BORG Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Another Motor Trend Shootout, and another last place finish for a Ford. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1307_the_big_test_2013_2014_full_size_sedans/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 A very poor, last place finish. But the surprise was the car that finished first.. I really thought that the Impala would be the top dog in the group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Unless Rory Jurneka is buying 2,000 Tauruses a month, his opinion is worthless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 The Taurus deserved to finish last, sadly. The MCE wasn't enough to overcome old bones, the pack-trailing performance, and the fact that the car is a compromised hold-over until a new platform can hopefully breathe some life into the car.If the next Taurus gets attention like the current Fusion did, it'll decimate the segment. The question is: how serious is Ford going to be about a sedan that won't touch Fusion sales numbers? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 "deserved to finish last" Yeah, well, I tried taking a magazine clipping to the bank and they wouldn't let me deposit it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 If the next Taurus gets attention like the current Fusion did, it'll decimate the segment. And it STILL won't finish better than mid-pack in a MT comparison test. A MT comparison test and a quarter won't even get you a frickin pack of gum! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Gripes that I have with the Taurus align somewhat with MT's gripes here, but the elephant in the room is that the higher-spec Taurus models are driving its sales not the base. The higher trim levels don't cure everything that ails the basic vehicle, but they help set the car in a better light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 (edited) And let's ignore the fact that there's a much better package, Taurus SHO with Ecoboost V6... Yep, Taurus deserves last place...... my ass... Edited June 4, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Look, a Fusion is still in the top spot of "my next car" list (forget my sig). But there's still a decent amount weight given to a couple years old SHO. If it wasn't for the SHO, I wouldn't give the Taurus a second look. Of course, NONE of the other models in its class get ANY look from me at all. To me, a Taurus SEL is just as "eh, whatever" as anything else in that class. I'd really go for a Fusion ST if it's out in a couple years when I'm ready for a new car...especially if we're talking a 2.7EB putting out low 300's hp/325 lb/ft. Because even if it's still less than the SHO, for me, it's all about the smaller car. I really love my Fusion now and if I could have the gorgeous new design, all the awesome tech that comes in it now AND plant-your-ass power, then THAT'S my car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hahnk37 Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 So a car that was almost universally praised by reviewers back in 2010 for its fit, finish and driving dynamics is now dead last. Comical to say the least. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jniffen Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Those magazines have always told what their readers want to hear, not what they need to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 In this shootout the Impala should had won, the Kia looks like the box the Optima came in plus the only advantage of the Krapa over Impala was 1mpg better observe, guess we know who KIA paid-off this month. The Taurus isn't bad car but the field was so good so MT had to have a red-headed stepchild to pick (see MT Explorer review). But I do agree the Taurus need more interior room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 The Impala is also yet to be tested by either safety organization, meaning crash test results can only be hinted at by the Cadillac XTS, with which it shares a platform. SHUT UP - SHUT UP - SHUT UP!!!! No one is supposed to know that!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Taurus was a great success for Ford for MY2010, but the problems are well known and can be attributed to the platform. It won't be too much longer until the next Taurus hits the streets. The 2010-14 model has served Ford very well. I give GM credit for finally making a competitive Impala. It's good... So good, in fact, it makes LaCrosse superfluous in the corporate lineup. Much as MKS's exclusivity was compromised to create a very good Taurus, LaCrosse and XTS have been offered up to the benefit of Impala. That haven't been said, I couldn't live with this steering wheel every day: It looks like something you'd see in a mid-90's concept car. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 If the next Taurus gets attention like the current Fusion did, it'll decimate the segment. The question is: how serious is Ford going to be about a sedan that won't touch Fusion sales numbers? The Taurus won't affect Fusion sales at all...if anything, once the Taurus moves to the CD4+3 platform, its going to be another "Lincoln" type vehicle in profit margin, since most of the development costs will be shared with the Fusion AND the upcoming Edge. The Taurus will be a more expensive and bigger Fusion once it redone on the new platform. Oh are they still making the Impala for fleets? or is there going to be another Impala Classic for that? Though the interesting thing I noticed was the 1/4 mile times...all where in the high 14-low 15 second times....that was great in the late 1990s in the Pony car wars I still love my SHO even with its "shortcomings", but then again Ford isn't offering a hi-po Fusion either, so I don't regret getting it either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 So a car that was almost universally praised by reviewers back in 2010 for its fit, finish and driving dynamics is now dead last. Comical to say the least. It wasn't universally praised - quite the opposite. Most reviews of the MY 2010 Taurus refresh acknowledged its significantly worse interior space utilization and outward visibility compared to the 2008-2009 Taurus/Sable. Driving dynamics and fit/finish weren't class leading either. When Ford tweaked the model in MY2013, it not only failed to address these flaws (among others), but actually made the car even worse with the addition of MyFordTouch on highline models. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Anybody else notice that the midlevel Taurus (SEL) was matched up against the top-spec Impala (LTZ), Avalon (Limited), and 300 (S) before being dinged for having the fewest features of all the cars? I'd have a better time stomaching this comparison if it were fair to begin with. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 They took a $33K Taurus to compete with the other Highline models, and the $44K "Cadenza" won. At that pricepoint, they could have taken a Taurus SHO and it would have answered most of their complains. So I'm not sure if someone would see that as a fair comparison. And if someone wants to pay $44K for a Kia, well good luck with that too. I do agree, ever since Ive seen the Impala steering wheel, i think it's one of the ugliest ones I have seen in recent time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 That steering wheel looks an awful lot like it was designed by some guy who used to do Pontiac body moulding design work in the early nineties. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 I do agree, ever since Ive seen the Impala steering wheel, i think it's one of the ugliest ones I have seen in recent time. Didn't someone have a photo of it and it looked like a frog face? LOL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Anybody else notice that the midlevel Taurus (SEL) was matched up against the top-spec Impala (LTZ), Avalon (Limited), and 300 (S) before being dinged for having the fewest features of all the cars? I'd have a better time stomaching this comparison if it were fair to begin with. They took a $33K Taurus to compete with the other Highline models, and the $44K "Cadenza" won. At that pricepoint, they could have taken a Taurus SHO and it would have answered most of their complains. So I'm not sure if someone would see that as a fair comparison. And if someone wants to pay $44K for a Kia, well good luck with that too. Motor Trend acknowledged this, stating "We talked about... how frugal the Taurus' price point was" on page 5. I presume that availability of specific vehicles in automakers' press fleets resulted in the curious mix of trim levels among the contenders. Even if a highline Taurus Limited V6 model was included in Motor Trend's comparison in lieu of the SEL they tested, the only logical ranking for the car would still be fifth place. The additional frills included on the Limited do not resolve the Taurus' flaws related to powertrain refinement, fuel economy, and most notably interior accommodations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 That Impala dashboard.......................................... Wow. That's ugly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 (edited) Motor Trend acknowledged this, stating "We talked about... how frugal the Taurus' price point was" on page 5. I presume that availability of specific vehicles in automakers' press fleets resulted in the curious mix of trim levels among the contenders.I'm almost certain they could have gone all-midlevel or all-highline, if not for any other reason than to avoid having to write filler like this:Though the Taurus is light on the wallet with the lowest as-tested price by roughly $6000, it was also light on content and space, and the only car here without nav. For the $33,490-as-tested price, you'd get better bang for the buck in the midsize segment. Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1307_the_big_test_2013_2014_full_size_sedans/viewall.html#ixzz2VG9wRMSX That's like saying "the low-level Fusion is devoid of content, so feel free to buy a loaded Focus Titanium instead." Not relevant to anything. Even if a highline Taurus Limited V6 model was included in Motor Trend's comparison in lieu of the SEL they tested, the only logical ranking for the car would still be fifth place. The additional frills included on the Limited do not resolve the Taurus' flaws related to powertrain refinement, fuel economy, and most notably interior accommodations. Now this I could deal with. Either make it even across the board or don't do it. Edited June 4, 2013 by papilgee4evaeva Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Unless Rory Jurneka is buying 2,000 Tauruses a month, his opinion is worthless. The Taurus is the second oldest vehicle in this test (unless the refresh of the Chrysler 300 qualifies it as an all-new vehicle), so the results aren't that surprising, or even that worrisome. Any fair comparison test would probably place the Taurus in a similar position. Given that Ford is hard at work on a new Taurus, and it has a very good track record regarding new vehicle introductions over the past few years, I'm not that worried over the results of this test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 (edited) The Taurus is the second oldest vehicle in this test (unless the refresh of the Chrysler 300 qualifies it as an all-new vehicle), so the results aren't that surprising, or even that worrisome. Any fair comparison test would probably place the Taurus in a similar position. Given that Ford is hard at work on a new Taurus, and it has a very good track record regarding new vehicle introductions over the past few years, I'm not that worried over the results of this test. 300 had new engine, new transmission, and all new interior and exterior (although still familiar looking) so yea, it would be considered all-new, just like the Taurus was all-new even though the platform dates back to 500 and Volvo XC90. I was honestly more surprised by some of the posts on page 1 than the fact that Taurus came in last place. If you look at it objectively, Taurus really has some flaws that would matter to large car buyers - e.g. cramped interior Edited June 4, 2013 by bzcat 1 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.