2010 Ford Taurus

[Tungsten]

so i just got to go test the new Taurus that came out recently

this car is basically just amazing, it can compete with a Bugatti for all i know

 

this is one good quality car, nobody even comes close to it

everything just feels solid as a rock

 

i also tested a Cadillac CTS and a Chevy Malibu (GM stuff)

the CTS sucked so bad it wasn't funny, it was a real pile of @!*%

Malibu was alright but nowhere near as good as the Taurus

 

for anyone that wants to get a solid sedan, the new Taurus is definitely it

 

http://www.fordvehicles.com/2010taurus/

[nunya]

You know the new Tauras is basicly the Five Hundred, right (not that it's a bad thing, my grand parents have one and all they have had to do to it was wiper blades and a light bulb) I swear I read somewhere too that the SHO can outrun a SRT-8 Charger...

[Tungsten]

i think its so good that i would rather have that than say a bugatti veyron

[nismothunder]

Yeah,it can...365 hp twin turbo v6...in a four do sedan...and in red they dont look that bad,for sure better then the colbolt,and it has the button start...adds nothing to performance but sure looks cool,wells look nice(even though they'll probly start oxidising ina matter of months,speedo that goes to 140 and a 7k red line...they look neat...

But I'd rather have the 4.6 with a blower in one like the old taures(not blown though)

[Tungsten]

keep in mind its also made to have better fuel economy

[nismothunder]

But its still cheaper to get a old car that gets 15 mpg then a new one that gets 30...

[4X4pathy94]

yea looks like they have done a better job then the previous taurus for sure. doesnt come across cheaply made as the older model was.

 

i would like to see how reliable this car will be good for ford.

[Precise1]

i think its so good that i would rather have that than say a bugatti veyron

I'll have the Bugatti please. I'd sell it and buy you the Taurus and enjoy the change.

Please, there is no comparison...

 

It's still a Ford.

 

B

[Toby]

CTS and Taurus aren't in the same segment. CTS and Malibu are both midsize sedans. Taurus qualifies for full-size as the fusion is their camry-fighter. I like their overall look but the interior is small for the size of that car. And yes, it's just basically new skin on an old Five Hundred chassis.

 

I'd much rather the new CTS over the Taurus. better interior quality, fit and finish, engine, etc. I dunno if I'd rather have the Malibu. The Malibu is a nice car but it's not as good as the Fusion.

 

Also the Charger SRT8 does o-60 in 5 seconds and a 13.5 quarter mile.

 

Taurus SHO is 0-60 in 5.2, and quarter mile time of 13.7.

 

It won't outrun it but it'll run just the tiniest bit slower. But if the Charger bogs the launch or the taurus has a better reaction time it's possible for it to win a drag race. I dunno if Chrysler is revamping the 6.1 hemi anymore or not.

[nismothunder]

CTS and Taurus aren't in the same segment. CTS and Malibu are both midsize sedans. Taurus qualifies for full-size as the fusion is their camry-fighter. I like their overall look but the interior is small for the size of that car. And yes, it's just basically new skin on an old Five Hundred chassis.

 

I'd much rather the new CTS over the Taurus. better interior quality, fit and finish, engine, etc. I dunno if I'd rather have the Malibu. The Malibu is a nice car but it's not as good as the Fusion.

 

Also the Charger SRT8 does o-60 in 5 seconds and a 13.5 quarter mile.

 

Taurus SHO is 0-60 in 5.2, and quarter mile time of 13.7.

 

It won't outrun it but it'll run just the tiniest bit slower. But if the Charger bogs the launch or the taurus has a better reaction time it's possible for it to win a drag race. I dunno if Chrysler is revamping the 6.1 hemi anymore or not.

Depends on who gets a better bite to the ground,the chargers usally just want to spin with the 6.1(and gutless with the 5.7) The taurus will out run the regualer one(for sure the 3.5,and the 5.7),but not the srt8(which is a 6.1)

thirty years ago the toraus would be named a torino and the charger would be dubbed a fury,since the new one doesnt live up to its ansesters...

[Tungsten]

I'll have the Bugatti please. I'd sell it and buy you the Taurus and enjoy the change.

Please, there is no comparison...

 

It's still a Ford.

 

B

 

that would be great lol

enjoy your change

 

 

 

I'd much rather the new CTS over the Taurus. better interior quality, fit and finish, engine, etc.

 

I'm sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

New CTS is the biggest pile of @!*% ever made. I would rather buy a whole fleet of Pathfinders.

Edited December 6, 2009 by Tungsten

[Toby]

I'm sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

New CTS is the biggest pile of @!*% ever made. I would rather buy a whole fleet of Pathfinders.

 

When I was considering a new car the new CTS was one of the vehicles I looked at. So I know a bit about what I'm talking about. They are great. The engine isn't amazing. But they are great. Great interior quality, ride, fit and finish, power, handling. They are on par with what a mid-size luxury car should be. I would rather one over a pathfinder honestly. Not that I dislike pathfinders. but the VQ engine in them is a tad rough and showing it's age. the 3.6DI in the CTS is a pretty great motor. You're off your gourd to not at least acknowledge SOME respect towards the CTS.

 

I love the looks of the Taurus. But it's still just a gussied up Ford Five Hundred. That chassis itself was a bit worrisome. And I don't like how you sit in the taurus. It's also just too big. Definitely competes more along the lines with the Charger/300, and maybe the Impala. it's not a mid-size at all. There's better mid-size cars out there.

 

Depends on who gets a better bite to the ground,the chargers usally just want to spin with the 6.1(and gutless with the 5.7) The taurus will out run the regualer one(for sure the 3.5,and the 5.7),but not the srt8(which is a 6.1)

thirty years ago the toraus would be named a torino and the charger would be dubbed a fury,since the new one doesnt live up to its ansesters...

 

SHO is AWD. Only way to get it last I heard (and even if it wasn't, FWD?). so it'd have a bit more bite. I think they'd be on par.

[Tungsten]

When I was considering a new car the new CTS was one of the vehicles I looked at. So I know a bit about what I'm talking about. They are great. The engine isn't amazing. But they are great. Great interior quality, ride, fit and finish, power, handling. They are on par with what a mid-size luxury car should be. I would rather one over a pathfinder honestly. Not that I dislike pathfinders. but the VQ engine in them is a tad rough and showing it's age. the 3.6DI in the CTS is a pretty great motor. You're off your gourd to not at least acknowledge SOME respect towards the CTS.

 

pffft please

i test drove 3 of them

they had the worst quality trim i ever seen

on the other hand, the taurus had amazing materials and attention to detail

 

one used cts with only 20k miles was in such bad shape already it wasn't funny

when i opened the trunk water came out of it because the gasket failed

Edited December 6, 2009 by Tungsten

[Toby]

pffft please

i test drove 3 of them

they had the worst quality trim i ever seen

on the other hand, the taurus had amazing materials and attention to detail

 

one used cts with only 20k miles was in such bad shape already it wasn't funny

when i opened the trunk water came out of it because the gasket failed

 

So? A used one isn't exactly the best way to judge a car. Not everyone takes great care of their vehicle. And a good percentage of cars are being repossessed from Cash 4 Clunkers and going back to dealers.

 

the Taurus' Duratec isn't all that reliable either lol. The CTS had great trim. Not exactly on BMW level. But better than the Taurus. They aren't even in the same segment so I don't see where it matters. Ford's trim is cheaper material. Granted I like the layout of the Ford interior more. I'd much rather live with the CTS as a whole it's better.

[Tungsten]

i still disagree with that

[Toby]

i still disagree with thathttp://npora.ipbhost.com//index.php?app=forums&module=post&section=post&do=reply_post&f=25&t=24791&qpid=452797

 

You can do that all you want lol. Pretty sure there's no chance your average CTS buyer would consider the Taurus. The taurus is crude, bigger, and just not that great. They may go for the MKS rebadge. but not the Taurus. Two totally different classes though.

 

Taurus SE starts out at about $26k. SHO at $38k. SE has a 3.5L Duratec good for 263hp. It's 202.9 inches long, 85.7 inches wide, and 60.7 inches high.

 

CTS starts at $36,730 for the base model with RWD. the 3.6L starts at about $45k for RWD. AWD is optional across the board. 191.6 inches long, 72.5 inches wide, and 58 inches tall.

 

Both offer 6 speed automatics. both have pretty much close to the same interior space. The trunk is alot bigger on the Taurus. But it's also longer by almost a foot and wider by 13 inches or so.

[Kingman]

Agreed with the absolutely outstanding quality of the new Taurus. I went with my mom to test drive one and I was completely blown away. I pushed and pulled on every piece of trim on the interior and not a thing budged. It was all nice and soft too.

[Precise1]

Just like the room you belong in...

 

I bet it even had that great 'new car' smell too, right??

 

B

[GrimGreg]

Talk it up all day long, but at the end of the day, it's still a POS FORD, no thanks.

 

(Though I wouldn't ever buy any of the cars you mentioned anyway, I'd be looking at BMW 5 series or a Maxima if I wanted that size sedan (which I never would "want").) Doubt I'd ever buy any kind of car again, unless it was a little weekend warrior sports car or drop top as a project.

[Kingman]

It's still a Ford.

]

 

Talk it up all day long, but at the end of the day, it's still a POS FORD, no thanks.

 

Those mindsets are almost 100% of the problem with anti-domestic people. No regard for fact or acknowledgment of the extreme improvement of GM and Ford products. Chrysler doesn't count because they still produce crappy products, save for a few vehicles they currently produce.

 

Yes, the big 3 have made hit and miss vehicles the past 20 years, but are greatly improving now while Import products continue to decline in quality and have been since the turn of the century.

 

I drove a new top-of-the-line Camry today at work, and what a POS that thing was. Chintzy materials, fit and finish, and a crappy layout. The feeling of the materials was directly comparable to a new Chrysler product, especially the lower-end models. That's bad.

 

I poked and prodded around in a new CTS as well when pulling it in for the night a few weeks back. Not the greatest, but still very good materials and build quality. There wasn't one mis-aligned panel on the exterior or interior. There were a few iffy interior trim panels that felt cheap but overall a good and well-made product. I especially appreciated the double stiched leather dashboard. The quality of the interior of a new CTS or Buick blows anything Toyota made, that includes Lexus, right out of the water.

 

People think their new Toyotas are all that and think anything else and especially Domestics are inferior, when they truley aren't.

 

When me and my mom went and drove a new Taurus we also looked at the MKZs and MTZs. The interiors were astounding in the attention to detail and quality. I knew they were improving, but damn those blew me away.

[Precise1]

Yes, the big 3 have made hit and miss vehicles the past 20 years, but are greatly improving now while Import products continue to decline in quality and have been since the turn of the century.

 

I drove a new top-of-the-line Camry today at work, and what a POS that thing was. Chintzy materials, fit and finish, and a crappy layout. The feeling of the materials was directly comparable to a new Chrysler product, especially the lower-end models. That's bad.

 

Yes, they have declined when they started making them in the US, hint hint...

 

So, all this materials talk. What kind of materials?? Polypropylene? Polystyrene? Polyethylene? Polyimide? What was the strength, the UV resistance index, the thickness, the curing process? Was it annealed?

 

You see, I hear all these statements and I'm pretty sure people haven't a damn clue what they are talking about other than a personal observation such "I like it" which is usually influenced my many other factors. The only facts mentioned are dimensions, weight and HP which doesn't tell you the quality of the vehicle at all.

 

The true test of a vehicle isn't someones opinion at the car lot, it is the opinion (and cars condition/reliability) after 50k miles, 100k miles, 150k miles, etc.

I love how people who have had licenses for a few years can tell you which car is better by tugging at the trim and driving it a few miles...

 

B

[Toby]

I'd like the Taurus more if it wasn't for that damn seating position. You sit too high and straight. I hate it. I don't want to lay down, but i don't want to sit like that. they are also more for show than sport.

 

MKS has too big of a greenhouse. It's real tall and has a goofy rear. I love the front and interior of it.

[Nytrosfinder]

I have a 1992 Ford Taurus SHO sitting on the side cause the value just went up from the New SHO (Legacy value boost is what my friend called it) and that 5 speed V6 Pulls! With 125k miles on it its still amazing!

[Toby]

I have a 1992 Ford Taurus SHO sitting on the side cause the value just went up from the New SHO (Legacy value boost is what my friend called it) and that 5 speed V6 Pulls! With 125k miles on it its still amazing!

 

Yeah the old SHOs were great for their time. Only real issue was it liked to eat timing belts and changing the back bank of plugs was quite a pain

[nunya]

Yeah the old SHOs were great for their time. Only real issue was it liked to eat timing belts and changing the back bank of plugs was quite a pain

 

 

Don't forget it is still a Tauras and plagued with the same transmission issues. I've seen more of them sitting in peoples garages with smoked trannys than on the road. No matter what way you look at it here though, you are arguing over a domestic badged sedan on an import 4x4 suv forum. What do you think the majority's opinion is? I wouldn't buy one for the simple fact it's A. a family sedan, I have no use for one already having 2 vechiles with 4 doors(and most people don't like riding with me anyway). B. too new, 1 obdII car is one too many. 3. automatic...bleh. Prefer having an odd number of pedals. D. payments, i like having none.