Article Comments - 2010 Ford Taurus vs. 2009 Honda Accord

38 messages, Last post on Sep 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM

You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

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)

Outline

Messages Page 2 of 5: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; Prev; Next; Last

#7 of 38 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Ford Taurus vs. 2009 Honda Accord [KarenS] by cawfebug Jul 23, 2009 (7:56 am)
Replying to: KarenS (Jul 22, 2009 11:10 am) I come from a Ford family, but have had many a Honda as well as Ford. To be technical, they have to compare them because of the EPA rated "large car" category. However, I do think they are completely different cars and the comparison just doesn't work. The Taurus is HUGE! It certainly feels more upscale. I had a 07 Honda Civic hybrid and couldn't stand the dashboard design. Too fussy... like something from a sci-fi movie - same for the Accord. So, yes, the editor, (naturally as anyone would) has their own opinion on driving qualities. I would say that I've disagreed with almost every automotive magazine. You can read the comparison, but it's up to you to go drive it and make a decision. and yes... Hondas have tons of road noise, and that is why they weigh less.
#8 of 38 Live with One for awhile by wjtinatl Jul 23, 2009 (10:23 am)
Having owned both Accord and (old) Taurus, I'd say living with one for a couple months might tilt the deck to the Ford. Most people use cars like this for mundane tasks; commuting, the family trip to the beach, the household runs to Wal-Mart, Home Depot and the grocery store. Same way I use my cars 99% of the time and I am a enthusiast (Focus SVT and Camaro Z-28 SS). 3/10ths of a second zero to 60 doesn't matter except 1 time on paper, better mileage on regular gas does, every few days at the pump. A couple hundred pounds savings is nice on paper, however a huge trunk and back seat compensate nicely on those big box store and beach trips. Crisper handling and faster slalom times is cool in the press, a quieter ride and better highway composure on comfort will matter more at the 40th payment. Quality wise, press and my experience rate it a draw, no recent Honda experience but my 3 Ford products dating back to 2002 and 90k miles have been trouble-free. Wildcard in this scenario (and unmentioned in the article) will be resale value. Here Honda's shine and Ford's (and most domestics) pale. Hopefully Ford and the others have gotten religion, scaled their production schedules to retail customers and won't result to dumping 100,000 Taurus's into Hertz, that will be re-sold at half of original sticker in 6-12 months. That's what kills the resale value. As a family that usually uses a full-size SUV (Navigator) as the vacation vehicle of choice, 800 miles around New England in a rented Chrysler 300 reminded me just how comfortable a full-size car can be. For my money, I'll skip the track test results and concentrate on how livable a car will be. Looks like the Taurus would be my choice.
#9 of 38 Re: Typical BS. [mschmal] by elroy5 Jul 23, 2009 (1:44 pm)
Replying to: mschmal (Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am) First of all the comparison is irrelevant, the Accord is not going to be cross shopped with the Taurus. Why wouldn't the Taurus and Accord be cross shopped? They are both "large" cars now. Second they didn't even mention may of the real world important points where the Taurus totally destroys the Accord, such as in Truck space, interior passenger space, ability to run on regular gas. They certainly did mention trunk space, and said the Taurus was a better cross country cruiser. They also mentioned that the Accord felt more spacious in the cabin, whether driving, or riding in back. Of course, if you have people riding in the trunk, they'll have more room in there. They also said the Accord had the more ergonomically designed interior. The Accord does run on regular gas. Did you actually read the article, or did you see that the Accord won, and immediately dismissed everything they said? It was not all about 0-60 times. Why do people HATE the Accord so much?
#10 of 38 What does fun have to do with these cars? by testuser3 Jul 23, 2009 (6:10 pm)
People hate the Accord/Camry, because they epitomize soulless appliances on wheels. Price wise the Fusion competes with the Accord and that's what most people will cross shop. Still, it's surprising when you actually look at the sizes of these cars. The Accord is actually in between the Fusion and Taurus in terms of size. It's a good deal longer than a Fusion and a good deal shorter than a Taurus. Camry = 189 inches long Fusion = 190 inches long Accord = 194 inches long Taurus = 200 inches long I'll agree, most don't cross shop these, but you can make a case for it. Still, it would be nice if these stats were scrutinized in the article. As far as performance is concerned, no one buying this car is going to care much, which means the focus should be on practicality entirely. They both return miserable 0-60 times, terrible 1/4 mile times and are front wheel drive. People buying these cars want to haul a lot of stuff, get decent gas mileage and have a few nice features. I guess one could be more "fun", then than the other. It depends on your definition of fun, though. Which one is more fun to drive: an Accord or a Taurus? It's like asking which is more fun: to close your finger in a car door or miss a nail and hit your thumb with a hammer? I'm not sure, but I don't like either.
#11 of 38 Re: Article Comments - 2010 Ford Taurus vs. 2009 Honda Accord [KarenS] by jayburu2002 Jul 26, 2009 (6:18 pm)
Replying to: KarenS (Jul 22, 2009 11:10 am) Hello. We at Honda look to make sure that we instill just enough road noise to make you wonder why the hell we don't do anything about our road noise. Pilot, Accord, Civic, Insight & Fit owners will enjoy the lack of sound insulation from noisy tires we provide...now...open the back window and feel the deafening, low frequency wind buffeting your ear drums....ahhhhhhhONDA. Ford is better. Jut drive it.
#12 of 38 Drag strip..0-60...quarter mile...? by ministerpaul08 Jul 27, 2009 (6:58 pm)
I just can't understand the relevance of testing family sedans on the drag strip unless they're built for that kind of driving. What I'm more interested in is city driving, resale value, reliability, comfort, and value. I don't plan on driving an accord/Camry to the weekend races for a showdown with soccer moms. Ford has made improvements, but is nowhere near Toyota/Honda in consistent quality/reliability across their lineup. Sure Ford has slightly pulled a head with the Fusion, Focus, and Escape, but Ford has no reason to celebrate or rest on its laurels. The new Ford Taurus looks nice, but remains unproven and can not ride the exhaust fumes of its smaller siblings. And at that price one can find a much better vehicle than the Taurus...like the Fusion for one.
#13 of 38 Accord Owner by edk57 Jul 28, 2009 (10:43 am)
I am not sure how you came to your conclusion! I owen a 2006 V6 EX-L and its one the worst Accords I ever had. The change in size between previous and new accord reminds me of Ford when they changed the original Taures in the early Nineties. The current accord driver seats totaly uncomfertable on long drives, my V6 was replaced due to it was consuming oil. Also, go on your owen website and autobeef.com and see how many many compliants the owners have on the accord rear brakes wearing prematurly. I am impressed with Ford's new products and my next car will be a Fusion because its just sized right. Replies to this message: elroy5 (Jul 28, 2009 1:09 pm) edk57 (Jul 29, 2009 8:02 am) bruneau1 (Aug 14, 2009 9:50 am) brucelinc (Aug 15, 2009 5:34 am)
#14 of 38 Re: Accord Owner [edk57] by elroy5 Jul 28, 2009 (1:09 pm)
Replying to: edk57 (Jul 28, 2009 10:43 am) You say the Accord is too big, and the seats are uncomfortable, yet you bought one anyway? I can maybe understand that a test drive didn't reveal that the seats were uncomfortable, but the car didn't grow after you bought it. Why didn't you buy a Fusion in the first place? Replies to this message: edk57 (Jul 29, 2009 8:02 am)
#15 of 38 Re: Accord Owner [elroy5] by edk57 Jul 29, 2009 (8:02 am)
Replying to: elroy5 (Jul 28, 2009 1:09 pm) I screwed up, I bought it based on past experiances with older Accords (i.e. still have a 1993 Accord that runs great an I enjoy driving). Also, When I bought the 2008 Accord in NOV 2007, the 2009 Fusion was avaliable which I didn't test drive, the 2010 Fusion was not out yet.
#16 of 38 But what? by rlyon Jul 31, 2009 (12:32 pm)
I'm confused. The article said "It was a big lug, a slobbery SUV shaped like a sedan." but was talking about the last gen apparently. Maybe they didn't see the photos or car correctly because that description COMPLETELY describes the new Taurus. It's a tall square box that looks the like F-150 design crew got a hold of the design duties. The same way the Lincoln MKS is a monstering, towering beast of a car, the Taurus is long, tall, square, stiff, boring, and looks like a flattened SUV. They had to jack up the rear end to allow the driver to see over the flat hood! Ford needs to confiscate ALL rulers and give it's designers FRENCH CURVES!!! Replies to this message: berri (Jul 31, 2009 5:40 pm)