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

16667697172109

Comments

  • Not sure if you were referring to my post or not, but no need to correct my info. I wasn't saying the SHO's were unreliable. Unfortunately, many others are. They seem to be getting that rep. I never had any trouble either.

    I was making comparisons between different types of Tauruses. One point I tried to make: the V-6 SHO was awesome and in a class by itself. The V-8 SHO had only a marginal performance improvement over a stock Duratec Taurus for a whole lot more money.

    And the prices I used were just ball-park MSRP for comparison. If your brother was able to buy a SHO for $24K then he probably could have had a Duratec Taurus for $20K or less (about what Mama paid.) Nobody pays sticker, do they?

    Yeah, the V-8 SHO was a nice car. And some days I wish I'd kept mine. But past is past - and mini-vans now have 235 horsepower!
  • regfootball said "These are tremendous assets to this SHO that were never mentioned because all the typical idiots who are only concerned with 0-60."

    Who are these people you're calling idiots? Never talked to anyone that was ONLY interested in 0-60 times in real life.

    It's just a tool for comparison. Otherwise, you'd get junk like this:

    Guy says, "My car is fast."
    Pretty fast, or very fast?
    "I dunno, but it's FAST!"

    With 0-60 times you can compare:

    Guy says, "My car is fast."
    How fast?
    "0-60 in 7.5 seconds."
    Mine goes 0-60 in 6.9 seconds.
    "Oh. Guess my car is PRETTY fast."

    Yeah, you gotta look at the overall performance picture, but you gotta start somewhere. There's a reason the car mags post 0-60 times: it's a valid and useful statistic for comparison.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    so how fast is that marauder....that's like a 7.5+ 0-60 time...
  • This isn't a Marauder discussion, but since you asked: 0-60 in 6.89 seconds...
    (source: Motor Trend)
  • corkfishcorkfish Posts: 537
    6.9 seconds? Geez, about a full second slower than a $22,000 Subaru WRX station wagon. Thought it was interesting that a top Ford exec just came out and said that the Camry was a better car than the taurus.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Well, you could buy a souped up go-kart that would go 0-60 faster than the Subaru WRX station wagon for a lot less than $22K also, but they are not the same size/type of vehicle. You are pushing a lot of iron with that Marauder, so the comparison is moot, in my opinion.

    As far as Taurus vs Camry, no one on this board will likely dispute the Ford exec's statement(except for styling which I think is an area that Camry really falls flat) I by the way, own and am very happy with my 2000 Taurus SES Duratec.
     
    However, for comparably equipped cars, you are paying a lot more for a Camry, so you should be getting something for that money. Well equipped Camrys with V-6's start to get pretty pricey, so when comparing cars, one also use price as a feature as well.

    For example, If I wanted to buy a new well equipped mid-size sedan with good 0-60 time of maximum of about the 8.0-8.5 seconds range, and with an overhead cam V-6 and want to stay under $20K out the door price, how many choices are there? You would soon find youself narrowing your choices down to Taurus, and not much else.

    So, you can go on and on about what Taurus is missing compared to the competition, such as variable valve technology, four wheel discs, navigation systems and slightly more luxurious "plastic", but beware all those little features add up to higher vehicle price.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    thing is, you can drive the sub 20k Taurus and at least you can admit it. There's not any stigma that's bad about driving a Taurus aside from it being a rental. Its a nice rental.

    But show up to the front door and be driving a Century or some other GM thing and there's not the same level of esteem.
  • It's car buying season...local Mercury dealer (same one I purchased from) has 20+ 2003 Sable LS Premium Touring Editions w/leather, ABS and moonroof, climate control, etc. for 18.5 after rebate. This is an incredible price -- a full $1000 less than I paid for my 2000, and it has at least one extra option in the "puddle lamps" that mine doesn't have. No matter what anyone has posted about Camry's, Accords and the like, this price is untouchable. Pick up an extended warranty out to 6-7 yrs to calm any reliablity worries, and you're still some 500-700 south of 20K.

    With similarly loaded-to-the-gills V6 Camry's MSRPing at 30.5, I can't imagine buying the Camry. No financial argument you make (depreciation, repairs, etc.), can offset the upfront differential of roughly 7500. (eg: buy the Camry with MSRP of 31.5 for 27.5, which may not even be realistic.)

    Bank the 7500 in an ING account(2.3%) or a long term CD and after you pay off the Sable(5yrs) you'll have a minimum of 8400 in the bank. Sable will have maybe 75K miles at that point, with a year to go on the extended warranty, and maybe things start to fail, but no way you'll spend 8400 on repairs. Hold her for another 5 years and the ING account is up to 9400. Figure maybe 2500 -3000K for repairs, and realize that interest rates will likely go higher over ten yrs, and you should still have maybe 6-7K. Nice little down payment for the next new car!!

    It's my plan anyway, 2 1/2 yrs in, no problems...
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    probably the best automotive value going today, no doubt.
  • No question that Taurus is cheaper than Camry, so if lowest cost is your top priority, Taurus is the way to go. On the other hand, many people feel it is worthwhile to invest $1000 more per year in a Camry so they can enjoy the hundreds of hours they spend in their cars each year in a vehicle that is more refined, more reliable, and which even Ford execs agree is better overall. You get what you pay for.
  • danielj6danielj6 Posts: 285
    I am not a Ford die hard. I try to buy value and get the best for my money. I have no loyalties to any car maker. But considering the economy, vehicle price, etc. I have to forgo Toyota's so called refinement and reliability for reality.

    I am not at all displeased with my Mercury Sable, and I've owned a Camry before. I can't see my self spending premium $'s for Toyota's features when I get more and pay less at a Ford-Mercury dealer. To me, shelling out $30,000 for a Camry just doesn't make sense if for quite a bit less I get a Taurus/Sable.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Well, you do not always get what you pay for.

    The concept of diminishing returns applies here. You can spend more, get a little more refinement and perhaps quality, but, you may not be getting it in the same ratio as the increased price. For instance, one can always get a better car by paying more. Start rationalizing paying $1000 more a year, soon you could rationalize $1100 more a year to get a slightly better car, and so on. If carried to the extreme, you could work your way up to a $40-$50k car. Tell me if the $50k luxury sedan is actually nearly 3 times better than the $18k Taurus? After say 7 years, would you rather be able to buy another $18K new car, and still have $14K in cash, or still be driving your 7 year old luxury car?

    Sure, there is a market for luxury cars as well as affordable cars as disposable incomes vary widely, but don't forget the market Taurus is targeted at.

    In my opinion, Ford shouldn't be criticized for positioning Taurus in the market as an affordable midsize family sedan, rather than taking the tactic of meeting or beating the competitors in perceived or real quality or refinement and thus pricing the car out of many people's budgets. After all Ford's heritage, from the Model T days was to provide vehicles at prices the masses could afford. With the current economy struggling along, maybe Ford's approach may make sense.
  • Toyota is not a top of the world to pay so much. Considering Camry I can say that it is the excelent car, but style and interior design is not strong point, you cannot ignore that, but also the car is not emotional. Then again it feels like Buick - you just don't feel the car, it is way too smooth.

    Taurus is not an ordinary car, it is not just another middle class bland vanilla sedan like Camry. It has a strong heritage, daring style, history behind it of Shakespearian proportions. At least two passionate books were written about designing two generations of Taurus. This car changed the way how american company was running in early 80s, how American cars supposed to look and feel and saved Ford as a car company. For me it doesn't have "rental image", just opposite, more like classic car image.

    BTW Ford Falcon also has classic car image these days, who could imagine it in 60s. Do you know any Toyota so famous, Toyopet may be?
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    The Taurus is a good value, but many do not know you can often buy a LeSabre for right around 20 grand new.

    I own a Taurus (SHO) and know its not a top dog. For many though, its about room, ride, safety, etc.

    Both a Taurus and LeSabre compare well as an alternative to Toyotas, for those who like the dull Vanilla of a Toyota. Toyota folks are looking for a soft ride, strong mechanicals, and a solid spacious car. I mean come on, no one buys a Toyota for looks.

    The Taurus has more room and is larger, rides almost as well. A Taurus maybe doesn't feel as nimble. The Duratec matches well to Toyota's v6. The fit and finish of a Taurus won't match the Camry but has just as nice an interior, excepting the cheap leather Ford always has.

    The Lesabre will cruise better than the Camry and have more space. It will be just as quiet, and nearly as smooth. Except its got a typical Buick style curse, barcolounger seats and mush for steering and handling. Buick needs a dose of lively.

    The Taurus and LeSabre with a nip and tuck in some areas for not much more money could be more favorable overall competitors to Camry, aside from their nice prices you can buy them for.
  • pluto5pluto5 Posts: 618
    I agree the Taurus is an excellent value but if you have lots of GM Card earnings the Impala LS is hard to beat at well wll under $20K. And avoid the AARP stigma of a Buick.
  • iusecadiusecad Posts: 287
    advertises the Impala. I think he's listened to by a few AARP members.

    But I just drove my dad's Impala ~500 miles, and I will say it didn't suck...
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    well, personally i wouldn't be caught dead in an Impala, Lesabre, pretty much any GM car. It just seemed to me a LeSabre would be something a Toyota intender might look at before an Impala.
  • iusecadiusecad Posts: 287
    it was alright... I wouldn't buy one myself, but I'm having trouble deciding what I would...
  • pluto5pluto5 Posts: 618
    Howabout a Corvette?
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    I meant GM sedan....sorry.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    if you get a Camry you don't have to get the top of line model. you can get a well equipped v6 model for far less than the $30k. then again, why get a camry when you can get the "classic" taurus for less? why even give the passat and accord a second look?
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Venus537 couldn't stay away for long.

    Toyota needs to gold plate that low hanging Camry exhaust pipe and add the Toyota logo on it, then maybe Camry could be called a "classic" as well!
     :-)
  • I know it is available. I am thinking of buying a used one in a few years and was curious about how common wood was in Tauruses.
  • fdthirdfdthird Posts: 352
    We've got a 2001 with just about every option but no wood. When was that available???
  • One thing you miss is that while yes you can buy a less expensive Camry, the goal would be to get one similarly equiped. That means leather, moonroof, auto climate control, 6 disc CD changer w/extra speakers and amp, heated mirrors, foglights, ABS, traction control, power adjustable pedals, alloys, etc.

    So my guess is that cheaper Camry's won't have all that, and you'll need to therefore get an XLS with an option package or two. I based my comment of a 30.5K Camry on a recent R&T review which had a loaded Camry that MSRP'd for that price. Loaded Passat is also pushing high 20's, and Accord V6 EX's ain't cheap either.

    Key thing you miss is that the Sable/Taurus represent an amazing value. Big roomy car, great safety ratings, average reliability per Consumer Reports, about every option you could reasonably want in a car, all for 18.5 back on President's day. Yeah, the Camry is probably more reliable long term, but at a considerable, and in my mind, unjustifiable upfront cost.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    You hit the nail on the head as many of us posting here have emphasized many times before-that Taurus may not be the class leader, but it is the price leader by a large margin when comparing similarly equipped cars. Also, it is certainly not a slouch of a choice, despite the many people who deride it because of it's perceived "rental car" stigma, without really giving it a fair evaluation. Anyone who drives one day in and day out as I do, especially Duratec equipped versions, will find this out. Mine is quiet, has a smooth ride but with still taught handling, (no boulevard float, which I detest) spirited acceleration which is more than adequate for a car in this class, comfortable seats, and in my opinion has better styling than much of the competition in the mid size affordable family sedan class. Taurus/Sable CR reliability ratings are not too shabby as well.
  • badgerfan, I agree that the Taurus has the best styling of any sedan in its class, maybe even of all sedans
  • riswamiriswami Posts: 192
    go again badgerfan. You can't make a post without differentiating a Taurus by mentioning Duratec.

    Had to have a repair for my Vulcan this week. My mechanic says the Duatecs are junk. His words not mine. Referred to engine failures. He also has a brother that works for Triple A towing vehicles. So maybe he gets more info from that angle.

    I don't have facts on the failure rates and maybe he has a bias, but I'll say again, for everyday driving there isn't much difference between a Vulcan and a Duratec!
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    intellichoice recently came out with their best values for 2003 and the taurus was no where to be found.

    sculldog33: i guess it comes down to your priorities in a car. would one want to give up some features when comparing similarly priced cars in order to obtain superior engineering and driving feel?
  • riswamiriswami Posts: 192
    intellichoice isn't going to rate a new Taurus as a wise buy. They take the car from sticker and then factor in depreciation.(I'm guessing here) Since a Taurus doesn't hold its value like some other models it doesn't fare well.

    The way to buy a Taurus is used. Then run it into the ground. Now tell me if it isn't a good deal?
Sign In or Register to comment.