2010 Taurus Sho vs. 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD

[blue2fire]

Originally Posted by Seminole

The SHO comes standard with Sync. All the tech goodies in the TL are optional with the tech package, and the SHO not only matches every tech option of the TL but offers some that aren't even available including:

-Heated and cooled front seats
-Rear heated seats
-Rear power sunshade
-Memory power adjustable pedals
-Auto-highbeam headlights
-Rain sensing wipers (seriously can't believe the TL doesn't have these)
-Blind spot monitoring system
-Cross traffic alert system




C&D did a Comparison of the TL-SH vs A4 vs G37 vs 328 and the TL came in dead last. (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...mparison_tests) It was slower to 60mph than a 328, though it essentially matched the BMW and Infiniti in braking and the skidpad.

1. I have no comment on the in depth feature list, only commented on 11past9's whining of the lack of Apple iPod support.

Still, it should be noted that the Taurus does not come standard with any of that, they are available in the Rapid Spec - 402A Package and this shouldnt be compared with the TL's tech pack anyway because you need to pay extra for nav in the Ford dreary even after selecting this rapid pack.

2. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...topanel..1.*#2

[Michael Schott]

Originally Posted by Seminole

The SHO comes standard with Sync. All the tech goodies in the TL are optional with the tech package, and the SHO not only matches every tech option of the TL but offers some that aren't even available including:

-Heated and cooled front seats
-Rear heated seats
-Rear power sunshade
-Memory power adjustable pedals
-Auto-highbeam headlights
-Rain sensing wipers (seriously can't believe the TL doesn't have these)
-Blind spot monitoring system
-Cross traffic alert system




C&D did a Comparison of the TL-SH vs A4 vs G37 vs 328 and the TL came in dead last. (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...mparison_tests) It was slower to 60mph than a 328, though it essentially matched the BMW and Infiniti in braking and the skidpad.

Did you read Car and Driver's review of the new SHO? It's not exactly flattering. Basically they think the car is too heavy and the handling is soft. It may be a good car but it's no world beater.

If I were in the market for a full size car, neither of these would be on my list. A G8 GTX is the way to go if you can still find one.

Thanks, Mike.

[imported_mega]

Originally Posted by darkcloud

Ford on the other hand makes 98% crap, interior/exterior doesn't matter.

stop badgewhoring for a second, how many fords have you owned, or even spend some time driving? Surly you cant be this ignorant.

We bought a 2004 f150 when they hit the lots. It was the best truck when it came out, head and shoulders above every other 2004 truck, we still love it. It has one of the best interiors and exteriors of any full size 1/2 ton truck there is, still to this day.


We also owned an old taurus, along with an E30, I had more trouble with the E30, all the standard e30 things. The taurus held up really well, went cross country a few times, and survived my 2 kids. I kept the e30 but it wore quite a bit worse than the taurus did

[11Past9]

Originally Posted by Vudoo4u2

I'll throw it out there, you like to yell.

But that aside

Some cars are financially worth leasing, some arent. The difference? depreciation.

I won't argue with that however MANY MANY people do not lease, in many cases leasing is a horrible way to spend their money. Leasing isn't attractive to people who modify their cars, or people who plan to keep their cars, or people who drive a lot.

And in this case someone was preaching about AWD systems and the track... how smart or likely is it that someone takes a leased car to a track considering the liability of even small things.

To a lot of people, depreciation is a bonus. I know it is for me. I love the prospect of buying a C6 zO6 with 6,000 miles on it for $43,000 and laugh at not having to pay $70,000 like the guy before me just did.

People can say "oh but I like to know what was done to the car, you never know" bla bla bla. Get it looked at, car fax it and drive it. If it checks out then you're fine.

You don't know what happened to the girl youre currently dating before you now do ya, and she one day could end up being your WIFE!

[11Past9]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

1. I have no comment on the in depth feature list, only commented on 11past9's whining of the lack of Apple iPod support.

I wasn't whining about it, I was being a smart ass about people who do...

Someone commented about the tech goodies the TL has over the SHO...

I said ZOMGGGGG NO Ipodddd. You get it now.

[11Past9]

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

Did you read Car and Driver's review of the new SHO? It's not exactly flattering. Basically they think the car is too heavy and the handling is soft. It may be a good car but it's no world beater.

If I were in the market for a full size car, neither of these would be on my list. A G8 GTX is the way to go if you can still find one.

Thanks, Mike.

Don't you mean GXP?

I take magazine reveiws with a grain of salt... do you know how many times they said the RX-8 was the better car compared to the 350z and Honda s2000? RX-8's are JUNK! They have over 60 active service bulletins

[darkcloud]

Originally Posted by imported_mega

stop badgewhoring for a second, how many fords have you owned, or even spend some time driving? Surly you cant be this ignorant.

We bought a 2004 f150 when they hit the lots. It was the best truck when it came out, head and shoulders above every other 2004 truck, we still love it. It has one of the best interiors and exteriors of any full size 1/2 ton truck there is, still to this day.


We also owned an old taurus, along with an E30, I had more trouble with the E30, all the standard e30 things. The taurus held up really well, went cross country a few times, and survived my 2 kids. I kept the e30 but it wore quite a bit worse than the taurus did

Dude I grew up on American. My parents had nothing but Fords, Mercury's and Chevy.

I learned on a 92 Ford Explorer. I drove the crap out of a 98 and 02 Mercury Mountaineer. Before the Explorer's my parents had 2 or 3 Taurus/Sables as well. My Dad's has had a laundry list of S-10's. We've also had 3 Jeeps, a 90 Wrangler, 04 and 05 Liberty's

Needless to say the Ford's got worse over time. The 90 Jeep was a classic and tank, the Liberty's on the other had sucked dick. My dad's 3 S-10's were nice from 84-94 then the 98 and 01 were garbage. So no, I'm not badge whoring. Oh I don't even have a BMW either if you are trying to peg me as a BMW snob.

I also saw an 05 or 06 F-150 on Sunday afternoon. It was rusted to shit all over the body. No sign of an accident either to say that was the cause. And I don't care how bad the Cleveland winters are percieved and even if the guy never washed his truck. There is no reason for a 4 year old car to be rusting in multiple locations let a lone 1.

Ford as a whole isn't all that great. Maybe they'll turn it around. But untill they can put together 5-10 good years of good looking, quality, and reliable cars I personally won't look twice.

[imported_mega]

Originally Posted by darkcloud

I also saw an 05 or 06 F-150 on Sunday afternoon. It was rusted to shit all over the body. No sign of an accident either to say that was the cause. And I don't care how bad the Cleveland winters are percieved and even if the guy never washed his truck. There is no reason for a 4 year old car to be rusting in multiple locations let a lone 1.

I was with you up to this point, do you expect me to believe this?

is it even physically possible for a truck that new to rust even when dunked into saltwater?

I have scratches in my 04 that still have not even got surface rust

[11Past9]

Originally Posted by imported_mega

I was with you up to this point, do you expect me to believe this?

is it even physically possible for a truck that new to rust even when dunked into saltwater?

I have scratches in my 04 that still have not even got surface rust

My dad had a 1996 F-150, he bought it used and sold it in 2006. Until 2005 it had not a spot of rust. He lives in Maine and works for the department of transportation up north and was constantly on salt/dirt/snowy roads.

I live in an area dominated by trucks, SUV's and what not and I find the statement ridiculous that an F-150 that old has rust on it...

Ford may suck at a lot, GM may suck at a lot but one thing you can't deny is that they make a hell of a truck. Tough, strong, and long lasting.

If rust is the new topic I'd like to point out that Toyota is NOTORIOUS for rusty trucks. Rust so bad I can't even explain, not just surface but straight up rotting bodies...

Nissan too

[darkcloud]

Originally Posted by 11Past9

My dad had a 1996 F-150, he bought it used and sold it in 2006. Until 2005 it had not a spot of rust. He lives in Maine and works for the department of transportation up north and was constantly on salt/dirt/snowy roads.

I live in an area dominated by trucks, SUV's and what not and I find the statement ridiculous that an F-150 that old has rust on it...

Ford may suck at a lot, GM may suck at a lot but one thing you can't deny is that they make a hell of a truck. Tough, strong, and long lasting.

If rust is the new topic I'd like to point out that Toyota is NOTORIOUS for rusty trucks. Rust so bad I can't even explain, not just surface but straight up rotting bodies...

Nissan too

I knew I should have taken a picture but I also have no reason to lie. I kid you not, around the lower 1/3 of the car had rust spots all over the place. Why?, I don't know but they were there. A majority where located on the front bumper, this model F-150 also had the color matched lower front bumper, not the chrome stuff. Most of the rust spots were between the size of a quarter and a 50 cent piece.

Why would I really lie about this? Oh the truck was also yellow. I go to the Home Depot I saw it parked at pretty regularly, if I see it again I'll take a picture.

My dad has a 06 Tacoma, no rust. Has held up to his abuse much better then any of his S-10's ever did. He puts around 30-40k a year on the truck as it's a work vehicle. He's about to turn it in for a '10 Tacoma TRD Sport.

[imported_mega]

Originally Posted by darkcloud

My dad has a 06 Tacoma, no rust. Has held up to his abuse much better then any of his S-10's ever did. He puts around 30-40k a year on the truck as it's a work vehicle. He's about to turn it in for a '10 Tacoma TRD Sport.

my parents have a tacoma and the frame rusted out, it was replaced under the toyota frame recall

every brand can have issues, I would not touch any modern 7 series with a 10' pole

[darkcloud]

Originally Posted by imported_mega

every brand can have issues, I would not touch any modern 7 series with a 10' pole

I'd lease one but that's about it. Prolly couldn't afford it either way

[islandbimmer]

I think Acura messed up big time with this look, their sales are down big in Canada this year while BMWs grew modestly. The only Acura dealer on Vancouver Island just closed its doors this month, the BMW dealer seems to be doing alright. The TL in black from the front in my view looks good, the problem appears to be the side view the car is big and bulky in an akward way and doesnot match the front and rear sharp angular stance.

[ChrisV]

Wow. Som seriously retarded, ignorant, children with zero real world experience ITT.

the SHO may be $45k, but it's the top of th eline halo version of the Taurus. Most will be in the $25-35k range, which is right in line with other full size sedans. (and those comparing it pricewise to much smaller cars ar morons. Simply morons. Oh, and yeah, compare it to a car that isn't even in production anymore, that's brilliant. Might as well compare it to an E39 while youre at it. Or even my own E38.

Speaking of which, BS talk about depreciation... Depreciation is BS on a car not yet to market. How do you determine depreciation of a car that doesn't yet have a resale/demand history? And to say that high depreciation is due to the car being junk, well, I can say that my E38 is nowhere near junk (I love the car to death), but it's depreciation curve, like ALL mass produced full size luxury cars (excepting the real high end stuff) is horrible, losing half it's value in the first two years. Yeah, it lost the TOTAL value of an SHO in two years time. So much for brand value, eh?



As for American car quality, of the hundred plus cars I've owned in the last 30 years, only three were bought new. All of them domestic, two of them were Fords. And they were all flawless for the entire time I owned them. My '99 SVT Contour was one of my favorite cars, and absolute performance bargain, and completely reliable. Junk? Not hardly. But immature and completely clueless little brand snobs here wouldn't have the brainpower to get it.

[Michael Schott]

Originally Posted by 11Past9

Don't you mean GXP?

I take magazine reveiws with a grain of salt... do you know how many times they said the RX-8 was the better car compared to the 350z and Honda s2000? RX-8's are JUNK! They have over 60 active service bulletins

Yes GXP. Thanks.

Regarding car reviews, over the 30+ years I've subscribed to C and D, I've found my tastes in cars are similar to theirs. We like the same traits. Regarding reliability, they don't consider that in their tests. C and D, Motor Trend and R & T are enthusiasts magazine's not Consumer's Reports. By the way when did they say the RX-8 was better than the other 2?

Thanks, Mike.

[Vudoo4u2]

Originally Posted by ChrisV

Wow. Som seriously retarded, ignorant, children with zero real world experience ITT.

the SHO may be $45k, but it's the top of th eline halo version of the Taurus. Most will be in the $25-35k range, which is right in line with other full size sedans. (and those comparing it pricewise to much smaller cars ar morons. Simply morons. Oh, and yeah, compare it to a car that isn't even in production anymore, that's brilliant. Might as well compare it to an E39 while youre at it. Or even my own E38.

Speaking of which, BS talk about depreciation... Depreciation is BS on a car not yet to market. How do you determine depreciation of a car that doesn't yet have a resale/demand history? And to say that high depreciation is due to the car being junk, well, I can say that my E38 is nowhere near junk (I love the car to death), but it's depreciation curve, like ALL mass produced full size luxury cars (excepting the real high end stuff) is horrible, losing half it's value in the first two years. Yeah, it lost the TOTAL value of an SHO in two years time. So much for brand value, eh?



As for American car quality, of the hundred plus cars I've owned in the last 30 years, only three were bought new. All of them domestic, two of them were Fords. And they were all flawless for the entire time I owned them. My '99 SVT Contour was one of my favorite cars, and absolute performance bargain, and completely reliable. Junk? Not hardly. But immature and completely clueless little brand snobs here wouldn't have the brainpower to get it.

If depreciation is high, the market has deemed the car not worth much used, thats all. It doesnt mean that you cant like a car with a high rate of depreciation, or that you might not get one which serves you well for a while. It just means that the market isnt willing to pay much for it, and this has a lot to do with brand and quality.

As for it being impossible to discuss depreciation on a new car. Youre wrong. How do you think they will lease this car if they have no depreciation data? There are already depreciation calculations, and they are largely based on this brand, and how their cars in this range tend to depreciate.

There is a reason some brands have lower depreciation. The brand with the lowest depreciation is...you might have guessed it...honda. I wonder why....

oh right, their cars are known for reliability, little to no repairs, or cheap repairs, and in the used car market, thats a huge factor.

Dont get me wrong, you can find a nice used car for cheap, but a used BMW, isnt exactly known for awesomeness, and thats largely due to the high cost of repair. This is the reason why a lot of used BMWs are cheap. The market deems them not worth buying beyond a certain price because of the cost factor of fixing and maintaining them. A used honda in comparison, will require 1/4 the cost to maintain or repair. In the used car market, luxury brands are "junk" in the sense that they depreciate at a higher rate because of the very high cost of repair, so they arent really worth very much used (in comparison to how less expensive hondas cost relative to their initial cost).

I dont mean that a used luxo is trash, but monetarily speaking, its a junk bond. It can give you higher returns than an AAA bond, but theres also higher risk involved, and thats why you arent willing to pay as much for it.

[blue2fire]

Here is the evidence to support some of our claims.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/21/b...sidual-values/

They interestingly rated Honda and Acura as having the highest residuals, you couldn't go wrong with the TL then. Article is of the latest survey (published November 2008).

A few excerpts:

"If you want a car with strong residual value, it wouldn't hurt to buy a Honda, as the Japanese automaker has won it's sixth consecutive Automotive Lease Guide residual award. Honda's Acura division joined its less expensive sibling for the first time by taking the top spot for luxury vehicles, too, making it a clean sweep for team H-badge"

"Japanese automakers won 11 of the 18 overall segment awards, while U.S. automakers won or shared three segments"

Industry Brand Residual Value Rankings
Rank Brand
1 HONDA
2 SUBARU
3 VOLKSWAGEN
4 TOYOTA
5 NISSAN
6 MAZDA
7 SUZUKI
8 SATURN
9 PONTIAC

Luxury Brand Residual Value Rankings
Rank Brand
1 ACURA
2 LEXUS
3 AUDI
4 INFINITI
5 LAND ROVER
6 BMW
7 PORSCHE
8 MERCEDES BENZ

Ford, GM and Chrysler must have been away meeting with the bankruptcy attorneys. Only Pontiac and Saturn had tiny mention (they axed and sold off them too).

So, very poor brand and the people who make the choices seem to agree.

[blue2fire]

Please allow me to show you one more.

http://corporate.honda.com/press/article.aspx?id=4877

Honda Brand Earns 2009 Overall Best Resale Value Award from Kelley Blue Book's kbb.com

Honda has been honored today with several of Kelley Blue Book's (www.kbb.com) 2009 Best Resale Value Awards, including the top overall award for the Honda brand. 2009 Honda models earning awards included Civic and Fit, Top 10 model awards; Civic Hybrid, Hybrid Car award; CR-V, Crossover award and Odyssey, Van award.

Nice Chart




No matter how you look at it 2nd place is a long way from 17th.

[quagmire]

I would think everyone here would be smart enough to know that perception does not equal reality with the perception of BMW owners being douches, assholes on the road, and snobish elitists.

Yeah, American cars have a poor reputation so resale will be poor because no one wants a "POS" American car. But with the exception of Chrysler, American cars have improved a lot lately and deserve more credit then people here are giving them.

[Vudoo4u2]

Originally Posted by quagmire

I would think everyone here would be smart enough to know that perception does not equal reality with the perception of BMW owners being douches, assholes on the road, and snobish elitists.

Yeah, American cars have a poor reputation so resale will be poor because no one wants a "POS" American car. But with the exception of Chrysler, American cars have improved a lot lately and deserve more credit then people here are giving them.

Cant argue that their quality has improved somewhat, but theres so much variability in their line, that it doesnt really matter for resale value.

I'll quote myself, I feel like its a good metaphor for the used car market:

Used cars are much like bonds. A junk bond can give you higher returns than an AAA bond, but theres also higher risk involved, and thats why you arent willing to pay as much for it.

[11Past9]

Originally Posted by Vudoo4u2

Used cars are much like bonds. A junk bond can give you higher returns than an AAA bond, but theres also higher risk involved, and thats why you arent willing to pay as much for it.

I can assure you the price to own a BMW taking service and repair bills is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than that of say... a domestic. People have very little to fear when buying a 100,000 miles Ford Taurus even if the paint on the radio buttons is worn off while even BMW enthusiasts joke about ditching their cars before that 100k mark to avoid taking out a second mortgage...

Whatever this thread is going no where.

[NewSong]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Please allow me to show you one more.

http://corporate.honda.com/press/article.aspx?id=4877

Honda Brand Earns 2009 Overall Best Resale Value Award from Kelley Blue Book's kbb.com



Nice Chart




No matter how you look at it 2nd place is a long way from 17th.

It's funny, because BMW is lower than Ford on that list.