Comparison Test: 2010 Ford Taurus SHO vs. 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey

When Ford announced its all-new 2010 Taurus SHO as a new-generation premium performance sedan, we took it to mean the term literally. So what better yardstick to measure Ford's claim than a current premium performance sedan with a proven record, the 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey?

The twin-turbo Taurus wouldn't have it easy, seeing how the Infiniti G35 sedan had dethroned the BMW 335i sedan in our five-car comparison last year. More recently a G37 devoured Acura's high-tech TL SH-AWD without so much as a by-your-leave in a head-to-head comparison.

But perhaps the reanimated Super High Output (SHO) Taurus will once again have a few sleeper sedan tricks for the establishment.

The Same?
Put the spec charts of the 2010 Ford Taurus SHO and 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey next to one another, and there are good reasons to believe these two sport sedans are peers — on paper, at least.

The 3.7-liter V6 in the Infiniti produces 328 horsepower, but that's outdone by the twin-turbo 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 in the Ford that generates 365 hp. Both cars can accelerate to 60 mph in less than 6 seconds. Wheelbase measurements of the two five-passenger sedans are separated by less than an inch. The EPA's estimate for combined fuel economy for each car shows a 1 mpg difference — 21 mpg for the G37 and 20 mpg for the Taurus SHO.

Sadly, that's pretty much where the similarities end.

Or Different?
The base price of the all-wheel-drive 2010 Ford Taurus SHO is $37,995. Our test car carried $7,480 in options for an as-tested total of $45,475. Gulp.

The rear-wheel-drive 2009 Infiniti G37 Journey starts at $34,565. Ours was equipped with $7,620 in options for a total of $42,185. In our protocol for scoring comparison tests, this $3,300 price gap between the two might be difficult to overcome in the final scoring.

Overall length, width and height of the Taurus SHO dwarfs the G37's, and therefore so does the interior passenger volume and cargo capacity. It might surprise you to learn, however, that most of the size advantage the SHO enjoys over the G37 is found in the dimensions of the backseat and the trunk (the Taurus' trunk measures 20 cubic feet, some 7 cubic feet more than the G37), and the front-seat accommodations are remarkably similar.

But you would also be correct in assuming the inevitable result of this sizable disparity is that the SHO's as-tested weight proves to be greater — in this case 684 pounds greater. That's like loading up the G37 with two NFL linemen.

But if NFL greats Lawrence Taylor, Emmitt Smith, Warren Sapp and Jerry Rice can compete — and win — on Dancing With the Stars, then maybe Ford's 2-ton flagship sedan has some latent dynamic abilities we might be missing in a simple comparison of scale.

Something's Missing
Then we drove the two cars.

We quickly determined the appropriately equipped SHO for this test would've been the one with the $995 Performance package. Though there were test mules lurking in Detroit, Ford unfortunately wasn't able to make this car available to us yet. Then again, the package would've pumped up the as-tested price of this SHO to $46,470.

So what's missing? It includes more aggressive gearing (to improve acceleration); quicker steering (to improve transitional responses); upgraded brake pads (to improve feel and fade resistance); summer tires (to improve grip, reduce stopping distances and increase heat capacity); and the ability to shut off the conservatively tuned stability control system (to enable us to test the limits of the car, not those set by an engineer and a corporate lawyer).

It would've been nice had Ford included all these performance features on its "premium performance sedan," especially one headed for a track test.

The Track Results
Even without the performance gearing, the heavyweight SHO still makes the G37 glance over its shoulder at the track.

With its 5.8-second acceleration to 60 mph from a standstill (5.5 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), the Ford is only 0.2 second behind the Infiniti, which does the task in 5.6 seconds (5.3 seconds with 1 foot of rollout). In the remainder of the quarter-mile, the G37 opens up a lead of 0.4 second and finishes with a significant 2.3-mph advantage, recording 13.8 seconds at 101.4 mph against the Ford's 14.2 seconds at 99.1 mph.

The difference in trap speed is significant because this measure is strongly influenced by horsepower. The Taurus SHO doesn't seem to exploit its 37-hp advantage, and we think the parasitic losses of the car's all-wheel drive play a role here, as do its size and weight.

Damned Physics
With such a large frontal area, the big-boned and not-so-slippery SHO (0.32 Cd) obviously tries to punch a bigger hole through the atmosphere than the smaller, more slippery (0.29 Cd) G37. And at 4,404 pounds, each of the Ford's 365 horses has to haul around 12 pounds while the Infiniti has an easier task with 11 pounds/hp. Indeed we noted that the SHO feels as if it lies down at the end of the quarter-mile even as the G37 is still accelerating.

When we hit the brakes from 60 mph, the SHO fares poorly against the G37, requiring 127 feet to stop compared to the G37's 110-foot best. What's more, the SHO's pedal grew progressively softer from the first to fifth (and final) stop and the pads smoked after several acceleration runs. The Infiniti's brakes showed no such signs of nearing their limits — ever. No doubt the G37's $2,100 Sport package helped here with, among other things, upgraded brakes and summer tires. Oh, and it wasn't saddled with those two invisible NFL players either.

Things got worse for the Ford when the handling portion of the tests began. Without the ability to shut off Ford's electronic stability system, the SHO was artificially relegated to 0.80g and a 63-mph slalom pass. While these numbers aren't embarrassing for a 4,400-pound car, the steering is vague while the chassis feel reluctant to change direction. Once the understeer began in earnest, the stability control started to rein in things. There might not have been more grip from the all-season tires in any case.

No such complaints from behind the wheel of the Infiniti. The steering is so quick and precise that it's effortless to catch any slides by the G37's lively rear end. We also like the car's knife-edge balance on the skid pad, which we can adjust delicately with steering, throttle or brake. The result is 0.87g in lateral acceleration and a 66.4-mph slalom speed. It's also worth pointing out that when we ran the same tests with the Infiniti's stability control system fully engaged, the performance changed little: 0.86g and 65.1 mph.

So What Does the SHO Do Well?
Freeways and two-lane on-ramps to freeways, and that's where the original SHO's sleeper-sedan directive lives on. Sure, the SHO comes up short compared to a G37 at a drag strip on a slalom course, but compared to other cars of its size and mass (or smaller), it's quick and it sticks. You should've seen the look on the guy's face in the Dale Earnhardt Signature Edition Monte Carlo when we went around him on the outside while merging onto the freeway.

The SHO's suspension works on an assortment of less-than-ideal surfaces, even with its 20-inch tires. The SHO is isolated without feeling floaty; it's sure-footed without beating you over the head about it. And it is remarkably quiet. Aside from the congenitally numb and springy electric-assisted power steering with its unnatural return-to-center, the SHO is the model for the way every Taurus should ride and handle. Nevertheless, a Taurus SHO should behave with a sharper and more dedicated attitude, just like the G37 with a sport package does.

Standards, Options and Gizmos
For around $40,000, you'd expect to find some pretty nice equipment on these cars, and you'd be right. Besides 300-plus-hp V6 engines, both the SHO and G37 arrived with xenon headlamps (those on the Infiniti articulate with the steering), dual-zone climate control, intelligent key with push-button start, and navigation systems.

When you select key sport sedan features — as we did in our scoring protocol — the Ford backs up such expected sporting options as shift paddles and all-wheel drive with some genuine innovations, like the Cross Traffic Warning (it should be renamed "Parking Lot Idiot Detector"). The device repurposes the existing blind-spot sensors to alert a driver backing out of a parking stall if another car is barreling down the aisle, and from which direction.

Also, the SHO is available with radar-based adaptive cruise control, but it's been engineered to also provide a collision warning system that not only flashes and sounds a warning but also pre-charges the brakes to give you an extra edge when coming to a halt quickly. At the same time, the threshold of safety intervention by the SHO's electronics is set to Chicken Little's standards — a little too vigilant and occasionally alarmist.

If you note the Top 10 Features, you'll see how the SHO claws back more points with its features than it loses in its price premium.

Alternative Realities
Sure, the more obvious all-American branded comparison might've been the one we featured over here: the 2010 Ford Taurus SHO versus our 2008 Pontiac G8 GT. It's a valid point, but the Pontiac G8 GT is an endangered species. Maybe a Cadillac CTS V6 DI would've been a better competitor, but that's supposedly where the 2010 Lincoln MKS EcoBoost is intending to hunt, isn't it?

So here's where we've landed.

The Infiniti G37 has improved much from its introduction as the Infiniti G35 sedan. A larger engine with more power, a multimode seven-speed automatic transmission with available shift paddles, a growing list of standard and available equipment, and improved interior materials content have made the 2009 Infiniti G37 Sport Sedan a genuine benchmark in its category. That it doesn't break the $43,000 mark when you add Premium, Sport and Navigation packages is simply icing on the cake.

The 2010 Ford Taurus has undoubtedly picked up right where the last 1999 Ford Taurus SHO left off. The problem is, this is not the year 2000. We agree that the thoroughly efficient, twin-turbo direct-injected 3.5-liter V6 is a very good engine that's loaded with brilliant engineering and probably even more potential than Ford is willing to admit at this point, especially as revised CAFE mpg requirements loom large on the horizon.

We agree that the SHO's styling is bold, forward-looking and tough all at the same time. While the SHO's interior is attractive, it still doesn't feel all that special or premium to us, though. And that strange theatre seating arrangement and the resulting convoluted headliner is just off-putting to us.

Finally, the subtle but necessary improvements made to the already top-notch Sync infotainment system didn't go unnoticed (thank you), and most of the new gizmos are both cool and useful, but there's a right way to execute parts-bin sharing of controls and a less right way. You must first start with a bin chock full o' high-quality parts, you see. Take, for instance, the G37's magnesium paddle shifters, which are the same ones found in a Nissan GT-R. And this makes us wonder when Ford is finally going to get rid of that cruise control interface on the steering wheel, the one that we've grown to dislike on our long-term 2009 Ford Flex? No "cancel" button, no telltale for on/off, etc., and now it's more complex with the adjustable cruise control?

In the end, the 2010 Ford Taurus SHO feels like an excellent all-new Taurus with a muscular engine, period. It's not quite up to the sport sedan badge. Once we finally get a chance to test an SHO with the Performance package, we're hoping it transforms the dynamic experience. Until then, the 2009 Infiniti G37 (and the crowd in which it is typically found) has nothing to worry about from the Taurus SHO. That is, unless someone starts changing the G37's list of standard equipment to include two NFL players.

The manufacturers provided Edmunds these vehicles for the purposes of evaluation.

We selected the following 10 features to help explain discrepancies in as-tested price, performance (actual or potential), convenience and safety.

Key:
S: Standard
O: Optional
O*: Optional but not equipped on test vehicle
N/A: Not Available

Typically a radar-based system, adaptive cruise control can maintain a driver-adjustable distance between your car and the one in front of yours. Optional (and present) on the SHO; optional (not present) on the G37.

All-wheel drive: Never mind the specifics of how each manufacturer chooses to distribute power to all four wheels, but AWD is standard on the SHO and optional on the G35.

Automatic high beam on/off: Hey, it's 1952 all over again, the year when these things were invented (you can look it up). These systems have recently seen a resurgence, though we're not certain why. Optional (and present) on the Ford; not currently offered on the Infiniti G37.

Blind-spot warning system: Once a bit of a novelty, these systems are gaining popularity and use either videolike cameras or short-range sonar to detect vehicles (even motorcycles) in the space beside/behind yours. The SHO optionally is equipped with such a device; not currently offered on the Infiniti G37.

Cross-traffic warning system: Repurposing existing blind-spot sensors, the SHO can warn a driver backing out of a parking spot if that person who speeds through parking lots (you know who you are) is approaching, and from which side. Optional (and present) on the Ford; not currently offered on the Infiniti G37.

Defeatable stability control system: In a sport sedan, this now ubiquitous electronic safety aid should be able to be shut down completely by experienced drivers who are looking for more spirited performance. Optionally available within the SHO Performance package; standard on the G37.

Imminent-collision warning system: Repurposing the adaptive cruise control system to monitor the rate at which the car is approaching another object makes it a collision warning device. The SHO optionally has such a device that sounds a warning, flashes a strip of LED lights reflected in the windshield and pre-charges the ABS. There's no such system currently offered on the Infiniti G37.

Manual transmission: If you call your car a sport sedan, we think you should offer the option of a DIY (do-it-yourself) transmission — you know, as in manual transmission. Optional on the G37; not available on the SHO.

Shift paddles: If you're stuck with an automatic transmission, you should be able to control it with shift paddles on the steering wheel or steering column. They are standard on the SHO; optional on the G37 within the Sport package. It should be noted, however, that while the shift paddle feature for both these cars offers quick, matched-rev downshifts, you must first select Manual with the console shifter in the Ford to use this feature, but you may at any time temporarily override Drive (or select Manual) with the shift paddles of the G37.

Summer tires: The term is a little misleading, as we define summer tires as those with a grippy, performance-oriented combination of construction, rubber compound and tread design that works best on dry or wet pavement, but not mud and snow surfaces (which is the province of all-season tires). Optional (though not present here) within the SHO Performance package; optional (and present) within the G37 Sport package.

Engine & Transmission Specifications

Warranty

Performance

Recommended Rating (2.5%): After the test, each participating editor was asked to rank the vehicles in order of preference based on which he or she thought would be best for the average consumer shopping in this segment.

28-Point Evaluation (20%): Each participating editor ranked each vehicle based on a comprehensive 28-point evaluation. The evaluation covered everything from ride comfort, steering response and brake performance, to cupholders and exterior design. Scoring was calculated on a point system, and the scores listed are averages based on all test participants' evaluations.

Feature Content (20%): For this category, we selected 10 features to help explain discrepancies in as-tested price, performance (actual or potential), convenience and safety. For each vehicle, the score was based on the number of actual features it had versus the total possible. Standard, optional (and present), optional (and not present), and equipment that's not at all available was taken into consideration and scored appropriately.

Performance Testing (20%): Both cars were put through a comprehensive battery of instrumented tests, including 0-60 acceleration, quarter-mile runs and panic stops from 60 mph. They were also run through a 600-foot slalom course to test transitional handling and around a skid pad to determine ultimate grip. The vehicles were awarded points based on how closely each came to the better-performing vehicle's score in each category.

Fuel Consumption (15%): The numbers listed were the result of a simple percentage calculation based on the EPA's combined city/highway fuel economy estimates for the cars in the comparison test. Assigning 100 to the more fuel-efficient vehicle, the less efficient vehicle received a resulting percentage value. If all goes as the manufacturers projected, the combined fuel economy figures between the two sedans will vary by just 1 mpg.

Price (20%): The numbers listed were the result of a simple percentage calculation based on the less-expensive vehicle in the comparison test. Using the "as tested" prices of the actual evaluation vehicles, the less-expensive vehicle received a score of 100; the other vehicle received a lesser score based on the relative costs of the two.