More Taurus spy photos

[rmc523]

I think this is lining up for the return of the Crown Vic in the US

[Hugh]

Continental and Crown Victoria? The Mafia have returned (head exploding)

[jpd80]

I think this is lining up for the return of the Crown Vic in the US

 

Careful, you'll wake them up.....

Edited April 2, 2015 by jpd80

[Hydro]

I think Feilds wants a more aggressive Taurus or/and a rwd sedan.

 

I just find it unusual that a platform twin is kept in dark close to production. Ford is good in keeping secrets these days.

You nailed it. We drove by a test mule last month in down town LA. It had all the sensors everywhere. My wife couldn't get a clear pic because they were too many lanes over. It does look like a large Fusion, but the fenders are very aggressive. reminds me of the Aussie Falcon fenders. Very sharp angles. The greenhouse was well covered, but the only thing on the front covered up was the grille. I could see heavy Fusion influence, but it definitelty looked aggresive. Much more so than todays model. It had a sporty stance and looked "beefy/brawny". In fact, looking at pictures of the 2014 falcon it looks similar.

Edited April 2, 2015 by Hydro

[RichardJensen]

What? You sat on that sighting for a whole month?

 

Dude. I've got a good mind to lock you in a room with JPD while he tells you what he thinks of Australian Rules Football, and the people that play it.

Edited April 2, 2015 by RichardJensen

[jpd80]

What's not to love about a supercharged 5.0 V8.

 

[AlRozzi]

I would be inclined to say that the photos of the white cars front and rear clips are not of the Taurus

but actually a Fusion refresh.

 

Also, I think the Continental has some current Taurus influence.

[TBirdStangSkyliner]

Because they can sell utilities for over $70k. They can't sell sedans for over $70k.

 

It's understood that, at present, the large sedan market is shrinking. It is also understood that the perceptual barriers to entry in the luxury large sedan market are formidable--at least at the price points of the established players.

 

Why, therefore, would Ford launch 100% new sheetmetal for two new large sedans (Taurus & Continental) on a heavily modified CD4 and then replace them with CD6 on a very short turnaround, or augment them with CD6?

Your point needs at least two assumptions to be true for selling CD6 sedans at something less than $70K to be a negative for Ford. The first is that lower price sedan sales would parasite the sales of the more expensive CUV's. This can't be proven either way without definitive consumer research. My hunch is that sedan sales would be far more additive than parasitic. The second is that a profit can't be made at the price and volumes that the sedan market would afford. This also can't be answered without more data, including cost and sales projections. It would seem that CUV's and maybe a higher line Lincoln would cover much of the platform cost. The Taurus tops out at about $38K with AWD, Premium Package, Driver Assist Package, and some other common upgrades. That leaves $10K to $15K for a CD6 sedan without bumping into a strata near the $70K range. Then, there is the question of when will the CUV's start to wane in popularity and will larger AWD sedans become more popular when this happens. Every type of vehicle that became the most popular American people mover has eventually peaked and dropped-off. What is it worth to Ford to already have a strong market share in two or three alternatives to CUV's as a hedge-bet? I don't know the answers to these questions definitively, but I think it is more complex than sedans won't fetch $70K as will utilities.

[RichardJensen]

You're not following my admittedly poorly constructed argument:

 

These are our knowns:

 

1 - we know that Ford is launching large sedans on a heavily modified CD4 chassis.

2 - we know that Ford has a platform in development called CD6.

 

There has been speculation that CD6 is launching in the near term (within two years).

 

If this is the case, I maintain that it would be used for large CUVs only.

 

Why?

 

Because we know that large CD4 sedans are coming, and the large sedan market does not justify launching 2016/2017 MY large sedans on CD4 and then launching CD6 sedans for the 2017/2018 MY. Or even, realistically, 2018/2019 MY.

 

The best available source, Reuters, asserts that CD6 is not due until MY 2019 (CY 2018); this seems more plausible as a source platform for sedans, but even there, I remain somewhat skeptical. If CD6 sedans are forthcoming, I expect CUVs to be launched first because that's where the money is--and CUV buyers aren't badge-enamored corksniffers--as the market performance of the RX and SRX demonstrate.

Edited April 3, 2015 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

What is it worth to Ford to already have a strong market share in two or three alternatives to CUV's as a hedge-bet?

 

Ford cannot obtain 'strong market share' in the S-Class/7-Series segment. At least not economically.

[jpd80]

Also bear in mind the very real imposition CAFE has on large sedans versus Utilities.

That situation get worse over the next five years where as not so much.for Trucks and Utes

[Fgts]

Also bear in mind the very real imposition CAFE has on large sedans versus Utilities.

That situation get worse over the next five years where as not so much.for Trucks and Utes

Yes and no, the new CAFE basically says the bigger the wheelbase, the less likelihood of fines for segments of sedans. Certain fullsize cars will upsize and midsize cars will downsize or/and wheelbases will get bigger because of CAFE. Edited April 3, 2015 by Fgts

[jpd80]

Yes and no, the new CAFE basically says the bigger the wheelbase, the less likelihood of fines for segments of sedans. Certain fullsize cars will upsize and midsize cars will downsize or/and wheelbases will get bigger because of CAFE.

But see, the window sticker that applies to those bigger footprint vehicles rises from 23 mpg today to 37 mpg in five years time.

The comparable Truck or Ute will stay at around 19 mpg for the next five years., that is a huge incentive to go with a Utility.

 

This chart explains the car thing but looks to be in uncorrected CAFE numbers, not window sticker values,

I assume they would be about 20% less...

 

Edited April 3, 2015 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

Man that's weird ass chart...should be flipped around to read left to right instead of right to left.

 

Also with future CAFE rules, how do hybrids etc get counted? You can get say 30MPG out of a fullsized sedan and maybe 35 or so with a hybrid?

[Fgts]

Indeed a wired chart plus buyers may not want a utility but a competitive fullsize car even if a hybrid is offered.

 

US manufacturers might make the mistake again thinking "everyone" wants a SUV while building uncompetitive cars if not careful. a turbo 4 fullsize was unfathomable 4 years ago now it's becoming a standard option.

[jpd80]

Indeed a wired chart plus buyers may not want a utility but a competitive fullsize car even if a hybrid is offered.

 

US manufacturers might make the mistake again thinking "everyone" wants a SUV while building uncompetitive cars if not careful. a turbo 4 fullsize was unfathomable 4 years ago now it's becoming a standard option.

At the moment those manufacturers ar responding to both the wishes of buyers and the constraints of CAFE.

Not as many people want large car anymore and it is receding to a niche but still a lucrative one if done right.

[atomcat68]

You're not following my admittedly poorly constructed argument:

 

These are our knowns:

 

1 - we know that Ford is launching large sedans on a heavily modified CD4 chassis.

2 - we know that Ford has a platform in development called CD6.

 

There has been speculation that CD6 is launching in the near term (within two years).

 

If this is the case, I maintain that it would be used for large CUVs only.

 

Why?

 

Because we know that large CD4 sedans are coming, and the large sedan market does not justify launching 2016/2017 MY large sedans on CD4 and then launching CD6 sedans for the 2017/2018 MY. Or even, realistically, 2018/2019 MY.

 

The best available source, Reuters, asserts that CD6 is not due until MY 2019 (CY 2018); this seems more plausible as a source platform for sedans, but even there, I remain somewhat skeptical. If CD6 sedans are forthcoming, I expect CUVs to be launched first because that's where the money is--and CUV buyers aren't badge-enamored corksniffers--as the market performance of the RX and SRX demonstrate.

The thing I don't like about this plan is that we were recently criticizing Gm for using separate platforms for Cuv and sedans where Ford was consolidating. Now Ford is making adding platforms after saying it will reduce them? I also wonder if we a assuming that this is the Explorer is incorrect. Could CD6 replace the Expedition and Navigator which are also due around that time? (Making cd6 an aluminum platform) Or are they really going on the pickup platform?

[jpd80]

CD4 was a globalization and life extension of EUCD which in itself will probably be replaced by CD6 in 2018,

maybe that change takes into account newer technology and the need to include D3 replacements?

 

Expedition and Navigator are going back under F150 platform.

Edited April 3, 2015 by jpd80

[akirby]

CD4 was a globalization and life extension of EUCD which in itself will probably be replaced by CD6 in 2018,

maybe that change takes into account newer technology and the need to include D3 replacements?

 

Expedition and Navigator are going back under F150 platform.

 

Exactly. If CD6 is really FWD and RWD capable then it should replace CD4 and D3/4 and support both sedans and utilities. Any CD4 work on Taurus and MKS was likely started before CD6 was greenlighted and is being driven by the need to get product to China now.

 

And as Richard says it would make sense to start with the utilities and Lincoln models first with Ford sedans later.

 

There is no reason a CD6 FWD Fusion would need to cost much more than a CD4 Fusion.

[jpd80]

 

Exactly. If CD6 is really FWD and RWD capable then it should replace CD4 and D3/4 and support both sedans and utilities. Any CD4 work on Taurus and MKS was likely started before CD6 was greenlighted and is being driven by the need to get product to China now.

 

And as Richard says it would make sense to start with the utilities and Lincoln models first with Ford sedans later.

 

There is no reason a CD6 FWD Fusion would need to cost much more than a CD4 Fusion.

Think modular platform like VW and the latitude that affords plus two front crash modules,

one transverse engine for FWD and one longitudinal engine for RWD.

 

That could handle everything above C1 and below F150/ Expedition

It could be as simple as merging Mustang elements into the mix...

 

That way, a lot of primary engineering module development work is covered under large platform project

while specific vehicles and changes are covered under derivative cost centers simplifying project financing.

This would help Lincoln and niche vehicles to branch off earlier without the costs of a dedicated platform

 

Kind of like brown fielding an existing platform but only better by timing all the developments together to

extract maximum synergy of development and supplier contracts.

Edited April 3, 2015 by jpd80

[akirby]

Think modular platform like VW and the latitude that affords plus two front crash modules,

one transverse engine for FWD and one longitudinal engine for RWD.

 

Or one longitudinal engine for both like Audi. Unless it's a lot cheaper to do a transverse engine, which is possible. In that case Ford would continue with transverse setups and Lincoln could use the more expensive longitudinal drivetrain to offer both.

[fuzzymoomoo]

Think modular platform like VW and the latitude that affords plus two front crash modules,

one transverse engine for FWD and one longitudinal engine for RWD.

 

That could handle everything above C1 and below F150/ Expedition

It could be as simple as merging Mustang elements into the mix...

 

That way, a lot of primary engineering module development work is covered under large platform project

while specific vehicles and changes are covered under derivative cost centers simplifying project financing.

Also, by the time CD6 is unveiled, we could also see the next major upgrade of the C platform to accommodate the rumored "extensive" use of aluminum in the MK IV Focus.

[jasonj80]

Saw this on Yahoo News today.

 

2016 Ford Taurus Confirmed For 2015 Shanghai Auto Show

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/2016-ford-taurus-confirmed-2015-shanghai-auto-show-090000656.html

 

..A debut of the U.S.-spec car, which we expect to arrive as a 2016 model, should take place later this year.

Edited April 3, 2015 by jasonj80

[fuzzymoomoo]

FWIW it also says CD4 platform

[Deanh]

IMO, the Taurus has to be a LOT more adventurous stylistically from what I have seen, to become anywhere close to a sales success....Vanilla wont cut it...