Test drive: 2010 Ford Taurus SHO
Tuesday June 23, 2009
Yesterday we discussed the 2010 Ford Taurus -- a good, solid hit, but not quite out of the ballpark. Today's review is the hot-rod version, the 365 horsepower Taurus SHO (which also happens to be the first car I've driven with Ford's new EcoBoost twin-turbo engine). So is this the car that'll have 'em standing in the bleachers? Find out in my 2010 Ford Taurus SHO test drive and review. -- Aaron Gold
Photo © Aaron Gold
Comments
I just can’t get past that to me it is the Robert Wadlow version of a Subaru Legacy…
So it handles like it was on rails, has a great ride, and is very fast but lacks passion?
Okay I admit that this car needs an manual or a DSG that is a given. Other than that it sound great. Also isn’t this car bigger than the G8 and G38?
Now if they would just put that motor in the Milan or the Fusion then we would have a real enthusiast car. But for a fast, full sized car this sound pretty good. It just needs a manual.
I like the effort. Pretty nice styling, inside and out. It’s probably a pretty nice car. But it just doesn’t work. The car just looks a bit too big to be a sports sedan. Too expensive. Doesn’t have the right shape. Kill the Taurus and bring us a Mondeo SHO and Focus RS.
Aaron,
Yours is the second review of the 2010 Taurus and SHO that I have read that seems to have an oddly indifferent or disaffected tone to the review of these cars, and I am just wondering why.
Both reviews said that the cars looked good, performed well, were powerful enough, had good handling dynamics, much improved interiors, had enough technology to satisfy the geekiest among us, good build quality and all of the other factors that the auto press usually insists must be present in a superior vehicle. But in the end, both your review and the other that I read on these same two vehicles, left me thinking that there must be something negative about these cars that the reviewers could not (or would not) express.
Your comment about the car lacking “passion” is a theme similar to what I read in the other review. But, I don’t know how to interpret a comment about a lack of passion as it applies to a fast, good-handling car that seems to do almost everything very well. Can you elaborate a little?
Thanks,
Steve in GA
Aaron, really like the side view of the car, but…. for a car pushing close to $50,000 fully loaded, I want it to “scare” me when I stab the throttle. Sounds like a 335i or G37 is the better deal for that kind of money.
Not quite sure that the Big 3 quite gets the American buying public just yet.
Wow is that just ugly. Why can’t Ford make a car that looks good. Even Hyundai figured that out with the Genesis. Looks is more than half of the selling point of a car. Pontiac GTO come to mind? Great car with boring look. Dodge Charger, terrible car with great look. Come on america, try and build something with both other than a truck or SUV.
Steve in GA –
The Taurus is skilled, but it’s not very involving. There’s no drama — not much feedback from the steering, no good sounds coming from the exhaust, no gears to shift, no twitches from the suspension. It goes fast, it grips well, and if you push hard the tires squeal, then it understeers, then the stability control system takes over. There’s just not a whole lot for the driver to do. I drove with Autoblog’s Chris Paukert on some *very* challenging roads, and we both kept backing down after a while. I felt, and I think Chris concurred, as if I *could* drive the car faster, but why bother? There just wasn’t a challenge. It’s like a two-piece jigsaw puzzle. There’s that, and the fact that it just doesn’t feel as far removed from an ordinary Taurus as an M3 does from a 335i, an IS-F does from an IS350, a C63 AMG does fro a C350, etc.
Now, Ford does have a Performance Package with better tires and a stability control system that can be set for partial-off operation. Maybe that one will be a bit more involving to drive — hopefully I’ll be able to test one in a few months. — Aaron
Steve — I’m just reading Chris’ review at Autoblog, and he goes into more detail about why the SHO is a bit of a snoozer. (Damn them and their lack of space restrictions! *G*)
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/23/first-drive-2010-ford-taurus-sho-offers-excellence-without-emot/
Aaron
“Mad skills,yo”? Really? Whats next, 24’s on your Accord?
“Yet it takes the edge off hard jolts as if the suspension was made of Vicoden.” – Its Vicodin, -5 pts on your essay Mr. Gold.
Spelling corrected. Clearly, you can see how much experience I have with prescription painkillers. Although what experiences I have had were rather memorable. Except the ones I can’t remember. Thanks, Joe! — Aaron
Aaron, Thanks.
Steve in GA
4.8 second 0-60s…13.3s in the quarter…Anything that big that runs that fast deserves respect…Nice work Ford Motor Company…I love it…
Were I in the market for a ~40k sport sedan, I’d probably pick up a G8 GXP (while supplies last!).
That said, this is a sharp looking vehicle that is a good match for how most people drive: lots of plodding around, wishing the seats were more comfortable interspersed with full-throttle freeway entrances.
Just mind those offramps, given what I’ve heard of the brakes.
Jeff — who ran it in 4.8? Ford was saying 5.2, and I think that’s the Performance Package which has lower gearing (and therefore better acceleration). — Aaron
Hmmm. Nearly $50K by the time you are out the door. When I bought my original SHO, not only did it have major attitude, but it was a screaming deal. This…not so much.
For nearly $50K, there are a lot of other 4 door sedans that I can pick up, both new and used that have major attitude and a stellar driving experience. You can buy a fairly low mileage Audi S-6 with all wheel drive and pretty much the same 430 horsepower V-10 they use in the Gallardo. I can buy a 06 BMW M-5 for $47K on Ebay with 24K original miles on it and a great stonking 500 HP V-10. Why Ford would choose to force me to put the trans in “M” to downshift with the paddles is beyond me. And I was so looking forward to this car.
I think the Taurus is a excellent choice for people that want to move up from the camcord class of cars and not be stuck with a grandma car like the Avalon. I currenly drive a 03 Accord that has been a wonderful car but I want some thing a little bigger and flashier. As far as mileage goes the Taurus with 18/28 mpg beats the V6 Malibu 17/26, V6 Altima 19/26, V6 Mazda 6 17/25 and is comparable to the V6 Camry and Accord. And price wise those V6 models are within just hundreds of dollars of the Taurus SE. Kinda a no brainer!The Taurus is bigger in almost every dimmension. I think I will be driving a new Tarus soon!
Aaron Gold ….. American?
Guess not, his love affair with Japanese autos is nauseating to say the least.
His perpetual dissing of US cars makes his articles less than useful …
Won’t stop him though
Keith, you’re right — I mean, how dare I evaluate cars based on their individual merits rather than their country of origin. Shame on me for trying to help consumers get the most for their money. They ought to revoke my passport. — Aaron
Aaron I’m writing this not about the the Taurus SHO, but rather about the stylistic approach you took in writing your review. Your varied combinations of metaphors and imagery, betrays the hidden yearnings of a novelist.No doubt you are aching to write that liberating creative, artistic piece that will free you from the bondage of the shackles of commerical wtriting/blogging that pays your bills. I feel your pain and have completed 33 chapters of a novel of my own undertaking.
My brother, I feel your passion!!!