2010 MGM v. 2011 Taurus

[WagonBoss]

My son is getting the Impreza in my signature so I'm car searching again. In the sedan class I'm cross shopping these 2 cars. A local Lincoln Mercury dealer picks up the MGMs off auction from rentals, so no program cars (Does Ford do that anymore?). He has a 2010 with 5k miles or so. I haven't driven either one yet, but do have some miles in a previous MGM rental.

I lean towards the MGM because of more simple mechanicals, great ride, and price to value ratio. I lean more towards the Taurus for interior room, styling, and an easier sell to the wife. Highway fuel mileage is a virtual tie from what I can find and around town is not a big deal to me. This is a highway car. Safety should be a wash.

Any other big factors to consider and would anyone know what rentals are going for at auction these days?

Thanks.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: WagonBoss
I lean towards the MGM because of more simple mechanicals, great ride, and price to value ratio. I lean more towards the Taurus for interior room, styling, and an easier sell to the wife.

Good call. I would only add that if the vehicle is to be driven in snow, the Taurus will most likely be a better choice.


Originally Posted By: WagonBoss
Safety should be a wash.

Don't be so sure. The cars are only two model years apart, but the Taurus is on a VASTLY newer platform that was designed with safety as a high priority. In this department, my money would be on the Taurus.


Originally Posted By: WagonBoss
Any other big factors to consider and would anyone know what rentals are going for at auction these days?

Rentals are often (though not usually) abused. Wouldn't a brand new (or nearly new) car with a warranty be better?

 

[Deltona_Dave]

I would go with the Grand Marquis. Body on Frame like the Crown Vic's. I just bought a 2008 Taurus for my daughter, but would have gone with the Vic, if I could have found one that met my specs.

The RWD body on frame will give a great ride. If ever in a crash, see here.

Keep 5W-20 Motor Craft oil in the 4.6 and you are good to go.

 

[The Critic]

The MGM is a dinosaur.

 

[AuthorEditor]

I like my '95 MGM and the Taurus doesn't look bad either, but I just read an article that experts are predicting $4 per gallon gas again by next summer. I would be looking at something with better gas mileage.

 

[Scienceman]

Originally Posted By: WagonBoss
I lean towards the MGM because of more simple mechanicals, great ride, and price to value ratio. Thanks.


There you go. I would lean toward that car to. The 4.6 is amazing, and its a great looking safe car.

 

[Falcon_LS]

My vote would go for the Grand Marquis, it's pretty much the last of the great American cars. They're reliable, generally easy to work on and you would be surprised how good they can be on gas. It's also had a 5-Star Government Crash Rating with its use of Ultra High-Strength Steel (UHSS).

My only 'issue' with the newer Grand Marquis' is the constant de-contenting Ford has done. Starting with the second production batch of the 2003MY it's become more of a fleet car, and one shouldn't expect to find 'traditional' refinements - stuff like under hood lighting, remote fuel door release, dual sunvisors with dual illumination, fullsize driver's floor mat, chrome interior adornments, etc. These are not exactly 'necessities', but some are very convenient to have. It's really no wonder that with the loss of the Grand Marquis, the whole Mercury line is discontinued.

 

[Deltona_Dave]

Originally Posted By: DT466E_bus
Originally Posted By: WagonBoss
I lean towards the MGM because of more simple mechanicals, great ride, and price to value ratio. Thanks.


There you go. I would lean toward that car to. The 4.6 is amazing, and its a great looking safe car.


The Panther platform is excellent. Proven, tough, and reliable. Not to mention a great ride!
Dave

 

[Scienceman]

+1

 

[SLCraig]

Grand Marquis.. One of the best cars Ford has ever made.. (Vic/GM)

 

[JOD]

The hwy fuel economy really doesn't seem that close to me; 4mpg, for a car with more HP and is significantly lighter. I think that adds up to a better driving experience in my book. It's certainly more money though, so the value part of the equation is obviously dependent on what's important to you.

I'm biased, since I have a Ford with the D3 platform and I really like it. I don't get the fascination with body-on-frame construction. When I was a kid growing up in the rust belt (and car's subframes and unibodies actually rusted out), I understood it. I also understand it for cops and cab drivers repeatedly getting banged up. I don't see any advantages in a consumer car. For a non-performance car, I don't see the advantage to RWD, either.

I do get the "simplicity" part of a 4 speed automatic and low-rev V-8 which has been around forever and a solid rear axle, so I see that part of it. The Duratec in the Taurus has been an extremely reliable engine though, the P2/D3 platform is a proven performer as well though, and it's also easy to work on.

It would probably be worth driving or even renting both for a few days, to get a better feel. They seem like really different cars to me.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: The Critic
The MGM is a dinosaur.


Thats' not always a bad thing. I mean, my old 1978 Jeep CJ7 is a dinosaur but there isn't anything new that can match it off-road.

 

[Nick R]

Taurus definitely. More more feature rich, much newer platform, more powerful engine, better gas mileage, better ride.... I don't see the benefit of the MGM at this point over a Taurus.

 

[daves87rs]

I like the GM myself...

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Taurus definitely. More more feature rich, much newer platform, more powerful engine, better gas mileage, better ride.... I don't see the benefit of the MGM at this point over a Taurus.

Better 'ride'? In what way? If you mean the Taurus handles better in most situations, ok. But for pure comfort, there simply isn't much on the road that compares to the cushy ride of a Marquis. It's one of the best distance/highway rides there is.

 

[Summerwind]

Another vote for the MGM (I know, kinda obvious from my siggy) Not to get into the RWD vs FWD debate, but with snows on the back of my MGM, I am able to walk away from stop lights as well or better than most FWD cars do, what with their lighter weight and too-wide of tires waffeling on the top of the snow. No, it might not be as "fancy" of a car inside, but I dont care for all of the gadgets anyway. You will have climate control, a message center, compass, map lights power locks and windows. On the HWY you will be getting mid to high 20's for mileage, and a much better ride than the Taurus. The only "complaint" I have with mine, is that to me, the wind seems to affect it more than I feel a big car "should-be", but I just might be picky on that issue. As another poster said, "drive 'em both" and see what works best for you, but I don't think you will ever be sorry if you go with the big Merc

 

[whip]

My car broke down before I had to drive to Alabama for a friends wedding. I borrowed my uncles Crown Vic. I thought the car was nice, it had a really nice ride, and I was impressed by the mileage it got. My one big complaint was that split bench seat was terrible on that long drive. If the MGM has the same seat, I'd lean towards the Taurus.

 

[Nick R]

I know me, and critic just don't get the "older is better" mentality. I would rather have a newer design, which has been overhauled by the "good" ford, versus something that has been relatively unchanged for what, 20 years?

I almost bought a used CVPI when I was buying my focus, but my mom wanted to get a car with a warranty on it, so that was out. But if I was looking at either a Panther or the new taurus.... There is no question. Taurus 100% absolutely.

 

[ekpolk]

We should also be explicit about how we are defining a "good ride". I strongly DISprefer what I see as the overly cushy, ultra isolated feeling provided by cars like the GM (though FWD cars can be this way too -- my Camry is awfully close, for example). I actually want to feel the road, not in a kidney jarring fashion, but enough that I know what's going on down there. The old RWD platforms tend not to provide this feedback very well.

"Good ride" to me is probably what the Taurus is providing. IMO, of course.

 

[eljefino]

I had a 97 GM and don't see what the big deal is.

I'd have to drive an 03+ with rack & pinion to pass judgement on the modern ones, but the steering on mine felt disconnected like a video game. Precise, but overboosted.

I did quite like the double wishbone suspension, throw it into a rotary (roundabout) at high speed and the tires would dig in and get around quickly and without even squealing.

But my bench seat was barely bolstered. This lead to tension in my butt as I tried to not fall out. One can't ride comfortably if they have tension. Maybe a Marauder seat would have taken care of this issue.

The trunk had all these weird hidey holes off the sides where they hide the jack etc. These are salt collection pockets and mine were severely rotted at 12 years old.