New Ford Taurus
06-26-2007, 08:21 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 2,330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Ford Taurus
*I don't follow domestic cars much - so it's likely the case that I don't have all of the information here, but here goes anyways*
I heard on TV yesterday that Ford was bringing back the Taurus name. Not a big deal- it's certainly been done before - lean on old successes rather than making new ones -
The problem I have with this is that it is essentially a Ford 500, with a new grill (so they said on TV)--and they're seemingly very OK with saying that publicly. If I'm Ford, I'm at least going to call it "the all-new Taurus"...because the 500 didn't sell and isn't reknowned for being a great vehicle.
Why would you want to take the name of arguably your only non-SUV success in years and put it on an unsuccessful car? Do they really think that a) the 500 is as good relative to competition as the Taurus was at the time? b) that putting the name on a lesser car will not dilute the power of that Taurus name? c) that it wouldn't have been a better idea to engineer a REALLY GOOD car, and then call it a Taurus?
What is the liklihood that people will consistently buy a slightly weak vehicle with a name they know on it?
Maybe I'm being to hard on the 500 but my impression is that the vehicle is less than impressive.
I heard on TV yesterday that Ford was bringing back the Taurus name. Not a big deal- it's certainly been done before - lean on old successes rather than making new ones -
The problem I have with this is that it is essentially a Ford 500, with a new grill (so they said on TV)--and they're seemingly very OK with saying that publicly. If I'm Ford, I'm at least going to call it "the all-new Taurus"...because the 500 didn't sell and isn't reknowned for being a great vehicle.
Why would you want to take the name of arguably your only non-SUV success in years and put it on an unsuccessful car? Do they really think that a) the 500 is as good relative to competition as the Taurus was at the time? b) that putting the name on a lesser car will not dilute the power of that Taurus name? c) that it wouldn't have been a better idea to engineer a REALLY GOOD car, and then call it a Taurus?
What is the liklihood that people will consistently buy a slightly weak vehicle with a name they know on it?
Maybe I'm being to hard on the 500 but my impression is that the vehicle is less than impressive.
06-26-2007, 08:27 AM
#2
Moderator
We had a thread on this a while back - the basic idea is whoever was in charge thought making all the car names start with 'F' was a good idea, and the guy who is in charge now thinks the Taurus name is too valuable not to use. Personally, I agree with the naming part, but the 500 is a dismal car to drive, its like piloting a drunk yak.
The 500/Taurus is the kind of car Ford fans buy but it won't win over anyone who owns a Toyota, Honda, GM, etc... It can't compete in its market and its a failure, but Ford is trying to float sales by attaching a successful name to it.
The 500/Taurus is the kind of car Ford fans buy but it won't win over anyone who owns a Toyota, Honda, GM, etc... It can't compete in its market and its a failure, but Ford is trying to float sales by attaching a successful name to it.
06-26-2007, 08:57 AM
#4
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I rather liked the 500 I had as a rental. I thought it was grossly underpowered, but if Ford gets smart and puts the newer 3.5L 6 cyl in it, along with the newer 6 speed transmission, I would assume it wouldn't be such a bad car. It is based on the volvo s80 chassis afterall.
06-26-2007, 09:08 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plano
Posts: 1,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Anrosphynx,Jun 26 2007, 10:57 AM
I rather liked the 500 I had as a rental. I thought it was grossly underpowered, but if Ford gets smart and puts the newer 3.5L 6 cyl in it, along with the newer 6 speed transmission, I would assume it wouldn't be such a bad car. It is based on the volvo s80 chassis afterall.
The only glaring faults I saw with the 500 I drove were styling and power. As stated, if the 3.5 L is made available, then it should be much more pleasant to drive. The car has a lot of room in it and a huge trunk.
It drives pretty much like the main-stream sedan it's supposed to be. Not really inspiring, but competent.
Ford made a big mistake in bringing out with the 3.0 L. It felt like it was working too hard in almost every situation. The 3.5 L should solve that problem.
Trending Topics
06-26-2007, 10:23 AM
#8
Originally Posted by Saki GT,Jun 26 2007, 10:27 AM
...but the 500 is a dismal car to drive, its like piloting a drunk yak.
Great line, by the way.
06-26-2007, 11:26 AM
#10
Which begs the question, why were you imagining a drunk yak? 