Ford is hawking their “new” Taurus (née Five Hundred) as America's safest full-size sedan. This tells us two things. First, the Ford division famous for producing the world’s safest cars (Volvo) is as good as gone. Second, The Blue Oval Boyz replaced their alleged allegiance to Bold Moves with a profound proclamation of Risk Aversion. Whether or not either decision is correct is a moot point; FoMoCo doesn't have the time nor the money to not to sell Volvo or develop edgy new automobiles. So is Ford’s safe car a safe bet? As the Afrikaners say, Ja nee.
Even a cursory glance reveals that the new Taurus is the same size, shape and stance as the "old" Five Hundred– if only because it's the same car. Luckily, the moniker change necessitated a face lift. Proportionally correct lighting pods remove much of the old model’s goofiness, while the tri-bar grille adds maximum Forditude. Even with fender vents and an Altezza lighting festival out back, the Taurus can’t quite shake off Mister Mays’ retro-futurist homage to Volkswagen’s bland sedans.
I repeat: there’s no getting around the Taurus’ quasi-VW creases. While the Limited-grade’s chrome side mirror skullcaps add extra presence (in the proud Detroit tradition of pay-as-you-go invidious distinctions), the Taurus is only somewhat less forgettable than the Five Hundred lurking underneath.
The Taurus’ interior also remains largely unchanged from its predecessor– if only because it's the same car. And let’s just say there’s a reason why the “old” Five Hundred was known for its spaciousness, rather than anything else. Spatially speaking, the Taurus' class-leading volume works against it; the wood veneer and oval dashboard clock fail to warm a cold, cavernous cabin. The Taurus Limited [re-]attempts to redress this sterility with perforated leather covers. Nice as they are, they fail to lighten the interior's Calvinist demeanor.
One tug at the Taurus’ vent registers reveals a distinct lack of plastic integrity. And while the door panels have the right soft bits and timber trimmings, the Accord’s tight-fitting elbow padding still drops a bomb on Ford’s (wide) gap band. The tiller’s rock hard airbag cover is the biggest let down: a constant reminder that bean-counted consumer touch points work for Rangers, but its no [fuzzy] dice on a flagship Ford. The only condolence: the gauge cluster’s richly detailed faces, a smattering of chromed knobs and the leather/chrome clad gearshift’s vault-like detents.
The Five Hundred’s 3.0-liter Duratec V6 was safe (i.e. slow) at any speed. Combined with a well trained six-speed autobox, the reborn Taurus’ 3.5-liter replacement morphs the sedan from zero to hero. Rest to 60mph now requires just 7.6 seconds of your time. Equally impressive, the 263hp Taurus hustles from the git-go and delivers linear power from the basement all the way to the penthouse.
Torque steer is out there, somewhere, but only the really determined gas masher will find it. Anyway, fear not, for the Taurus sits upon a cost-engineered variant on Volvo’s robust P3 platform, complete with the usual safety cage and crash force management and additional rollover and crash sensor (the computer determines how much to inflate the air bags and how long to keep them inflated). Considering the Taurus’ new level of handling prowess, this is not a purely psychological selling point.
Tragically, the Blue Oval suspension tunerz took the path of least roll resistance. This chassis is no longer a poor man’s Volvo S80; it’s a reincarnated Ford LTD. True to land yacht lore, the new Taurus pitches in corners, bobs in bends and dives in panic stops. Luckily, braking is still solid with 18” rims and discs at all corners– once you get over the long travel pedal and spongy effort.
One fast turn in the Taurus and its clear that Ford took one step forward and one step back. The extra power is much appreciated, but the Taurus is dying for last year’s springy bits. Understeer arrives quickly and stays until the party’s over and everyone– including the tow truck driver– have gone home. Meanwhile, the Taurus’ numb steering has more on-center play than Yao Ming on a fourth-quarter fast break.
Even with hundreds of internal modifications (e.g. cramming sound-deadening stuff into every unseen orifice), a disconcerting amount of tire growl still invades the cabin. On the positive side, the numerous tuning-tweaks have had a negligible effect on this chassis’ already impressive ride quality.
If wallow and float were the missing ingredients stymieing the Five Hundred’s commercial prospects, the “new” Taurus will be a guaranteed home run. Hey, it's not inconceivable. The return of the Bull heralds the death of the Crown Vic. Most Fordies loyal to Ye Olde Panther platform will likely find the Taurus a suitable replacement. While lacking the Vic's brick-house construction, RWD poise and old school seating, the “new” Ford Taurus is the Toyota Avalon of American sedans. How great is that?
81 Comments on “Ford Taurus Limited Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
I suppose that the Gillette grille helps this beast “cut the wind” keeping the cd less than 0.5…
You’re right that Ford will now have to kill the Crown Vic; they’re vying for the same demographic!
when I noticed the so called taurus name- holder, what struck me in design, was this old and obsolete side window next to c-pillar. at such angles they made windows a century ago. well at least not audi, that tried this oldie thing on a6.
the taurus has lost it`s only trump, the provokative ,distinct looks. could you attract a client in ford because of reliability? no. because of gadgetry? must be kiddin. design. may be, overdiscounting. may be. being american? may be. today taurus looks as boring as german sedan, yet not giving a single hint of german meticulousness inside, or under the hood. volvo platform? yeah, right. where did the volvo get money to build a new platform, being constantly drained by ford ownership? so, i guess it is amazda 6 platform. so a, ajapanese platform, a japanese gearbox, a german -boring looks, an american attitude of bean counting and detailing, american reliability( at least refers to those parts that were ford designed) … and you are trying to convince me to buy this?If i am a patriot, if I like good cars, with distinctive looks, if i want reliability, and quality….. what it has to do with FORD?
Bland.
The 500 was known for its underpowered engine and lousy CVT.
The new Taurus will be known for… Nothing, just a generic big car.
The mid-’80s Taurus was simply breathtaking in terms of how it looked when placed beside 99% of all other affordable cars of the era.
The mid-’00s Taurus is simply prosaic in terms of how it looks when placed beside 99% of other affordable cars on the market.
To me, that sums up the problem quite neatly. What is a Taurus? How is this a Taurus? If I squint I sorta kinda see the original’s headlamps in the design. But I see precious little else – either in the metal or on the spec sheet – that promises innovation or cutting edge design.
It sounds like they’re inching closer to viability with the overgrown Passat.
What is it with Ford and these tail lights? I know they’re all into this retro thing with the Mustang and all..but the “hot” tail light from 5 years ago ain’t exactly..”retro cool” now. They could make a case for it on the “sporty” version of the Fusion, but the crowd that opts for the 500..err..Taurus..probably isn’t concerned with impressing the tunerz at Sonic’s.
Sajeev,
Great write-up, as usual! Do you have any thoughts on Ford’s desertion of the CVT? When the 500 bowed, with a CVT, I felt it was a big commitment, and a big gamble. To offer the CVT as the only automatic option ought to mean that Ford had unlimited faith in the tranny. Now it seems – oops – it wasn’t that smart a move after all. Does this mean that the CVT is dead and buried, again?
In my view, the problem with this car was always design. Even old folks know they’ve seen that canopy on an old VW and probably mistake it for such. How do you go retro-futuristic minus the futuristic on a design you penned 15 years ago? The new design and name do nothing to resolve this problem and in fact may compound it. By leaving the most distinctive feature intact and calling it a name that doesn’t really fit who will notice it as a new car? Who will even take the time to learn the other differences.
On another note, I am suprised to hear the all new steering gear is unresponsive. It is bizzarre to me that Ford chose to design a 100% new rack and pinion gear for this car at huge cost, especially when hydraulic steering systems are nearly obsolete in the car market. It is truly sad that it isn’t even as good as the one it replaces.
Zzzzzzzz for all the captions but one! He, he, he.
The Fusion should be the Taurus. At least in spirit they are somewhat related. Oh well.
I don’t mind the appearance of the new Taurus. Although I suppose ‘I don’t mind’ isn’t really a ringing endorsement for a car design. Those tail lights must go! (The Aveo and the Taurus, bringing Altezza lights back!) It does have one feature that I do like and that is a huge greenhouse. Something to be said for being able to see out.
I agree that this spells the end of the Crown Vic and the Grand Marquis. Although that might serve it well in terms of sales (hey, adding all those copcars and taxis will give it a real sales boost) it also immediately taints the design in some consumers eyes…a lot of people don’t want to be in the same car that all the cops and taxis use.
Pity that it has some shortcomings, although those are easily fixed I guess. It is not a breakthrough product, but it seems overall to be a good, ‘workmanlike’ car.
I wonder if Mullaly has ever been in a Japanese car in this class. Doesn’t sound like it.
The taillights look to me, the Altezza-ignorant, like a Mercedes reference. The current (07) Accord does it better, though.
“Altezza lighting festival.” Awesome. What is the fascination with these lights anyway? They’re hideous. I wouldn’t buy a Taurus just because of those lights.
NickR,
Yeah, I have no idea why they brought back a mid-sized nameplate for a full-sized car, but it sort of makes sense. I have recommended the Five-Hundred to my conservatively-driving neighbors who were looking to get something like a Crown Vic. Maybe I am weird, but I think it is decent-looking and reviews have it pegged as being about perfect for a good all-around conservative choice for people who want a big vehicle that performs fairly gracefully, as long as you don’t plan on autocrossing it.
Don’t forget, the new Mercury Sable (ex-Montego/same as new Taurus) is out too! It should offer some different interior options for around the same price.
I am a taurean and I cringe everytime “taurus” gets bashed. Please… someone change the name to any other sign? Capricorn maybe??
I agree that this spells the end of the Crown Vic and the Grand Marquis. Although that might serve it well in terms of sales (hey, adding all those copcars and taxis will give it a real sales boost) it also immediately taints the design in some consumers eyes…a lot of people don’t want to be in the same car that all the cops and taxis use.
Cops aren’t going to buy this.
Ford designers who worked on super duty trucks need to get involved more with their car designs. Those HD trucks are very butch looking and 500 could use some of that.
Looks like RoboCop’s helmet. Come to think of it didn’t the cops drive original Taurus’ in that movie.
I personally don’t get Ford’s styling direction these days, they lack cohesion or a unified focus or something amiss.
Don’t think this is off topic in the review of a land-yacht class automobile.
What happened to the column transmission selector? What is the deal with putting a console shifter and a big honkin’ console in between the two seats.
When front drive came to big cars, one of the big selling points was that you didn’t have the transmission tunnel so you had this enormous amount of room to stretch your legs and move your feet around. Yeah, yeah, both hands on the steering wheel and foot on the gas ready to cover the brake at all times, but there are long road trips and highways and cruise control, and not having my foot bump against a center console is a big deal for me.
It seems around the time of the 1996 Taurus, the shift came to wanting to be cocooned in a car somewhow — I remember these “focus group” adds for Ford where some dope wants “the car to wrap around me.” One yahoo with agrophobia or whatever you call fear of open spaces, and all sedans have this look, and now they all have the console tranmission stick.
Yeah, yeah, AWD option means that the transmission tunnel is back, I am either an old fogey or a very long-legged person who belongs in an F-150 pickup. But the new Taurus is meant to be land-yacht class. Center console, console shifter, feet bumping against that bundling board – what happened to cruising around town with your sweetie slid over on to the middle seat (OK shoulder belts and air bags).
whitenose:
I wonder if Mullaly has ever been in a Japanese car in this class. Doesn’t sound like it.
He was a Lexus LS430 owner prior to being hired by Ford. One of his first complaints were all the different headlamp switches, and told the troops to standardize on just one.
If the current Taurus had been introduced 3 years ago, it would have made a bigger splash, but it’s simply playing catch-up.
Altezza squared: the new Sable’s taillights are completely white. Ugh.
Paul,
Simply using the term “bundling board” is revealing.
But I’m with you on this. At a time when so few cars in this country have a manual available, giving up so much interior space for the “sexy center console” (yes, I’ve read the description) is appalling.
If not in real room, the feeling of not being hemmed in, mentioned in other design aspects like tumblehome and dash features, surely counts in the console area. (Disclaimer: I’m lean and blend-in tallish.)
Cops aren’t going to buy this.
You don’t think so? Why not? I am not arguing, I am just wondering why you think they wouldn’t. I agree that the Impala and even the Charger are more ‘typical’, but…
Anyway, curious to know your thoughts.
This car is crazy bland. But so is the Avalon, the LaCrosse, the Sonata and the Malibu. Bland sells. Bland serves a purpose and this car is good for what it is supposed to be. Functionally it’s solid. A SHO version would be nice and so would a less clunky looking grille and tail end. So much untapped potential in this platform.
When the 500 bowed, with a CVT, I felt it was a big commitment, and a big gamble. To offer the CVT as the only automatic option ought to mean that Ford had unlimited faith in the tranny.
Tsofting: The 500 had the CVT in AWD configurations only. I don’t care for CVTs in my experience, but since AWD is not a common trait of vehicles in Houston, I never tried this one. From the sounds of it, nobody’s gonna miss it. The 6-speed is a sweetheart, quite responsive for a large sedan.
You’re right that Ford will now have to kill the Crown Vic; they’re vying for the same demographic!
Shaker: from what I’ve seen (salespeople, Ford’s website) the Crown Vic is for fleet consumption only starting in 2008. Retail buyers walking in for a Panther are likely to be escorted over to a Bull.
The Fusion should be the Taurus. At least in spirit they are somewhat related. Oh well.
NickR: they needed to shut the old Taurus’ Atlanta plant down about 2 years earlier for that to work. I agree, but I don’t fault Ford for their decision…at least not that one.
Don’t forget, the new Mercury Sable (ex-Montego/same as new Taurus) is out too! It should offer some different interior options for around the same price.
Neilberg: tu-tone interior colors and woodgrain textures are gonna be the full extent of it.
What happened to the column transmission selector? What is the deal with putting a console shifter and a big honkin’ console in between the two seats.
Paul: Nice idea, not gonna happen with beancounters and a global-sourced chassis. Only a American design like the Panther (or GM W-body) would do such a thing.
Or as Cake once said: stick shifts and safety belts…bucket seats have all got to go.
I like the changes. I doubt many of the folks that will consider the Taurus will have an issue witt the suspension as you did. Geesh, when the 500 came out, most reviews said it was a good car, except the powertrain needed to be stronger and it needed more visual apeal. Ford goes and does what it is told, still no respect. There is no pleasing some people! (that’s just what Jesus said!)
double post
triple post
Geesh, when the 500 came out, most reviews said it was a good car, except the powertrain needed to be stronger and it needed more visual apeal. Ford goes and does what it is told, still no respect.
Well if they didn’t mess with the best part of the 500 (suspension and steering) the review would be a lot more “respectful”.
All they had to do was put the 3.5L in, change the name/style and it would be a nice ride for pistonhead and pistonhead’s family.
Ford just cannot wrap its collective brain around the current marketplace. There was nothing really wrong with the 500 outside of the CVT and vehicle weight. The Taurus and Taurus X need to have AWD (preferably RWD biased), achieve at least a 3000# tow rating (air suspension option????), and tack on an extra grand and make that interior as close to Audi spec as possible (the design isnt offensive, its the subpar materials!). Seriously, what is so flippin hard about this FoMoCo? If you are going to sink the ship, at least go down FIGHTING….THAT is american (or at least, used to be.)
My preference would have been to upgrade the mechanical power and leave the looks alone until the refresh next year. Poor Ford – no money and a legacy vehicle that is tough to make pretty.
B Moore – Autosavant.net
At the end of the day this is all about sales numbers; the Taurus will outsell the 500. Ford is starting to take the right steps to turn the ship. Better quality, good value, and competitive vehicles will keep the current base. That should buy Mulalley some time to have a product line that not only competes but beats—The Fusion and Edge are a good start–much more needs to be done.
At least they upgraded the motor from the 500. I remember test driving one about a year ago. I thought I was going to become a hood ornament trying to merge on to I-264.
Not that impressed with this car and will wait for the refresh to see if they do anything worthwhile with it.
So far it just looks like motivation to keep my Crown Vic running for a long time.
I’ll agree that this will never be patrol unit material. The origional Taurus was used by some budget constrained departments (including the one I did my academy time with) and they were horrible as police cars.
Worse reliablity issues than the Caprice or Crown Vic, underpowered and just far too cramped. After the radios, siren and light controls, and shotgun rack were added the front passenger seat room was non-existant. Stumbling out on pins-and-needles legs to a hot call was no fun at all.
” .. the “new” Ford Taurus is the Toyota Avalon of American sedans. How great is that?”
If Taurus can start acquiring some of Avalon’s image for reliability and cosseting quiet and comfort, it’ll be pretty darn great. And I think that’s Ford’s hope. How well Taurus can slalom is not the target market’s priority.
The thing that strikes me is how the Taurus could be the platform for rejuvenating the Town Car. (Remember, Ford originally termed the extra-roomy 500 its “flagship.”) Put a formal roof on it, square up the rear end and install a truly sumptuous interior with minimal or no console. Ford would then have something to give the Town Car demographic a reason to buy.
This is something minor…but Ford:
PLEASE for all things holy, dump the pointless, tacky, and cheap-looking “side vents” from your designs! Ford isn’t the only one (I’m looking at you Mini Cooper S (on the hood) and Pontiac (all over the place)), but really, are we looking at today’s version of the dreaded vinyl top, trunk-mounted luggage rack, and gold trim package?
Oh yeah – the “Taurus.”
Yawn.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
50 Merc—My understanding is that the 500 / Taurus platform is the basis of the 2009 Lincoln MKS—-the good news here is that the MKS will be unique design and not a blatant badge engineer job like the MKZ / Fusion.
So far it just looks like motivation to keep my Crown Vic running for a long time.
Ditto.
Has anybody sat in one of these yet? Wondering if I’m the only one who thinks the ridiculously narrow driver footwell totally spoils the otherwise vast interior. With no room to move my left leg laterally, and the console hard by my right, I end up feeling cramped inside this thing, even though it has unbelievable amounts of leg and headroom otherwise. I don’t know what’s tucked behind that big box alongside the footwell, ahead of the driver’s door, but it needs to be moved to open up a few more inches of width. Big turnoff when you first sit down and try to get comfortable, as it is.
Wondering if I’m the only one who thinks the ridiculously narrow driver footwell totally spoils the otherwise vast interior. With no room to move my left leg laterally, and the console hard by my right, I end up feeling cramped inside this thing, even though it has unbelievable amounts of leg and headroom otherwise.
Felt the same way about the console size relative to seat width. Its almost as space inefficient as the Crown Vic. Well, maybe not that bad. :)
I still remain to be convinced as to how this vehicle is touted as a replacement for the Panther.
As mentioned above, the interior doesn’t communicate “big”, nor does it drive that way. This vehicle feels like any other cookie-cutter car out there, i.e. zero road presence.
Hip and shoulder room are good by Eurasian standards but are found lacking on this continent.
When I step into a Crown Vic, I know I’m driving a big car. And that’s what I wanted. The Anti(tode)-Civic.
Just put red taillights on it and it’s as boring looking as an Avalon.
I don’t like what I’m hearing about the console being too wide and lack of foot room.
Yes1 To comment on the “new” Ford Taurus You mean to tell me this might be Fords “savior” from going out of business? Lets face facts Ford isn’t going to be able to make a profit until 2010. Hopefully they won’t be out of business by than.
Wow….absolutely WONDERFUL. A whopping 40 responses!!!
That says everything.
If this were a review of the new Accord, there would be ~150 replies…some positive, some negative, but at least there would be interest in the vehicle.
The Grim Reaper is a-knocking on Ford’s door….and nobody cares!
I agree with substantially all of this review.
I had about 4 hours of seat time in this thing and I found it mildly pleasant. Is that faint praise enough for you?
I echo the comments on the footwell. I was actually stunned. If I could compare, it felt a lot like the passenger side of a Ford Econoline because of the intrusion of the inner panels.
However, the rest of the car was roomy, and the backseat was tremendous. The car is a decent alternative for the import-hater who wants to buy passable American iron. I doubt it will convince the Camry or Accord buyer to switch over without significant incentives, though.
As for the fender vents, I believe this trend is unfortunately going to become the Opera Windows of the modern design era.
This Taurus will most likely compete with…
1) Lucerne
2) Avalon
3) Azera / Amanti
4) Grand Marquis
5) Camry
I doubt if it will sell. The overall design is simply too bland and the interior components on the lower to mid-end are way too cheap.
yawn
Not my cup of tea – I much prefer my Grand Marquis. It doesn’t seem any different than any other large front wheel driver – didn’t GM learn the folly of dumping your old school RWD full sizer for a lesser vehicle?
Again Ford turns its back on the Australian Falcon, in favour of warmed over eurotrash imitations.
I still remain to be convinced as to how this vehicle is touted as a replacement for the Panther.
86er: don’t think they’ll ever tout the Taurus that way, Ford would rather let the Panther slip away and hope that nobody cares. But when you’re the last of a breed, people (even if its only a few on the Interweb) will indeed notice.
I don’t like what I’m hearing about the console being too wide and lack of foot room.
Dynamic: the new Taurus is another non-American platform reworked to appeal to Americans. Works if you’re Honda or Toyota…wait…so many of their sedans are designed exclusively for the American market…
To comment on the “new” Ford Taurus You mean to tell me this might be Fords “savior” from going out of business?
A mild redesign of an unpopular chassis should never be considered a corporate savior. Just another stopgap until their fresh(?) models come out in 2009.
After looking at the Falcon Wikipedia entry where its suggested that the 08 Falcon may be engineered to be fitted as left hand drive – if so hopefully the Taurus/500 is a short term stopgap till 09 when it and the panther can be pushed off a cliff .
Are there any interior trim options besides the plood? Gloss black or faux-Al perhaps?
One big, long-standing American car icon is the highway cruiser. Something that can go long distances in comfort. Read “On the Road-” nobody chose a little MG sports car for burning up the miles.
I went to look at the new Taurus in just this vein. Not in the current review trend of, how far aways is it from being a BMW, but how close is it to being a Buick Roadmaster.
The Ford goes a lot in this direction. But to a responders point, there is no option for front bench seats, as there stil is in an Impala or Vic. I don’t think Americans ever demanded bucket seats only, I think this was thrust upon them.
But there is one disappointment in what we often here as the ‘monstrous cabin’ in this model, and that is that it is narrow inside. Although rear foot space is very nice, here is less width in the interior than in the Impala. True to Ford’s tradition of offering less interior space than the size of the car would justify (a la Panther), this skinniness is inexplicable.
It’s even more apparent in the soon to be Taurus X, long and skinny inside. Nice for tight spots, but compared to the beaminess of say the Pilot, it’s just not there.
But I am glad that Ford is making a car like this, whatever it is called, and I hope it is successful.
While the car is far from perfect, it does offer some unique features. It’s large with a massive trunk. It has available AWD, traction control, ABS and stability control. A car like this would make a very compelling choice for the commuter who needs the all-weather capability of a SUV without the miserable gas mileage, miserable handling, or the growing stigma of a SUV. This thing may not be a sports car, but compared to a Ford Explorer…