... to deliver a horable comparison. Although I have a slight bias towards Ford, I am able to recognize when a Ford does not meet or beat the competition.

Their latest comparison is just .. idk .. dumb? Their criteria? Who knows .. I don't think they use criteria, to be honest. One could be reading a comparison between an Accord and a Mazda 6, in addition to a comparison between a Fusion and a Camry, both from Inside Line, and the winning criteria would be completely different in terms of a "grading scale" if you will, or lack thereof.

So .. here it is: 2010 Ford Taurus vs. 2009 Honda Accord. Wait a minute ... we are comparing a 4000 lb. well equipped Taurus with a 3600 lb Accord? huh .. I could understand if they wanted to compare bang-for-buck family sedan. Or even if they were comparing performance and performance alone. But we all know that Inside Line kinda just drives the cars and really don't uphold any specific criteria in the majority of their comparison's, which is fine if it's actually fact based, rather than on such opinions.

So who wins? Just incase you don't want to read the article, the Accord does .. of course. Why? Better handling, cheaper, and "more cabin room". Wait a minute .. more cabin room? No .. not exactly. So what about comfort, convenience, leg room, cargo room, amenities and features, safety? What about the things that actually matter in the family sedan category? Oh ya .. well, the Taurus has the edge in all of those aspects. For another 5K on top of the Accord, you can have blind spot detection, collision warning system, radar cruise control, all the options you can think of to make your ride farrr more comfortable, quite, convenient and safe.

When it comes to performance, can one even really compare the two? I mean the Accord has a near 400 lb. weight advantage and barely wins the acceleration battle. Looking at the data, props to the Taurus for nearly keeping up even with all of that weight. Could be do to the fact that it has a 6-speed transmission and overall a better engineered drivetrain, which is one area the awesome Accord fell behind in, only being equipped with a 5-speed. And lets not forget their last comparison between the Accord, Fusion and Mazda 6. Who won? The Fusion. So wait a minute .. that means that the Fusion is better than the all new Taurus? because it's cheaper and more agile??? Man .. I can't wait to see that comparison!!!

Whatever it may be, the new Taurus is a fine car and has earned rave reviews. This is just one more review attempting to take away Ford's late success. Ford's losses last month were half that of Toyota's, the next company behind Ford in loss in sales. Props to Ford ford buildin an incredible car that I know will sell great and I'm glad to see the Taurus name truly restored and living up to it's reputation of leadership.

www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=153146

Bit odd comparing a Taurus to an Accord. I agree, not sure how you can make a call, since they seem like two distinct car markets. Kinda like comparing a Civic and Fusion then saying the Civic is better because it gets better Fuel Economy. I figure if they wanted to compare it to Japanese cars they should compare it to a Maxima or Avalon, those share the same market as the Taurus.

That's what I would think too.. but it's Edmunds, remember? I believe a few years back they did pick the M3 over the Veyron ... What's next? Kia Forte Koupe vs. Aston Martin One77?!?

Seriously...