493 messages,
Last post on Oct 05, 2011 at 8:37 PM
You are in the
Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Forum.
What is this discussion about?
Ford Taurus, Automotive News, Future Vehicle, Sedan
#271 of 493 interior dimensions not that different--go figure
by pod
Nov 25, 2009 (10:12 am)
I would have thought that the 3i would be cramped given that the 3i is listed as a "compact" car, not even a midsized. However (go figure) the 3i matches the 2010 Taurus ( categorized as a large car) in front headroom and legroom and in rear headroom.
The Taurus has much more shoulder room (3" difference) but I wonder how the flowing center console crimps the drivers body position to the left effectively reducing the shoulder room advantage.
Isn't it startling how close the interior dimensions of a compact and large can converge?
Re: the ford focus. I did consider that but drum rear brakes, no tele/tilt/, lesser fuel economy, generally agreed that focus has less "feel and performance", and its lame duck status (to be discontiued after 2010) give me pause.
#272 of 493 Re: looking for car in all the wrong places [pod]
by gregg_vw
Nov 25, 2009 (2:51 pm)
Why wouldn't you consider the Fusion? The Volkswagen CC 4 cylinder? The Suzuki Kizashi? Subaru Legacy? Even the 4 cylinder 2010 Lacrosse? They are all more compact than your Sable but with at least as much interior space. That way, you are not jumping all the way down from a full-size (at least on the outside) to a compact.
#273 of 493 Re: looking for car in all the wrong places [gregg_vw]
by pod
Nov 25, 2009 (5:06 pm)
I did look at the Fusion but the cost for similar base models is about $6500-7000 more. At least I think I found the base Fusion, a 2.5L I4 with about 30 more HP than the 3i (but almost 2 seconds slower to 60 mph?). The fusion has a 6 speed while the mazda is 5 speed. Again it is remarkable but the interior dimensions of the Fusion and the 3i are almost identical (from edmunds data) except for shoulder room. The Fusion has fog lights which I consider decoration and it has "leather seats" which seemed strange for the base model. I prefer cloth. Maybe it is "leatherette" like my Sable. The only thing I would miss on the 3i is cruise control (which isn't even optional on that model). Mazda is 400 pounds lighter and thus 3-4 mpg better, and it does have the option of manual shifting the automatic.
I expect I am more of a minimalist than most car buyers, wanting a basic, reliable, comfortable means of transportation that will get me to speed promptly and be quiet on the road.
I think the VW is quite more expensive (didn't research b/o their reliability issues and the new model risks). Subaru is a player. I'll take a look at the LaCrosse but expect it will be more expensive than the Fusion.
At this point in my search the Mazda seems to offer remarkable value for $18-19K. Surprisingly most of the car magazines rate it as very satisfying with respect to performance, most ranking it as best in class. I like Honda Civic but very noisy on the road even when new (tire and road noise).
Thanks for your suggestions. I'll keep an open mind and continue to mull options. I hope to squeeze another 30K miles out of the Sable (now
140,000 miles without any issues which amazes me). I do have confidence in Ford products based on that experience and other reviews.
I'll lurk on this forum but don't want to monopolize or change the topic which is the Taurus. My summary is that the Taurus is a very good car but no longer a value for my money.
#274 of 493 Re: looking for car in all the wrong places [pod]
by thegraduate
Nov 26, 2009 (8:07 pm)
I expect I am more of a minimalist than most car buyers, wanting a basic, reliable, comfortable means of transportation that will get me to speed promptly and be quiet on the road.
Interesting; because those virtues aren't Mazda-like at all. Mazda's are more visceral than the quiet appliance you describe. Mazdas are louder and ride rougher than "basic, reliable, comfortable" transportation. They're also a lot of fun to drive.
It sounds like you'd be more suited to something with a quieter interior and a softer ride. The Hyundai Elantra and Toyota Corolla come to mind for your situation, but the Taurus is also quiet and comfortable, but by no means basic.
#275 of 493 Re: looking for car in all the wrong places [thegraduate]
by pod
Nov 27, 2009 (1:07 pm)
Mazda 3's are reliable and provide a truly basic model for as little as $15.5K. Even the top of the line model with the 2.5 engine and all amenities comes in under 25K. I am looking at the low middle probably.
You may well be right about the comfort. Sports suspensions are tuned to give feedback about the road. Feedback is fine but I don't want to feel and hear every dimple in the road. NVH also is an issue. Hondas, as an example, are notorious for road noise despite their otherwise excellent reviews
Coming from a family of Lincoln buyers I don't want the floaty "land yacht" feeling that the older Lincolns provided. Maybe the Mazda 3 will come in somewhere in between. Between 0 and 75 mph (the world I live in) the Mazda's are graded performance wise at the top for 4 cylinder sedan. The Mazdaspeed variants are racer boy cars, not my cup of tea. As a former BMW and Toyota Supra owner I wouldn't mind good steering feedback and good brakes (both rated high in Mazda and criticized in the Taurus). You are right though if the ride seems harsh and noisy the marriage will be called off. Given the remarkable pricing of the Mazda line I might even look into the cost of softening the ride (aftermarket) before I call the caterer to cancel. Thanks.
Dec 01, 2009 (8:15 pm)
Consumer Reports came out and gave a less than stellar review of the "new" Taurus in this month's magazine.
#277 of 493 Re: Consumer Reports [mikemartin]
by akirby
Dec 02, 2009 (7:07 am)
So which part of the toaster did they not like? Was it the heat setting or did the toast not pop up high enough?
#278 of 493 Re: Consumer Reports [mikemartin]
by bruneau1
Dec 02, 2009 (11:42 am)
Go back to Consumer's report on the Taurus and count up the number of positive comments and then the negatives. Something not quite right with the evaluation. i guess they were not happy about the reduced rear seat area (which is still very good) and the other good stuff didn't matter too much.. And of course, the frumpy look of the Avalon and its old dash with all its plastic aluminum didn't count either. I drove the Lacrosse and knocked my knee twice getting out. The awd Lacrosse is under-powered. The Azera bangs over bumps and its seats don't adjust enough. But then, each to his own taste. I go out and drive them all; then i make my decision. My priorities are not necessarily those of CR which places no value on looks.
#279 of 493 Re: Consumer Reports [bruneau1]
by berri
Dec 02, 2009 (2:16 pm)
The new Taurus is a car I still can't make my mind up on. I think it's a good idea to look at things like CR or JDP on reliability, but then you're right - drive your finalists and make up your own mind.
#280 of 493 Re: Consumer Reports [berri]
by gregg_vw
Dec 02, 2009 (7:17 pm)
Yes, it is a definite improvement. However, I wish it either had trimmer overhangs, a longer wheelbase, or (when you subtract the trunk) more interior space than many mid-size cars (Accord, Sonata, Lacrosse). They did a great job of revising it, but who ever signed off on the proportions of the 2005 Five Hundred consigned Ford to have to work with oddly proportioned architecture for years to come. Bottom line, it is good...it could have been so much better.