FordBuyer Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Click here: Chrysler 300 Tops GM-Ford Sedans in Consumer Reports Test - Bloomberg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Wait for it.... As for Chrysler, I'm surprised. I've been seeing more of these on the road, as well as the new Ram trucks. No knowledge how they ride, handle and what not. But I have noticed from walk arounds in parking lots, that the fit/finish of these products is not up to par. A lot of panel gaps, less than stellar paint quality, and what appears to be improved interiors (compared to past Chrysler/Ram products), but nothing spectacular IMHO. Still, interesting findings. But I agree on the comments about the Taurus. Great overall car, but is cramped on the interior with poor visibility. Haven't been in a Taurus with MFT, but can see their point with the continuous MFT issues around all models. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted August 22, 2012 Author Share Posted August 22, 2012 Wait for it.... As for Chrysler, I'm surprised. I've been seeing more of these on the road, as well as the new Ram trucks. No knowledge how they ride, handle and what not. But I have noticed from walk arounds in parking lots, that the fit/finish of these products is not up to par. A lot of panel gaps, less than stellar paint quality, and what appears to be improved interiors (compared to past Chrysler/Ram products), but nothing spectacular IMHO. Still, interesting findings. But I agree on the comments about the Taurus. Great overall car, but is cramped on the interior with poor visibility. Haven't been in a Taurus with MFT, but can see their point with the continuous MFT issues around all models. Ford did what they wanted to do with new Taurus....make its exterior styling stunning which it did, but at expense of packaging and outward visibility. Styling does sell if its done right, and this generation Taurus is stunning. It's too bad it lost a lot of its practicality as a result. Guess it's kind of hard to do both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 HAH! Champion went back to Nissan. "It is a bit worrying..." Guess I can retire this by now tired glimpse into the biases of CR's chief tester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Ford did what they wanted to do with new Taurus....make its exterior styling stunning which it did, but at expense of packaging and outward visibility. Styling does sell if its done right, and this generation Taurus is stunning. It's too bad it lost a lot of its practicality as a result. Guess it's kind of hard to do both. Ford did the only thing they could afford to do at the time. Where were they supposed to get a new platform back then? That's also why I don't see D3 being viable for sedans going forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted August 22, 2012 Author Share Posted August 22, 2012 HAH! Champion went back to Nissan. "It is a bit worrying..." Guess I can retire this by now tired glimpse into the biases of CR's chief tester. I have to admit that Champion to me is kind of an asshole. He seems fixated on small items with Ford and never with the Asian imports. His latest fixation is MFT and will remain so no matter how much Ford improves it. I seem to remember he fixated on the tailgate door handle on the Edge when it first came out like that was all that mattered about review of vehicle. Like I said, what an asshole. I hate reviewers that fixate on certain, small issues. Kind of like friend who visits your gorgeous house and grounds and instead of complimenting you fixates on a weed in your garden or a dirty window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 (edited) Ford did what they wanted to do with new Taurus....make its exterior styling stunning which it did, but at expense of packaging and outward visibility. Styling does sell if its done right, and this generation Taurus is stunning. It's too bad it lost a lot of its practicality as a result. Guess it's kind of hard to do both. Sure Ford did. The 500 was bland but very roomy. The new Taurus, like you said, is beautiful but very cramped as I've experienced too often on longer drives in my father-in-laws 2010. But hard to do both is debatable. One example is my wife's '04 Altima (yes not the newest ride on the block). I think it looks good. It's considered a mid-sized car though, compared to the Taurus as being classified as full-sized. The only area on interior dimensions where the Taurus clearly is better is hip room. Otherwise the head/shoulder/leg room is so miniscule no one would notice, or comes out in the Altima's favorite. Heck the interior volume of the Altima is larger than the Taurus. Keep in mind I'm in both these vehicles quite often, in both front & rear. The front of the Altima feels clearly more comfortable and less cramped, as the Taurus has a very cramped foot space. The rear of the Taurus feels only slightly better. I believe part of the Taurus's issue are the extremely thick doors and the flow through center console. So for the Taurus to be sold as a full-size, it is very cramped IMHO. Edited August 22, 2012 by V8-X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 But hard to do both is debatable. It's not hard to do both if you're starting with a clean sheet like the original 500. Taurus did not have time to make any significant platform changes (24 months from inception to job 1 IIRC) so they had to make tradeoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 That's also why I don't see D3 being viable for sedans going forward. Aside from PI, it won't be. :reading: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 (edited) Taurus did not have time to make any significant platform changes (24 months from inception to job 1 IIRC) so they had to make tradeoffs. Unfortunately, the tradeoffs Ford chose with the Taurus refresh resulted in a product worse than its predecessor in most respects. For comparison, the 2008 Taurus Limited scored 75 in CR's road tests, eleven points higher than the 2013 model mentioned in the Bloomberg article. Ford isn't the only automaker for whom one or more new/refreshed models don't measure up either to competitors or the previous generation of the same vehicles (Volkswagen, Honda, BMW, and Toyota come to mind), but that doesn't make it any more palatable to consumers. Based on PREMiERdrum's reply, at least the Taurus fiasco won't be repeated so I give Ford credit for that. And kudos to Chrysler for a superbly executed refresh of the 300! Edited August 22, 2012 by aneekr 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Unfortunately, the tradeoffs Ford chose with the Taurus refresh resulted in a product worse than its predecessor in most respects. For comparison, the 2008 Taurus Limited scored 75 in CR's road tests, eleven points higher than the 2013 model mentioned in the Bloomberg article. Ford isn't the only automaker for whom one or more new/refreshed models don't measure up either to competitors or the previous generation of the same vehicles (Volkswagen, Honda, BMW, and Toyota come to mind), but that doesn't make it any more palatable to consumers. So it's technically worse than the previous model, but it looks significantly better and that has translated to better sales of the new model and (I assume) lower incentives. I'll take more profit over better magazine test scores every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) So it's technically worse than the previous model, but it looks significantly better and that has translated to better sales of the new model and (I assume) lower incentives. I'll take more profit over better magazine test scores every time. True, but a good looking uncompetitive vehicle won't get you a repeat buyer. I'm speaking in general terms by the way. I've admittedly never driven a last gen or current gen Taurus. Edited August 23, 2012 by Intrepidatious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 True, but a good looking uncompetitive vehicle won't get you a repeat buyer. I'm speaking in general terms by the way. I've admittedly never driven a last gen or current gen Taurus. Just because it has a few issues or didn't win a magazine comparison does not mean it's uncompetitive. In fact the new one appears to be more competitive than the old one in terms of sales and market share. Obviously they need to fix the shortcomings in the next version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Unfortunately, the tradeoffs Ford chose with the Taurus refresh resulted in a product worse than its predecessor in most respects. I have to beg to differ on this...I've driven a 2008 Sable several times (parents) and drove 2013 SHO recently. Personally I hated the Command Seating on the 2005-2009 500/Taurus. I felt like I was in a high chair and was up too high in the car. The 2010+ Taurus chopped the roof a couple inches and dropped the seats back down into floor where they belong (IMO)...as for seeing out of the car...I didn't have that problem, but I'm also 6'2 and used to driving a Mustang every day. I did hear the sales person in the car mention about site issues in the Taurus, but she was also a 5'5 woman also. The Interior is fine for the most part, but I do have to admit that the 300/Charger has a wider interior when it comes to the front passenger area, from experience in an old co-workers 300, but for 95% of the time this wouldn't be an issue unless you have a fairly large adult sitting with you in the passenger seat. The D3's suffer from issues with the footwell area where the Passenger sits. The interior bits are FAR better in the 2010 vs the earlier models also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 uncompetitive But who's the arbiter of competitiveness? CR or the marketplace? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted August 23, 2012 Author Share Posted August 23, 2012 So it's technically worse than the previous model, but it looks significantly better and that has translated to better sales of the new model and (I assume) lower incentives. I'll take more profit over better magazine test scores every time. I agree. It's about sales, not about CR score. Giving CR way too much credit. Ford wouldn't have done such a radical change so soon if the previous generation Taurus had been selling well. Maybe it scored better in CR, but sales were way below expectations meaning probably a loss or little profits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Here's a video of CR's 2013 Taurus evaluation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QARFMsHnW7s&feature=player_embedded And here's one for the 2012 Buick LaCrosse eAssist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3bpDjaj-HE&feature=plcp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) Ford wouldn't have done such a radical change so soon if the previous generation Taurus had been selling well. Maybe it scored better in CR, but sales were way below expectations meaning probably a loss or little profits. Sales volumes of the Taurus since the fifth generation car debuted for MY 2008 have been moderate - nothing like the 300,000+ quantities the nameplate garnered in the early 2000s. U.S. sales of the fifth generation Taurus + Sable in CY 2008 (first full year for fifth generation): 68,854 Sales of the sixth generation Taurus in CY 2010 (first full year for sixth generation): 68,859 Edited August 23, 2012 by aneekr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Sales volumes of the Taurus since the fifth generation car debuted for MY 2008 have been moderate - nothing like the 300,000+ quantities the nameplate garnered in the early 2000s. But you do forget that the Taurus was a fleet special at that time...the new car sells in lower volumes for far more money then the old car did...I'd say that ATP has gone up from 20k to 30K with the newer Taurus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Here's a video of CR's 2013 Taurus evaluation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QARFMsHnW7s&feature=player_embedded That review of the 2013 Taurus covers the goods/bads of the vehicle that I have become accustomed to with my father-in-laws 2010 Taurus. Wouldn't say to purchase another model though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Sales volumes of the Taurus since the fifth generation car debuted for MY 2008 have been moderate - nothing like the 300,000+ quantities the nameplate garnered in the early 2000s. Comparing to the older Taurus is a bit dishonest. After all, the old Taurus was covering a much broader portion of Ford's sedan offerings then. There was no Fusion filling the traditional "midsize" role and Contour never really got any footing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Comparing to the older Taurus is a bit dishonest. After all, the old Taurus was covering a much broader portion of Ford's sedan offerings then. There was no Fusion filling the traditional "midsize" role and Contour never really got any footing. Not only was one car covering 2 segments, it was also a fleet queen even in the early 2000s. Apples and watermelons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) D3 products combined monthly tally is well over 25,000 - pretty close to 300,000 a year, In terms of profitability, Ford's D3 is miles ahead of what GM and Chrysler are doing and IMO, having a single platform covering both Utilities and large cars saved Ford heaps of cash. Edited August 25, 2012 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehaase Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 In terms of profitability, Ford's D3 is miles ahead of what GM and Chrysler are doing and IMO, having a single platform covering both Utilities and large cars saved Ford heaps of cash. There is a rumor that GM will combine the Lambda and Epsilon platforms for the next generation large cars and crossovers and combine Delta and Theta for the next generation compact cars and crossovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 There is a rumor that GM will combine the Lambda and Epsilon platforms for the next generation large cars and crossovers and combine Delta and Theta for the next generation compact cars and crossovers. Good for GM but Ford is already achieving amazing scales of economy across a lot of vehicles. 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.