Ford Dealer Training: 1989 Ford Taurus vs 1989 Honda Accord

NOTE: Bullshit comments from Honda lovers will be deleted

This video is from a Ford dealer training VHS titled "1989 Ford Competition Today", and compares the '89 Taurus GL with the '89 Accord.

These videos were only available to dealers and not for public viewing.

DO NOT DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO AND POST IT ON YOUR CHANNEL!

Category:

Autos & Vehicles

Tags:

• ford
• taurus
• honda
• accord
• car
• dealer
• dealership
• training
• vhs
• honda=crap

[frantiks3gee]

Honda did offer a fuel injected engine for the Accord on the LX-i model, though it still had less horsepower than the Ford engines.

[91Taurus]

Ya but they were comparing two specific trim levels which were the "best-selling" versions of each model. If they wanted to compare the best each car model had to offer they could have chosen the Accord LX-i and the Taurus SHO. But that would have been an extremely stupid comparison

[somewhatlongdong]

I like how they didn't didn't trash the Accord, they acknowledged it was a good automobile as well.

[fordxbgtfalcon]

i always loved the taurus, but the 3.8 was a defective motor, head gaskets blew in 80% of them. and im sorry but you just cant compare a ford to a honda....

[psykotanks]

I rather walk then drive an asian car. Those characterless things makes me sick!!! Cool video by the way.

[heissdavid]

One thing we can all agree is resale value, and thats not as of then, but as of NOW. I rather buy a 1989 accord rather than the same year taurus. Most likely the accord needs a tuneup, tires and possibly a MAF(common to go bad). On the other hand, the taurus is likely already have a head gasket and/or transmission rebuild done prior to the sale of the same. The mileage on the accord is approx. 223k on the engine and powertrain while the taurus is approx. 188k miles. KBB shows a $50 difference.

[YuckieDucky]

@FanMNS i agree with you, only because a north american car is different then an import and it's nice to see that. imports should stay imports and american should stay american. if the public wants an american car, so be it. same with the imports. :)

[Sealy1986]

I thought it was a little biased how they compared the Accord in HP and roominess when in fact Honda has notoriously been a compact car from 1972-1989. I wouldn't agree with them on how the Taurus looks more stylish. It may be personal preference but I think a lot would agree with me the Accord looks a little more sleek. One thing you cannot deny is ride quality. While the Accord gets you from point a to point b the Taurus does it better. I've owned a 93 Taurus before and boy does it ride sweet.

[Audioquest56]

Yes, the LX had a 2-barrel carb, but the Accord EXi had a 2.0 12-valve fuel injected engine that made 120 hp. Those A20 engines were pretty indestructible. Also, my guess is that the Taurus was a lot heavier than the Accord, so comparing horsepower is a little silly.

[Iwabuccs]

Only on the DX and the LX. The LX-i and the SE-i both had fuel injection.

[starmanovich]

That was just to justify their "comparison". Haha, the cars aren't even in the same weight class.

[firebird890]

yea the lx had the carbureator but the lxi and sei and ex all had the electronic fuel injection 2.0 liter engine whcih made 120hp. that was a great engine! but the taurus was equally nice! i like both!

[snoopyloopy]

ahh yes, when the taurus was the best-selling car in america. i'm sure ford definitely misses those days. but i think we can kinda see here part of the reason the big 3 is in a bit more trouble than the jap 3. the big 3 makes way more options available on a trim level of each car. the jap 3 instead like to group common feature choices into a single trim level and then offer a few options on that. that way you can streamline assembly lines. i think only now are the big 3 starting to realize that.