Media | Articles
The Ford Taurus Was a Case Study in Case Studies
If you, a car enthusiast with an encyclopedic memory for inane historical details, have spent any time researching the 1980s, you know about the barnstorming success that was the 1986 Ford Taurus. And if any of you readers are currently in high school or college, desperate to write a term paper on something that isn’t mind-numbingly boring, consider this cheat code*: Write about the people who brought the Taurus to life. It is such a fascinating story, you are guaranteed** an “A” if you do it right.
Those who read my work regularly know/tolerate my FoMoCo bias, so it should surprise few of you that I immediately fell in love with the Taurus and Sable when they landed in local showrooms. Even with reliability issues thrown into the mix, the car’s success on the road and in sales made it a case study for management consultants and storytellers alike in the 1990s.
The Ford Taurus could be one of the most studied vehicles in recent history, at least when it comes to the practices of corporate management, marketing, and vehicle design. I will put my money where my mouth is here, because I graduated Magna Cum Laude because of this forgotten family sedan. My success in management classes came from Taurus-themed term papers, ensuring my GPA skyrocketed in my junior and senior years. Here are the books you must read to follow my Ford-fueled path:
I chucked the owner’s manual of a 1987 Taurus MT-5 (that I found in the junkyard the week before) into one particular college presentation, citing the company’s “guiding principles” and waving it in front of everyone.
The soft-spoken management professor exclaimed “Wow!” when I used said owner’s manual as a prop. No, I didn’t slam it on the floor or anything, but maybe that was an opportunity; after all, the Taurus was designed in the turbulent Malaise Era. But these were also innovative times, and Ford’s futuristic family sedan proved a home run. Even Motorweek discussed the Taurus’ core tenets of uncompromised exterior/interior styling, cutting-edge computer-assisted design, and the enlightened management practices known internally as Team Taurus. This is one of the few times when peeling back the veil on how a car was developed actually appealed to the general public. The story of this homegrown winner, nurtured by working-class Americans, helped drive sales. (It helped that the car was also very good.)
To wit, Motorweek‘s video notes the Taurus was “a car designed more by commitment, than by a committee of bean counters.” This short video essay is better than any book, because it uses Ford’s B-roll footage to ensure the point hits as smoothly as, well, a Taurus slicing through a wind tunnel!
Marketplace
Buy and sell classics with confidence
Case studies, indeed, do not have to be. My Hagerty colleague, Jason Cammisa, created an episode of the YouTube Revelations covering the Taurus SHO tale. It starts with a fantastic primer on what made the underlying Taurus family sedan so special and so radical for the times. I encourage you to watch it and subscribe to our channel.
The original Taurus embraced technology, embodied the latest design trends, and once the SHO arrived in 1989, even appealed to the traditional car enthusiast. I do not know what classes my esteemed colleague took in college, but let’s reflect that his video generated 2.8 million views (as of this writing) on a case study for a 35-year-old Ford sedan. That’s ample reason for graduation with honors, don’t you think?
*Sorry children, but to truly understand the car industry, you still have to read the books and do the analytical work. I doubt AI will understand the nuances of varying automotive corporate management styles, much less apply them to a Ford Taurus with any level of detail and accuracy.
**This is a real guarantee in the same way arcade tokens are real currency.
Find more values
Search for prices of other cars, trucks, vans and motorcycles
tenets… sorry
I remember when they came out I thought they were the most futuristic thing I’d seen in real life. At the same time I’ve always hated the roundy look that took over car styling and stuck there for 40 years
A bit off topic but every time the topic of AI comes up at work, I say you have family feud where the most popular answer to popular questions wins, whether it is right or wrong, and you have jeopardy where the correct answer to very obscure questions wins. AI is family feud
It’s been addressed
Sajeev- Of any topic you have written about, I believe the Taurus story should have been one that deserved one of your classic deep dives. The concepts listed in the page from the Owners Manual alone are worthy of “Mehta-ian” analysis of how far FoMoCo drifted from “Quality is Job One” to “We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Quality” over the years. Please add “Demings Road to Continual Improvement” by William W. Scherkenbach to your mandatory reading list. Mr.Scherkenbach was a vital part of helping FoMoCo see the benefit of applying W.Edwards Deming’s not-so-secret sauce known as the “Fourteen Points” to the way out of the crisis while embracing the new economics. Thanks for another chance to geek-out!
Maybe one day I will do a proper deep dive on the Taurus and/or Quality is Job 1, but that will take a lot more time. Time that I currently do not have. I mentioned Deming’s Fourteen Points in my last Taurus article:
https://www.hagerty.com/media/market-trends/the-1989-91-taurus-sho-still-punches-above-its-weight
I have written or cited the Taurus so many times in the last 19 years of writing that sometimes I forget I should repeat myself when it comes to the core values of this monument of a vehicle.
Quality is Job 1 would be a fascinating deep dive to see how far from that they have gone. All the little bean counter cuts that affected quality negatively. My feeling is Quality is Job #2. I did that on purpose to say Job #2 instead of just Job 2.
Demming was all over in this era. It helped some but most of the cars were sub par. Yes even the Taurus. He was all over the Fiero program too. It helped a bit but it still was not enough to turn most auto MFGS. Even Ford.
Here in the rust belt they had major rust issues. The headlight would turn yellow and cloudy and the paint peeled off like my Cougar in sheets.
They were built to a price point. That is what I found in my T bird too. It was as cheap as a Sunfire Pontiac and appeared to be a great deal will many of the quality issues arrived in various areas. When the antifreeze started to vanish it was traded for my SSEI that gave me no issues.
Look they all had issues back then and Ford for a while was better than most. But time caught up and some bad decisions were made.
Bob Lutz books on Ford, Chrysler and GM all detail the failings of this era with each.
Bob Lutz also his his great fails so he should talk.
Thanks! I’m sure it will all be in the book you write someday, in your spare time. LOL!
Might look this spring it will first be a web story of a sight I write for.
Sorry but working full time and other priorities now soak up much of my time.
Getting hit head on, family, work and health issues come first.
Might look this spring there will a web story of a site I write for.
Sorry but working full time and other priorities now soak up much of my time.
Getting hit head on, family, work and health issues come first.
Paul, are your comments referring to Sajeev, or or hyperV6?
Thanks norm1200, and apologies to hyperV6. The book comment was directed to Sajeev, but I would also read hyper’s book.
Quality went to the toilet after 2011. They should’ve never shut down the plant. It was producing the highly popular Lincoln town car, mercury, grand marquis, and the mighty Ford crown Vic. I worked on the assembly line in Chicago assembly point. We did not build garbage but often times the parts we had to build the cars with where substandard due to Ford chewing down the suppliers so that hurt quality.
Plants were a mixed bag. Some are better than others. Depends on investment in many cases.
The Lorain plant for the T Bird and Cougar had a horrid paint shop. My buddy father was a higher up guy there. He got his son’s car returned to the plant and Ford repainted it because it was a mess.
They got a better one later but the car died then.
In 1989 with a brand new baby I had become a family man and it became necessary to seek family transportation. As a lifelong GM man I was left cold by the offerings available in those showrooms, the Corsica and Lumina et al, and turned to Ford. The Taurus was in its third year and had received a few styling tweaks. I settled on the base model in charcoal grey with convenience package and those lovely alloy wheels. It was a looker. Equipped with the 3.0l V6 and automatic the car was exactly powerful enough. Over the next decade, I found that car to be comfortable, roomy, solid and engaging to drive. Even more engaging when I installed upsize Dunlop performance tires. And, contrary to its reputation, with thoughtful and regular maintenance, it was perfectly reliable.
Some may sneer, especially if they recall a bad experience but I’ve owned many cars and that one still holds a special place in my memory.
Great piece, I enjoyed that. One point though – I thought it was compulsory in articles about the Ford Taurus to mention the classic 80s movie, Robocop?!
I did that in my first Taurus article…back in 2007.
When you’ve been writing about the Taurus as long as I have on the Internet, you avoid the low hanging fruit.
My take on this car was it had the right price and size at the time. It was never a great car but one that was affordable and fit most needs.
While not a great car it was better than many others like the K car and the Citation but cheaper than the Accord.
When the styling got more odd with the oval rear window then it got bigger and more expensive people moved to the Explorer if they had to pay more.
My wife and I bought a new 1986 LX. First year Taurus. Black with argent lower trim, fancy wheels and tan leather. It was expensive looking and comfortable while delivering good fuel mileage from its 3.0 v6. Niggling problems like the drivers side seat frame split ( I only weighed 180 at 5’10” then. The computer buttons broke, the coolant system fouled requiring a new head on one side of the engine. These and other issues prevented it from being almost the perfect vehicle. Rushed to market prematurely is my diagnosis. Should have been what Ford promised but was not so in the first year anyway. Maybe it was later. By that time we had moved on to a 1994 Maxima. Probably the best sedan we’ve ever had.
Still hoping I can find that 1986 Ford Taurus LX wagon, Next week it will literally have been 6 years since I was so close to getting that one I found in Portland Oregon. Since then I’ve literally only found 2 LX trim 86 Taurus wagons for sale in the United States. There was one that showed up for sale last month but it was in Chile. I have no clue how much it would have costed to import it back to the States. I need a bit of luck real badly.
The Tauruses were well built, bulletproof cars, the early ones
@Guy (And Sajeev)- “Tauruses” or “Taurii”?
Absolutely loved my 89 Taurus SHO. It came with the only two options you could add to that car. I wish I had kept it. So much fun driving a car that size with a manual transmission.
Owned two of the Taurus station wagons, an 89 LX and a 95 LX. Both with the 3.8 V6. Solid road trip cars for the family vacations. 4 wheel disk brakes, all independent suspension, comfortable seats, the third rear seat for kids or dogs only. No major mechanical issues, just routine maintenance. Put nearly 200k miles on both before selling. Reliability of the Taurus was relief from the Chrysler K car and early minivan reliability problems. Gas mileage just OK. The last of the affordable wagons as styles changed to SUVs. Imagine a wagon with the SHO motor.
Back in the early 1980s I worked for a consulting firm that had a Ford contract to produce a salesperson’s product knowledge manual. I spent several days in Dearborn with Ford engineers and marketing people learning about the Taurus before its introduction. I was particularly impressed with the “Best in Class” program that gathered components from all the planned Taurus’ identified competitors.
Seats, for example, were gathered from many of the world’s similar sized cars and installed in Ford company fleet cars that employees were encouraged to drive. There was an evaluation card on each vehicle’s sunvisor with ratings on a seven-point scale. Once the best in class component was identified, engineers tore it apart to determine what made it best. As I recall the best in class seat was from the Opel Commodore.
The same process was applied to many of the Taurus’s proposed components with an eye to producing a superior part at an acceptable price. Sometimes it worked.
There was also some discussion about whether the Taurus should have an overhead cam engine to compete with European sedan imports, but was dismissed in favor of a push rod V6. The Taurus had to sell against other U.S. mid-size cars and had to sell to average folk “in Topeka” who were used to the low speed torque of a push rod engine.
I think I still have a copy of the manual kicking around. I may have to dig it out to help remember other aspects of the Taurus development.
This. This is why I love to write about the 1986 Taurus. Thank you for sharing your insight, Chris.
If you ever want to sell that manual, drop me a line @ pistonslap@hagerty.com
@Chris- Great “inside baseball” information. Thanks!
I also love hearing stories like this!
I have a 1994 SHO that I bought new. After almost 31 years it has been fairly reliable. The only major issue was the auto transmission (yes to this day I regret not getting the 5 speed!) failing at 73,000 miles 3 years ago. It was not cheap getting it rebuilt. Parts availability is now my only problem. Whenever I go to cars and coffee, cruise nights etc someone will always mention Robo Cop!
I drove one once back in the day and really liked it. Unfortunately around here, every inch of those cars would rust out like no other which surprised me due to such a smooth shape devoid of trim.
if you review Toyota’s history Ford borrowed quite a bit of those statements from Toyota. Some of which go back to the 30’s when was Toyota started and then in the early 50’s as Toyota and many of the Japanese companies adopted Deming’s teachings in the 50’s and 60’s. This led to continuous growth in the US through from 70s to now. Where the Rav4 is actually the best selling light duty vehicle in the US (outselling the F150) in 2024 and has had the #1 selling car (Camry) for quite a while
@Tom- It might be the case that Ford’s use of Deming’s principles reinforced the fact that Toyota was smart enough to take full advantage of Deming’s and Joseph Juran’s teaching after WW2. The Big Three didn’t have any time for Deming and Juran until Japanese quality started making a dent in their sales.
I owned a 96 “jelly bean” Taurus for several years. Great car! Was passed on to a family member who drove it for another few years. The best Ford I’ve ever owned, with my 2005 Expedition being a close second.