Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison
6844 messages, Last post on Mar 23, 2009 at 12:32 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Apr 16, 2008 10:44 am) Some of us are old enough to remember Galaxy 500s  , not that I can recall anything remarkable about that particular car. but no matter they changed it back to Taurus to give buyers something to recognize. and then to their amazement they discovered that they had ruined that name as well - and it still doesn't sell. The Taurus was a pretty contemporary (and successful) car 20 years ago or so. |
|
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Apr 16, 2008 10:44 am)  that (unfortunately) was reused). The current Taurus coming instead courtesy of a Volvo S80- perhaps the reason for the car's height, boxier proportions, and generally good safety ratings.
|
|
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Apr 16, 2008 10:26 am) Maybe their V8, not a BMW V8. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (Apr 16, 2008 10:38 am) I've heard this repeatedly now: "the Duratec 3.5L is just a bigger version of the old unrefined Duratec 3.0L." It actually takes a lot more than just bumping up displacement by 0.5L to get an additional 60 HP. Just like comparing the Lexus ES300 (210 HP) to the ES350 (272 HP). They had to do a lot more than just increase displacement to get that additional 62 HP. The fact that they kept the "Duratec" label means nothing. They've done it before: look at the first year of the "Triton" 5.4L V8 in the 1997 F-series. It made only 230 HP. The current "Triton" 5.4L makes 300 HP and provides better fuel economy. Both engines have the same label, but other than displacement, they have little in common internally.
|
|
|
Replying to: tonycd (Apr 16, 2008 7:06 am) That's a good analysis of what happened. Trying to make Fords out of Jaguar. 
|
|
|
Replying to: autokritiker (Apr 16, 2008 2:35 pm) The heads went from 2 to 3 valves and some sort of variable valve timing was introduced. The basic engine design and bottom end are very similar if not identical. You are right about the Toyota example though, the 3.0/3.3 have nothing in common with the 3.5. Ford's 3.5 is considered "all new" however, I do wonder how much of the "old" 3.0 was used. They share the same 60 degree architecture and similar valve layouts. |
|
|
Replying to: kdshapiro (Apr 16, 2008 1:52 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: autokritiker (Apr 16, 2008 2:35 pm) they have little in common while I'll admit to know little about the specific components in Ford's DT engines, and generally will agree that a ~20% bump in displacement is hard pressed to yield a 30% increase in HP, my observations (in an Edge) are generally that the 3.5 is the same DT in terms of refinement as the anemic 3.0 was. This has generally been confirmed in many other reviews of this engine in multiple Ford products including the Taurus. Reference the current issue of CR where they road test/compare the new Accord along with things like the Amanti and Taurus, and you will see the same sort of comments along with a negative comment about the 'new' engine's FE. It does seem that Ford's 'new' DT3.5 while it does give the Taurus competitive power it does not really give it an overall competitive engine in terms of refinement. It may or may not be a simple bore/stroke job or it may or may not be a 'new' engine as Ford will certainly claim but the results are the same - a generally substandard engine IMO especially when you consider that it was 3 years late in coming (it was supposed to be in the original Five Hundred), and in relation to things like the Toyota 2GR, the Nissan VQ and even the Hyundai 3.3/3.8. I would be willing to bet that had Ford been able to get the production of the 3.5 up in time we would not be talking about the 'Taurus' today however - the 500 would still be alive and would have sold much better!
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (Apr 17, 2008 5:49 am) The Duratec isn't as silky as the 2GR when you listen to it, but it's also TONS better than the GM pushrods, and certainly not loud or obnoxious enough to be offensive. The top of the class is the 2GR, but that doesn't make everything else bad; just not as "excellent" as the 'Yota.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Apr 17, 2008 6:15 am) as almost any DOHC engine should be - but you also forgot to mention Ford's own 4 liter pushrod V6 - recently had the experience of driving one in a rental Mustang - that engine is the one that gets my nomination as the worst of the worst with all due 'respect' to the GM 3.8. And yes, the engines in my Avalon (and my wife's Altima) have definitely gotten me to expect more out of a V6 than simply some HP.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Buick Lucerne
2010 Chevrolet Impala
2011 Dodge Charger
2010 Ford Taurus
2010 Hyundai Azera
2010 Toyota Avalon
2010 Nissan Maxima
2009 Pontiac G8
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
