Ford Taurus earns Top Safety Pick from IIHS
2010 Ford Taurus SHO - Click above for high-res image gallery
Color us unsurprised that the new 2010 Ford Taurus earned a coveted Top Safety Pick rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. After all, the previous-generation Taurus took home the award in 2008 and 2009 and the pre- name-change Ford Five Hundred was a Top Safety Pick way back in 2007.
In order to win the Top Safety Pick award, the IIHS says "a vehicle must earn the highest rating of good in the Institute's front, side, and rear tests and be equipped with electronic stability control." Click here and you'll see that the 2010 Ford Taurus got solid green marks all across the board.
We'd love to show an image gallery of the 2010 Taurus crash test results, but none are available. The last full-size Ford sedan actually crash tested by the IIHS was the 2007 Five Hundred. Therefore, the Top Safety Pick was awarded based on Ford's own internal crash test data after being verified by IIHS researchers.
Gallery: First Drive: 2010 Ford Taurus SHO
Photos Copyright ©2009 Chris Paukert / Weblogs, Inc.
[Source: Insurance Institute For Highway Safety]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Max 3:10PM (8/04/2009)
This should come as no surprise. The IIHS loves recommending 4,000 pound land yachts.
Reply
Luis 3:21PM (8/04/2009)
Seeing the new SHO next to the previous SHOs in Car and Driver was telling. The new car towers over the old Taurus, indicative of how big these mainstream have become. I'd love to see a montage of all generations of Accords and Camrys next to each other as well, just to visualize how these vehicles have blown up.
Protzenegger 3:28PM (8/04/2009)
We used to have an '87 Taurus in the family, and my first impression of the new model at the auto show was that it's absolutely enormous. Sadly, reviewers are right that it rather lacks interior room for its size.
UH2L 3:33PM (8/04/2009)
@Luis
The old versus new comparison also shows how big mainstream Americans have become. :-)
akboss302 3:37PM (8/04/2009)
Didn't this happen in the 60's and early 70's? Gas was cheap (relatively), cars got huge. Gas skyrocketed in the mid-late 70's, cars got small, seems like its proportional. But it is incredible to see how much bigger cars have gotten over the past two decades. I noticed this seeing a new BMW 5-series park up next to a late-80's model, looked like the new Bimmer had been cowing out on donuts. Maybe its the drivers that are getting bigger, and cars to follow suit?
CoffeeJones 9:50PM (8/04/2009)
There's nothing wrong with 2 ton, 350HP AWD land yachts.
Rick 3:55PM (8/04/2009)
Land yacht? I think you're exaggerating the sheer size of this beastly truck with 4 doors and no bed. It's massive, square and boring, but hardly large enough to equal a yacht. Anymore overhang and maybe...
Randy 8:51PM (8/04/2009)
"land yacht"
In person it looks bigger than it actually is. I know the Lincoln MKS is on the same platform / frame so they are very similar in size (that's about the only similiarity)
I've got to say, the Lincoln MKS is incredible in person. This should prove to be the same! I'm a HUGE 2010 Taurus Fan... And MKS fan now too!
urdaddy 1:07AM (8/05/2009)
Well yeah, when I looked into buying one I was told I needed Semi plates based on the vehicle's size and weight so I would at least expect Semi safety in the event of a collision.
merlot066 3:13PM (8/04/2009)
Well the previous confusion of a 500/Taurus was the safest car (structure wise) the IIHS had ever tested, so it's no suprise that the new one is a "Top Pick".
Reply
nrb 3:49PM (8/04/2009)
+100
I also think that even the older Taurus was one of the safer vehicles on the road for decades.
Farmboy 1:00AM (8/05/2009)
The sad thing is how bad it looked. Now we can have safety and style. :D
JB 3:30PM (8/04/2009)
ford can thank volvo for that
Reply
Jared 3:36PM (8/04/2009)
Yup. The Taurus is based on the S80 architecture.
nrb 3:51PM (8/04/2009)
Yep. Ford is just too darned stupid to make any kind of contribution of it's own. After all, they're American. Anything well done, must be fully credited to a foreigner.
/sarcasm
psu48187 4:59PM (8/04/2009)
Just because a vehicle shares a platform does not mean that it will inherit 100% of its attributes. Case in point the Mazda 6 vs. Ford Fusion crash test ratings (according to IIHS). That example, along with previous Taurus' crash test ratings, should prove that Ford knows how to engineer safety into their vehicles.
the4thheat 9:21PM (8/04/2009)
Well you know Ford could still have done it by taking the safety tricks they learn from Volvo and applying it to Mazda platforms (they probably did actually). It's pretty silly to insist that everything must have been done without using any acquired technology-what would be the damned point of acquiring other car companies if you never apply the acquired technology even though you have it? That would be the dumbest waste of money ever.
So there's nothing wrong with taking the Mazda platform then using knowledge from Volvo to beef up safety or using the Volvo platform. Obviously Ford is willing to use tech from their subsidiaries or they wouldn't be using the platforms at all. Getting your panties in a bunch because you want everything to be originally engineered in Detroit is stupid because if they wasted time reinventing safety technologies when they already have a ton of technology to make cars safer from Volvo that they could just apply and improve upon would be the really dumb thing.
How do you think it went? Do you think Ford's engineers went, "Hey we're building this car on the S80 platform, and we want it to be safe. But you know what guys, let's completely ignore all the safety engineering that we already have in our portfolio from Volvo and start from scratch."
There's absolutely nothing wrong with taking the best parts of all the technology in your portfolio and combining and improving upon it to make good cars. Otherwise there would be no point to paying all that money for those companies.
And for those people with hilariously short memories, this is what the F-150's crash test ratings looked like back in 2003:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=7
Frankly who cares how they did it, I'm glad that Ford went ahead and improved the safety of their vehicles. And I for one actually hope that they did use Volvo technology because otherwise it means that they paid money for Volvo then sat around and did nothing with the technology which would be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.
Other Man 3:35PM (8/04/2009)
A Chevy Impala to combat this is so overdue GM.
It's especially bad when we know you have all the basic ingredients to do it too.
Reply
Farmboy 7:48AM (8/05/2009)
The problem for GM is that they won't update the Impala until 2013. If that is the case, then it could be that the Impala may not fit into GM's future.
DarthMaltball 3:54PM (8/04/2009)
Too bad it's a a Ford.
Reply