In August of 2018 I bought brand new 2018 ford Taurus SEL. I traded in a 2009 Taurus SE, which I drove for 9 years with good service. The new Taurus is a wonderful car in every way, with lots of updates such as navigation, Sirrus Radio, Voice Command, rear camera, lane drifting notice and other features. I have seen so many negative reviews on the new Taurus and don’t understand these reviews. My new Taurus handles very well, with plenty of power 288 HP V-6 Engine. A super color, ruby red with black leather seating, heated and climate control. Do you know why there are so many negative things said about this car?
No I don’t. I will tell you that 2 cars I bought new were rated unacceptable by consumer reports and I was happy with both cars. I don’t care what other people think of my car, I only care what I think of my car.
There objective reviews and subjective reviews. Objective is based on measurable facts such as 0-60 times, leg room, trunk volume.
Subjective reviews are based on reviewers on experiences reflecting their own good or bad impressions, though some are due to positive or negative bias of the reviewer.
Example: I like my 13 YO Mustang. But when C&D compared it to the same year GTO, the GTO beat the Mustang in most measured tests. C&D wanted the Mustang to win the comparison so added 25 points for styling.
Consumer Reports tries to be less biased but it slips in too.
Bottom line— I agree with oldyimer_11.
Give me an example of a couple bad reviews. I don’t need the actual review (though that would help), just the publication name. I suspect I can shed some light on why you may have read some negative reviews (and it has little to do with the specific model). I review cars for four publications. Happy to pull back the curtain.
I am of the opinion that “If the shoe fits, wear it”. Since my shoe size is 14 AA, if I find a shoe that fits my long narrow foot, I am happy.
The same applies to vehicles for me. Consumer Reports automotive experts don’t have to live with the vehicle I purchase, but I do. For example, CR was critical of the Ford Aerostar, as it was more like a truck. Well, I liked the 1990 Ford Aerostar I owned because it was body on frame construction like a truck. It had rear wheel drive and was better for pulling trailers than the competing vans that were front why wheel drive. I also owned a 2006 Chevrolet Uplander which did not receive a good review from Consumer Reports. It served my purposes well and my son now has the Uplander. It has gone over 200,000 miles with no major repairs.
Now I am not dinging Consumer Reports. In fact, I subscribe to CR and buy gift subscriptions for my son and my brother. What I am saying is that if a vehicle fits your needs, don’t concern yourself with the reviews in magazines. The police department in my community has Ford Taurus police models in its fleet. I doubt that the police department read printed reviews.
I think many cars these days get bad reviews not because they are truly bad but because they are just not up to snuff compared to the leaders in that class. The Taurus is a great example of a car that, on its own merits, is a pretty good car. Compare it to others in its class, such as the Toyota Avalon or Chevy Impala, and it is just not that great. It’s smaller inside, has poor outward visibility, and controls that are harder to use.
If you like it then that’s what’s most important. Consumer Reports does like the power and quietness of the Taurus. Don’t worry about what others think and enjoy your car.
you had a 6spd trans and not the cvt trans in the taurus X and mercury versions. maybe because the taurus is a rental car staple it gets a bad rap. you made it 10yrs with no trans issues or motor issues. i had 2 tauruses recently and liked them both.
Did you drive any other, comparable cars before you bought your 2018 Taurus? Those would be the Impala, Avalon, Charger, and Chrysler 300. I bout my current car in 2017. I test drove the Impala, Avalon, and Accord. I knew I wanted a larger sedan. I liked all three, but the Avalon driver’s seat was uncomfortable for me after a while. I liked the Impala a lot, but average gas mileage was in the mid-20s and it was about $8000 more than the Accord EX L I bought. The Accord also gets mid thirties gas mileage and is very comfortable. I did not test the Taurus since I haven the had good success with the three Ford products I’ve owned.
I can’t speak for the present generation of Taurus, but the university where both Mrs. Triedaq and I were employed had Taurus cars in its fleet. Mrs. Triedaq drove a lot of miles recruiting graduate students and she would request a Ford Taurus for these road trips. She preferred the Taurus over the Chevrolet Malibu or the equivalent Dodge model. This information may not be relevant today because we both retired in 2011. The vehicle she didn’t care for was the Honda Civic Hybrid. I drove the Civic Hybrids to conferences on a couple of occasions and the driving position was uncomfortable for me.
I once owned a 1988 Ford Taurus and we inherited a 1989 Mercury Sable. Both were good cars. The 1988 Taurus was totaled in an accident and we replaced it with a 1993 Oldsmobile 88. The Taurus was more comfortable for either of us to drive.
Like shoes, if the Taurus fits, drive it.
Thanks to all for your comments. The bad reviews were CR and Edmunds as well as Cars.com
I will take your advice and enjoy my Taurus, like shoes it fits well for my needs.
CR seems to test what is popular with the younger, well heeled segment of the population. CR often criticizes a vehicle as having “dated styling”. They no longer give turning circle diameter, front and rear legroom, headroom,stopping distance, etc. The writeups are more opinions of the testers. These opinions are important, but I would like more specifications.
I’ll just through this out there. When he retired back in 2012 my dad had the option to buy out the lease of the company car his company had provided for him. My dad had just taken delivery of a 2011 Taurus a few months prior and liked the car, the buy out price was very attractive. So he bought the car and drove it 4 more years, and then the engine s*** the bed. It turns out that the water pump located inside of the timing cover and is driven off of a timing chain. When the water pump leaks, it dumps coolant directly into the oil pan, there’s no external leak to tip off the owner. As you might imagine, the coolant in the oil will trash the main bearing in short order, which effectively junks the engine. Dad’s Taurus had just over 100k miles on it. After getting the bad news, he went out and bought a new 2016 Avalon and couldn’t be happier. He was a life-long Ford guy (he does still have an F-150).
The newer models have a water pump with a double gasket design with a weep hole between the two gaskets, which causes coolant to leak onto the ground should the first gasket fail, giving the owner a chance to catch it before it’s too late.
But yeah, against it’s primary competition (Avalon and Impala), it’s really doesn’t stack up that well in anything but price (the SHO is a different animal doesn’t have a direct competitor in it’s price bracket expect for maybe the Stinger), and I’m saying this as a Ford guy.
My first requirement in a car is a comfortable front seat for my large size, bad back and extremely long legs. When I drove a school bus, we used cars to transport small numbers of students to out of district schools. We had Impalas, Suburbans, one Taurus (The 500 was the larger Ford that year), and a 2008 Dodge minivan. None of these had power seats. The ergonomics of the GM vehicles were all wrong for me. The Suburbans would have been OK if the floor and pedals dropped down about 4 inches, or if you raised the seat, windshield and roof about the same. As it was my knees were up in the air putting pressure on my lower spine and when it was raining, I had to drive with my head tilted left or right to see out of the wiper arc. I had the same problem with GMC tractor trailers.
The only problem with the Taurus was not enough legroom and if The seat would have gone back far enough, no one could have sat behind me. The Impala had lousy seats sitting right on the floor and the drivers sear broke down by 60,000 miles so quickly that the seat springs were hitting the floor.
The only one that fit me was the Dodge minivan, not surprising, since I have owned a Plymouth and Chrysler Minivan. Both of which fit so well that a 788 - 800 mile trip left me without a backache.
It is ridiculous that a Chevy Suburban be uncomfortable inside for a driver that has been comfortable in a Plymouth Horizon and a PT Cruiser.
The point is, I could not write a good review of any vehicle made by GM that I have driven and yet 90% of people have no problem with them. My current Camry is ok, but not quite as comfortable as any Mopar I have ever been in. I understand the Crossfire would not have fit me,but never drove one.
The two worst cars I ever had for fit were a Corvair convertible I sat in at the Buffalo auto show and when one of my friends shut the door, I was trapped with my arms at my sides, unable to reach the door handle and the other was an MG TD that a friend of mine restored in the late 60s. He had just finished the restoration when I stopped at his house. I told him I had always wanted one and he told me to take it for a ride. I tried getting in by putting my right foot down the tunnel leading to the pedals. I could not get my left foot beside it. I then tried putting my left foot down first and could not get the right one down. I then tried the right one again with the left shoe off, then both size 14Ds off. No Go, I cant drive a TD.