IL Track Tested: 2010 Ford Taurus SHO vs. Pontiac G8 GT

"optional performance package"???

What the heck is an "optional performance package" on a SHO?
You tested a non-performance SHO??? What the heck is that?

Oh the Taurus is riding on all-season, and the G8 has summer tires...

UH, smaller, lighter, more powerful, rwd? Props to the Taurus for keeping up with it, but there is just no comparison here. I'll take the G8 and its BMW looks and handling (sort of) any day.

Yeah, the G8 is faster, cheaper, and has better performance. BUT, which gives better fuel economy?

Bueller?

your G8 running a little slower these days or what?

Did you read the full article? The SHO gets 17/25 supposedly, the G8 GT gets 15/24. Congratulations Ford!

Good for the G8... but 5.8 and 13.95 seems a little slow to me! Put some premium in it.

Michelin Primacy MXV4

OH NO NO NO NO NO NO

Re-do with the Optional Performance package

Actually, $45K *is* fully optioned. The test car did not have the performance pack, but that is not available with some of the luxury lard--the most expensive you can get with it is $43,815, and even that has options that aren't available on the G8, so if you're going to argue about price, it would be more fair to equip them at comparable levels. The SHO has every high-tech device Ford can think of, and I question whether many people would actually buy all of them.

The G8 is definitely a performance bargain, as it should be with a big OHV V8 that has at best 2/3 the SHO's specific output. Considering that Toyota asks $40K for a loaded Avalon, the SHO doesn't look so bad, considering its mission.

This is not an SHO. There's no edge. It's an overpowered, and slightly harder version of the normal top-tier Taurus. It shouldn't even exist in this form; why bother with the MKS when the Taurus is a $45K luxo-barge? For a different grille?

And it's enormous. Why, oh why must these vehicles be so large and heavy? The G8 is almost as guilty, at near 4000 lbs and 196 inches. It's almost like there's an instruction manual for American car executives that requires all powerful engines to be surrounded by two tons of vehicle. BMW makes oodles on money on the 1-series, and Porsche has been gouging customers for years on the most modest sorts of weight reduction. Why must Ford attempt to create value the traditional way ("more!") when a change in emphasis would give them so much more credibility?

Hmmm, I think I'd take a G37 sedan or a Genesis instead.

@ cx7lover: hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

That's exactly what I was thinking. Why would anyone ever put Michelin Energys on a performance car? I am impressed with the acceleration tho. It might be a bit under-rated.

When someone writes "why oh why must a car be so heavy" I picture someone crying in a corner and not seeing the sun for long periods. Cars, Japanese, American and German are heavier today because they're crammed with more stuff that make them heavier. If Hyundai makes a light vehicle, it's because they cobble them together with monkey snot and tin shards.

I paid $63k for an Audi that is .1 second slower than this car. I love my Audi, but the SHO is a car that I must test drive. The first and 2nd generation SHOs were the ultimate yuppiemobiles that really didn't measure up to the BMW M series. But people seem to have reinvented the history of a failed car. BUT, the reality is that no other car has peaked my interest as this new SHO has. And I'm going to give it serious consideration. Not because it's $20k cheaper than my nearest alternative, but because it seems that it could be really good in spite of price.

@Hondacura4: What are you talking about? More features, and more luxury (whatever that means)? The TL lacks: adaptive cruise control, pre-collision system, blind spot/cross traffic detection, no Sirius Travel link, cooled seats, rear heated seats and multi adjustable seats.

Nevermind the fact that the TL Type-S is a full second slower to 60.

Anyone with 45k to spend on a car will probably buy a SUV or choose any one of the German mid-size. Pontiac is dead, and people should realize that. G8 may be back as a Chevy or Buick, but the final decision has to pass through government appointed environmentalists.

iancar: Edmunds had an article yesterday that confirms the G8 will be officially dead. Fritz said it will not live on as a rebadged car in the US market.

Everything about the new SHO was starting to sound pretty good except 2 things:

1) Electric Power Steering? Are you serious, Ford?!?!?! That alone turns me away!

2) The price!

For that kind of money, give me a CTS 3.6 DI. I'll sacrifice a little room, 7/10 of a second 0-60, and the potential of better fuel economy (Edmunds achieved 32 MPG). The CTS is faster through the slalom (67 MPH), better lateral grip (.85g) and better brakes (109' 60-0).

My previous comment: I meant the CTS has the potential of better fuel economy...

In all seriousness, those really aren't bad number from a car wearing all seasons and weighing 2 tons. I think people underestimate how big of a difference tires make. Anyone try launching a 400 rwhp Cobra with Goodyears? Try it with a set of Nitto's and tell me you don't legitimately feel a difference. I think with the optional track pack and some actual performance tires on those 20's and 0-60 should fall around 5.2 to 5.4 and I GUARANTEE it will break into the 13's and hit the 100 mph mark. Braking distance would definitely come down too.

My jaw literally dropped when I read the as tested price of the SHO. I can see 35k, but 45k+??? Long list of sedans I'm buying for 45k before this Ford (335i, G37, TL, G8, IS350, CTS 3.6, Benz C, etc). And I'm truly hoping the american sedan makes a comeback. Not there yet but it is progress I guess.

I think it's a riot that people want to complain about price and compare this to an American car. Finally, we're back to Ford vs Chevy (Pontiac). Woo Hoo!!!

This cars target competition is the BMW 353xi, which starts at $53.4K and can be optioned to $60K. The Ford SHO starts at $38K and can be optioned to about $46K. Will it best the BMW? Maybe. Maybe not. It's $14K less.

I'm sure when Edmunds gets their hands on one with the performance pack, they'll retest.

Oh yea. Kudos to the G8. For what it is, it's a great car.

"If I'm seeking a FWD based AWD car I could easily get a LOADED TL SH-awd 6MT with more features, much more luxury, better handling and a higher level of ugliness for less money."

No this car is fully loaded. The TL lacks 20" wheels, SYNC, auto cruise control, heated rear seats, 20 cu ft trunk, fold down rear seats, cooled seats, etc. The Taurus whips the TL in equipment levels and a loaded TL-AWD is only $2k cheaper than this much larger sedan.

The redline on the G8 is NOT 6900rpm and the Taurus redlines at 6250 according to MT. No version of the duratec 3.5L redlines at 6700. Why are their mistakes EVERY time they post these comparisons?

Probably for the same reason people post 'their' rather than 'there'.

Good for Ford. I like it. I wonder how well it well though.

The fact that many people are arguing how much better the SHO is than the TL SH-AWD shows how far Acura has fallen off their game.

Fuhteng:

I'm not paid to post info for IL and I most certainly do not review and edit every comment before I post. When you are a respected publication you should edit your data. I assure you if I was paid to update content here I would check it before offering it to the public.

brn:

You are exactly right, all these people care about is the badge. They are like "you can get a BMW for that price!". Who gives a damn. You can get a stripper 530i for $45k or a sligtly optioned 335i that is slightly larger than a Civic. You cannot get a spacious, AWD European sedan with over 300hp and a full slate of options for anywhere near $45k. This car has almost as much equipment as a loaded 5 series costing $15k more. A loaded FWD ES350 with less content costs $44k- is that a better deal?

Fuhteng-NICE. I'm an English teacher and the misuse of their, there, and they're bothers the hell out of me.

lexus:

I wouldn't go that far. I would say that the SHO is impressive. The TL is an advanced vehicle, its just ugly and pricey compared to its superior predecessor. The TL AWD is the kind of car Acura needed but its unsightly. The Taurus isn't the best looking car on the road but it looks better than the TL and its faster as well. The fastest 0-60 time I've seen for the TL is 5.8 secs but that has not been duplicated in other tests. In a recent C&D test it was clocked at 6.5 secs, slower than the lighter FWD model.

1487, I was teasing. You're right of course, I don't like the editing errors IL has. Consider them little bonuses to keep us on our toes when we read.

I don't have $45k to spend a car, but if I did, I'm afraid I WOULD care about the badge. I even had a hard time coming around to the fact that Pontiac had a car I would be interested in.

And I just realized I screwed up my previous post: I wonder how well it will SELL though.

I dont get the obsession with dismissing cars based on badges. A loaded F150 is well over $40k- possibly close to $50k and people think $45k is too much for this advanced sedan with the space of an S class. This car is overpriced but a 335i at $41k to start isn't? I dont enjoy stripper luxury but I do realize there are many Americans would would rather be in a BMW with leatherette and manual AC than have a loaded American branded vehicle with better performance. In addition, the car starts at $38k which is similar in price to the 2010 Lacrosse CXS comparably equipped or the Avalon Limited. Would people rather have a $38k Avalon with an 80s Buick type suspension and 17" wheels? That car isn't overpriced?

The SHO shouldn't have an optional performance package. The SHO should be the ultimate performance package, standard. Stupid on Ford's part.

Oh yeah, and long live the pushrod!! Once again, it proves itself at making efficient power, even against the latest technology. The SHO's small (1 MPG) fuel economy improvement is mostly due to the direct injection. Put direct injection on the pushrod V-8, and it will get better fuel economy, and even more power, than the SHO.

The BMW 335 is not the primary competition for the SHO. Have you seen the SHO in person? The car is HUGE by comparison to a 3-series. It almost seems like twice the size. OK, I'm exaggerating, but the SHO is MUCH bigger. The SHO may even be larger than a 5-series.

"You are exactly right, all these people care about is the badge. They are like "you can get a BMW for that price!". Who gives a damn. You can get a stripper 530i for $45k or a sligtly optioned 335i that is slightly larger than a Civic. You cannot get a spacious, AWD European sedan with over 300hp and a full slate of options for anywhere near $45k. This car has almost as much equipment as a loaded 5 series costing $15k more. A loaded FWD ES350 with less content costs $44k- is that a better deal?"

The E60 BMW 530i ended after MY2007.

I bought a 2009 G8 GT last year.
Nothing I have seen or read
[ here or elsewhere ]
about this new SHO suggests to me
that I'd have chosen this car
over mine - if it had been available.....
- Ray
Happy G8 GT driver...

Talk about a lopsided comparison. The love Edmunds has for the G8 is admirable and no doubt there are many people who would like it to live on, but give the Ford a chance. Testing it with the non-performance package (mediocre Michelin ALL Season tires and undefeatale DSC!) and making claims that it's subpar is unfair and bias. I'll choose to ignore this ridiculous comparison until Edmunds actually gets a SHO optioned equal to the G8. Until then just accept the demise of the G8. Life is unfair and good things die. Get over it.

Next the SHO wins by default as there will be no pontiac to go against.

"I don't get the obsession with dismissing cars based on badges."

1487, I don't either. However, I think the sticker shock comes from the perception of the Taurus name not this actual car as its clearly changed its initial direction in terms of overall mission. To add to that the negative perception more than likely stems from the fact that its no longer affordable while steering away from the original SHO and mainstream Taurus theme.In other words people don't associate the Taurus name with this kind of price tag regardless of features or performance level.

Would you (1487) buy this car over the G8? Id easily take the G8 GT/GXP or even the Chrysler 300C/SRT8. Sure the Taurus offers a plethora of features those cars don't but that doesn't make up for its performance shortcomings.

Not only Michelin Primacy MXV4 is a all season tires but it is for comfort rider not sport in any ways!! It is not a fair comparison to Potenza RE050A.
Why on earth would Ford choose this tires on the 'performance' model? Performance package or not a SHO is suppose to be a sport sedan! At least put a 'sportier' all season!

So what if SHO with performance package win the G8 GT? It's $40k+!!!!! That's over $10k different! And I am highly doubt it will win the G8 GTP.

Sorry i meant G8 GXP not GTP

@ne1butu2:

""why oh why must a car be so heavy" I picture someone crying in a corner and not seeing the sun for long periods. Cars, Japanese, American and German are heavier today because they're crammed with more stuff that make them heavier."

Don't leave out words. The car is 4400 lbs for two reasons: (1) it's enormous; (2) Ford didn't put any engineering effort into weight reduction. This SHO is a 100 lbs heavier than a 7-series and 700 lbs over a 5-series. Those cars have the same safety equipment and electronic gadgets, and 7's engine has two additional cylinders.

"The first and 2nd generation SHOs were the ultimate yuppiemobiles that really didn't measure up to the BMW M series."

The original SHOs were entertaining. This car could be replaced with any of a dozen similar boulevard cruisers. It's not particularly fast, sharp, or interesting. If there's no spice, you might as well buy a V6 Accord.

@1487:

"You cannot get a spacious, AWD European sedan with over 300hp"

Yes, but why is that the only option? What if I want an American 3-series? I don't put 6-foot adults in my back seats. I don't have have nine kids. My trunk is empty, save for a bottle of washer fluid. I don't need the space, but I do need to be able to park in areas this car wouldn't fit with a crate of Crisco. Where are the Euro-style, mid-sized, American performance cars? It's like they think people won't notice if they add another foot to the ridiculously long rear overhang.

Good showing for the old PONCHO G-8GT.

A suggestion for Ford: Drop the turbo 3.5 on the Fusion AWD and ask $ 35,000.

For the Taurus S.H.O just drop in the Yamaha V-8 again and Turbo or Supercharge that baby and ask the $ 45,000 grand you want to charge.

Have a good day!

I am thinking about this four door sporty sedan issue; it seems the Taurus is missing the mark (too heavy, too expensive), the G8 is now a failed brand (so buy a used one in a few months for next to nothing). Acura is always a good choice except for the disappointing, dare I say, exasperating styling? What is left? BMW/Mercedes are stratospherically priced. Toyota: boring. Cadillac CTS: fussy looking. Chrysler: they are still not making any at the factory. May I suggest the new Maxima? A much lighter car with a sporty interior with all the tech you might want. A nearly 300 horsepower engine with a sweet exhaust note of a 370Z with a highly entertaining multi-mode CVT transmission. Performance in some magazines has it on par with the G8 and the Taurus SHO (Edmunds shows it slightly slower). With the sport suspension, tech package and summer tires, well under 40k, a large price advantage over the Infiniti G37S, which is narrower, styled like a jelly bean and which has a teeth-rattling ride (my tester had rattles aplenty).

"I don't get the obsession with dismissing cars based on badges."

Know what comes with a badge? Resale value. You can say the SHO is like a European luxury sport sedan for $10,000 less, but you'll lose most (or all) that money on resale. A 535i might actually be cheaper to own for 5 years.

"The E60 BMW 530i ended after MY2007"

Meant 535i which starts at $44k or so.

"Would you (1487) buy this car over the G8? Id easily take the G8 GT/GXP or even the Chrysler 300C/SRT8. Sure the Taurus offers a plethora of features those cars don't but that doesn't make up for its performance shortcomings. "

Can you explain the shortcomings relative to the G8 GT? The G8 is better looking and cheaper, but thats about it. The performance of the two cars is listed above and the G8 isn't much better. If you look at tests from MT and C&D the two cars are almost dead even. I like the G8 but its underequipped.

Tall driver:

The G8 GT is about $5k cheaper (base price) than the SHO, not over $10k as you state. A loaded G8 is in the $36k range but it lacks at least a dozen features found on the SHO.

Compliance:

Depreciation is impossible to forecase accurately and its not an out of pocket expense. A comparable equipped BMW will lose more value than this car over 4 years based on higher MSRP alone. If Ford doesn't over produce the car resale value should be fine. If gas is high in five years the resale value of ALL performance sedans is going to take a hit- that includes BMWs.

alex:

First of all the 535i is around 3700-3800lbs so its not 700 lbs lighter. Even if it was the 5 is smaller in EVERY single dimension and cannot compete with the Taurus in terms of space.

The CTS is a midsize performance sedan that goes head to head with 5 series. Americans generally dont want compact RWD cars. The 3 series sells well considering its price but overall the segment is small. If you are against trunk space, rear seat space and elbow room perhaps you should stick to the 3 series. The SHO is obviously not a 3 series competitor. IN realtiy, every car that is a 3 series competitor except the IS and C class is larger than the 3 series. If you dont care about space the Mustang and Camaro provide great performance for decent money.

"forecase" -should have said forecast. Oh yes, I would love for a detailed explanation about how one can save money buy buying a $55k BMW vs a $45k Ford. Please include financing costs in that discussion.

HondaAcura:

Someone at MT actually had the common sense to remember this thing called INFLATION. The old SHO wasn't that affordable for its day. The new car is only a a few hundred bucks more than the 1989 car if you account for inflation. Sorry, but its not less affordable than the old car. If we went back to 1990 people would laugh at the idea of a Camry costing $32k. Everything is much different today in absolute dollar terms.

"This SHO is a 100 lbs heavier than a 7-series and 700 lbs over a 5-series. Those cars have the same safety equipment and electronic gadgets, and 7's engine has two additional cylinders. "

thats interesting because Edmunds listed the 750il as weighing 4640lbs and its only a few inches longer than the Taurus and has a 14 cu ft trunk. The shorter 750i weighs 4560lbs in spite of being smaller. Speaking of the 750, its not faster than the Taurus in spite of having 400hp.

SHO Curb Weight (lb): 4,404

2009 535 Curb Weight (lbs): 3660 (source: KBB)

4404-3660 = 744

SHO is nearly 750lbs heaier then 535.

"The CTS is a midsize performance sedan that goes head to head with 5 series."

I like the CTS, but the CTS has neither power nor understated appearance. It's blingtastic. And it's oversized and unavailable as a coupe. And you pay for the Cadillac badge and the standard electronic toys, neither of which is of great interest in a performance car.

I'm not about to quibble over a hundred pounds here and there. The point is that the "SHO" is an extremely large vehicle, and there are no modestly-sized American alternatives.

"the 5 is smaller in EVERY single dimension and cannot compete with the Taurus in terms of space."

Yes, and thank the deities for that. Why should it compete on space? That isn't competition, it's losing. It's like pointing out you can tow more with a pickup than a Porsche; you're picking an irrelevant, negative metric.

"Americans generally dont want compact RWD cars."

You speak for all Americans, do you? The 3-series/C/A4 category sees something like 300K sales per year, and that's despite upper-tier pricing. We won't even talk about the 100K+ Mustangs Ford sells every year. The market is there; the American makes just haven't bothered to deliver.

You cannot compare as tested curb weight to manufacturers weight. What about the driver? BTW, according to edmunds the 535xi (which is the better comparison) weighs 3902lbs vs 4460 for the SHO. That isnt 700lbs. In addition, the 535xi starts at $53k. I'm not sure why someone was comparing a RWD BMW to an AWD Taurus but I should have noted that its a best to compare AWD versions the first time.

Either way the SHO weighs less than the 7 series contrary to what was said earlier.

I would never in a million years allow myself to spend $45k on a Taurus. I have no doubt it's a good car, but I don't fully understand why Ford chose to make the Taurus bigger/heavier/more up-market at this particular point in time. I understand that cars often need to become heavier from one generation to the next due to ever-demanding safety regulations, but this thing is a yacht.

I sense an impending identity crisis with the new Taurus. Nobody but AARP members purchased the previous generation Ford 500/Taurus, and I suspect it will be the same story with this one. And since so many oldies will be puttering around in base Tauruses on their way to IHOP, I bet very few younger (in relative terms) enthusiast-minded drivers will opt for the SHO variant. But then again, the Baby Boomers are getting up there, and they remember how much fun torque can be. Maybe there is a market for a $45k SHO after all...

http://www.answers.com/topic/curb-weight

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curb_weight

Note that the weight of driver/passengers are not included.

They should have called this the Crown Victoria and slotted in a less expensive, mid-sized vehicle as the Taurus.

Some tested weights include driver in auto publications- I'm not talking about manufacturer stats. If that is empty weight the SHO isnt 700lbs more than the 535xi anyway. Even if it was, the performance doesn't suffer and the 5 series is much smaller so it should be lighter.

zegerman:

This is the perfect time to launch a large car. Upcoming fuel efficiency standards and consumer preferences mean that cars are going to increase in popularity. Not everyone who is leaving an SUV is going to jump into a Fit or Prius. The base Taurus gets 18/28 which is better than any midsize crossover or BOF SUV. In addition, the large car segment is all but being abandoned by GM so Ford can pick up sales from current Buick/Pontiac owners as well as LX car owners. To suggest no one wants size or space when SUVs and trucks are close to 50% of the market makes little sense. Obviously a lot of Americans want space and practicality.

alex:

The CTS has more power in its DI engine that the 535i. What do you mean it lacks power? Now you are changing your criteria because you were wrong. You said there are no midsize American performance cars. I named three, one of which is the CTS which you say doesnt count because you dont like the styling. BTW, the coupe comes out next year.

"You speak for all Americans, do you? The 3-series/C/A4 category sees something like 300K sales per year, and that's despite upper-tier pricing. We won't even talk about the 100K+ Mustangs Ford sells every year. The market is there; the American makes just haven't bothered to deliver. "

A4 isnt RWD. The Camry sells over 400k units ALONE. I didnt say no one wants compact RWD sedans, I said that is not a huge segment of the US market. And its not.

@ 1487

"To suggest no one wants size or space when SUVs and trucks are close to 50% of the market makes little sense."

Straw man, how I miss thee. No one suggested that. Your argument, backed by nothing in particular, was that Americans don't want compact RWD cars. Existing sales of compact RWD cars say otherwise. My question is why I have to buy foreign to have one. Either they believe Americans will always prefer the larger car, or they're simply incapable of producing a desirable product. I'm betting on the first; Holden's Coupe 60, minus about 6 inches of wheelbase, would be class-defining.

There are appeals to SUV and trucks beyond mere size; seat height, interior configuration, and perceived safety surely play a role. Size is just a proxy, and a poor one, as I'm sure you've noticed the mass exodus to smaller and more practical car platforms that offer many of the same benefits.

@ 1487

"The CTS has more power in its DI engine that the 535i."

The CTS is a 6.5 second car, about on par with a V6 Camry. The 3.6L DI doesn't approach the BMW 3.0L in either power or torque, which is why the 5-series is about a second faster than the Cadillac to 60.

"I didn't say no one wants compact RWD sedans, I said that is not a huge segment of the US market"

So what? A car doesn't need to sell 400K units to be worth producing. GM only sells around 25K Corvettes. I don't even think the Cobalt is the in the 400K range.

I had a 335i last year, and was thinking of a G8 to replace it, and my best friend did get a G8 GXP. I ended up getting a X5Diesel in the interim, pass it on to the wife, and get one of the new cars coming out over the next year.

The SHO is fairly high on my list, as I want a 335xi, except in a full grown American size. The 335 is fast, really fast. Both my friend and I think that it's a toss up between it and the GXP, and I know its faster than my E46 M3. The SHO fits the bill, except for the badge, and the price tag. I was thinking that it would come in right at $40k loaded, and the universal 5% discount, but $46 seems a bit steep.

The one car that really trumps it is the Genesis, no it doesn't have AWD, but it really is fantastic, the V6 is excellent, and the V8 is pretty good too, on top of all that, it would actually be cheaper than the SHO.

I love the Sync/Nav system in the Ford's, but and it's most certainly roomy, having been in a MKS, but I don't know if anything for the price trumps the Genesis. The CTS is great, but its no bargain, the CTS-V is actually a better deal than a loaded CTS, value for money. And that is all GM has, or Chrysler for that matter.

Us even talking about a Taurus in the same breath as Acura, MB, BMW, and oddly a Genesis, shows how much better Ford is doing.

The G8 is a fantastic bargain, especially in GT trim, but oh if they could have just added some of the electronic doodads that everyone wants, Nav specifically, and of course not killed it, it was a mid cycle refresh away from near perfection.

Some people actually buy a car based on size and space. Shocking! The vast majority of people buy a car based on size and price rather than which wheels drive the car. Most people that are choosing what wheels drive the car choose AWD. People in the market for the Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger are mostly not in the market for a sedan.

You guys are acting like there are alot of choices for performance vehicles in this price range and size. You pretty much get 2 competitors.

Chrysler 300C or 300C SRT8
Pontiac G8 GT or GXP

Anything else is vastly more expensive. The Taurus is bigger than a BMW 7-series and cheaper than a 335i. It's over a foot longer than a 5-series.

Still I agree that the Taurus need Jenny Craig. I also agree that an Ecoboosted Fusion would be a much bigger market.

miniguyverona,

The Genesis is a great car in every way except handling. It's pretty spongy and lacks alot of feel.

stingray454: "The SHO's small (1 MPG) fuel economy improvement is mostly due to the direct injection."

I don't want to take away from the Pontiac engine. You're right about it. It's powerful. I loved driving it. It gets decent fuel economy.

However, the SHO's managing a 1mpg improvement with a heavier car and spinning all four wheels. The 3.5 deserves a little more credit than you give it.

dougtheeng: "2009 535 Curb Weight (lbs): 3660 (source: KBB)"

KBB says 3902lbs for the 535xi. It doesn't list curb weight for the SHO.

It does appear the SHO is heavier, but the value is closer to 500lbs. It's a bigger car.

fuhteng: "I don't have $45k to spend a car, but if I did, I'm afraid I WOULD care about the badge."

That only makes sense for two reasons.

1. Reputation for quality. Ford does just fine there.

2. Status symbol (more common). Well, I don't know what Ford could do to win you over then. Any suggestions?

alex:

First of all the CTS is a RWD sports sedan. You initially said there werent any. Then you said the CTS doesnt count because you dont like the styling and its underpowered. The CTS with a manual was clocked at 5.8secs by C&D. Not as fast as the twin turbo 535, but fast enough for most people. US manufacturers have never specialized in pricey compacts because generally Americans associate size with price. In Europe a $30k FWD compact isnt unusual, in the US such a car would be a slow seller. There are numerous examples of small/midsize cars with decent performance but they are not all RWD.

3 series is successul for a luxury car, its not a top seller overall. Also, GM sells more than 25k vettes in the average year and even if they didnt the car is so expensive that GM can justify its relatively low volume.

I said size and practicality. SUVs and crossovers have essentially replaced the large American car. My point was there may be a renewed interest in large cars because they are more efficient than all but the smallest SUVs. Ride height is something a car can't duplicate but the Taurus has plenty of size and weight which should appeal to those who are concerned about crash safety. If you dont like cars larger than the 1 series that is on you. Dont sit here and tell me that there is little demand for cars with decent space and cargo capacity. Compact RWD are a small part of the market and they always will be. European manufacturers sell the same models all over the world and except for Audi they are largely RWD. American automakers are not going to develop new RWD small car platforms to get a few thousand sales a year.

Alex:

one other thing, you cant prove a car in underpowered by comparing it to another car that is reasonably fast. The V6 camry has been clocked as low at 6secs to 60 which is faster than many luxury cars (A4 and TL come to mind) so the fact that the CTS' acceleration is in the same ballpark is irrelevant. The 330i with an auto was good for a 6.5 sec time which is about the same as most V6 family sedans on the market today. Does that make the 330i slow?

mini:

Genesis is a bargain for sure, but its not much cheaper with options. A loaded V6 is close to $40k. The SHO is faster than the V6 and V8 Genesis models, has AWD, more trunk space and possibly more features. I would think its reasonable to expect a few grand off the MSRP of the SHO in this economy. I do think the Genesis looks better on the outside. The inside is a toss up to me.

If you dont care about the FWD the Lacrosse CXS is an option. Its loaded at about $40k and has 19" wheels, HIDs, 40GB hard drive, HUD, ventilated seats, rear sunshade, etc.

Can you guys please make a summary table so it is easier to compare the numbers?

@ 1487

"First of all the CTS is a RWD sports sedan. You initially said there werent any."

Stop putting words into my mouth. Here's where I started: "Where are the Euro-style, mid-sized, American performance cars?"

As I've already said, the CTS isn't much of a performance car. I wouldn't even call it mid-sized, it's larger than the 5-series. The whole point of an American BMW is that it would offer similar performance and handling for less money. If I was willing to spend $50K on a BMW-alike, I'd just buy a BMW.

"Dont sit here and tell me that there is little demand for cars with decent space and cargo capacity."

You're arguing with yourself. Another straw man.

"generally Americans associate size with price."

If you say so. I won't speculate to what 300 million disparate people generally believe. I'd rather look at the sales figures of existing compact performance cars.

"Compact RWD are a small part of the market and they always will be."

Now there's forward thinking. Pretty typical of the American makes, which may well explain GM's current predicament. I'm glad you weren't in charge in of the Genesis Coupe, Hyundai seems to think otherwise. Perhaps the problem, insofar as there is one, is that the only compact RWD vehicles are luxury cars?

"the fact that the CTS' acceleration is in the same ballpark [as a Camry] is irrelevant"

Why? Because you say so? The A4 and TL are slow too, and so is the automatic 330i. The bar was raised by the 335i in 2007, not to mention the Pontiac above. The CTS DI isn't in the same league.

1487,

If the Genesis has more features than a MKS then how can the Taurus have more features. The Genesis can hit 60 in 5.5sec .3 sec slower than this PERFORMANCE oriented car. It has already been confirmed that the Genesis is going to get a 5.0L V8 pushing out more than 400hp with an 8-speed auto so I would reserve judgment until it comes out.

GM makes the best sport sedans and cars when compared to its American competition end of story.

Sure, these cars run about even, and there are certainly some aftermarket speed parts out there for the Pontiac, but the Performance Ford Nuts of the world WILL inevitably start cranking up the boost and tweeking their ecms, and well, there will be blood in the streets, and glorious clouds of tire rubber, a ventilated blocks, and big sh't-eatin' grins all around. I can't wait for the Ecoboost to go mainstream. Seriously.

Bottom line w/ the SHO: the performance is there and the features are there, IMO it's the styling what makes or breaks this car. I reserve judgement for now, until i see it in person.

BTW, the smartest comment I read today was the suggestion to put this engine in the AWD Fusion Sport. WTH, put it in both cars, and the Mustang too - where's it written the SHO is the only Ford car allowed to have a 3.5 ecoboost?

I find it odd that people find a $45,000 Ford with seemingly excellent build quality and technology up the wazoo (Sync for one) is an odd animal when BMW charges double that for a 7 series with a iDrive system that pales to the more intuitive and usable design of Sync. Personally I would buy the Ford since it will undoubtedly have better reliability and lower repair costs. Sure it isn't German but you know EVERYONE has a BMW now. Not everyone will have the SHO. Plus it has AWD! Just include the performance package standard since it is a performance car and everything will be right with the world.

I like the G8 a lot but it's demise is a non-starter.

"The CTS is a 6.5 second car, about on par with a V6 Camry. The 3.6L DI doesn't approach the BMW 3.0L in either power or torque, which is why the 5-series is about a second faster than the Cadillac to 60. "

alexdi - Doesn't approach? The 3.6 DI in the CTS has 304 hp to the BMW 535's 306 hp. So 2 hp difference doesn't "approach" to you? What kind of planet do you live on? OK, so the torque isn't quite as impressive at 273 ft/lbs versus the Beemer's 300, but it's still in the ballpark.

The difference in 0-60 times between the CTS and the 535 is mostly due to the heavier weight of the CTS, rather than power difference.

"The CTS DI isn't in the same league."

Again, the CTS is RIGHT there with the 335i. Countless comparison reviews have either placed the CTS DI ahead of the 335i, or at worst, 2nd place behind it. They are both great cars, with unique attributes and pros/cons that will matter to some people and not others. You can't go wrong with either one - it comes down to what your priorities and preferences are.

Look, it's obvious you have a severe import bias, and in particular a hardon for BMW's. It's too bad for you, because your biased blinders are preventing you from experiencing some fine American cars such as the CTS. Maybe you should drive one before knocking it so much.

Keep in mind that "stellar" 3.0TT from BMW is making 300hp with not one, but two turbos strapped to it. Imagine what that 3.6L would do with some forced induction.

why even compare? GM is discontiuning the G8 anyway and not gonna rebadge it. By the time the SHO hits the showroom, the G8 will be gone. the G8 is an awesome car with lots of fans. GM just continue to suck after bankrupcy.

@stingray

"OK, so the torque isn't quite as impressive at 273 ft/lbs versus the Beemer's 300, but it's still in the ballpark."

You'd think so, but no, it's not. No one who's driven both would agree with you. There's a reason the 335i vaults to 60 in 4.8, while the CTS lags almost a full two seconds behind. Stock, the BMW motor is good for 275-285 HP at the wheels; that's around 330 HP at the crank, with more torque at 2000 RPM than the CTS has, ever.

"You can't go wrong with either one - it comes down to what your priorities and preferences are."

You're right: my preferences are fast and small. The CTS is neither. The overriding point to all this is to question why *every* car from an American make must be the oversized value leader. Where's Cadillac's 1-series? Or even 3-series?

@ thephotoguy

"Imagine what that 3.6L would do with some forced induction."

Probably blow itself to pieces. Imagine what the BMW 3.0L would do with a $400 piggyback module. Or don't:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78916

Addendum to post above:

Replace "335i" with "535i" and "almost a full two seconds" with "over a second." Everything else stands as written. You don't lose a full second and 5 MPH in the quarter-mile by adding 80 lbs to a similar engine.

The CTS is a darn good car, the interior is much improved, and performance is probably second only to the 335 in the segment. Those are really the only two that share the same performance goal in reality. The C-class, A4, TL, ES350,really aren't "performance" sedans, maybe the IS350, but it's smaller than all the others and looks weird, although faster than everything but the 335i.

The Taurus actually matches up really well with a CTS AWD, it's bigger, faster, handling with the performance package isn't known yet, it costs roughly $10k less, and has similar luxury doodads, and the interior appears to be as nice. If you want to go for a prestige brand, you can get an ecoboost MKS for basically the exact same price as a CTS AWD, it's a prestige brand in the US at least. It's handling balance is more toward the Lexus side, but is probably tuned similar to the base SHO settings.

The one thing that would make me look at a CTS over the Taurus is the new CTS Wagon. It just looks great, and if they were to stuff the 3.0DI turbo mill in it, I'd probably buy it. Even better, bring over the GM Europe 2.9Diesel built by VMM, it was supposed to go in the CTS anyway, they put it on hold in March. The wagon with 250HP and 406ft/lbs would be nearly perfect. Heck, if BMW put the 335d in wagon form I'd have bought one of those instead of the X5d, even though it's much smaller than a CTS.

Back to the SHO, it's a big, fast, AWD car that doesn't really fit into any market segment, or it fits into too many. It's priced like a luxury car, but it doesn't have the same brand cache, Ford has that version in the MKS. If it were $5k cheaper, topping out at $40k, then it would be nearly perfect. But I doubt Ford is trying to sell more than a 10% of Taurus in SHO form, it gets them good press, doesn't cost much as the MKS has sunk most of the engineering cost, and generates dealer traffic and online discussions.

I'd guess that no one here will end up with one, when push comes to shove we'd probably all end up in something else. Even if the SHO might be a better all around car than others, it's still a $45k Taurus. But hey, VW failed with Phaeton, but Hyundai hit a home run in the Genesis, we'll see if value trumps trying to stretch the brand.

All the arguing here comparing the SHO to BMW, Mercedes, Acura, Audi et al is moot, pointless and worthless. This car is way over priced at $46K. Doesn't matter if the numbers stack up against the the likes of BMW. Whether you folks like it or not the badge and brand does sell period especially at this price point. Give the average Joe a choice of $50k for BMW or $50K for Ford, 90% choose BMW, it's called marketing, they don't care about the numbers. Ford needs to knock off $10k off this car then it will sell. As it is, you all can argue until you are blue in the face, at $46k its over priced, I don't care what the numbers show.

My first car was a 1993 SHO. I must say I'm impressed with the new one, but I would NEVER pay 45k for a Ford, nor even think about choosing A Ford over an Infiniti, BMW, Cadillac, Mercedes or Lexus. Also, while impressive, it just doesn't have the pizazz the old ones like mine had. I guess it's the fact that there wasn't such (better) competition then and maybe the fact that I was a kid then. A mix of both. I will tell you that the SHO was a cool car. Something about that name. The new one, well the badging sucks. The engine appearance, is that a joke? I'd pop my hood to ANYONE with my '93 and get instant respect. The badging is lame....I'm used to seeing "SHO" buried into the rear bumper, not some girly ecoboost "sho" symbol.

Also, the car was a piece of sh!t. In the shop every two weeks, literally. Broke the bank keeping it on the road. I would hope that Ford has improved some, but I would never, ever buy one again. It's like the same formula almost, tons and tons of features, but let's not forget it's a Ford.

You Ford junkies who justify buying this over the imports(a ford over a BMW/Infiniti/M-B)...are you kidding??), well, I'll tell you how I had to manually screw my door hinges in so the doors wouldn't fly open while driving, among about a million other things.

Let's not forget the resale value that this car will have versus an import--that's laughable too.

But, still the SHO was--and is--a cool car. I hope it does well; however I'm not stupid enough to buy one.

Having purchased, in 2003, a Taurus SES Sport, with a Duratec 3.0 V6 (no SHO was available that year) and currently owning a 2009 G8GT, I would have reservations about the new SHO. Even though the chassis is different, the 500/Taurus chassis was designed with comfort in mind, not performance. The 3.5 EcoBoost being nothing more than a hopped up 3.0 with direct injection and twin turbos also is cause for concern. The underhood tempatures with twin turbos spinning, boosting a traversely mounted V6 certainly results in a very high heat environment. My 3.0 Duratec's performance compared to my 2005 Malibu Maxx offered no performance advantage and actually achieved less fuel economy. Rated at 27 MPG, it would only achive that figure when you drove like an anemic grandmother with the cruise set exactly at the speed limit. I must admit that the Taurus had a better interior and highway ride than the Maxx, but in driving dynamics, the Maxx was better.

No compared to the G8, driving like the same anemic grandmother will result in the exact same 27 MPG on the highway as the old Taurus, handing, acceleration, braking, all superior to the Taurus, highway ride, just a little more firm in the G8 than the Taurus. I realize that the new Taurus is not the old, but like I said earlier, the basis of the new was the 500, and performance was not factored in in the inital design, so that is a cause for concern.

As for pricing, a G8GT can be purchased currently, with every option, for less than $30K with the current incentives, and I seriously doubt that Ford would be offering $15K in rebates for the SHO.

As for the G8 being dead, that decision has yet to be made, it is dead as a Pontiac, but no firm decision has been made by GM as if it will return as a Chevrolet or a Buick. It was the only passenger car that GM showed in May as having a year over year increase in sales with over 3K units purchased, and increase of over 64%.

kingfish4, every single thing you hear from someone up high at GM says the G8 is dead in the US. Seems pretty convincing to me (sadly).

brn, what it took for me to consider (and then buy) my Poncho G8 was the overwhelming positive response from IL, MT, C&D, Automobile etc., and especially the IL long-term blog about it. As far as I'm concerned, the SHO doesn't have the same kind of massive praise. A lot yes, but not really in the areas (handling, braking) that appeal to me.

However, if I was looking for a large car (and no, I've not seen a new Taurus so I'm not sure just how big this thing actually is) and I wanted all sorts of toys, the new Taurus WOULD be on the list, but I'm not so sure the SHO version would be.

13.95 on the G8? What were you hauling, a house behind the G8? I do believe you guys set the record for the slowest GT in the world.

PS I love my GT.

Alex J
GT owner-17K miles

The Ford is overpriced and overfed. I'll take the G8 any day over this.

"Stop putting words into my mouth. Here's where I started: "Where are the Euro-style, mid-sized, American performance cars?""

Same thing. If you want a "euro styled" car buy one from BMW or MB. The CTS is American styled but designed to perform as well as its European counterparts. You are asking a question that makes no sense. BTW, the CTS is about 1-2" larger than the 5 series and has about the same amount of passenger and luggage space. Where do you get off saying its not midsized? Stop making up stupid excuses instead of admitting your initial question was ridiculous.

" I'd rather look at the sales figures of existing compact performance cars. "

No you wouldn't. I addressed that already and you are still arguing that RWD compacts are a major part of the market. They are not. You referenced 300k sales a year and I pointed out the Camry sells more than that alone. Most americans buy FWD based compacts, midsizers or crossovers.

"Why? Because you say so? The A4 and TL are slow too, and so is the automatic 330i. The bar was raised by the 335i in 2007, not to mention the Pontiac above. The CTS DI isn't in the same league."

So any car slower than the 335i is too slow? What kind of sense does that make? Most luxury cars with 6 cylinder engines get to 60 in the 5.5sec-6.5sec range. The 335i is one of the faster cars in the price range but that doesn't mean that EVERY slower car is unacceptable. The G8 has been clocked at 5.3-5.8 secs to 60 with a V8 engine. The CTS with a V6 has been clocked at 5.8-6.3 secs. Not a huge difference when you consider the CTS has 57 less hp and over 100lb-ft less torque.

As for RWD American cars I will mention the Camaro and Mustang once again. Both are coupes, both are fast and both are compact inside. Are they not American? You have not addressed them yet.

Lexus:

Provide a list of features on the GEnesis but not on the SHO. The list will be very short. And dont get into future product enhancements, thats a cop out and nothing you are talking about has been confirmed. I've seen 5.6-5.8 secs for the Genesis V8 which is OK but not great. I am willing to bet the SHO is at least as sporty as the Genesis.

"You'd think so, but no, it's not. No one who's driven both would agree with you. There's a reason the 335i vaults to 60 in 4.8, while the CTS lags almost a full two seconds behind. Stock, the BMW motor is good for 275-285 HP at the wheels; that's around 330 HP at the crank, with more torque at 2000 RPM than the CTS has, ever. "

The BMW engine has twin turbos jackass. Of course it makes more torque. In addition, the compact 335i weighs about 300lbs less than the CTS. That has something to do with the acceleration gap. No naturally aspriated six cylinder engine can mactch the torque output of a forced induction engine. The G37, C350 and other NA competitors cannot keep up with the 335i. That doesn't make the CTS slow.

"Where's Cadillac's 1-series? Or even 3-series?"

Cadillac doesnt have access to small RWD platforms and there isnt much demand for a 1 serie sized luxury car. Thats whay there is only one super compact RWD Euro coupe on the market. PRevious efforts from BMW and MB have failed miserably. Rememeber the C230 hatch?

Your comments about the results of a turbo 3.6L show how stupid you really are- GM already uses turbos on Saab engines and the 2L DI turbo in the Cobalt SS and Solstice GXP. Its one of the best turbo fours on the market.

"This car is way over priced at $46K. Doesn't matter if the numbers stack up against the the likes of BMW. Whether you folks like it or not the badge and brand does sell period especially at this price point. Give the average Joe a choice of $50k for BMW or $50K for Ford, 90% choose BMW, it's called marketing, ."

You do know the car starts at $38k. Did you bother to read that? According to your logic vehicles like the Genesis, Tahoe, Yukon, Sequoia, MKS, CTS, Enclave/Acadia, Flex, Highlander, Avalon, etc. dont sell because their prices overlap with BMW pricing and all those vehicles lack the cache of a BMW. You were probably one of the people predicting the Genesis would fail because it costs well over $30k with a Hyundai badge. You were wrong. People would chose a loaded BMW or over a similarly priced loaded Ford. I happen to think most SHO buyers wont even be looking at small BMWs with leatherette and manual AC. You mistakenly assume that everyone spending over $35k for a car is considering a BMW. Who told you that?

"You Ford junkies who justify buying this over the imports(a ford over a BMW/Infiniti/M-B)...are you kidding??), well, I'll tell you how I had to manually screw my door hinges in so the doors wouldn't fly open while driving, among about a million other things.

Let's not forget the resale value that this car will have versus an import--that's laughable too."

You know the resale value already?

I bet you made similar predictions about the impending failure of the 300 when it came out. How did that turn out for you? In 2004 the price range of that car was about $25k-$35k and that stretched to about $41k when the SRT came out. You are mistaken if you assume people will not buy domestic cars costing close to $40k. Not every one who considers this car will be cross shopping or currently driving a compact import luxury sedan. Why cant this car take sales away from the 300, Charger, Avalon, Lucerne, DTS or G8? Why wouldn't a current 300C, Impala SS or Charger RT customer look at this?

> So any car slower than the 335i is too slow? What kind of sense does that make?

Dude, seriously. You must... must.. try to read. You can't take everything I say, turn it into an absolute, and then counter that. Wikipedia has a whole article on this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Nobody will ever listen to you if you misrepresent their position.

My personal cutoff for a "quick" car is around 5.5 seconds, which is about where an old LS1 Camaro would be. If a car can't come within spitting distance, I'm not interested. So, a G37, an IS350, and the 335i make the list. The CTS doesn't. It may seem arbitrary, but you have to draw the line somewhere. My line is around 5.5 seconds.

Incidentally, this is all with Edmunds numbers. What M&T and C&D do with a 5000 RPM launch, a rollout, no-lift shifting, and a tacky surface, I'm not interested in.

>If you want a "euro styled" car"

Yet again, I didn't say that. "Euro-style" comprises a lot of things; compact, handles, and understated. The physical appearance of the car is just one component. We can dicker about the class definition of 'midsize,' but the fact remains there is no Cadillac sold on these shores the size of a 3-series. Some of use don't want a 5-series.

> As for RWD American cars I will mention the Camaro and Mustang once again. Both are coupes, both are fast and both are compact inside.

At this moment, my next car will be a 335i or a Mustang GT. It won't be a Camaro because that car has awful sightlines, no steering feel, and the interior is garbage. The front suspension was changed from the G8, and not for the better. It's a fast bruiser. I'd prefer the Mustang lose about four inches off the back, but I can't have everything.

> No naturally aspriated six cylinder engine can mactch the torque output of a forced induction engine.

Then why should I settle for a naturally aspirated engine?

> Rememeber the C230 hatch?

Here's my one generalization: Americans don't like hatchbacks. They associate them with fuel crises. That's why BMW isn't selling the 1-series hatch here. The C230 was a godawful ugly and overpriced car with a Mercedes grille. No shocker it crashed and burned.

> GM already uses turbos on Saab engines

Are any of them the 3.6L DI? No? Then how does that counter what I said? The 3.6 DI has an 11.4:1 compression ratio. Perhaps it could be reworked to support a turbo, but not in its current guise.

1. I bought in 1989 a new SHO. Everything except the Yamaha engine was rubbish. Not recommended as a used car!
2. I'm looking forward to driving the 2010 Cadillac CTS Sport Wagon with AWD and the 3.6DI engine and the 2010 SHO with summer tires. Maybe an American-made car may once again get my dollars.
3. The Hyundai Genesis is rumored to get an AWD option. Perhaps then it will be competitive with large, powerful European and Japanese AWD sedans.
4. My 2007 Subaru Legacy spec.B and Outback 3.0R wagon have been exemplary, though short on amenities.

alex:

Just shut up. You made a ridiculous statement initially and then you justify it by saying the CTS doesn't count as a luxury performance sedan. NEver mind the fact that most here and the automotive media would disagree. I dont have to misrepresent your argument- it was absurd on its own merits. Now you have drawn an arbitrary line in the sand with regards to 0-60 times and claim the CTS is slow. I will draw the line at 6 secs and say the CTS is not slow. How about that? Even if that wasn't the case we weren't even talking about 0-60 times initially but you managed to shift the discussion to avoid acknowledging you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. If 0-60 times are all that is critical to you I will note that the Camaro SS is as fast as the 335i for less money- and its American.

"Yet again, I didn't say that. "Euro-style" comprises a lot of things; compact, handles, and understated. The physical appearance of the car is just one component. We can dicker about the class definition of 'midsize,' but the fact remains there is no Cadillac sold on these shores the size of a 3-series. Some of use don't want a 5-series. "

WTF are you talking about? A few posts ago you said the CTS is larger than the 5 series and inferred its too big to be considered a midsize luxury car. Now you have shifted BACK to the 3 series. You are the only one confused enough to think we have to "dicker" over what constitutes a midsize car. Most of us have enough sense to recognize the CTS and 5 series are in the same class. I never suggested the CTS was as small as the 3 series and I clearly stated American automakers do not specialized in small RWD cars. If you want a "Euro style" car the size of the 3 series I suggest you get a 3 series. Aside from acceleration the CTS stacks up well vs the 3 series in terms of performance so its size is not a handicap. It also looks better inside and out and has slightly more space. I'll take the CTS.

"Then why should I settle for a naturally aspirated engine?"

Let me try to be clear: if you want a compact, RWD car with European flair and a twin turbo I-6 with 300hp I suggest you get a 335. In terms of acceleration turbo engines are great but some people like NA engines and thus they buy a CTS, G37 or C350. I dont see sales of those cars suffering because they lack turbos. Also, the CTS runs on regular while the 335 needs premium.

"Then how does that counter what I said? "

You said the 3.6 would blow up if they tried to put a turbo on it which suggests they dont know how to build a reliable turbo V6. Thats not the case. I didn't say the engine wouldn't have to be modified, I merely suggested no sane person would presume GM couldn't turbocharge the engine successfully if they so desired. There really isnt much need to add a turbo when the engine makes 304hp in stock form. If the CTS was as light as the 3 series 0-60 would be on par with the IS350- low to mid 5s.

"Here's my one generalization: Americans don't like hatchbacks. They associate them with fuel crises. That's why BMW isn't selling the 1-series hatch here. The C230 was a godawful ugly and overpriced car with a Mercedes grille. No shocker it crashed and burned. "

Is that a straw man I see?

I said super compact RWD cars have a dismal history in the US market. You didn't say anything to disprove that. The 1 series satisfies a small niche- nothing more.

> I will draw the line at 6 secs and say the CTS is not slow.

That's your line. Given that we've been talking about my subjective preferences, I don't find your line of great interest.

> I dont see sales of those cars suffering because they lack turbos.

That's everyone else. Same point as above.

> I clearly stated American automakers do not specialized in small RWD cars.

Why is that, do you suppose?

> ... recognize the CTS and 5 series are in the same class.

I agree. And the 5 is pretty large. And the CTS is larger. I'm not sure I consider either mid-size.

> You said the 3.6 would blow up if they tried to put a turbo on it which suggests they dont know how to build a reliable turbo V6.

Nope. There's nothing in there about GM's skill. We were talking about the existing 3.6 DI. Maybe it could stand forced induction, maybe not. It would depend on the strengths of the block and heads.

> Is that a straw man I see?

Given that the sole example of the category was a hatchback, I think not. The 1-series seems to be doing rather well for the price, however.

Why are you taking my personal desire for a small, high-powered vehicle as an attack on the CTS? I think it's a great car. I recommend it all the time to non-gearheads, and I think it's preferable to the 335i for most people.

But not me.

"That's your line. Given that we've been talking about my subjective preferences, I don't find your line of great interest."

And yet acceleration wasn't the topic of discussion. You said American automakers don't make midsize performance cars. That was incorrect. Now you have determined any car that needs more than 5.5 secs to get to 60 isn't a performance oriented vehicle.

"I agree. And the 5 is pretty large. And the CTS is larger. I'm not sure I consider either mid-size. "

Ever heard of the EPA? Their classifications are typically what count and both are midsize by their standards.

"Nope. There's nothing in there about GM's skill. We were talking about the existing 3.6 DI. Maybe it could stand forced induction, maybe not. It would depend on the strengths of the block and heads. "

The 2.8L is a smaller version of the 3.6. Its all the same engine family and the 2.8L can be turbocharged up to 325hp. The only reason there isnt a turbo 3.6 is because there hasn't been a need for one yet.

"Why are you taking my personal desire for a small, high-powered vehicle as an attack on the CTS? I think it's a great car. I recommend it all the time to non-gearheads, and I think it's preferable to the 335i for most people. "

The first thing you've said that makes any sense. Finally we agree. And back to the SHO- none of the stuff you posted takes away from the performance of the SHO. If you want a smaller car go buy one.

1487 - "If 0-60 times are all that is critical to you I will note that the Camaro SS is as fast as the 335i for less money- and its American."

Sorry to interrupt your GM sales pitch but what? The Camaro is designed/engineered by Australians and assembled by Canadians. How is it American again?

Don't tell me it's because it has some "parts" from America.

> Its all the same engine family and the 2.8L can be turbocharged up to 325hp.

The 2.8 has a reduced compression ratio and a different block. As before, the 3.6L may or may not stand forced induction. Even at a reduced compression ratio, the cylinder walls may be too thin. I don't run GM Powertrain and neither do you. That the two engines are in the same family has little relevance; GM didn't supercharge the LS7 for the ZR1 for precisely the reason above.

> If you want a smaller car go buy one.

So nyah! :)

> The Camaro is designed/engineered by Australians and assembled by Canadians. How is it American again?

It says Chevrolet on the front. :)

"You know the resale value already?"

No, but I know it's a Ford. "F*ckerOnlyRunsDownhill" I'll bet you a million dollars it will do MUCH, MUCH worse resale value wise than a G37, TL, 3 series, C300, IS350, or a CTS for that matter." Let's see how your SHO stacks up against a 328i in five years. I bought my '93 SHO for DIRT, DIRT cheap in 1998. Comparable Maximas were at least 2-3k more. Now there's a good car.

"I bet you made similar predictions about the impending failure of the 300 when it came out."

The 300 is a pretty solid ride, riding on a Mercedes Benz chassis. That earns it major respect in my book. I'm not fully aware of the resale value on this one, but I still bet you it's lower than comparable imports.

"In 2004 the price range of that car was about $25k-$35k and that stretched to about $41k when the SRT came out."

You know how many SRT 300's I've seen in my city? About one. Even 300C's are scarce. I see FAR, FAR more of the mentioned imports on the road daily.

"You are mistaken if you assume people will not buy domestic cars costing close to $40k."

You are right in that statement, but it's not 40k cars people buy, it's trucks and SUV's. Here in east TN, big domestic SUV's are literally every other car on the road, and for good reason. They are rock solid. I wouldn't even consider something foreign over a GMC Yukon. America knows how to build full size trucks and SUV's, not cars, which is sad.

I would have to go with the G8. Give the SHO the optional performace package, what it really matter. You save the 10K by getting the G8, and put a supercharger on it with money you save, and have 460HP to the wheels.
http://www.pfyc.com/pc/G83006/G8UNDER/MagnaCharger+Intercooled+Supercharger+Kit+-+08-09+G8+GT.html?a_aid=froogle
The SHO wouldn't even come close, and you spent around the same money or even a little less.

sellcars:

1. By brand the Camaro is American. Alex was the one saying American brands dont offer reasonably sized performance cars. Did you miss that?
2. The SHO isnt made by GM so I'm unclear on the "GM sales pitch".
3. I guess the X5 is American because its made in South Carolina.
4. The Camaro was designed by someone of S. Korean decent that works for GMNA- it was not designed in Australia. They were responsible for the chassis since its based on a Holden platform.

"No, but I know it's a Ford. "F*ckerOnlyRunsDownhill""

You sound pretty ridiculous with statements like that. Resale value is often affected by up front discounts andn fleet sales. I dont think the SHO is going to be high volume and I doubt it will be sold to Hertz. Low volume performance cars typically hold their value. Buying a $60k car vs a $40k car just because the $60k may hold its value better is absurd. That is not what you call a financially sound decision.

Alex:

A turbo 3.6 is irrelevent- the 2.8L makes 300hp and 295lb-ft. That could be why there have been no steps taken to add a turbo to the 3.6. The new Opel GTC makes 325hp from the 2.8L without direct injectiom. There's GM's turbo six cylinder engine and it will be in the SRX.

If I had to choose between those two I'd choose neither. The Pontiac is an orphan and a bastardized orphan of an Australian and a dying American marque. The new HOT Taurus SHO just screams warmed of Ford Five Hundred to me still. And honestly, that car was always too much...too much size, too much lard and more or less a misuse of a decent corporate platform.

Ford is doing what they should have always done. They are building a great car and pricing it accordingly- just like BMW does, just like Ford Europe does. If you don't like the Taurus or can't afford it, don't buy it. But if you do buy it, you'll know that you are getting what you paid for. This whole price issue happened with the Flex last year.

I have friends that drive only BMW and MB and they get in cheaper mainstream cars and can't understand why a Chevy, ford, or Toyota isn't as soft or nice as their cars. Duh! all that isn't free. If the Focus or Fusion was priced like the Taurus is, I would say it isn't worth it, but they aren't. The Taurus is a huge car. There is alot of everything in it and stuff costs money.

If Hyundai can build crap, and then make a drastic quality turn around and make a move upscale all in about 20 years, why can't over 100 year old Ford? Besides, this is that make's Flagship. Plus, I don't hear anyone complaining about how much the S80 costs. It's resale value isn't anything special and the SHO is bigger and outperforms it while offering more equipment.

bringit01, I agree that I would go with the supercharged V8-G8, BUT the G8 can't come with the toys of the Taurus.

I think many of us agree the Taurus is too expensive for that name. However, when one delves deeper I think the price is not so bad as it seems. But how many of the buying-public are going to be doing that research? (It is exactly the same thing I faced when I heard about the G8, in that I couldn't believe Pontiac actually had a car I would be interested in, at any price.)

@dougtheeng

"SHO Curb Weight (lb): 4,404
2009 535 Curb Weight (lbs): 3660 (source: KBB) 4404-3660 = 744
SHO is nearly 750lbs heaier then 535.

According to Motor Trend, the new Taurus SHO has a Curb Weight of 4361 lbs

BMW 535i xDrive Steptronic: Curb Weight: 3946 lbs
*This 5-series is turbocharged, AWD and has an auto transmission just like the Taurus SHO.

4361-3946 = 415
The AWD SHO is 415 lbs heavier than the smaller 535i xDrive Steptronic.

If you use the heavier 4404 lbs Taurus SHO curb weight from Edmunds, InsideLine...

4404-3946 = 458

The AWD SHO is 458 lbs heavier than the smaller 535i xDrive Steptronic.

"You sound pretty ridiculous with statements like that."

I didn't make up that acronym! It's called that for a reason. I can tell you from personal experience that my Ford Taurus SHO was a POS car, and I have enough knolwedge/experience in the car industry that I can 100% confidently tell you that a Ford just ain't gonna stack up to a Bimmer or pretty much any of these imports. Quality, performance, resale, you name it. Ford is good at trucks and crown vics. That's pretty much it. Then again we don't ask too much more from them; that's where the BMW/Infiniti/MB/CTS/etc come in.

"I dont think the SHO is going to be high volume and I doubt it will be sold to Hertz. Low volume performance cars typically hold their value."

When I (very, very infrequently) see an older SHO like the one I had, I'm not wondering how it's still worth 25k just because it's a super high output special Taurus.

"Buying a $60k car vs a $40k car just because the $60k may hold its value better is absurd. That is not what you call a financially sound decision."

Say what? Stop mealy-mouthing! More than one person can be right!

AJT:

You provided ZERO context for your claims that this car will be unreliable. Consumer Reports, JD Power and other sources say that ford quality is above average- and that includes their cars. Since when are MB products known for being problem free? That is news to me. People buy MB for prestige, build quality and luxury- not for reliability.

The original SHO had a Japanese powertrain- maybe that was part of the problem from a reliability perspective. The new SHO wont have that problem.

Broq:

You are making sense. People want better product but don't want to pay for it. They will likely be complaining when the Euro grade Focus comes here next year and is priced higher than the current car. Quality and performance costs money. The Flex is expensive because it has a great interior and features you wont find on some pricey Euro crossovers.

1487 never misses a chance to bash BMW to promote a domestic. Good to have you back, dad.

"You provided ZERO context for your claims that this car will be unreliable. Consumer Reports, JD Power and other sources say that ford quality is above average- and that includes their cars. Since when are MB products known for being problem free? That is news to me. People buy MB for prestige, build quality and luxury- not for reliability."

Well, I don't feel like I need to research to convince everyone (except YOU, obviously) that, generally speaking, a Ford is NOT a quality/reliable car. Everyone knows that. I drove one; I know people who have driven them; I've been reading car stuff since I was 5; I see the resale value of them suffer; I'm not crazy here. I drove a SHO; don't you think I'd be on their side? No; I was stranded enough. I don't care what CR says, I wouldn't even think about buying a Ford, ever.

"The original SHO had a Japanese powertrain- maybe that was part of the problem from a reliability perspective. The new SHO wont have that problem"

Oh yeah and again FROM EXPERIENCE, I can tell you that the Japanese Yamaha motor was about the only good thing about the car. The whole car fell apart around the engine. At about 60-70k.

And wait just a minute...I never said a MB was the paragon of reliability.....Granted, Mercedes isn't the most trouble free brand, but certainly but you can't tell it's junk/POS like the way people mean a Ford is; if that's you're saying, you're crazy. It's like a boat; the investment is high, but so is the return.

BTW, I opened up my Road and Track, and it was an owner survey on the Chrysler 300; one of the negatives was RESALE VALUE, although the consensus was that it was a well engineered car. Gee I wonder why that is.

Just admit that American cars are junky.

"Well, I don't feel like I need to research to convince everyone (except YOU, obviously) that, generally speaking, a Ford is NOT a quality/reliable car. Everyone knows that. "

Actually thinking people who follow the industry dont know that. I would say you are the one who is uninformed and out of date. You are biased, ignorant and immature. All of the facts contradict your opinion which is based on one experience with one car. Get over it.

1486:

Most German cars are nice and they should be for that kind of money. Dont get mad because the SHO delivers full sized performance for thousands less than similar (but much smaller) German sedans. I'm not bashing German cars, just stating facts. They are very expensive to buy and maintain and they skimp on features found standard on lesser cars.

"Actually thinking people who follow the industry dont know that. I would say you are the one who is uninformed and out of date. You are biased, ignorant and immature. All of the facts contradict your opinion which is based on one experience with one car. Get over it."

So what, getting defensive and needing to call me names because I clearly called you out? You should be ashamed to call yourself a car enthusiast; Whooptie doo, sure the new Fusion is halfway decent--that doesn't erase a horrible reputation, and for good reason. You defend pretty much the worst marque quality/reliability wise out there with crappy claims and then bash others for knowing which cars are the best? You were dead wrong about your Chrysler 300 claim about resale from the start (want me to scan the article onto here?), so immediately your claims don't hold water. You are obviously either an old man who served in WWII and can't forget about Hitler/Pearl Harbor, a pitiful Ford racing redneck, or just plain stupid. FORD SUCKS!!!! Will you still even be alive when the SHO costs about 7k used while the rest of these imports are going for double? Probably not, so STFU!

AJT123-You have to be a joke.

"I've been reading about cars since I was 5."

I'm sure that you understood everything that you read at that age.

"Ford is not a quality/relaible car."

Then explain to me how I had a Ford P/U that had over 310K miles without a major issue, or my last Ford Escort with over 235K without any problems. Perhaps it might just be you don't know squat about cars, but your 5 year old mind "reads" about cars.

German quality-that is a joke, just read about the 2003 M3 that IL is doing a long term test on.

A mechanic once told me this, "the worst thing that a consumer could be is the proud new owner of a used German sedan, the repair cost will kill them."

Hah, Kingfish, ain't that the truth. I bought a 2003 E39 M5 and within 6 months had the VANOS go 'bad' due to 'carbon buildup' resulting in a nearly $10,000 repair bill. BMW covered half. That was nice of them. The E39's a magical car, just as long as you have a money printing press in your basement.

I replaced it with a 2008 BMW 335i, you know, the one the BMW fanboys up above are raving about? With that fantastic engine? Well, that engine overheated with less then 1000 miles on it. The water pump failed. Twice. And then the fuel pump failed. Three times. Lemoned back to BMW and I'm 6500 miles into a 2010 Fusion Sport with no issues.

"Then explain to me how I had a Ford P/U that had over 310K miles without a major issue, or my last Ford Escort with over 235K without any problems. Perhaps it might just be you don't know squat about cars, but your 5 year old mind "reads" about cars."

Well, actually, if you scroll up and read one of my beginning posts, I had nothing but praise for American TRUCKS (NOT CARS). I never said one bad thing about trucks; they are the best in the world EASY. And I agree, I've had a Yukon for 5 years and it now has 100k on it and it's had NOT ONE problem, and it still feels as solid as the day I bought it. America knows how to do trucks, not cars. Are really you also going to come on here and tell me that a Ford CAR is as good as a Honda/Toyota/Nissan? That your Escort that miraculously went 235k with no problems is a better car than a comparable Civic? And you suggest that I know nothing about cars?

"Then explain to me how I had a Ford P/U that had over 310K miles without a major issue, or my last Ford Escort with over 235K without any problems. Perhaps it might just be you don't know squat about cars, but your 5 year old mind "reads" about cars."

Well, actually, if you scroll up and read one of my beginning posts, I had nothing but praise for American TRUCKS (NOT CARS). I never said one bad thing about trucks; they are the best in the world EASY. And I agree, I've had a Yukon for 5 years and it now has 100k on it and it's had NOT ONE problem, and it still feels as solid as the day I bought it. America knows how to do trucks, not cars. Are really you also going to come on here and tell me that a Ford CAR is as good as a Honda/Toyota/Nissan? That your Escort that miraculously went 235k with no problems is a better car than a comparable Civic? And you suggest that I know nothing about cars?

Bottom line both cars are bloated inefficient designs.

Bottom line both cars are bloated inefficient designs.

AJT123-My Escort was superior to my brother-in-laws same model year Toyota Corolla, and was vatly superior to the two previous Honda Civics that I owned. I never had to replace the head gasket in my Escort, like one of my Civics required, not did I have any rust issues like the Civics.

Buy the way, I rebuilt the my first engine, a Honda motorcycle engine, when I was 14 years old. When you have actual hands on experience with vehicles, get back with us.

Want a cookie?

So because I'm not a mechanic I can't know anything about cars?

The Motor Trend, C&D, and Edmunds testers aren't all engine rebuilders either, so are they wrong?

I find your story hard to believe. You're telling me that properly maintained(not nitrous blown) Civic won't outlast an Escort? That an Escort is superior to a Corolla? I'd say the vast majority of people who know cars would disagree big time with you.

I could tell you that my 04 Infiniti I35 is superior to a same year Lexus ES330, but it really isn't. It's got a better powertrain, but it lacks the interior of the Lexus. I still think it's superior, but the guy driving the Lexus will say the same thing about his car.

Someone is missing something here. The SHO is a top of the line Ford, their flagship full-size car, in fact, wheras the G8 isn't even equiped in its basic form as well as a non-SHO Taurus. Considering that it has all wheel drive plus every other top line piece of equipment worthy of an Audi A6, no wonder it doesn't weigh 3000 pounds!! Refinement and fully equipped autos cost and weigh; check out the Mercedes and Audi mods with SHO performance at $20-$25,000 more. The real issue is that after years of complaining that American car makers couldn't build good sport/luxury sedans, on with a Ford name, no less, is now sitting on the well manicured lawns of Mercedes and Audi and is where it belongs(but with a substantial discount!).