630land Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) When the Five Hundred came out, it was dismissed as 'too bland', so they spent $$ to make it 'exciting'. Now, it's "too overstyled" for police work. Can't have it both ways. It was designed as an 'exicting' passenger car first. Get an Explorer for more room. Edited September 19, 2013 by 630land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucky2 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) It's a Taurus, not a BMW. Save for the SHO, it's never going to provide excitement. I don't know of too many people who given the option of another cup holder up front, more room and less fighter jet touches, who'd want less usability and less space, all for aesthetics. Just doesn't make sense for the Taurus branding... Edited September 19, 2013 by chucky2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) When the Five Hundred came out, it was dismissed as 'too bland', so they spent $$ to make it 'exciting'.Now, it's "too overstyled" for police work. Can't have it both ways. It was designed as an 'exicting' passenger car first. Get an Explorer for more room. Mulally insisted I am pretty sure on bringing back the "Taurus" name since it was so recognized. All I remembered about them was the transmissions failing at 60K miles like clockwork. I never understood why he thought the name had any equity. And the old ones were butt ugly with funky dodge neon headlights for a few years. God those cars were ugly. Edited September 19, 2013 by chevys 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 You're telling me for the past 18 months, no single end user non-business customer has come looking for a Taurus? If so, that is...yikes... exactly..............sad.....and the Fusion put even more nails in the Coffin....IMO, drop the taurus name, change to ...heck, even Interceptor, move more upmarket, utilize the 5.0 engine and, coup de gra......RWD........FLAGSHIP...... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 exactly..............sad.....and the Fusion put even more nails in the Coffin....IMO, drop the taurus name, change to ...heck, even Interceptor, move more upmarket, utilize the 5.0 engine and, coup de gra......RWD........FLAGSHIP...... actually wouldnt be surprized if this happened, Fiesta is where the focus used to be, Focus where the Fiusion used to be, Fusion where the Taurus used to be....Taurus...its time to go up-market.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucky2 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 exactly..............sad.....and the Fusion put even more nails in the Coffin....IMO, drop the taurus name, change to ...heck, even Interceptor, move more upmarket, utilize the 5.0 engine and, coup de gra......RWD........FLAGSHIP...... Dang man, I knew they weren't selling well but I never knew they were that bad. actually wouldnt be surprized if this happened, Fiesta is where the focus used to be, Focus where the Fiusion used to be, Fusion where the Taurus used to be....Taurus...its time to go up-market.... It could be called...wait for it...Crown Vic... :D 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBFlex Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) Dang man, I knew they weren't selling well but I never knew they were that bad. Yeah, check out the monthly sales threads on here sometime. The Taurus has always been disappointing sales wise since the 2010 reskin....which makes it understandable why they would offset some of the sales with fleet. But even then, the Explorer is a far better patrol vehicle than the Taurus. Visibility is better, price is comparable. Fuel economy is just as bad, but that's to be expected. 3/5 Edited September 19, 2013 by EBFlex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 19, 2013 Author Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) W know that CD4 Taurus/MKS is in the pipeline, so that should go a long way towards rectifying the criticisms. exactly..............sad.....and the Fusion put even more nails in the Coffin....IMO, drop the taurus name, change to ...heck, even Interceptor, move more upmarket, utilize the 5.0 engine and, coup de gra......RWD........FLAGSHIP...... Ford has a great RWD large car and Utility platform just begging to be saved but unfortunately....NOT INVENTED HERE Edited September 19, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 19, 2013 Author Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) Yeah, check out the monthly sales threads on here sometime. The Taurus has always been disappointing sales wise since the 2010 reskin....which makes it understandable why they would offset some of the sales with fleet. But even then, the Explorer is a far better patrol vehicle than the Taurus. Visibility is better, price is comparable. Fuel economy is just as bad, but that's to be expected. 3/5 It helps that Taurus and Explorer are D3 based and come form the same plant, effectively increasing Explorer builds and increasing transaction prices. Taurus is now purely incremental sales on D3, so when it changes it will become incremental product on CD4. People who want Taurus are buying them, the main game now is the efficient Fusion. Edited September 19, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Dang man, I knew they weren't selling well but I never knew they were that bad. It could be called...wait for it...Crown Vic... :D retail yes, but they ARE the choice of Police and municipalities, both Dodges and GMs efforts arent being bought nearly as well....and the Explorer PIs are a hit for two reasons, SIZE and utility.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 W know that CD4 Taurus/MKS is in the pipeline, so that should go a long way towards rectifying the criticisms. Ford has a great RWD large car and Utility platform just begging to be saved but unfortunately....NOT INVENTED HERE that I know J, but something tells me Control Blade WILL see the light of day in something down the road.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 W know that CD4 Taurus/MKS is in the pipeline, so that should go a long way towards rectifying the criticisms. Ford has a great RWD large car and Utility platform just begging to be saved but unfortunately....NOT INVENTED HERE the ante better be upped and the interior cavernous with legroom comparable to the Flex second row....and PLEASE, put that damn 5.0 with DI in a sedan......screw CAFE....flagship needs desirability, and as good as the eco is, Im STILL a V8 fan.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Yeah, check out the monthly sales threads on here sometime. The Taurus has always been disappointing sales wise since the 2010 reskin.... I'm not so sure that Ford is that disappointed, given the lack of visible consumer marketing effort to sell the car. It seems that fleet sales to police, government and industry plus the MKS is sufficient for CAP with the D3 platform, for now. Consider that the next MKS should be quite an advance over the current one, with more "bespoke" options like Max has talked about. The point is, if the MKS is to be built at CAP, then the assembly systems for its increased complexity will have to be built and organized, so it could well be that Ford is OK with the Taurus while it works on getting CAP ready for the next generation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 19, 2013 Author Share Posted September 19, 2013 that I know J, but something tells me Control Blade WILL see the light of day in something down the road.... I sure hope so, a "maverick would be nice.. CB IRS is being replaced by Integral link suspension that does the job better, it's under new Fusion and coming Mustang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Mulally insisted I am pretty sure on bringing back the "Taurus" name since it was so recognized. Taurus had a recognition rate with the general public of something like 80%. Five Hundred was probably in the single digits if that high. It was a no-brainer that didn't cost them a dime. Where's the downside? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 20, 2013 Author Share Posted September 20, 2013 A new, more space efficient Taurus will make a world of difference to perception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Guess what, folks, the retail market for full size vehicles of all sorts is small and not getting bigger. And anyone who says that sales of the new Taurus are 'disappointing' compared to the old Taurus needs to look at sales figures from 2009 and 2010MYs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBFlex Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 What I find interesting is why the 2.0 is not pursuit rated. It's got 10 less HP than the Crown Vic (plus two more gears) and slots nicely between the 3.5 and 3.7 for torque. Really, there is no reason that the 2.0 shouldn't be pursuit rated. In reality, even in civilian trim, the 2.0 Taurus is still considerably faster than the 'pursuit rated' Crown Vic. Not rating it for pursuit is pure marketing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 What I find interesting is why the 2.0 is not pursuit rated. It's got 10 less HP than the Crown Vic (plus two more gears) and slots nicely between the 3.5 and 3.7 for torque. Really, there is no reason that the 2.0 shouldn't be pursuit rated. In reality, even in civilian trim, the 2.0 Taurus is still considerably faster than the 'pursuit rated' Crown Vic. Not rating it for pursuit is pure marketing. Is there a specific definition of "pursuit rated" or is that just a marketing term? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 (edited) What I find interesting is why the 2.0 is not pursuit rated. It's got 10 less HP than the Crown Vic (plus two more gears) and slots nicely between the 3.5 and 3.7 for torque. Really, there is no reason that the 2.0 shouldn't be pursuit rated. In reality, even in civilian trim, the 2.0 Taurus is still considerably faster than the 'pursuit rated' Crown Vic. Not rating it for pursuit is pure marketing. I was wondering the same thing, but... Is there a specific definition of "pursuit rated" or is that just a marketing term? I think there is more to it than just HP. I think it has to do with better brakes, handling upgrades, ability to use all that HP for extended lengths of time, etc. being required to make it "pursuit rated." While it probably is a marketing term, I'm betting there are other things that go into making it "pursuit rated" than just HP, and this EB I4 just doesn't get those goodies. Edited September 20, 2013 by fordmantpw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 I was wondering the same thing, but... I think there is more to it than just HP. I think it has to do with better brakes, handling upgrades, ability to use all that HP for extended lengths of time, etc. being required to make it "pursuit rated." While it probably is a marketing term, I'm betting there are other things that go into making it "pursuit rated" than just HP, and this EB I4 just doesn't get those goodies. If I had to guess I would say mostly brakes and tires to handle higher speeds, but without an objective definition it's still just marketing whether they want to call it pursuit rated or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Taurus had a recognition rate with the general public of something like 80%. Five Hundred was probably in the single digits if that high. It was a no-brainer that didn't cost them a dime. Where's the downside? I wouldn't be surprised if Ford actually saved some dimes related to costs of model name decals affixed to the decklid: eleven characters for FIVE HUNDRED versus six for TAURUS. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Dang man, I knew they weren't selling well but I never knew they were that bad. Are the Taurus's sales really that bad? They're selling at about the same rate as the Fiesta--according to the August retail sales figures, the Taurus and Fiesta have each sold ~50K units YTD, and the Taurus is significantly more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Maybe a better name for the top dog would be Galaxy 500? Sure sounds better to me than Taurus. Mulally is a wizard but I disagree with him on the Taurus name. It does have a lot of recognition but its not all good. It would be like Chevy bringing back the Cavalier or something. Well, not that bad but you get the idea. Sometimes you need to shed the luggage of the past. I would be interested to know more about what is and isnt "pursuit rated". Probably just tires and brakes with some bs marketing thrown in. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 The full sized car market as a whole is down significantly this year...61% according to this report http://wap.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html 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.