Featured Articles

2010 Ford Taurus SHO has a Weight Problem

Posted in Car Reviews, Cars, Detroit, Domestic Review, Fast Cars, Ford by Corey | May 5th, 2009 | 9 Responses |
Plowing to a KFC near you.

Plowing to a KFC near you.

Four thousand three hundred and sixty eight pounds.

The 2010 Taurus SHO is motivated by a twin-turbo V6 that musters up 365 horsepower and 350 lb. feet of torque. A six-speed automatic with a rev-matching downshift handles the shifting and a Haldex all-wheel-drive system that’s been modified to send more torque to the rear wheels gets the power to the ground. A more responsive electronically assisted power steering system points the SHO in the right direction while the modified suspension (ten percent stiffer than a standard 2010 Taurus) sorts out the bumps.

But it weighs just over two tons.

Comparatively the 2010 Audi S4 weighs 3700 lbs., the Cadillac CTS-V weighs 4200 lbs. and, finally, the 1988 Cadillac Brougham weighs 4268 lbs.

Brougham said it would consider 'bagging and tagging' the new SHO.

Brougham said it would consider 'bagging and tagging' the new SHO.

Alright, so that weight is for a pre-production test car as reported by edmunds.com but, if anything the production SHO may tip the scales with a bit more flab as extraneous technological niceties are added on to please the masses.

It’s no secret that cars (even so called performance cars) have been gaining weight for quite some time. But is it really necessary? Save the heated headliner, massaging back seat and automatic pedicure pedals for cars that don’t have ‘S’, ‘R’ or ‘M’ letters on the trunk. All the fully adjustable electronic dampers in the world can’t make a car nimble, it’s about weight.

I’m sure some will clamor to drive the new SHO but I won’t be one of them. I was excited when I first got word this car was coming back and when those magic phrases ‘twin-turbo’ and ‘all-wheel-drive’ came into the equation I started frothing at the mouth. However, two tons and a bunch of go fast goodies does not a performance car make. You can appease me though, Ford. It’s simple. Bring over the Focus RS.

via Edmunds

Our Best Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

9 Responses

  1. Alex Kierstein says:

    4,368lbs? You didn’t mix up the numbers with a Freighliner semi, did you? Just kidding. Too bad they’re putting that awesome EcoBoost motor in such a pig.

  2. Charles says:

    Look you told on yourself when you said you bring on the RS! You are a small car guy!

    I think by the car weighing two tons is a benefit, maybe it wont be like the two Honda Accords I have owned in that the metal is as thin as a beer can and has enough road noise that you think you are on a lawnmower!

  3. Gary says:

    The new taurus is based on the Volvo S80. Weight safety Blis cruise.
    This car has it all.Power and the safeist car on the road.

  4. Dominik says:

    Charles…you’re a fool. Any and all Honda’s OWN any and ALL Fords! Quality, HP, MPG, the works. There is no EXCUSE for a family sedan to be a worthless piece of non-maneuverable PORK CHOP with weak gas mileage and a weak motor. The only thing that impressed me with this car was the monster 20-cubic feet of trunk space! THAT’S WHERE IT ALL ENDS. This is another American piece of overweight junk. ANd Alex didn’t say he was a SMALL CAR GUY…HE was talking about PERFORMANCE you fool! Boy are you quick to jump on people without reading their posts correctly huh?

  5. Dominik says:

    Gary, I agree with you on the features list. Yes, the ’10 Taurus has features many car companies wish they had: SYNC, BLISS, etc. But the bottom line is this: it has a weaker engine then Accord, worse fuel mileage, weighs 736lbs !!!! more then the Accord, is several thousand dollars more for the same equipped model. So where is all the hoot and hollerin all for? More money for less MPG, less HP, and less driving dynamics and far worse handling. Sorry, you can keep your BLISS (I use mirrors and don’t need a computer to tell me something is behind me!), and I could care less for the SYNC ($1500 for what? So I can scream to a readio like my buddy does to get it to play? LOL). 2010 Taurus is a FAT GIRL with pretty make-up and a lot of glitter which at the end of the day means one thing….she’s still a FAT GIRL =) lol

  6. Dwayne says:

    I own a 2010 Taurus SHO. So far, love the car. It’s fast, extremely comfortable, good road manners, predictable on most challenging roads. So far gas mileage has been in the mid 20’s on the highway, high teens, low 20’s around town during reasonable driving. If you’re looking to drive a curve burner, this is definitely not the car for you. It’s not targeted for that market. If you’re looking for a very comfortable ride, excellent fit and finish, and some hp for the viscerally motivated, the new SHO is a good consideration. Priced in high 30’s for the SHO version is steep but the car has been worth every penny to me. I’ve lived through the curve burner days of my life, now I’m looking for comfort, quiet, performance and safety. All are attributes of this new SHO. It’s not meant for anyone who wants to aggressively drive tight, twisting roads. That was for my Z3 coupe days. Another good car and targeted for a completely different market … and time in my life. The new SHO is heavy and if that offends some folks, you don’t have to buy it … or drive it for that matter. Maybe if Ford can find a way to shoe horn the Eco Boost engine into an AWD Fusion, that might address concerns about weight. And as the author mentioned, there’s always the Focus RS, (if Ford elects to bring that car to the US). The new Taurus SHO is a great car for the market it’s intended to impact. For other market segments, there are other cars to consider.

  7. shortale says:

    This is how words lose meaning. The mileage figures for the treehugging, greeny-green “ECO-boost” 3.0 liter 6 (17/25) are the same as my 2002 Continental 4.6 liter V-8. Impressive next to a ’68 Impala, but not much else.

    The late 80’s/early 90’s Taurus weighed about 2800 pounds. The LeSabre/Delta 88 of the same era weighed about 3100. These cars had all the room anyone could want in a sedan, and the 3.8 engines had plenty of power.

    When I first heard about the 365 hp SHO, I figured the thing would lift itself off the road, but then I saw the curb weight. Ugh.

    Everything I read about the compact-size Volt puts it over 3200 pounds. I realize that it’s a compromise (though commendably far-sighted) design and the battery weighs about 400 pounds, but come on. The 3.8/transaxle/radiator was quite a hefty chunk of metal.

  8. Sam says:

    It seems that people where I live are ready to buy a used BMW or Mercedes that just got broken in as opposed to buying a Ford Taurus SHO. I haven’t done any statistical research, but it just seems to me that no matter how much power Ford puts into the SHO, or how flashy they make it, it’s still a ‘Ford’ and when it comes to people’s wallets, they’d probably pay more for a new BMW or the same or less for a used one just for the name, reliability, and styling.

    I really do like the car and would love to own it, and like the fact that it’s heavy. But if I had a choice, for the money, you’d probably find me driving a BMW instead.

  9. Ricky Cherry says:

    These dummys have no idea what they talk about. I have a 2011 Taurus SHO(with Performance Package),Awesome! Ford did their homework on this one and they get a great big ‘A-Plus’! I love everything about this HEAVY BABY(especially the speed,very fast car).Keep up the good work Ford. Thanks for not selling out to Goverment Motors!