[ptack]

Originally Posted by UltimateBMW

After reading through this thread, and seeing it mentioned that the new taurus is cheaper but still comparable, even if in their own mind, to other high end luxury cars. And after hearing all the CTS-V vs. M5 hype with it being near $30k less money is anyone else just fed up that Americans always make the cheaper underdog car? Why didn't GM put the extra $30k (or at least $25k to be competitive) into the car and blow the M5's socks off?

Why isn't the new Taurus a true competitor to these other luxury brands? Whats with all the exceptions and for-instances in their car line ups.

Mind you this is just some random thoughts that ran through my head reading previous posts. So they are most likely wrong/flawed/not fully thought out. I'm just getting tired of American brands using the 'For substantially less money' caveat. Make a true competitor please, improve your quality across the board, and stop being the eco-boxes you've been for the last decade GM/Ford.

(Although, I think Ford is certainly better off than GM atm.)

Ah, Ford isn't talking to BMW owners (who they probably doubt would willingly move to a Ford), they're talking to the slightly less affluent middle America that would like to be able to buy a BMW or Mercedes. They very much want to convince their bread and butter buyers that a Taurus is almost as good and a much better value. It's all marketting. Time will tell if the hype will move the product. I think they'd stand a much better chance if the car didn't look so boring.