yet another backhanded review from that outlet.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exploder48 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 just a bunch of pro-Toyota fan boys hoping that all 3 Detroit makers would go under. WOW- you got that right. These guys have no guts and refuse to accept that American vehicles, especially Ford, can be as good as or better than the imports. How the he** can you compare this car to those tinny boxes called AccoraCamry? Time will tell, no doubt, and I predict a resurgence of the brand and the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmm55 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) The problem for many people (and reviewers) is that the Taurus IS a large car. The Fusion is almost the same size as the original Taurus. It may be just bad timing for a big, heavier car, no matter how "good" it is. I think it'll do better than the last Taurus/Five Hundred on looks alone. It won't be the home run of the original, that Taurus was the right size, the right price, good MPGs and the right "look" that set it apart. Edited June 22, 2009 by timmm55 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 The problem for many people (and reviewers) is that the Taurus IS a large car. The Fusion is almost the same size as the original Taurus. It may be just bad timing for a big, heavier car, no matter how "good" it is. I think it'll do better than the last Taurus/Five Hundred on looks alone. It won't be the home run of the original, that Taurus was the right size, the right price, good MPGs and the right "look" that set it apart. Well of course it won't be, the duty of this Taurus is entirely different than that of the original. I fully expect this vehicle to dominate the large car segment, attracting those from luxury makes that can no longer swing the payments but aren't willing to give up the tech. If Hyundai is able to do this with the Genesis, the Taurus should have no problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Well of course it won't be, the duty of this Taurus is entirely different than that of the original. I fully expect this vehicle to dominate the large car segment, attracting those from luxury makes that can no longer swing the payments but aren't willing to give up the tech. If Hyundai is able to do this with the Genesis, the Taurus should have no problem. Agreed on all points. Let's look at the competition... - Blows away the current Chevrolet Impala, and no one knows when the new one on LWB Epsilon II is coming. (Not counting the new LaCrosse due to upmarket positioning.) - Should eat the current Dodge Charger on all points (except the SRT8, but that's expected). The new one (MY '11 if indications are true) will make this a two-horse race among the American (ok, North American :P) large family sedans. (The next 300 will probably move more upmarket as well.) - Honda has no veritable competitor unless you don't order a sunroof. :lol: - Should outsell the Hyundai Genesis due to price and the Azera due to... everything else. - The Nissan Maxima is a really good car, but the Taurus wins on the economical side. - Reports have indicated that the Toyota Avalon (overpriced stretched Camry that it is) will disappear in 2011 to be replaced with -- guess what? -- a stretched Camry. I have a feeling that Avalon customers won't buy something as plebeian as a Camry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobu37 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I have a feeling that Avalon customers won't buy something as plebeian as a Camry. Don't underestimate the blind loyalty of the Avalon owners. They have stuck with that car through the numerous transmission issues and I don't see why they would stop doing so just because Toyota starts calling the Avalon what it is has been all along. A stretched Camry with a hideous out of proportioned trunk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I have a feeling that Avalon customers won't buy something as plebeian as a Camry. Don't underestimate the blind loyalty of the Avalon owners. They have stuck with that car through the numerous transmission issues and I don't see why they would stop doing so just because Toyota starts calling the Avalon what it is has been all along. A stretched Camry with a hideous out of proportioned trunk. My mom owns an Avalon. She definitely would not buy a Camry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 The problem for many people (and reviewers) is that the Taurus IS a large car. The Fusion is almost the same size as the original Taurus. Which is why the Fusion should have been badged Taurus from the start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Which is why the Fusion should have been badged Taurus from the start. So they could call the current Taurus the Crown Vic? The Original Taurus was always on the big side for a midsized car, esp when compared to the Camcord over the years...even in post 1996, when the Camcord was took over the top selling car spots from the Taurus, they where considerably smaller....the Camry and Accord had a 105.1 wheel base, with the Camry being 190in long and the Accord 186. The Taurus rode on a 108.5 wheel base and was 197.5 inches long. The current Camry has the nearly the same wheelbase as the old Taurus at 109.3 and overall length of 189.2 and the Accord is even longer at 110.1 with a length of 194.1. The 2010 Taurus is 112 and 202.9 overall..using that as a guide, the Taurus grew at the same rate as the Camcord did over the years. Not to mention Taurus was always too big to fit a I4 for in it, even though they did it for a year or two when it first came out and it was unverisally panned as being way underpowered. An I4 is needed for a CD sized car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted June 25, 2009 Author Share Posted June 25, 2009 And that boat anchor Vulcan 3.0L Ford used as the base engine, I don't think was any better than an I-4. Ford used bragging rights about having standard V6, but the Camcord bragged about better fuel economy. Even if the Vulcan had good torque to get it moving, it was the high revving "feeling" of the Camcord that people preferred. Finally the Vulcan is dead...not that it was a bad engine, just offered nothing special. Next...the Cologne 4.0L ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 So they could call the current Taurus the Crown Vic? No, the Fusion should have been the new Taurus from the start, the D3 flop never should have happened, that $$$ should have gone into an updated Panther foremost or a new RWD full sedan of some sort second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtstakelin Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 The whole "its a carry-over chasis and engine" is total BS. Honduh and Toyoda do this all the time. The Camry and Accord keep their platforms and get re-skined all the time and no one in the press gives two shaits about it. I'm so tired of the media bias! The Taurus is a great car. The 3.5 is very peppy and moved the car well. the fit and finish is great. I see the new model rocking sales charts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDP Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 I agree. Edmunds doesn't 'not' like the car, but they nitpick at a few things here and there just for the purposes of doing so. In the end, they try to praise it without praising it, in a way that affords them a get of of jail free card if car doesn't do well in the market. Only time will tell with respect to sales. I wish there was a second optional powertrain to fill the gap between standard 3.5L and the Ecoboost. A 100 hp jump and over 100 lbft of torque is a HUGE difference. Would be nice if they had something with around 260-275 lb-ft of rotational energy available. hey they failed to mention that the 3.5 is base engine you can get 355hp ecoboost option and the sho is 365hp :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtstakelin Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 hey they failed to mention that the 3.5 is base engine you can get 355hp ecoboost option and the sho is 365hp :shades: The ecoboost was upgraded to 365hp for the SHO. The engines are the 3.5 na and 3.5 eb (eb in SHO only) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 No, the Fusion should have been the new Taurus from the start, the D3 flop never should have happened, that $$$ should have gone into an updated Panther foremost or a new RWD full sedan of some sort second. Why would they drop any more money into the Panther when their most outspoken supporter on this forum won't buy one? 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.