Tall, creased sides, a lower roof and large wheels make the 2010 Taurus seem muscular compared with earlier models.
A man dressed in seersucker crossing Sixth Avenue in midtown Manhattan called the 2010 FordTaurus I was driving "beautiful," and asked for a peek at its interior. My aesthetics-obsessed sister said the car's rear end was "all wrong."
For Ford Motor Co., any comment on its redesigned sedan is a step up from last year's Taurus. The older model, while roomy, comfortable and versatile, was cursed with styling so bland that people rarely noticed, much less remarked, on its appearance.
The latest version not only improves on its looks, but on its ride, handling and interior décor. It feels more like a luxury car than a bread-and-butter family sedan, and it gracefully took on the potholes, railroad crossings and bumpy construction zones that litter my commute.
I often use an exit ramp's pavement irregularities – in this case, a series of dips followed by what look like parking-lot speed bumps – to separate high-end cars from the more mundane ones. The bumps feel like hammer blows on the bottom of almost any car that costs less than $40,000. Some lighter vehicles briefly take flight at 60 miles per hour. However, costly models from Audis and Acuras to Porsches traverse the obstacles without drama, their sophisticated suspensions efficiently soaking up the shock.
Chrome, leather and nicely defined shapes in the interior reflect Ford's effort to give the Taurus a more luxurious feel than earlier models. A button allows the driver to switch among several colors for ambient lighting.The Taurus felt like it belonged in the high-end group. There is a reason behind this: The Taurus shares much of its chassis with the Volvo S80, a Ford luxury sedan that often costs $50,000 or more. While the cramped Volvo sedan seems underwhelming for the price, the roomier Taurus starts to look like a particularly good value -- the front-drive model starts at $25,170; the mid-level all-wheel-drive "SEL" model I drove, which is expected to be the most popular, costs $29,020.
In everyday driving, the Taurus feels like a lot of car -- and it is, weighing in at two tons and measuring nearly 17 feet long. Its heft and middle-of-the-road power keep it from feeling sporty. Still, it accelerates smoothly and with adequate authority. And its size and weight give the car a sense of stability, safety and even richness the earlier models lacked.
The fuel economy rating for the all-wheel-drive model I drove is 17 miles per gallon for city driving, 25 on the highway, compared with 17/24 for last year's model and 18/28 for the 2010 front-wheel-drive model. In actual driving, I logged 27 mpg on the highway, which is good for a car this size.
While its exterior gets more attention from passersby -- many couldn't believe my car was a Taurus -- the interior is just as likely to win, or lose, customers. The previous Taurus was known for limousine legroom in the back seat, but the 2010 model has three fewer inches in which passengers can stretch out. Some headroom is gone, and the windows are smaller. This makes the car look more muscular, but also hits at claustrophobia.
Pete Reyes, chief engineer for Taurus, says the interior changes resulted from the new car's lower, more stylish roof, which necessitated lowering the front seats and moving them back about two inches. Thicker seats account for the rest of the lost legroom. To some degree I think the lowered seats make it feel more like a big luxury sedan such as a Lexus, Infiniti or even a Mercedes-Benz -- an effect the older model, with its high, truck-like seating position couldn't achieve.
Earlier Tauruses were known for their huge trunks. The new model has only slightly less cargo space than my mother's 2008 model. Most important: We don't have to remove the front wheel of our jogging stroller to get it in.
My parents, who drive a 2008 Taurus, immediately noticed the smaller interior and decreased visibility, and lodged complaints. But what we all missed much more than the back-seat space was the ease of backing up. The old Taurus's huge rear window gives the driver a better view than the new model's mail-slot-style portal.
The new Taurus still has a huge trunk, though. At 20 cubic feet, it accommodates our jogging stroller without disassembly. With most other cars, we have to take the front wheel off. I also loaded a child's bike and a tricycle into the trunk and still had room for groceries.
There are other hits and misses: Door handles, window switches and other controls have a pleasant, high-quality feel. But the radio knobs seem too light, like a tight grip might crack them. Ford also has a penchant for using a fuzzy, weedy lawn-like fabric to upholster the area behind the back-seat headrests. It is time for a new interior textile -- perhaps smooth felt or faux suede.
But most complaints with the Taurus were minor and wouldn't keep me from buying one. I don't love the rear-end styling, and from some angles the roof seems like Ford borrowed it from a Chrysler 300. But overall it is a desirable car.
Perhaps for the first time in 20 years, the Taurus will no longer be synonymous with rental cars.
Source: The Wall Street Journal | by: Jonathan Welsh Wed | 12/12/2009
0 Comment:
Post a Comment