Articles on the 2016 Taurus

[yowen]

Not too much to tell... But thought it was highly relevant:

http://jalopnik.com/the-2016-ford-taurus-will-be-a-really-big-fusion-that-r-1547425701

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2016-ford-taurus-will-be-quicker-lighter.html

Highlights include:
2.3L EcoBoost from the Mustang will be available
Expect a 9 speed auto

No word on whether a SHO model will be available, but I'm thinking there will be one, because Ford will be wanting to offer it to law enforcement anyway.

[mval]

man i get tired of these rags ditching our car. We all know she's a hefty gal that could loose some weight but read this comment from the article

"The problem with today's Taurus is that it is overweight and even the high performance SHO is not really competitive. With all the power from the (365-horsepower) V6 EcoBoost, it is pretty hard to overcome the amount of mass that the SHO has to move"

But GM's Caddy XTS which also weighs in at 2 tons is a Prom Queen. To bad the Prom Queen has already been recalled.
mikev

[yowen]

In essence they are right, its a heavy vehicle, and unfortunately we can't get one of our tuned vehicles in there this late in the game, or can we? Haha.

[FoMoCoSHO]

If anyone hasn't figured it out yet, there is a serious bias against Ford in the lamestream media because they didn't take bailout money.

How dare they fix their company without ripping off the taxpayers!

There will never be a gm or chrysler/dodge/fiat product in my driveway ever again.

[IHeartGroceries]

In regards to heft...
It's pretty crazy.

For example, my 72 C-10 long wide,  350/350 weighs 400 lbs less than my SHO. Holy smokes.

But, I enjoy other aspects of the car enough to look past such a detail.

The 2.7l is the EB with the magical, lightweight block, right?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[krdiesel]

the taurus is kinda heavy, But one of the design criteria was being able to survive a 75mph rear end impact.

[FracaSHO]

the taurus is kinda heavy, But one of the design criteria was being able to survive a 75mph rear end impact.

That stems from the old Crown Vic's. I'm sure it's for the police.  Personally, I pull into a parking lot or nearest side street when I get pulled over. And if it takes me a minute to find a safe place and they ask what took so long for me to pull over, I tell them I wanted to find a safe spot for them. The boys and girls in blue always appreciate that.


Brad
2010 SHO with PP
Sent from my iPhone

[bamsho]

Yes the newer SHO, Taurus are little heavy so what.  If we wanted light tinker toy cars we would of bought them.  They need to quit comparing the Gen 1,2's to the current model, they are so different beasts.  The orginal 89 had no "nannies" on it and was a stick and alot less other safety items in it, which all adds weight.  I've owned all 4 Gens of SHO's.  the earlier ones were alot less refined but very fun to drive, the 96-99 the ball was dropped there, but still a nice trip car ( yes I can bash that one, I still have mine ).  I feel my 2012 is light years ahead of those.  So just wish they would stop comparing them,  I feel its like comparing a 85 Mustang GT to the current model- they aren't in the same zip code.  Yes I had one of those too.

[BiGMaC]

Having taken some road trips in my 2013, I appreciate the weight.  It really makes the ride stable and smooth.  I find it's still nimble enough for the maneuvers I make in traffic.  Plus it's quick enough, even now before the tune, to be great 0-90 in daily driving and enough to embarrass most folks at the stoplight..  The reviewers just don't seem to get it.  The idea is not new... a big comfortable hotrod like the Eldorado of the 70's.  It has the potential to go full race if folks want. Could improvements be made... sure, like any car, and the folks here are doing most of it!

[yowen]

The weight is nice on a snowy highway, you get the traction+weight of a 4x4 truck, but you aren't driving something size of a Pirate-sail, lol.

But at the end of the day, I think it'd do just as well at the 3,500-3,750 pound mark, along with a marked improvement in handling.

[REDSHOCGO]

aww better put my second wife on a diet.......lol.. Cant complain about the weight like yowen said living up north.

[68_GT]

not competetive ? ha. I'm sure our SHO's will crush 90% of the cars you actually encounter on the road 0-60mph. Weight ? As for being a heavy car but I like that it's also a big comfy car and has massaging seats and safety features. I noticed the other day my SHO was almost as big as the SUV sitting next to it in a parking lot.

[IHeartGroceries]

Ha! I had the SHO briefly parked in my street, in front of the house, next to a neighbor's company van. The two were amazingly comparable in proportion (and heft I'm sure, haha!).

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[shoman04]

WHY DO THEY SAY WE ARE SO HEAVY,? LIKE THE OTHER COMPENTION IS SO LITE!!!!
STOCK SHO vs  V6 Camaro vs V6 Dodge Challenger vs V6 CHARGER vs other.
SORRY THIS GOT LONG! But other v6 are same weight(with in 100-400lb) as we are (and lighter than there V8 brothers). If SHO weight the same as there loaded V6,? and out perform there V8's, and price less than some of there V6 most of the V8!? BASE ON THESE RAGEs OWN #'s WHY DO THEY BAD MOUTH OUR WEIGHT SO? Just down right JEALOUS!!!!!!

   
2012 Chevrolet Camaro RS convertible (only 40hp less) 
   BASE PRICE  $36,375 
   PRICE AS TESTED  $37,710 
   VEHICLE LAYOUT  Front engine, RWD, 4-pass, 2-door convertible 
   ENGINE  3.6L/323-hp/278-lb-ft DOHC 24-valve V-6 
   TRANSMISSION  6-speed automatic 
   CURB WEIGHT (F/R DIST)  4105 lb (50/50%) 
   WHEELBASE  112.3 in 
   LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT  190.4 x 75.5 x 54.7 in 
   0-60 MPH  6.6 sec 
   QUARTER MILE  14.9 sec @ 94.7 mph 
   BRAKING, 60-0 MPH  111 ft 
   LATERAL ACCELERATION  0.90 g (avg) 
   MT FIGURE EIGHT  27.0 sec @ 0.66 g (avg) 
   EPA CITY/HWY FUEL ECON  18/29 mpg 
   ENERGY CONSUMPTION, CITY/HWY  187/116 kW-hrs/100 miles 
   CO2 EMISSIONS  0.89 lb/mile 

2013 Dodge Challenger Rallye Redline

MSRP (with destination): $30,690
PRICE AS TESTED: $33,255

ENGINE:
3.6-liter DOHC V-6
Horsepower (hp): 305 @ 6350rpm
Torque (lb-ft): 268 @ 4800rpm

CURB WEIGHT:
3834lb


      2014 Chevrolet Impala LTZ     2013 Chrysler 300S     2013 Ford Taurus SEL 
POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS 
   DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT  Front engine, FWD  Front engine, RWD  Front engine, FWD 
   ENGINE TYPE  60-deg V-6, aluminum block/heads  60-deg V-6, aluminum block/heads  60-deg V-6, aluminum block/heads 
   VALVETRAIN  DOHC, 4 valves/cyl  DOHC, 4 valves/cyl  DOHC, 4 valves/cyl 
   DISPLACEMENT  217.5 cu in/3564 cc  219.9 cu in/3604 cc  213.4 cu in/3497 cc 
   COMPRESSION RATIO  11.5:1  10.2:1  10.8:1 
   POWER (SAE NET)  305 hp @ 6800 rpm*  300 hp @ 6350 rpm  288 hp @ 6500 rpm 
   TORQUE (SAE NET)  264 lb-ft @ 5300 rpm  264 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm  254 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm 
   REDLINE  N/A  6400 rpm  6500 rpm 
   WEIGHT TO POWER  12.6 lb/hp  13.7 lb/hp  13.8 lb/hp 
   
   
DIMENSIONS 
      CURB WEIGHT  3855 lb  4110 lb  3968 lb 
   TEST DATA 
   ACCELERATION TO MPH 
      0-60  6.2  6.4  6.6 
   
   LATERAL ACCELERATION  0.83 g (avg)  0.85 g (avg)  0.87 g (avg) 
   MT FIGURE EIGHT  27.1 sec @ 0.68 g (avg)  26.7 sec @ 0.66 g (avg)  26.9 sec @ 0.67 g (avg) 
   TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH  1600 rpm  1300 rpm  1700 rpm 
CONSUMER INFO 
   BASE PRICE  $34,555  $33,990  $29,695 
   PRICE AS TESTED  $39,505  $40,625  $33,490 
   
   
      2014 Kia Cadenza     2013 Toyota Avalon Limited 
POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS 
   DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT  Front engine, FWD  Front engine, FWD 
   ENGINE TYPE  60-deg V-6, aluminum block/heads  60-deg V-6, aluminum block/heads 
   VALVETRAIN  DOHC, 4 valves/cyl  DOHC, 4 valves/cyl 
   DISPLACEMENT  203.9 cu in/3342 cc  210.9 cu in/3456 cc 
   COMPRESSION RATIO  11.5:1  10.8:1 
   POWER (SAE NET)  293 hp @ 6400 rpm  268 hp @ 6200 rpm 
   TORQUE (SAE NET)  255 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm  248 lb-ft @ 4700 rpm 
   REDLINE  6700 rpm  6250 rpm 
   WEIGHT TO POWER  12.8 lb/hp  13.3 lb/hp 
   

DIMENSIONS 
    CURB WEIGHT  3755 lb  3557 lb 
   TEST DATA 
   ACCELERATION TO MPH 

   0-60  6.3  6.3 

   PASSING, 45-65 MPH  3.2  3.0 
   LATERAL ACCELERATION  0.82 g (avg)  0.81 g (avg) 
   MT FIGURE EIGHT  27.2 sec @ 0.67 g (avg)  27.2 sec @ 0.66 g (avg) 
   TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH  1800 rpm  1700 rpm 
CONSUMER INFO 
   BASE PRICE  $35,900  $40,445 
   PRICE AS TESTED  $41,900  $42,719 

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1307_the_big_test_2013_2014_full_size_sedans/#ixzz2zKDWV9hS

V6 CHARGER
Not only is the new Charger light years ahead of the one it replaces at a baseline level -- the interior alone is a huge leap forward -- but the new entry-level powertrain is a legitimate option even for those with an enthusiast bent. The combination of the eight-speed and the 292-hp 3.6-liter V-6 shaves a full second off the old 250-hp, 3.5-liter V-6/five-speed automatic combination's 0-60 mph time and 0.7 second off the quarter mile, for starters. Granted, even the new numbers of 6.6 seconds and 15.1 second at 95.2 mph aren't anything special, but this is a 4100-pound, full-size American sedan

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1211_2012_dodge_charger_sxt_plus_first_test/#ixzz2zKG2sYsX

[FoMoCoSHO]

Shoman, I answered your question above....