Inside Line pits Ford Taurus against Honda Accord. Who wins?
When Honda decided to grow its bread-and-butter Accord sedan in every dimension, it entered into the large car segment. The press has been pretty well split on whether or not that was a good idea, but the car buying public continues to vote favorably with its pocket books.
Ford has had a large car entry since the 2005 model year when it unleashed the Five Hundred to the surprise and delight of just of... well... someone, presumably. After lackluster sales, Ford changed the name of its full-sized sedan to Taurus for 2008, but the end result remained the apathy of car buyers. Ford appears to have finally stepped up its game with the 2010 Taurus, however, as the Blue Oval has decided to take its super sized sedan upmarket, with an elegant interior and an exterior that people will actually notice.
Our friends over at Inside Line have brought the Accord and Taurus together in an epic battle of the big rigs. The Accord has a quality pedigree and the love of the car-buying public, while Ford counters with an upstart Taurus that has become the flagship of a vastly improved lineup. The battle was close, but only one large sedan could end up on top of this comparison. Hit the link below to head over to Inside Line to read the comparison for yourself.
Gallery: First Drive: 2010 Ford Taurus
Photos copyright ©2009 Chris Paukert/ Weblogs, Inc.
Gallery: First Drive: 2008 Honda Accord
Photos copyright ©2008 Jonathon Ramsey/ Weblogs, Inc.
[Source: Inside Line | Image: Scott Jacobs]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
jv2k 1:31PM (7/22/2009)
Isn't the accord still technically smaller though?
Reply
Yaroukh 1:33PM (7/22/2009)
Edmunds has no issue with that. They compared it to a smaller Infiniti with no hesitation whatsover.
alex 1:52PM (7/22/2009)
yeah the taurus is way bigger. and they said the accord wins for performance and price, two things that you'd expect out of a smaller car.... so what i'm getting from the article is that they are both nice cars and you should decide between them by deciding what size car you want.
Yaroukh 1:58PM (7/22/2009)
Taurus is even larger than Honda Legend.
But this seems to be Edmunds trademark: Find a reason Taurus loses for, than pick a car that beats it because of that "reason".
Coming soon on Edmunds: Ford Taurus vs. Honda S2000! :))
blue3874 2:04PM (7/22/2009)
The Taurus is eight inches longer, four inches wider and two inches taller than the Accord.
jsmaikell 2:18PM (7/22/2009)
The accord is smaller but in the article the interior space is actually close 122.3 cu ft for the Taurus and 120 cu ft for the Accord.
So yes the Taurus is bigger overall, but the Accord is more efficient with its space, smaller outside for nearly the same size inside. I think this is a valid comparison.
derek 3:40PM (7/22/2009)
Wow...this is obvious: FORD TAURUS WINS!!!
The Honda is a great brand, dont get me wrong. But the Accord is aging rapidly...I remember when it looked good for the first few months.
The New 2010 Ford Taurus is one amazing looking car! A stern executive front fascia, a new edge look for rear ends, the interior is amazing...and the upcoming FORD Taurus SHO will RULE!!!
FORD WINS.
ALWAYS!
'nuff said.
some1 2:30PM (7/22/2009)
wow, i didnt know we rated family sedans now the same as sports cars...
Next truck review they decide to do, i hope they base the comparison between the ram and f-150 on drag times and road coarses... rather then their tow ability....
and how do you DOWN PLAY all the nice gizmos and electronics the taurus has... most would consider this a plus, but i guess it doesnt make you feel like your in a "life form" then the honda...
what a crock... the taurus is far better at being a comfy family sedan...
geo.stewart 2:40PM (7/22/2009)
the cheesy thing is that they loaded the Taurus with 4K worth of technology not in the Accord and then said that the Accords lower price affected the outcome.
I'd say that reeks right out of the gate.
I'll concede the Accord may be speedier but contrary to the article, most looking for a large family sedan wont care about a .5 second difference in 0-60. sub 8.0 seconds is phenomonal if you consider what those times averaged 10 years ago
Judy Zik 2:57PM (7/22/2009)
I am getting sick of the review sites.
1) If I am buying a Sports Car I care about how fast it takes off. If I am buying a big family hauler I only care if it is too slow to be safe merging or passing and none of the modern vehicles have that problem. I wouldn't take either of these vehicles to a track so why the focus on sporty handling?
2) They never option the vehicles that same and then complain about price differences or lack of features. Then to top it off they compare different classes. How about Fusion vs Accord or would they try to have us believe the Fusion and Civic compete?
3) Reviewers use their own experiences too much. Oh wow the controls in the Honda seem familiar. Could it be he already drives one? The Ford controls would be familiar to people who have driven one previously. A previous Ford driver might find that lack of any kind of iPod integration let alone Sync to be a deal breaker for Honda.
4) Where is the information that matters? Did they try putting three kids in the back? How are the seats on a road trip? Can you see out? What's it like to park or do a 3 point turn?
Tool 3:31PM (7/22/2009)
It's interesting that the Toyota Camry wasn't included. This must mean that Edmund's thinks that the Accord is the king of the hill right now. From a value proposition, execution and simplicity standpoint, it probably is.
Jim 3:42PM (7/22/2009)
Judy Zik:
"How about Fusion vs Accord or would they try to have us believe the Fusion and Civic compete?"
The waters are muddy here, now. The Accord is now just into "D-segment" size, while the Taurus is bigger outside but about the same size inside. With Accord moving up into the D-class, there's nothing in the Honda line-up that directly competes with the Fusion (Fusion is an "in-between" size, thus the platform family name of CD3.)
I don't think Honda really cares, though. They sell just fine.
nrb 4:12PM (7/22/2009)
Tool, they did one that included the Camery, Accord, Fusion, Mazda6, and Sonata:
http://blogs.edmunds.com/strategies/2009/07/comparison-test-accord-vs-malibu-vs-fusion-vs-mazda6-vs-sonata.html
This comparison actually makes a little sense. They're all mid-sized sedans.
I'd brag about the winner, but this comparison is full of holes too.
Not THAT Matt 12:31PM (7/23/2009)
"wow, i didnt know we rated family sedans now the same as sports cars..."
If you consider the Honda Accord a "sports car" then you should get your eyes checked.
Sports sedan? Maybe... just maybe. Probably not.
Sports car? No.
Not THAT Matt 12:38PM (7/23/2009)
Tool,
"It's interesting that the Toyota Camry wasn't included. This must mean that Edmund's thinks that the Accord is the king of the hill right now."
A lot of outlets consider the Accord/Maxima/Mazda6 as the top three, and the Camry is slipping behind just about everything except the Avenger/Sebring, given how old the current-gen Camry is compared to basically everything else. I'd have to agree on that one, although I'm not a huge fan of the Accord (the coupe looks good, though)... if I were in the market (and the Chevy Malibu/2010 Fusion didn't exist) I'd pick up a Maxima over the Accord.
The Camry is too old people-ish for my tastes, not to mention uglier than the devil's face. Why and how it sells so many God damned cars is beyond me, although I imagine if Consumer Reports didn't exist Toyota would unload quite a bit fewer of them. ;)
Randy 1:59PM (7/24/2009)
Such a BS comparison! - The Taurus is made to compete with luxury cars! Not Accords that are within a hair of being mid sized cars! These two cars should NOT be compared! EVER!
Both are excellent!
Aaron 1:34PM (7/22/2009)
i had a 08 Accord for a rental car over the weekend.
I really wasnt that impressed with it. I actually liked the 09 Taurus/Sable
Reply
AMcA 9:53PM (7/22/2009)
Edmunds bashing:
They complain that the Taurus costs $3500 more than the Accord.
But they optioned up the Taurus with necessities like blind-spot detection and radar cruise control to the tune of $3300. (These options aren't even available on the Accord.)
I'm not going to accuse Edmunds of being domestic bashers or anything like that. I'm just going to call them stupid.
Nellydesign 8:46AM (7/23/2009)
I'm a Ford fan but to be fair, the vehicles were provided by the manufacturers. I don't think Inside Line had any control over the content. But they sure did play up the weight and cost and minimalize the extra features that contributed to those elements. It all smelled fishy to me. All the features made the Taurus feel less like an "organism" I guess. That made me laugh. What BS.
dennyduan 1:58PM (7/22/2009)
how can you compare cars with that much price difference... axxhole
Reply