Ford Taurus
10-04-2009, 07:09 AM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Abdizzle,Oct 3 2009, 04:49 PM
How does it being heavy affect you? I can't seem to understand what you're complaining about. Do prospective owners of these types of vehicles take them out on Canyon Runs or track sessions or do you have your audiences mixed up.
It being heavy has absolutely no bearing what so ever on any of the factors buyers are looking for in a car like this besides possibly fuel economy. So take your useless complaint to a thread where it's relevant.
I don't get these S2000 owners like you who think they're 1990's Roadster is light for it's dimensions/time period (which it isn't by any means) yet have the balls to call a modern Family Sedan heavy.
It being heavy has absolutely no bearing what so ever on any of the factors buyers are looking for in a car like this besides possibly fuel economy. So take your useless complaint to a thread where it's relevant.
I don't get these S2000 owners like you who think they're 1990's Roadster is light for it's dimensions/time period (which it isn't by any means) yet have the balls to call a modern Family Sedan heavy.
2.2 tons of bulk.
203 inches long, almost 17 feet.
76 inches wide, almost 6 1/2 feet.
127 feet to stop the barge from 60 mph.
0.80 G's around the skidpad.
62.9 mph in the slalom.
10 year old chassis recycled (3 times) from the Volvo S80.
FWD platform with a transverse engine layout.
But it's got twin turbo's and direct injection!
Yeah, Ford's done it again! Classic Detroit "design"!
My God, is there any "new" family sedan design less relevant than this barge at this point in history? The entire industry is scrambling to bring more fuel efficient cars to market and Ford offers up this barge from yesteryear.
10-04-2009, 09:46 AM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZDan,Oct 4 2009, 05:42 AM
I never said and don't think the Taurus should be a 4-door S2000 or Elise.
But I don't think they'd alienate *anyone* and they'd certainly attract more true enthusiasts if the car were more of a G37 (not a lightweight car, but 500-600 lb. less than this behemoth).
Sooner or later, we're all (or most of us anyway) going to have to go in the smaller/lighter/simpler/cheaper direction. This car is a step in the wrong direction.
Reliance on big/heavy/expensive cars is what led to GM's bankruptcy. Making a bigger/heavier/more-expensive new Taurus isn't, imo, the sharpest move on Ford's part.
If I were recommending or buying a 4-door for my sister or my company, this car wouldn't even be on the list.
One man's opinion!
But I don't think they'd alienate *anyone* and they'd certainly attract more true enthusiasts if the car were more of a G37 (not a lightweight car, but 500-600 lb. less than this behemoth).
Sooner or later, we're all (or most of us anyway) going to have to go in the smaller/lighter/simpler/cheaper direction. This car is a step in the wrong direction.
Reliance on big/heavy/expensive cars is what led to GM's bankruptcy. Making a bigger/heavier/more-expensive new Taurus isn't, imo, the sharpest move on Ford's part.
If I were recommending or buying a 4-door for my sister or my company, this car wouldn't even be on the list.
One man's opinion!
Ford already has the AWD Fusion if you want something the size and weight of a G37x. I'd like to see a Fusion SHO as much as the next guy, but the Taurus clearly was never going to be a Fusion SHO.
And the Taurus isn't much bigger or more expensive. It's an inch longer and has the exact same starting MSRP. It does weigh 300 lbs more. Big deal. The G37 also weighs 200 pounds more than the G35 it replaced. Oh, and do spin us a story how the G37 is lighter/smaller/cheaper/simpler than the G35. Or the TL. Or the Accord. Or the new Prius. Or.. well, I think you get the point.
10-04-2009, 10:10 AM
#44
[QUOTE=Malloric,Oct 4 2009, 09:46 AM]The G37x is 3,800 pounds and is a substantially smaller car than the Taurus.
10-04-2009, 11:26 AM
#45
Isn't this why they have different categories for sedans? Compact, midsize, and Large. This was marketed as a large sedan so not sure why some folks are surprised about weight, size, and performance. Check out large size sedans on edmunds and cars in this category include most 'large' sedans. Family types shopping this car won't care about weight or performance(they'd be checking out if passengers will be comfortable in rear seat or if baby seat will fit or will there be enough room in trunk for Costco trips). Other manufacturers make large sedans not just Ford lol. Subaru just made the Subaru Legacy larger and heavier. I'd cross shop this if in the market. Ford Fusion is their midsize sedan and likely working on next model redesign already. New Fiesta also coming so not sure where logic for some folks here to generalize company failure by make a category specific car. 
10-04-2009, 12:21 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The people complaining about this cars weight are the same ones who have an SUV parked in their garage yet never question it's weight. This car appears to be 7 series scale and those things are well north of 4000LBS so I really don't understand the big fuss here.
Nothing will ever please people on this site. The ones whining in here are the same people who cry about a new super cars function over form styling because there is nothing else to complain about. In this case they came out with a decent car that is comparable to other gigantic sedan's but some how it's a revelation that 4 doors have been hovering around 4000LBS for a while now.
LoL @ "The motor is transversely mounted! No way, I'm not interested in that thing!
Pathetic!
Nothing will ever please people on this site. The ones whining in here are the same people who cry about a new super cars function over form styling because there is nothing else to complain about. In this case they came out with a decent car that is comparable to other gigantic sedan's but some how it's a revelation that 4 doors have been hovering around 4000LBS for a while now.
LoL @ "The motor is transversely mounted! No way, I'm not interested in that thing!
Pathetic!
10-04-2009, 12:53 PM
#48
Originally Posted by Abdizzle,Oct 4 2009, 12:21 PM
The people complaining about this cars weight are the same ones who have an SUV parked in their garage yet never question it's weight.
Nothing will ever please people on this site. The ones whining in here are the same people who cry about a new super cars function over form styling because there is nothing else to complain about. In this case they came out with a decent car that is comparable to other gigantic sedan's but some how it's a revelation that 4 doors have been hovering around 4000LBS for a while now.
LoL @ "The motor is transversely mounted! No way, I'm not interested in that thing!
If you can't tell the difference, I'm not surprised...
10-04-2009, 01:12 PM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Abdizzle,Oct 4 2009, 12:21 PM
The people complaining about this cars weight are the same ones who have an SUV parked in their garage yet never question it's weight. This car appears to be 7 series scale and those things are well north of 4000LBS so I really don't understand the big fuss here.
Nothing will ever please people on this site. The ones whining in here are the same people who cry about a new super cars function over form styling because there is nothing else to complain about. In this case they came out with a decent car that is comparable to other gigantic sedan's but some how it's a revelation that 4 doors have been hovering around 4000LBS for a while now.
LoL @ "The motor is transversely mounted! No way, I'm not interested in that thing!
Pathetic!
Nothing will ever please people on this site. The ones whining in here are the same people who cry about a new super cars function over form styling because there is nothing else to complain about. In this case they came out with a decent car that is comparable to other gigantic sedan's but some how it's a revelation that 4 doors have been hovering around 4000LBS for a while now.
LoL @ "The motor is transversely mounted! No way, I'm not interested in that thing!
Pathetic!
As far as the transverse engine layout, that's not necessarily a bad thing. The NSX and any number of other (rear) midengine cars mount the engine transversely for packaging efficiency and weight distribution. But in Ford's case they not only turned the engine sideways, they also placed it out over the front axle along with a transaxle thereby creating a nose heavy design prone to understeer and nosedive. Lot's of family sedans use FWD/transverse layouts. It's the most space efficient design and can free up lots of cabin space. But, in a barge like the Taurus (or 7 series) packaging efficiency shouldn't be that much of a concern. And it most definitely states that the design team chose to trade off performance for space efficiency. So how can it be considered a sports sedan?
Anyway, I find it hard to applaud Ford for doing what they've been doing in Detroit for the past 40 years. Take a mediocre family sedan, stuff in a powerful engine plus some badging, and sell the thing as a "performance" model. It's called perfuming the pig. And in your case it appears to work. I wish you the best of luck and much motoring enjoyment with your new $45K Taurus. I'll try not to point and laugh when you drive by.
10-04-2009, 01:16 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I wasn't referring to you. And yes if you are to own a ginormous 4-door luxosedan that does not have those characteristics while remaining light you'd be looking at nothing on the market! Because that car does not exist.
My car weigh's 3100LBS and is daily driven. If it were 500LBS lighter I wouldn't give a shit. Why? Because it doesn't mean crap on a vehicle which serves the purpose of getting one from point A-B/people hauler. Sure I'd be faster around a track (and maybe get better MPG going to the grocery store) but again you are complaining about things that DO NOT matter to buyers of this car and it's previous generation.
This is one of the few forums I've come across where there is a constant struggle between massive ego driven expectations vs. people who are in touch with reality. The ones accepting the car in question for what it is appear to be sane. On the other hand we have those who seem to be completely oblivious and ignore fact, this car is BIG in SIZE thus heavy. It is FWD and nose heavy, it will not handle well. Neither of those mean a damn thing to Mom and Pops taking their kids out to dinner.
My car weigh's 3100LBS and is daily driven. If it were 500LBS lighter I wouldn't give a shit. Why? Because it doesn't mean crap on a vehicle which serves the purpose of getting one from point A-B/people hauler. Sure I'd be faster around a track (and maybe get better MPG going to the grocery store) but again you are complaining about things that DO NOT matter to buyers of this car and it's previous generation.
This is one of the few forums I've come across where there is a constant struggle between massive ego driven expectations vs. people who are in touch with reality. The ones accepting the car in question for what it is appear to be sane. On the other hand we have those who seem to be completely oblivious and ignore fact, this car is BIG in SIZE thus heavy. It is FWD and nose heavy, it will not handle well. Neither of those mean a damn thing to Mom and Pops taking their kids out to dinner.