Last post on Oct 05, 2011 at 8:37 PM
You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable
What is this discussion about?
Ford Taurus, Automotive News, Future Vehicle, Sedan
#107 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [thegraduate]
Sep 24, 2009 (11:05 pm)
I'd like to know what people who say the Taurus is overpriced think the Taurus should be priced near.
Near a Honda Accord. The Honda offers the same passenger compartment volume as the new Taurus and offers the comfort and convenience features that buyers want for thousands less than the Taurus.
An Accord EX-L with the V6 stickers for $29,800. An equivalent Taurus Limited w/moonroof is $32,890. The Accord is 10% cheaper, 10% lighter and 10% more efficient.
We don't even need to discuss the 4 cylinder Accords because their price, weight and efficiency are so far superior it becomes 21st century vs. 20th century.
I don't know that all this matters much though. The rebates and incentives on the Taurus will likely have the actual transaction prices very, very close to the Accord.
I believe by spring 2010 Ford will have $3,000 rebates on all Taurus models. The Taurus is good but so is the competition. If Ford can get enough butts in their seats, they will turn some heads and make some sales.
#108 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [gregg_vw]
Sep 25, 2009 (6:19 am)
I understand what you're saying Gregg, but that's not what these yahoos are saying. They're saying it's too expensive just because it has a blue oval on it and that's rubbish. My guess is they wouldn't spend $35K on any new vehicle period and they have an axe to grind with Ford.
Anyone who does an objective comparison based on FACTS (like grad) understands that the Taurus is competitively priced. If the market won't support it then Ford will have to make a decision to make but cutting the price probably isn't on the list. They'll either make do with a smaller market share or get rid of it. Cutting the price puts it too close to the Fusion.
I don't think Ford wants to attract bargain hunters because there's no money in it. They're not trying to establish an entire brand like Hyundai. They have a plan to take Ford upmarket and they certainly have the product to do it. If it doesn't work with consumers then it doesn't work but I don't fault Ford for trying.
This is just typical Ford bashing by people who wouldn't buy a new Ford anyway unless it came with a $10K discount. They're probably disgruntled Panther fans.
#109 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [dodgeman07]
Sep 25, 2009 (6:28 am)
Near a Honda Accord.
Oh sure - let's conveniently forget about the Fusion. I don't care if the Accord is borderline on the EPA size chart, it competes with the Fusion and the Camry. You never hear about the Accord competing with the Avalon.
#110 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [akirby]
Sep 25, 2009 (8:22 am)
This is just typical Ford bashing
No, I don't think so. I think it is mostly the opposite. Here Ford stands at a critical juncture to their long term health - they should be pricing aggressively to get people into their showrooms and see the new product in order to change stereotyping of it. Large rebates only serve to cheapen product in the consumers eyes. If you hope for larger margins down the road, you've first got to differentiate and change people's perceptions of the company and its products.
#111 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [akirby]
Sep 25, 2009 (9:08 am)
You never hear about the Accord competing with the Avalon.
What planet do you live on? The Accord does compete with the Avalon.
You need to wake up. Planet earth to kirby. Come in!
#112 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [dodgeman07]
Sep 25, 2009 (9:20 am)
There are hundreds of comparison tests between Accord and Camry. How many can you find comparing Accord to Avalon? I've never seen one. Just like you see Accord and Fusion, not Accord and Taurus.
#113 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [berri]
Sep 25, 2009 (9:35 am)
Since when is $1000 on a $30K car considered a large rebate? If it was $3K or $4K then that would be a problem.
The new Ford will cut production before they raise incentives to high levels. That is a fundamental change that took place at Ford over the last 2 years. Inventory levels are being managed so that they don't end up with overstock situations where you have to put $5K on the hood just to get rid of excess inventory.
Ford spent the better part of the last decade trying to compete on price and found out there are others that can do it better. They tried selling vehicles to rental fleets and putting huge amounts of cash on the hood just to keep factories open and found out that doesn't yield profits. They tried relying on a few vehicles to generate profit and found out that doesn't work when the market changes.
This is definitely a new move for Ford and it has some risks, but at least now they have the reliability and a decent product and are building the reputation that it takes to pull it off.
I understand that some people still think Ford needs to sell a lot of cars right away or do something drastic with rebates or lowering the price but that would only produce short term results and Ford needs to focus on long term sustainability.
If you think the Taurus is too pricey, don't buy one. But that also means the REAL competition is also too pricey.
#114 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [gregg_vw]
Sep 25, 2009 (10:18 am)
The Genesis is a very good car, but it will never get you up a slippery hill in winter and it rides badly over bumps. I have driven it and was dissapointed.
#116 of 493 Taurus vs. Avalon
Sep 25, 2009 (10:46 am)
While I agree with earlier posts that Avalon is the natural competitor for the new Taurus, I disagree with the assertion that the Avalon is better, top to bottom. I'll grant that the Toyota 3.5L V-6 is a jewel of a motor, easily the smoothest and most efficient, if not a powerful as the Nissan V-6. However that's where Avalon superiority ends. Toyota reliability is not what it used to be and their build quality while consistently good, is not exceptional and is easily equaled by Ford, as well as some GM (Buick) competition. The Avalon chassis, being a stretched Camry (an average driving and handling car at best) is nothing special and I find the Avalon to be spongy, underdamped and suffering in the tire and brakes department. Finally, at least in the Southeast, there have been many Avalon's dumped into rental fleets (mainly Hertz) so their residual resale values are hardly legendary. I do think Ford is stretching the Taurus brand to it's limits with their pricing strategy and question the ability to mine enough equity from the Taurus nameplate to justify the price. The availiability of AWD as well as the high-tech options may appeal to some, but with an AWD Limited near 38k, they're facing some stiff competition from Acura, Infiniti, even corporate sibling (for now) Volvo. I give Ford credit for sticking by the name and greatly improving the product, just hope they haven't reached too far in this economic climate to give a solid product a chance.