Ask the Car People.SM


Article Comments - 2010 Ford Taurus vs. 2009 Honda Accord

40 messages,  Last post on Nov 30, 2010 at 7:06 AM

You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Forum.

What is this discussion about? Ford Taurus, Honda Accord, Car Comparisons, Sedan

Comparison Test: 2010 Ford Taurus vs. 2009 Honda Accord - Officially, the 2010 Ford Taurus and 2009 Honda Accord each seat five. Realistically, neither of these large sedans will ever see more than four passengers. And nobody will so much as rub an elbow, shoulder, buttock or knee during the 15-minute drive to the sushi buffet. (more)

Messages Page 3 of 4

#21 of 40 Re: Typical BS. [brucelinc] by neuspeed

Aug 03, 2009 (6:19 am)

Replying to: brucelinc (Jul 23, 2009 5:47 am)
That's awesome.........according to Edmunds, the V6 Fusion kicks the V6 Accord to the curb but it's big brother Taurus can't do the same.......I guess lighter, cheaper wins the race.......
 
But I do have to agree w/a lot of the folks on this post. The Taurus is HUGE compared to the Fusion or Accord. The #s don't do it justice. Just stand next to one........No one should x-shop the Accord vs. Taurus......
 
I like the Fusion the best but I can't imagine anything (besides the Town Car) being safer to drive than the new Taurus.....the car just feels so substantial.....it's HUGE....and that should count a lot especially when these cars have basically the same fuel efficiency.....

#22 of 40 Re: ak47.Honda Rules.NO1 [nomoredubs] by berri

Aug 03, 2009 (8:41 am)

Replying to: nomoredubs (Aug 02, 2009 6:47 pm)
...amd Honda is one of the few cars still using interference engines with timing belts!

#23 of 40 Re: Typical BS. [neuspeed] by baggs32

Aug 03, 2009 (9:23 am)

Replying to: neuspeed (Aug 03, 2009 6:19 am)
But I do have to agree w/a lot of the folks on this post. The Taurus is HUGE compared to the Fusion or Accord. The #s don't do it justice. Just stand next to one........No one should x-shop the Accord vs. Taurus......
 
Count me in on that too. Also, only those Accords without a moonroof are classified as large cars. The tester in this comparo was an EX-L V6 which means it had a moonroof and is therefore classified as a mid-sized car by the EPA. i.e. it competes with the Camry, Fusion, Altima, etc.

#24 of 40 Re: Typical BS. [baggs32] by elroy5

Aug 03, 2009 (2:25 pm)

Replying to: baggs32 (Aug 03, 2009 9:23 am)
The reviewers did mention that the Accord felt larger inside, so I think the interiors are comparable, regardless of the actual measurements. Both cars have way more interior space than the Fusion. The impression I got from the article is they felt the Taurus was more comfortable and accommodating on long trips (smoother ride, softer seats, larger trunk for luggage), but the Accord would be the one they wanted to drive every day (better handling, performance, and better designed interior). Which one you think is better depends on what you want from a large car. I think these cars are very comparable.

#25 of 40 Re: Typical BS. [elroy5] by baggs32

Aug 04, 2009 (9:24 am)

Replying to: elroy5 (Aug 03, 2009 2:25 pm)
The reviewers did mention that the Accord felt larger inside, so I think the interiors are comparable, regardless of the actual measurements.
 
Correct, but totally irrelevant because the reviewer was going by EPA classification when comparing them and not how they "feel". You can't have it both ways when trying to be objective.
 
I see them as being somewhat comparable in size (save for the Accord's pathetic excuse for a trunk and don't get me started on the stupid circa 1980s "U" arms Honda still uses on the lid) too. However when it comes to available equipment at the same price points there is no comparison. The Taurus wins that race hands down.

#27 of 40 Re: Typical BS. [baggs32] by elroy5

Aug 04, 2009 (2:33 pm)

Replying to: baggs32 (Aug 04, 2009 9:24 am)
However when it comes to available equipment at the same price points there is no comparison. The Taurus wins that race hands down.
 
Is available equipment the only thing that's important to you? Personally, I don't need SYNC. I guess the reviewers didn't think it was enough to sway the decision either. I like my moonroof, too bad the Taurus didn't have one. I think the biggest point for the Accord was that it had all the interior space of the Taurus, without the Town Car ride and handling.

#28 of 40 Sync Fails by mikemartin

Aug 05, 2009 (12:42 am)

Here's how great sync is (not):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja65oINs1gs

#29 of 40 Re: Sync Fails [mikemartin] by baggs32

Aug 05, 2009 (10:47 am)

Replying to: mikemartin (Aug 05, 2009 12:42 am)
That's just the new Navi feature and one scenario. It's certainly not perfect but it can help you in a pinch and it's free. If you want something better, spring for a portable unit or the factory versions. Good grief.

#30 of 40 Re: Typical BS. [elroy5] by baggs32

Aug 06, 2009 (9:40 am)

Replying to: elroy5 (Aug 04, 2009 2:33 pm)
Is available equipment the only thing that's important to you?
 
Nope. Just like everyone else I have a list of things that are important to me.
 
Personally, I don't need SYNC. I guess the reviewers didn't think it was enough to sway the decision either.
 
SYNC is not the only feature the Taurus had over the Accord.
 
I like my moonroof, too bad the Taurus didn't have one.
 
No, too bad the Accord did. Because they chose to compare an Accord EX, which comes with a moonroof standard, they completely made this comparo irrelevant. Their statement was that they were comparing large, sedans and the Accord EX is not classified as such by the EPA. To make this apples to apples they have to compare an Accord LX which is a large sedan according to the EPA. Doing that lowers the price for the Accord significantly but also gets you smaller wheels, a much smaller engine, and far less features/options. The smaller engine and wheels could very well take that small handling advantage away from the Accord. Yes, even against a Taurus SE or SEL.
 
I understand why they compared the top Accord to the Taurus and that similar size/space measurement you keep preaching. However they did not compare comparable models and they could have just as easily compared a Taurus SEL to the same Accord and it would have been much closer or even a different result altogether because the SEL's price is quite a bit lower than the Limited's and is far more comparable, in size and features, to the EX-L V6.
 
IIRC Edmunds also just compared an Accord LX to a 2010 Fusion SEL and the Fusion won. I think the Edmunds editors need to communicate a little more before they go posting articles willy nilly again.

Messages Page 3 of 4

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