Taurus Car Club of America : Ford Taurus Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Im sure we have all bee trolling around the 'Net and have found many many reviews on the Taurus over the years. I decided to denounce these reviews as LIES in an experiment. I spent a few days reading every review I could find as to the performance on the 2003 with the Duratec motor, focusing on 0-60 times. The fastest I saw was 8.4 seconds. Armed with my trusty stopwatch (an extrodinarily accurate piece of equipment left over from my semi-professional athelete and coaching days, and i trust it) and set out. I made many runs, and the results are posted below:
Note: All runs are with the following data:
Car with me, 2/3 of a tank of Mobil 89 octane, a box of 3 christmas lighted reindeer in the trunk (they were on sale....), sound rig ON, heater on its lowest fan setting, highest temp setting, and a few extra assorted pieces of clothing. Vehicle weight can therefore be calculated at:
3316 (listed curb weight for an SES Deluxe)
145 (me)
75 (gas, which weighs 6.17 pounds per gallon at 60*, times 12 gallons)
50 (combined weight of assorted crap that resides in my car.
3585 total weight
Engine at standard indicated operating temperature
54* ambient air temp
6 miles of driving with a few squeelies to get the rubber warm.
Run 1: TC ON-8.31 seconds
Run 2: TC ON-8.30 seconds
Run 3: TC ON, 1500 brake torque-8.43 seconds (damn bogging...)
Run 4: TC OFF-8.25
Run 5: TC OFF, 1500 Brake Torque-8.20
Run 6: " " 2000 " " -8.12
Run 7: " " 2500 " " -8.08
Run 8: " " 3000 " " -7.95
Run 9: " " FLOORED -7.85
Tires issuing all kinds of hate and discontent on the last 3 runs, I think a little bit of the extra knock off can be partly attributed to the tires getting a little bit of extra grabby on them. I did one more run, but it cant really count, as It was going down hill, but it was a 3K BT and it came out to 7.55!
Short version folks, either car reviewers cant really drive for shyt, they dont want to, or they are regurgitating FoMoCo nubmers (with, ironically, are 8.4), and Ford is up to its usual derating. Ford seems to derate EVERYTHING after the 00-01 cobra debacle. For example, the new GT is listed by Ford at 3.75 0-60, but Road and Track did it in 3.3! I would speculate that under "race" conditions, i.e. less then a quarter tank, all extra crap out, all accessories off, 93 octane, a Dura should clock in under 8 seconds every time without overt engine/transmission abuse. With a chip, shave another tenth or 2 off. Full intake and exhaust job, probably another tenth.
I guess what Im saying is that with about a grand to 2 in work, our cars should be seeing low 15, high 14 second quarters. Thats a FULL intake job (CAI, MAF, TB, Custom chip, Extrude honed intake manis (swap the composite for an older metal one if needed)), a Full exhaust job (extrude hone manis, hiflow primary cats, punched out secondary cat, removed resonator, split rear with hi flow mufflers), good rubber on all 4 corners (Continental ContiExreameTrac 225/50R16's for me please...) and a 1-2 inch suspension drop (optional).
Anyone have REAL dynocharts and timeslips to back any of my rantings up?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,306 Posts
Dont forget that a lot of the cars the magazines drive are fresh from the factory models; new cars need a break-in period for all the parts to basically fit together cohesively and run at their peak. Hence, it's pretty much a given that a properly broken-in car will actually run faster than a fresh-from-the-factory model.

Anyways, I think a lot of car companies now tend to make conservative estimates for their car's performance...I mean the Dodge SRT4's were rated at 215 hp, yet on the dyno of one magazine, it actually ran 223 hp at the wheels.

Anyway, I wouldn't make such a big deal out of it; a lot of the reviews of the Taurus were mainly positive, and there are more things that concern the regular reviewer than straight line numbers alone (I hope). Things like comfort, luxury features, noise, fit and finish, and how well the car responds to the driver are right up there on the priority list.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
623 Posts
I had a friend once who said the older and looser his Mustang got, the faster it ran. Until it finally blew up on him
 
X

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
As far as I know most magazines do not brake torque or drop clutches when doing tests like this. Also if magazines are under rating the taurus in performance tests, I am sure they are also doing the same with the other cars they test since they all test the same way.
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Unfortunately, I think a lot of maganizes are biased (or the people doing the testing) and want to make certain cars look better than others for whatever reason. The magazine I have come to trust the most is Car & Driver. From reading what the actual stock numbers are from different forums and whatnot, from what I've seen, Car & Driver produces the closest numbers with their road tests.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,415 Posts
Originally posted by XLSuruaT@Mar 12 2004, 09:33 PM
As far as I know most magazines do not brake torque or drop clutches when doing tests like this. Also if magazines are under rating the taurus in performance tests, I am sure they are also doing the same with the other cars they test since they all test the same way.
Actually, when car and driver tested the new rx8 they dumped the clutch at 8k to launch the torqueless wonder into a 14 second 1/4. They also compared a 5mph roll to 60 with an 8k clutch dump 0-60 run, and the difference was more than 2 seconds IIRC. I think they were just trying to get the point across that rotary has NO TORQUE under 5 or 6k RPMs. I believe they even said that they couldn't even feel the acceleration at WOT until after 5 or 6k RPMs.

But I doubt they'd go to those lengths testing family sedans. They probably leave the a/c on when testing tauruses.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,415 Posts
Originally posted by BF2001SES@Mar 12 2004, 07:16 PM
Anyone have REAL dynocharts and timeslips to back any of my rantings up?
Ask venom. He only has a couple bolt-ons on his gen3 tec, and he runs low 15's. I believe he has dyno charts as well as time slips as hard proof.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,963 Posts
Originally posted by mikehawk@Mar 12 2004, 11:24 PM
They probably leave the a/c on when testing tauruses.
Shouldn't matter since the A/C system cycles off when the Taurus goes WOT.
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Originally posted by Majisto+Mar 16 2004, 11:40 AM-->QUOTE (Majisto @ Mar 16 2004, 11:40 AM)
<!--QuoteBegin-mikehawk
@Mar 12 2004, 11:24 PM
They probably leave the a/c on when testing tauruses.
Shouldn't matter since the A/C system cycles off when the Taurus goes WOT.
[/b]
Yeah, I have noticed that, lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
BF, I love it when you post because I always get a good laugh.

You really expect to disproved thousands of dollars worth of measuring equipment with a stopwatch?
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Originally posted by afi292@Mar 16 2004, 09:20 PM
why does it matter if the AC is onor off at full thorttle/
A/C draws quite a bit of power from the engine. So when the car detects that you are at WOT, it shuts off the A/C to give you as much power as possible, which is good because if you are flooring it then the car knows you need power so she'll give you all she's got.
 
X

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mikeys_Taurus@Mar 16 2004, 11:39 AM
You really expect to disproved thousands of dollars worth of measuring equipment with a stopwatch?
HAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHHA.......BURN!!!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,415 Posts
Originally posted by Mikeys_Taurus@Mar 16 2004, 02:39 PM
BF, I love it when you post because I always get a good laugh.

You really expect to disproved thousands of dollars worth of measuring equipment with a stopwatch?
Yeah, but it's an extrodinarily accurate piece of equipment left over from his semi-professional athelete and coaching days.


I still don't think they put forth the same efforts testing a taurus as they do testing sports cars, which is completely understandable.
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Alright, I think he gets the point, let's quit flaming.


You are definitely making a valid point BF and I agree with you and appreciate your efforts, however you definitely need to go to a track or something to get accurate times (obviously).
I have to assume that you realize this as you seem to be a very knowledgeable and intelligent person especially when it comes to Ford vehicles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Hey Mikey, until you decide to yank your head out of your a** and consider the questions Im posting for general conversation, please refrain from responding to my questions. Ive been posting on TCCA for nearly 2 years, and it seems that every time I post something, you hang a "not invented here" sign on it. Please ask yourself the following questions:
Have you ever:
1. Owned a real, high performance vehicle?
2. Sold vehicles for a living?
3. Spent time with professional Ford Master Certified Engine Mechanics discussing munitia regarding engine design and performance?
4. Circumnavigated the Washington D.C. Beltway (Interstate 495) in less then 50 minutes?
5. Even DRIVEN a vehicle with more then 350 rated horsepower?
6. Owned a vehicle that local "tuners" would slow down and be respectful of at the meer sight of it?
7. Gotten pulled over at 120+ mph and gotten off the ticket because the law enforcement official wondered what the hell was under the hood?
8. Been invited to a local "tuner" burnout fest in a Taurus based on a colossal tireshredder let loose in the presence of one of thier members.
9. Had a new local performance shop, to be run by someone who has been dicking with motors since before you were a dirty thought ask you to come on board as a concept designer and prototyper after spending an afternoon discussing potential products and services able to be offered at local speed events?
10. Been a Master Certified Ford Product Consultant?
11. Worked with a machine shop to design a universal adapter plate for the purpose of supercharging an engine based on a sketch you made on a napkin in a friggen bar at 2 in the morning and been told that it was a hell of a good idea and that it would be possible to set up a modular, modifiable plate to make it useful on practically ANY fuel injected V engine made by Ford?
Ok, when you can answer ALL of these questions with a "yes" then Ill consider allowing myself to think of you in the same breath as myself. You are the other part of why I took a few months off of TCCA, because I was sick to death of asking a question and you being a grade A prick about it. I make you laugh? You make me disgusted to think of someone who runs a "SHO shop" but doesnt have the goddamned common sense to read the question and consider the variables involved, and instead decides to act like a jackass and question the baseline data instead of the the theory. I wouldnt trust you to modify a moped, much less the major investment that is a modern automobile.
Well, now Im going to savor this rant and go to bed. I came back because I was trying to figure out if some of the things my shop owning friend and I discussed would be viable performance options with real interest to the taurus community. Seeing as noone considered asking themselves "Gee, a well thought out and designed airflow improvement system that wouldnt crush my bank account sounds like a pretty good idea, maybe I should donate some of my brain pan to figuring out the problems", Im just going to hit my rack and tell Paul that anything we want to do for a Taurus can go on the back burner and we can focus on the real performance market of I4's and V8's, Focus, Mustang, F150.
Thanks for your time.
 
J

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Let's keep this clean from here on out (no more flaming) or it will quickly become a closed topic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
Originally posted by BF2001SES@Mar 17 2004, 12:34 AM
Im just going to hit my rack and tell Paul that anything we want to do for a Taurus can go on the back burner and we can focus on the real performance market of I4's and V8's, Focus, Mustang, F150.
</sarcasm>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
BF, cmon you cant actually think that mags purposely drive only ours cars slow?If you read the specifics on how they test cars you would realize how wrong you are. Did you do all your runs in opposite directions and average out the times? They do. Just because YOUR car pulls those numbers doesnt mean the magazines are lying. Motor Trend had a 2000 Taurus at 16.1 @ 88mph awhile back. They DO brake-tq, they DO high rpm clutch dumps. They experiment to find out what works best. They DONT do mods, remove weight, or race on an 1/8th tank of gas like most people do at the track.

Did you ever think that the reason the Taurus ranks so low in acceleration tests compared to other cars in it's class is because IT MAKES LESS POWER THAN EVERY MAJOR COMPETITOR? Add in a tranny that saps power like nuts and you'll get a not-so fast acceleration times. Truth be told Ford is the only one to blame for its lack of performance, not a godamn magazine. Place the blame where it is due.

02-present Nissan Altima V6 = 240-250hp/245tq
03-present Toyota Camry V6 = 210hp/220tq
03-present Honda Accord V6 = 240hp/212tq
04 Malibu V6 = 200hp/220tq
00?-present Impala = 200hp/225tq

See my point? All have more tq, if not much more hp, and most likely they all have more efficient transmissions.


And your stopwatch comparo is lame, to be honest. The reflexes of your hand and the innacuracy of the speedo greatly affect any resemblance of accuracy in your testing. Go to a track and get some high 14's/low 15's before ranting about how it is done.

And just saw your last post. How does driving fast, having driven a car with more than 350 hp, selling cars, or boasting about all your fascinating certifications make your claims of magazines lying any more correct?


Also, lets try not to make this into a flame fest. We can all have different opinions without getting pissy like 10yr old girls.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,306 Posts
And dont forget the mazda 6...that thing has a duratec and makes 20 more HP than the Taurus...Don't even get me started on the v6 Lincoln LS...
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top