2010 Ford Taurus Road Trip: Chunky Is a Town in Mississippi

seriously... if those of you are interested in a Ford but think the Taurus is too big, Ford does offer a very good looking car named Fusion. Just all the flaming about how big the Taurus is has to be a tad ridiculously too much.

Agree with the posts about the Taurus not being too big. Not everyone can make their living and/or transport their family in a Prius or Fusion size car. And compared to a Impala, 300/Charger or Avalon, it's only incrementally bigger and provides more interior space than the Impala or Chrysler products with a much more efficient and modern drivetrain. Accords, Camry's, Maxima's... all have grown over the years as manufacturers find ways to incorporate more efficient drivetrains into American sized products. If they could only find a way to cut 500 lbs. out of the curb weight, Ford would really have a class -busting performer in the Taurus.

alman08

The new Taurus is the sedan equivilant of the Ford Excursion. Like the Excursion it is destined to be the butt of jokes as a symbol of excess that is out of step with the times.

Well, I didn't want to imply there was anything horribly *wrong* about that. They do need to set it apart from the mid-size Fusion, and, now that the RWD Crown Victoria replacement has been shelved, it could assume taxi/police duties when those fleets are retired.

Somehow these jokes didn't get made about the 300C AWD's 4280 lbs. curb weight. The 7" longer and 2" wider Taurus SHO only manages to be 80 lbs heavier, not to mention faster. The Taurus is also more fuel efficient.

My mother's side of the family is from Chunky... it is strange to see it referenced on a website. Actually, my grandparents in Chunky have a Taurus too.

firstwagon: An Excursion? Did you think before you typed that out?

How is a vehicle that more than likely will equal the fuel economy ratings of the outgoing Taurus a symbol of excess? Do you consider the 300, Avalon, Maxima and Impala symbols of excess?

gdmstrb

Of course. Just as the age of the giant SUV was coming to an end, Ford came out their biggest one of all and everyone made fun of it. The Taurus is the same.

Actually the Excursion when equipped with a diesel wasn't that bad on mileage. The problem is the excess size for no reason.

Ford's engine is very efficent and it gives the Taurus decent numbers (if it can match them in the real world).

Trouble is new cars should be doing better then the one they replace. With new requirements for better mileage right around the corner, Fords answer is to come with a car that's bigger and heavier then everyone elses. It rivals the land barges of the 70's.

When the price of gas goes back up over the next year, whether or not it gets the same mileage as other full size cars won't matter. People will look at this huge car and think they need something more efficent.

A while ago there was a number of posts referring to the 300C as a dinosaur. That may or may not be true but at least it was around for years before it became a dinosaur. The Taurus was born a dinosaur.

gdmstrb, I have to echo your comment. The Excursion was bigger than any previous SUV, even the Ticonderoga class Suburban.

The Taurus is large, but it's not Maybach size large.

See what happens when you send a girl to do a man's job..........
Nag nag nag nag nag all the way to the left coast.
Erin say's
It's to big
It hurts my back
I'm not going in that motel
Do they really go that deep?
Look!....You made me break a clip
How cute she is.........
Erin, may I suggest that next time you stay away from vehicles your'll never ever like, it's not true reporting, your personal opinon and who you are are dishonest.
I have to ask but what makes you the expert?
A college degree?
A couple of days behind the wheel?
Or a few years as a writer?

Either way you writers have it all wrong
Why write about a vehicle class you will never own? it's really not honest to your readers.
Maybe your way off target?
Why not have people that drive simular sized vehicles day in and day out because they enjoy the comfort size and freedom, let them write the article
Go find a full size Japanese/German vehicle owner and ask them to do the same road test and then get back to us
I have a mother and two sisters and they all had input here

Excursion??? Come on now, that's just a bit of a "stretch".

fniguy28--I think you're just jealous that Erin got the job rather than them calling you. It's called "a different point of view." Girls drive cars too.

Ms. Riches, you're doing an excellent job with your reporting.

Firstwagon: Sorry going on and on about an Excursion when we are talking about a large family car just doesn't make much sense whatsoever. Then to go on and compare this vehicle to the 'land barges from 70s'? Seriously, you come across as very misinformed and uneducated.

And whether a Taurus has the ability to match those numbers should be evident by now. I don't understand why you are second guessing what Ford has done here, especially when road tests for reg. Taurii are coming back averaging 23 MPG.

I think folks are still hell bent that this vehicle is supposed to compete where the Fusion is doing duty. This is no shape or form will be a large volume vehicle. If it's not efficient enough, then go buy a Fusion case closed end of story. The lack of fuel 'efficiency' isn't strictly a Taurus issue, it's a class issue.

gdmstrb

Sorry, I'll try to explain my point to you more slowly and clearly so you can understand.

What I'm saying is the Taurus is to the family sedan what the Excursion was to the large SUV. An oversized example of a dying breed.

I wasn't comparing the Taurus to the Excusion directly.

When I said it rivals the land barges of the 70's I was referring to size and weight (which it does, trust me I was there).

And since the Taurus just came out, I doubt you'll be able to get enough mileage figures to get an educated average yet.

I had thought of comparing it to the Edsel. It was a car that failed because it pushed excess styling one step too far in an era where more conservative designs were becoming popular just as the Taurus is a design that will fail because it pushed size one step too far just as smaller cars are becoming popular.

But you likely wouldn't understand that one either.

It's not about me numbnuts
Don't you find it strange how Honda/Nissan and Toyota never get the "different point of view"
Here'a an example of her own double talk.

So the 2010 Honda Insight LX is nearly as fuel-efficient as the 2010 Toyota Prius, at least in our unofficial real-world test. It also costs $5,100 less. And we like how it drives, so much so that it's the unanimous personal pick of everyone involved in this test.

And Erin's opinion and double talk

Sure, the 2010 Honda Insight might be cheaper and a little more fun, but for 95 percent of your motoring existence, the more practical 2010 Toyota Prius awaits, ready to serve your every commuting need. It also happens to be the more iconic of these two cars, and regardless of what anyone tells you, image matters when you're living with a hybrid

Give me a break... Although the Honda wins, Erin's opinion is that the Toyota is still better and image matters, you just can't help but see her bias towards Toyota and in her video Starbucks
That's why she can't be trusted.....

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=144926

hmmm some people are lost on the thought that all things have positives and negatives...
Must have skipped the pro's and con's list class in middle school. Could have been educated in a Detroit inner city middle school...

How did a blog with no caption spark such controversy?

Firstwagon: Save your personal attacks and stick to the facts, it's lame.

I understood your point from the get go, and it as I mentioned b4 it makes no sense. The Excursion was designed as a heavy duty vehicle from the get go exempt from CAFE fuel economy ratings. A Suburban 1500 was not.

So what you've done here is compare the excess of a heavy duty vehicle because it was larger, to that of the Taurus which is only slightly larger yet provides the fuel economy of vehicles smaller and lighter? See where you fail?

On top of that you question the fuel economy ratings when C&D documented 23 MPG on average. If all publications are reporting that the Taurus will duplicate the mileage of the 08 and 09 MY, what's so hard to understand?

I also guess that Hyundai and Nissan are pretty backwards as well, because they've just poured a ton of money into developing large vehicles....

And an Edsel? LOL

firstwagon, you're better than this:

"Sorry, I'll try to explain my point to you more slowly and clearly so you can understand."

Insults?

"And since the Taurus just came out, I doubt you'll be able to get enough mileage figures to get an educated average yet."

It shares a lot with the 2009 Taurus, like the drivetrain. Also, I still trust EPA ratings more than anything that any magazine (or web site) puts out.

"Taurus is a design that will fail because it pushed size one step too far just as smaller cars are becoming popular."

Yes, but SUVs are becoming unpopular. People will give up their 14mpg SUV and get a 23mpg Taurus. They can even use the Cash For Clunkers BS to get a good deal on it.

"But you likely wouldn't understand that one either."

Insults again?

The key is, will people buy this? If you can get them to test drive it, I think they will.

brn

After reading gdmstrb comment... "Seriously, you come across as very misinformed and uneducated." I was less likely to be polite.

It's OK for gdmstrb to use insults but not for me to respond in a simular manner? Any reason for that?

It's anyones guess as to whether or not it will sell well. I don't think it will just as the Five hundred before it failed.

"Firstwagon: Save your personal attacks and stick to the facts, it's lame."

Compared to your remark... "Seriously, you come across as very misinformed and uneducated"...I was just being mildly condescending.

I was just trying to explain why I think the Taurus will fail. History will show who's right.

Everyone discussion of the Accord, 300C and Mazda6 always include talk of them being too big and heavy. So Fords answer was to make a car that's even bigger and heavier. All the reviews I read obout the old Taurus (500) said it was too big and heavy but Ford decided to make it bigger.

See where your argument fails now?

It's too big and is destined to be the butt of jokes. That's just the way it is. The era of the giant sedan is nearing an end again whether you like it or not.

like I have been saying about this new Taurus... "it looks promising on paper, we shall see in a couple of years..."

Firstwagon, I can appreciate your dislike on these full size sedans. But like I stated, in my opinion, for those who don't know the full size Taurus and are still interested in Ford products, they do offer a very nice looking car named the Fusion. Are the Accord, 300C and Mazda6 really that heavy and big? Well, maybe so but I also see many of them on the road.

fw, I didn't say it was OK for anyone. I just said you're better than that. I don't know if gdmstrb is better than that or not.

Firstwagon: My apologizes if it came across as condescending, and I can see how it was misinterpreted. When I mentioned uneducated and misinformed, I was referring to the facts associated with this vehicle (not in general). Again my bad.

The Taurus is no longer designated as Ford's mainstream volume sedan, that's what the Fusion is for. Mazda and Honda lack a true fullsize sedan, hence the growth there. Ford on the other hand has the Focus-Fusion-Taurus (compact-midsize-large) vs. Honda's and Mazda's (compact-midsize/large).

I just don't understand how this car is being deemed a failure due to size alone. If it were at the bottom of the barrel in terms of fuel economy I would see your point, but it's not.

"When I said it rivals the land barges of the 70's I was referring to size and weight (which it does, trust me I was there)."--firstwagon

Emphatically NOT correct.

2010 Taurus (from Edmunds):
Overall length: 202.9
Overall width: 76.2
Curb weight: ~4300 lbs

0-60: 7 sec
EPA mileage: 18/28

1975 LTD (from Consumer Guide Magazine):
Overall length: 223.9
Overall width: 79.5
Curb weight: 4658 lbs
Engine: 400 cubic inch V8
O-60: 13.0 sec
EPA mileage: 10/14 (actual window sticker--God knows what it would adjust to using today's deflationary system)
Observed fuel economy: 9.5 mpg

Q.E.D.

Something about Chunky, Mississippi really brings out the fight in people. The firstwagon/gdmstrb argument is understandable, but I must say, the attacks on Ms. Riches opinions and credibility really were surprising, unfounded, and unnecessary.

I often wonder if others realize how tactless they can be.

And just for the record, I happen to be enjoying the Taurus road-trip blog very much. Keep up the good work. <3

Too bad you are going through on I-10 or you could see signs for Fairy, TX and Farwell, TX.

Canadia, how can Erin justify her complaint about the size and weight of the 2010 Ford Taurus when
she does'nt tell readers the complete truth.
Who would you believe, The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety or Erin's 3 day trip to the west coast?

New crash tests demonstrate the influence of vehicle size and weight on safety in crashes; results are relevant to fuel economy policies

ARLINGTON, VA — Three front-to-front crash tests, each involving a microcar or minicar into a midsize model from the same manufacturer, show how extra vehicle size and weight enhance occupant protection in collisions. These Insurance Institute for Highway Safety tests are about the physics of car crashes, which dictate that very small cars generally can't protect people in crashes as well as bigger, heavier models.

And where did I find this information?http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/Manufacturers/Toyota/

Wait, why are we talking about the relationship between vehicle weight and crash test ratings?

I wasn't aware that a contrary argument had been made.

I'm not taking any sides here, just that to me it seems as though you are taking offense to Ms. Riches finding fault with the Taurus, for her own personal reasons. Understand that with most forms of journalism, ultimately the article is just the opinion of its writer, and you're perfectly entitled to disagree with it. The Edmunds staff is not the EPA or the IIHS - don't treat them as if their observations are cold hard facts, and you won't have a problem.

Also, for all the minor flaws she has found, she also seems to praise the car very highly for its road manners and driving characteristics, which are arguably more important features than relatively minor things such as the gauge cluster and location of the dead-pedal, etc.

Canadia.......You ask
"Why are we talking about the relationship between vehicle weight and crash test ratings?

It might have been helpful if Erin had informed the readers(about 50 of them)that Ford had or is about to discontinue the full size Crown Victoria as well as the Mercury Grand Marquis/Lincoln Town Car, and that the 2010 Ford Taurus would/could be a very good, if not great replacement

Anyone wanting a full size vehicle and are safty conscious Ford may have answered they're hopes, needs, and desires with the 2010 Ford Taurus.
BTW, did Erin mention the Volvo connection with the Ford Taurus?
How about if the Taurus has a full or mini size spare tire?
Or that the Taurus is made in Chicago by American workers, would'nt you agree it makes sense to keep your well earned dollars here in America?
Or that elderly folk may not fret due to the size and weight which by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study makes the Taurus a much safer vehicle to be in, in the event of an accident compared to let's say a Honda Accord EX with a V6 for $30 large
You might also agree that if anyones parents were hit by a drunk driver or involved in a multi vehicle accident they'd be praying that they were in a vehicle like the 2010 Ford Taurus, I could go on and on but I think you get the point.

Finally, I'd like to address the stiff footbrake workout she nagged about.
With all that soda she's been guzzling per the photographs, and all that bbq she's been pounding (not to mention the cashew nuts) and writting about it would'nt surprise me if she did'nt need a workout or two, plus with so much talk about food and drink, for a second I thought I was reading Home and Gardening

If your still interested
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/11/detroit-2009-ford-reveals-2010-taurus-party-like-its-1986/

I don't work for or own a Ford but I just might buy a 2010 Ford Taurus