- #47 of 275
-
Re: weight and SHO [pod]
by brucelinc
-
May 06, 2009 (11:08 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: pod (May 06, 2009 9:34 am)
The 2010 SHO has a MSRP of around $38,000 to start, IIRC. The Ford Vehicles website has the prices, standard & optional equipment, colors, etc.
|
- #48 of 275
-
Re: weight and SHO [brucelinc]
by kernick
-
May 06, 2009 (11:47 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: brucelinc (May 06, 2009 11:08 am)
So the typical SHO will be over $40K? That's a lot of money for a Ford, that doesn't have a Shelby emblem.
That sort of price means there are very few people who will consider it seriously, no matter how nice it is.
If I were Ford, I would be concentrating more on vehicles like the Fiesta and an inexpensive small pickup/SUV.
|
- #49 of 275
-
Re: weight and SHO [kernick]
by brucelinc
-
May 06, 2009 (12:30 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: kernick (May 06, 2009 11:47 am)
I agree it sounds high but if you want a higher performance sedan with decent luxury equipment and lots of room, what else is there in that price range? Pontiac G8 will soon be dead. Chrysler 300C and Charger R/T have an iffy future. I don't know what foreign nameplate offers the same combination of size, luxury, and performance for less.
No doubt, the Taurus is moving up-market. Some people might go to a Ford showroom interested in the SHO but drive out in a Fusion Sport, instead. That would still be good for Ford. They haven't had anything interesting to draw much of a crowd for quite some time. Some good press and some interesting cars like the SHO could generate lots more showroom traffic.
|
- #50 of 275
-
Re: weight and SHO [kernick]
by akirby
-
May 06, 2009 (12:40 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: kernick (May 06, 2009 11:47 am)
So the typical SHO will be over $40K? That's a lot of money for a Ford,
It's also a lot more car than any previous Ford sedan - way more. Show me a full size sedan with the same features and power and I guarantee it will cost at least that much and probably way more. An Audi A6 Quattro starts at $62K (and it's smaller).
A fully optioned Accord or Camry goes for $32K (with a lot less power and without AWD). Perhaps you haven't looked at new car prices in a while?
|
- #51 of 275
-
Re: weight and SHO [pod]
by thegraduate
-
May 06, 2009 (7:03 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: pod (May 06, 2009 9:34 am)
Let's stop comparing to Accord here (although I'd welcome a comparison forum if someone else would like, I'd be happy to set it up, just let me know. The Sonata is more of a full-size car than the Accord (the latter of which is only full-size when not equipped with a moonroof, which all V6 models are).
You'd do better to compare to vehicles such as the 300C. Similarly equipped with AWD and the big 5.7, the Chrysler weighs in at 4,280 lbs.
|
- #52 of 275
-
Re: weight and SHO [akirby]
by kirby2010
-
May 27, 2009 (4:39 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (May 06, 2009 12:40 pm)
Excellent comment. In fact I bought a new '94 SHO and sold it in 2001 with 108,000 miles. I bought a new 2001 A-6 2.7T w/6-speed. If I could have bought another 1994 SHO at the time I would have been all over it. I paid $46K for the Audi and I still drive it. 103K miles, no door dings, no rust, serviced every 5K miles at the dealer and hardly anyone ever rides in the back seat. I did take it to the Audi dealer last year to talk trade but I can't see paying $62K to replace this car. In 1994 I paid about $27K for my SHO. $40K-$42K for a 2009 is right in line with what I would expect to pay. There may be some discounting. But if this model is anywhere close to the 1994 this will be a great value. (Interestingly I did a lot of thinking in 2001 becuase the Acura TL was almost exactly the same dimensions as the A-6 and $10K less. But the Acura then was far short of the Audi I bought and the SHO I sold.)
|
- #53 of 275
-
Is the 2010 Taurus in showrooms yet?
by ronsmith38
-
Jun 17, 2009 (5:33 am)
-
|
|
I see the 2009 Taurus is no longer listed in the car lineup on the Ford Cars home page.
|
- #54 of 275
-
2010 Tarus vs 2010 Lacrosse
by jlc
-
Sep 11, 2009 (7:27 am)
-
|
I am looking at both cars but can't make up my mind. I have driven both. I thought the Traus SEL had a firmer ride and more tire noise? The buick was an CX. I was impressed with the interior of both, but the Lacrosse seemed to have a roomier feel. Any other feed back would be appreciated.
Thanks
JLC41
|
- #55 of 275
-
Re: 2010 Tarus vs 2010 Lacrosse [jlc]
by bruneau1
-
Sep 11, 2009 (9:12 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: jlc (Sep 11, 2009 7:27 am)
What tires were on the Taurus? The standard 235/55/18 or the optional 255/45/19.? The latter are stiffer and noisier. We have ordered a SEL with the standard tires. Drove a Limited with the 19" and found the ride too thumpy.
|
- #56 of 275
-
Re: weight and SHO [brucelinc]
by mevander1
-
Sep 12, 2009 (12:24 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: brucelinc (May 06, 2009 11:08 am)
The pricing on the SHO is too high in my opinion, as well as a decently equiped non SHO model. Ford had the chance for a home run here. The Taurus will depreciate vs top German models of smaller size.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans 
