Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Sedans Pre-2008



  • reesejreesej Posts: 23
    No, that is not better ... just childish. If the negative postings would go away then people wouldn't feel they need to defend. I just want to see the attack & defense garbage dropped -- Those kinds of posting are not what conferencing is about. Let's try to help each other out, share our ownership experiences, and keep the "attitudes" off-line.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    Wow. Did I ever shake up the hornet's nest? Sorry malibu99, I still think an Accord is better than a Taurus or a Mailibu. But thanks for the web page. I did expect to get some strong rebuttals with my comments, to bad they were for the most part childish. Do better!!! I guess Honda doesn't make any money, with them paying off all the auto magazine writers. You have to trust me on this - I got an Accord because I wanted one, not because some magazine thinks I should.

    I guess I fall into categories 4 and 5. In regards to category 5, I thought the purpose of these postings is to converse with others. One thing we all have in common is that we're auto enthusiasts. I don't think I spend anymore time than anybody else reading and writing posts. Doesn't it get boring conversing with someone who thinks just like you about cars? The Accord and Taurus are fierce competitors. So what is so awful about Accord and Taurus owners needling each other a bit. Just don't get personal.
  • malibu99malibu99 Posts: 305
    That is just it you can think the Accord is better I think it's not and I don't expect us to agree but to respect each others opinions. I seems to miss where in my argument agains teh accord I was childish,hmmmmmm. Either way in my opinion the Accord is just plain boring and the feeling of driving the car is that of being an 86 year old. However if you like it the best hey it's your car so you better like it. And where did I say that Honda pays auto magazines? I don't see that, all I see is that a car is overrated and people buy it because the magazines say so. Glad you bought your car because you want one but when I see people buying a car because magazine X says so and not because they REALLY wanted one. My co worker that sits next to me just bought a Civic because he read that it in a magazine. He passed on the Ford Focus and now he regrets it because the car is annemic. Oh well. Either way good luck to everyone, oh and Venus man you didn't stir anything up I really enjoy commenting and watching foreign auto owners jump in with the same arguments, I can predict which ones tehy will use, like your fleet thing. THAT was really funny.
  • tractiontraction Posts: 141
    Thanks for trying to clear out some of the extraneous traffic on this board. I especially liked your rating system!!!! You hit it right onthe nose!....I will keep these different ratings in mind when I read messages on this board to help me filter out the chaff.

    1. You own a Taurus.
    2. You want to own a Taurus.
    3. You secretly admire the Taurus, but since you
    made another choice in vehicles you would like to
    find fault in what you wish you would have
    4. You are checking out your very competitive
    5. You have nothing better do with your time than
    surf from page to page finding someone to fight
    with so that you can have some one to converse
    with. (If this is you, you are pathetic)
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    I don't care who posts what here as long as I don't have to read 22 posts about "DOOR TRIM MOLDING" again.

    Hey why don't we talk about the 32 valve 3.4 litre v8 motor in my Taurus SHO and why Ford is darn foolish for not continuing to build a Taurus with this jewel of a motor?

    Or why don't we talk about how when I sit in my SHo (most comfortable seats you can buy in this price range) I can't help but think of how comfy and cushy this car is and not tacky like a typical GM sedan that reminds you of your grandpas 1971 lesabre.

    Or why don't we talk about the tremendous value and how a family on a budget can buy a well built contemporary reliable good looking feature laden family sedan with lots of room for not much more than 16-20 grand?

  • bolivarbolivar Posts: 2,316
    my 1991 SHO.

    Badly out of alignment when new. Took 3 tries for Ford to get a decent alignment.
    The motor mount that failed.
    The air conditioner that leaked.
    The air conditioner clutch that failed.
    The water pump that failed.
    The windshield wiper that failed.
    The paint that appeared to 'evaporate' off the car. Top and trunk were down to primer in 3 years.
    The clutch that was really bad when new, and worsened to being a monster.
    This was within 42,000 miles. This was the worse new car for things failing since my 1972 Corvette.

    Ok, there were some good things...
    The motor, the motor, the motor, the motor.
    The cloth interior was very nice. The seats were very nice (after you dragged yourself over the tall side bolster and got into them).
    It was quiet and very stable on the highway.
    It was very fast. Very quick from a dead stop even with the horror of a clutch. I ran it to 135mph and it still had more left. And was very stable at this speed........

    But the things that failed - still not sure if I would buy another Taurus because of it.

    P.S. This was the V-6 motor. I drove the Automatic V-8 (1995 or so????) thinking this might be a better 'fit'. It was much slower than my V-6, so much that I wasn't interested in it.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    Your co worker should of read those magazines more carefully. I have never driven the car, but those magazines give the Focus very high remarks. Its only fault being the four cylinder engine it uses. I actually think the four door looks very nice. The Civic on the other hand is a lame duck car. The 2001 Civics will be completely redesigned. I personaly think the Mazda Protege and Ford Focus are currently the top cars for the economy class. If I was in a market for an economy car, I would probably test drive those cars and more. Using the auto publications I trust as a starting guide only. And darn it, the Accord isn't boring. Most people who drive them don't take advantage of its handling characteristics or get it with a 5-speed.

    Post #358:
    Its definitely not items #1,#2, or #3 for me. Are there any Taurus owners on this topic who are friendly with outsiders?
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    I owned an '89 too.

    Thankfully, I bought it from the original owner who had replaced a lot of that stuff for me.

    Oh but what I'd do to get that car back. Fast! Effortless highway cruising. Unreal handling.

    The motor was so good in that car. It made me forgive all the things that would periodically need fixing. The motor itself was bulletproof though.
  • rpbohnrpbohn Posts: 3
    My wife and I want to buy a used 1999 Ford Taurus. Which model is recommended in the 4 door sedan and why? What are the included options?
  • rpbohnrpbohn Posts: 3
    I have long legs. While I like the Honda, Camry and Mazda, they all have large consoles that knock against my lower right leg. The only foreign car I can find with a bench seat is the Toyota Avalon. Unfortunately, they are pricey. What is your recommendation for more leg-room? I am leaning toward the Ford Taurus. Thoughts?
  • tractiontraction Posts: 141
    The Taurus has a bench seat standard. The center section of the front bench seat folds out to expose a console or folds back into a seat if you need the seating room. The higher end Tauri have bucket seats and a fixed center console with floor shifter. You would have to judge for yourself if it provides adequate leg room for you.
  • 99taurus99taurus Posts: 20
    I can recommend the SE model. I have one and I love it. The sunroof and spoiler are very nice options. I would not do without the center counsel with A/C vents to the rear seat. I would also look around to find one with the 24 Valve engine. Very much worth the extra money! You only loose about a mile per gallon with many extra Horses to justify it.
  • fordman33fordman33 Posts: 32
    Has anyone with a 2000 Taurus been able to get the advertised mileage? I'm averaging about 15 city, 22-24 highway. I was on a trip yesterday and got 25 mpg on a 300 mile stretch of interstate, cruise control set on 75 (I hardly used the brakes or gas the entire 300 miles). I'm not really complaining, cause I love the car and it gets much better gas mileage than the 98 F-150 I traded for it. The F-150 didn't get the advertised mileage either. BTW, I have the Vulcan 3.0. I guess you have to drive 45 -50 mph to get the advertised mileage....
  • 911dan911dan Posts: 9
    See my entries (268 & 345) on my 99's friend bought an 00 Taurus...went back complaining of poor mileage....they said she had a FUEL INJECTOR problem!!!!!
  • reesejreesej Posts: 23

    Don't take the credit for shaking up a hornet's nest ... it was well under way before you posted #346. If everyone remembers that this is the Taurus topic and tempers their posts accordingly, then Taurus owners can be quite friendly to the "outsiders". I don't come online to get blasted by some jerk with an opposing opinion in my own car model topic -- it gets real old, REAL FAST ... Everyone can take it somewhere else!


    I agree -- I don't care who posts here as long as I don't have to read any more "Brand xxx is better than Taurus" posts. Not too familiar with the SHO ... what output did the 3.4L V8 have and what do you foresee Ford possibly doing for the SHO in the future? As far as the door moulding issue goes -- This was [is] addressing a REAL and CURRENT problem some owners are experiencing. If you are not interested in possibly HELPING, then let it be (looks like ohio7 has gotten a good fix on it).


    My last fill-up this morning netted 24+ mpg for around town and inter-city (mixed driving, 55 mph max, no A/C). Drops to 22 mpg with A/C on. Able to get 28 mpg on the inter-state running at 65 mph. I have the 24V engine and have had the recall reprogramming recently done -- seems to shift just a little differently ... slower to downshift when you push on the gas (doesn't wind-up quite so easily).
  • goldorakgoldorak Posts: 6
    Hi, I'm currently looking for a 1997 Maxima (don't start telling me it's a crappy car 'cause it's not a Ford, you'd be wasting your time and more importantly mine, I like this car) but recently, a 1995 Taurus SHO I saw for sale at a very interesting price (about 6 795 U.S. $) has caught my eye. I like the big monster look (especially the pipes in the back) and the great engine.

    Now, the only reason I'd buy this car is because it's a lot cheaper than the Maxima. But I'm afraid of the reliability issue. Can anyone help me on this? I don't want to spend all the money I'd save on repairs. BTW, the car is an automatic.
  • rgd99rgd99 Posts: 1
    Fuel Pump broke left me and family at roadside.
    Roadside assistance was bad(would not provide a rental). Dealer said many other 2000 Taurus' have same problem(no recall yet). Fuel pump problem is present on all engine versions from what 3 different service men said. Found pump installed redesigned pump(pumps are on back order). Still like the way the car looks, feels and it is roomy. Getting 24mpg city 27mpg highway. Gets better than that when I push.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    I didn't realize this was your very own topic forum. Can you tell what other topics you consider under your ownership so I can be careful not hurt your precious feelings? I don't remember calling anybody any names with any of my posts. Too bad you can't say the same.
  • reesejreesej Posts: 23
    Since you are shopping for a 2000 Volkswagon Jetta, currently own a 1998 Honda Accord, and your dream car is a 3 seriew BMW, why all the noise in the Ford Taurus topic?

    The intent of my comment was not that I own the topic, but that the topic matches the model of car that I own (duh). As far as names -- if the shoe fits ....
Sign In or Register to comment.