Ask the Car People.SM


2010 Ford Taurus

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

Messages Page 8 of 50

#65 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [akirby] by dodgeman07

Sep 23, 2009 (12:03 am)

Replying to: akirby (Sep 22, 2009 5:48 am)
NASCAR Mike was making light of the fact that $40K is a lot of money for most American sedan buyers. The comparison was not a direct one.
 
Ford has a winner with the new Taurus but it is priced too high. Most nicely equipped offerings are $32K-$33K or about 10% above where they should be.
 
We all know that someone who plunks down $32K today for a well equipped SEL will have a $22K car 6 months from now. The Asian and European makes will depreciate half that much in the same timeframe.
 
I may be interested in a $19K 2010 Taurus with 10,000 miles on it next fall though.
  They'll be plenty around for under $20K soon.

#66 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [dodgeman07] by akirby

Sep 23, 2009 (6:37 am)

Replying to: dodgeman07 (Sep 23, 2009 12:03 am)
The new Taurus is a desirable car that's not being overproduced and isn't being dumped into rental fleets. You can't predict depreciation based on past vehicles.
 
People who say the new Taurus is overpriced simply have no idea how much a new car costs or what the competition offers. The new Taurus isn't a bargain, but go compare it to imports of similar SIZE and features - it's priced competitively.

#67 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [akirby] by thegraduate

Sep 23, 2009 (7:46 am)

Replying to: akirby (Sep 23, 2009 6:37 am)
I agree on price. I spec'd out an Avalon XL with cloth and little 16" wheels. It was more expensive sticker wise a paddle-shift Taurus SEL with leather, Sync, and a popular option package. Wasn't rolling on funny looking tiny wheels either.

#68 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [thegraduate] by akirby

Sep 23, 2009 (8:19 am)

Replying to: thegraduate (Sep 23, 2009 7:46 am)
Exactly. I think some people just like to complain or simply haven't priced the competition lately.
 
Or they want to buy one and can't.

#69 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [akirby] by dodgeman07

Sep 23, 2009 (8:53 am)

Replying to: akirby (Sep 23, 2009 8:19 am)
Right akirby - we have no idea how much a car costs.
 
A used 2010 Toyota Avalon will be worth $27K next year and the comparable Ford Taurus will be worth $19K.
 
Facts are facts. Your opinion that past depreciation doesn't predict future depreciation is what Detroit has been praying for for 25 years. It hasn't helped yet.

#70 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [dodgeman07] by ronsmith38

Sep 23, 2009 (9:07 am)

Replying to: dodgeman07 (Sep 23, 2009 8:53 am)
A used 2010 Toyota Avalon will be worth $27K next year and the comparable Ford Taurus will be worth $19K
May be true, but not many of us buy a car one year and get rid of it the next. For those of us who keep a car for eight or ten years the depreciation is of little concern.
In fact I pay a property tax annually on the value of my vehicles. So, in this case, faster depreciation may be a plus.

#71 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [dodgeman07] by akirby

Sep 23, 2009 (9:11 am)

Replying to: dodgeman07 (Sep 23, 2009 8:53 am)
The point you're totally missing (on purpose?) is that Ford has changed the things that caused poor resale value in the past. Reliability is no longer an issue. They're no longer overproducing and putting huge rebates on the hood of new cars or dumping cars into rental fleets.
 
I don't know what the resale value will be on a 2010 Taurus - and neither do you. We'll just have to wait and see.

#72 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [akirby] by dodgeman07

Sep 23, 2009 (9:33 am)

Replying to: akirby (Sep 23, 2009 9:11 am)
I won't argue with you on re-sale value. Of course for people who keep their cars 10 years, re-sale value is no concern.
 
Ford put a decent body on and interior in the 2010 Taurus. Everything "under the skin" is the same as 2009. Used 2009 Ford Taurus' with 15,000 miles on the clock are available for half of sticker price today. I'm glad I didn't buy one for $34K last year when I can get one today for $17K.
 
I've taken a bath on used Ford's I've traded in. Used Honda's were a much better story.

#73 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [dodgeman07] by akirby

Sep 23, 2009 (9:51 am)

Replying to: dodgeman07 (Sep 23, 2009 9:33 am)
And the 2009 models were boring and had big discounts to move them. If you parked a 2009 and 2010 side by side only a handfull of automotive enthusiasts would know they used the same platform. They're totally different, inside and out. Even the front clip was modified to handle the SHO engine output.

#74 of 493 Re: weight and SHO [dodgeman07] by bruneau1

Sep 23, 2009 (9:57 am)

Replying to: dodgeman07 (Sep 23, 2009 9:33 am)
Not everything under the skin is exactly the same. The suspension has been improved, the engine made more responsive, the transmission programming improved, much more sound insulation, stiffining and reinforcing of the body. This is called refinement. I hate road noise and Hondas have plenty of that. Besides, the new Taurus makes a visual impact which i like. Nobody even notices another boring Honda with good resale value.

Messages Page 8 of 50

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement