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

15681011109

Comments

  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    where's all the posts?

    did someone say "darn" or something?

    Geez they let you say some naughty things on the napster message board.
  • sable93sable93 Posts: 107
    Well, I just realized the other day that I've had my '97 Taurus for 2 months. I loved it the day I got it, and I can honestly say that the feeling hasn't changed. While the 3.0L vulcan engine doesn't produce as much power as my previous Sable's 3.8L engine, it is definitely above adequate for all the driving I do. The interior is great, and I must say that I love the integrated radio and climate controls. It looks great, drives great, and I got it for a great deal. If Ford found ways to improve this car for the 2000 model, I think there is no reason why the Taurus shouldn't regain #1 spot in the next few years.
  • tractiontraction Posts: 141
    Wow....I guess the 2000 Taurus really has taken off. Ford reported record sales today for the Ford Taurus, 43,365 units. For comparison purposes, the Impala sold 15,522 units.
  • zhelderzhelder Posts: 42
    Sable93, I know the feeling. I have my '96 Taurus just over 2 months now as well, and the car is absolutely incredible. It's quiet, powerful (I have the Duratec engine), it rides like a dream and I love the interior.
    While I brought the car in for service an oil change a few weeks ago, I looked around the dealer at some other Taurus vehicles. The 2000 Taurus is very nice, but it doesn't appear to be all that different from the '96-'99 models. Also, I definitely think that the '96-'97 dashboard is the best looking Taurus dashboard of all time (even though it has been only about 15 years since we were blessed with this vehicle. )The styling is a lot nicer than the styling used in the newer (and older) models. The font is so much nicer, and I like having the numbers displayed in increments of 10 rather than in 20. Although the dashboard introduced in '98 isn't bad looking, I think the '96-'97 dashboard blows it away aesthetically. Does anyone agree with me?
  • beepersonbeeperson Posts: 1
    Yeah, I really loved the dashboard on my '96 Taurus too. Until the day I had a problem with the cassette player. The dealer had to remove the entire console and send it out of town to be fixed. Since it was mid-winter and I refused to be without by defroster so that I could see, the dealer relented and gave me a loaner for the time it took to get the consoled repaired, returned and replaced. I really loved the styling on the entire vehicle. They just didn't think it all the way through when they created a radio/climate control console as one unit.
  • taterstudtaterstud Posts: 1
    Folks...my 96 Taurus ran like a dream...but now.....At speeds like 60, 65 mph sometimes the rpm's will drop from 2200 to under 1000 then jump back up again for no reason. At deceleration sometimes coming to a stop sign or turning off an exit ramp with no foot on the gas, the RPM's will drop from 1000 to under 500 then jumb back up. I took it in for service, and they say that they put it on the computer, and drove it...and I got the dreaded "Sorry, we can not duplicate the problem". Any ideas here?
    Thanks!!
  • esposito1esposito1 Posts: 1
    Just picked up my new '00 Taurus SES on Saturday! Nice car, but a bit plain. Went w/the 24V motor and leather interior. Ordered the rear spoiler to give it a little more of a sporty look. Any suggestions about additional add on's. Why no dual exhaust? Can I do any mods w/out voiding warranty?
  • iusecadiusecad Posts: 287
    I have a '90 Crown Vic that did the same exact thing (I know they have nothing in common but...) it turned out to be the computer itself... the shop that finally fixed it said that ford electronics are the hardest (of the big 3) to diagnose because they only report codes when things go wrong. the others (apparently) display what all the sensors are sending in. just a thought.
  • slunarslunar Posts: 479
    taterstud: I had a similar problem with a 1991 Taurus when it was brand new. I went back & forth 4 times with the dealer with no satisfaction. Couldn't duplicate problem, they tried the throttle sensor, O2 sensor etc. I kept insisting that it was the computer but they wouldn't change it. Got the Ford regional rep. involved and we finally agreed that the computer would be replaced, but if it didn't fix the problem I'd have to pay for the computer. The computer change fixed the problem. We kept the car to about 60K then sold it to a neighbor who drove it to 135K without the problem never occurred again after the computer was changed.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    The Taurus outsells the Impala because its a good looking car!

    I'm convinced most people buy cars based primarily on two criteria

    -looks
    -price

    as for price from what I've seen Tauruses can be had a bout 1000 bucks cheaper or more than most GM models.

    As far as looks, wouldn't most of America rather have a handsome 2000 Taurus than a confused looking Impala?
  • barjonbarjon Posts: 27
  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    GM produces a lot cars in about the the same size / price range as Taurus: not only Chevy Impala, but also Buick Century, Buick Regal, Chevy Monte Carlo, Olds Intrigue and Pontiac Grand Prix. And a bit smaller Chevy Malibu.

    All of them but Malibu are close related: they have more or less the same underbody, suspension, engines and transmissions. And there is a serious internal competition between the models: people have to select, for example, between Impala and Regal, or between Monte Carlo and Grand Prix.

    I am not 100% sure, but it looks more reasonable to me to compare not the Taurus sales vs. the Impala ones, but the Taurus + Mercury Sable (sedans and wagons) vs all the mid-size GM (sedans and coupes).
  • teoteo Posts: 2,508
    Granted the new Taurus is a much decent looking car than the very "Confused" previous 96-99 generation. However, based on my very negative past experiences with Ford regarding the reliability of their "Quality Job#1" products and lousy customer service, I would recommend the Taurus or any other Ford product with a great dosis of caution. The Impala is not meant to be a "Crowd" pleaser like the Taurus. The Taurus caters primarily to those buyers than are attracted to the "Import" looks but for one reason or another will not put an Asian product in their garages. On the other hand the Impala and the Intrepid cater to those buyers that appreciate the virtues of traditional full size American sedans with all the advantages of modern technology in areas pertaining to powertrain, suspension, handling, safety features without losing the "Positive" (Positive means solid handling, safety, comfort, etc) American feel. The Taurus deserves a lot of credit in American automotive history as the car that not only saved Ford Motor Company but the car that open a whole new generation of better engineered domestic sedans. Before 1986, the domestic industry was suffering at the hands of the Asian manufacturers and the Taurus completely changed the mind set of domestic and foreign car buyers alike. The main problem with the Taurus is its reliability reputation. Most Tauruses have been extremely problematic cars while others have had exceptional reliability. The First generation Taurus SHO was a milestone for the model line as it showed the capacity of a domestic automaker in producing a world class sport sedan. Sadly, the most interesting Taurus model has been discontinued, but It might make a comeback in a few years time.

    Aside from the old and worn out debate of who's better (Ford vs. Chevrolet) and the reliability issues that have plagued the Taurus line as well as other GM lines, the Impala is an alternative for those of us that simply don't care for the "Mainstream" looks and performance of the Ford Taurus. The Taurus is indeed a much better looking vehicle than the either the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry, but the typical Impala and Intrepid buyers are not after these vehicles. You have to understand the market mission of the Taurus, Impala and Intrepid:

    Taurus competition targets: Accord, Camry, Altima

    Impala competition targets: Intrepid, Concorde, Ford Crown Victoria.

    Intrepid: Impala, Buick LeSabre, Regal, Grand Prix, Intrigue, Maxima, Passat (To a point).

    Why I chose the Impala over the Taurus?

    Here are my reasons (Personal perspectives)

    * Complete distrust of Ford quality
    * Tainted reliability reputation
    * Taurus looks sharp but still is bland and easily gets lost in the parking lot.
    * The Impala's 3800 Series II V-6 and smooth, precise automatic transmission is a cut above the "Vulcan" and the OHC "Duratec" engines and the slow Ford 4-speed automatic.
    * The Impala drives better, handles better and provides a much better road feel than the Taurus.
    * The engine/transmission combo in the Impala provides amazing braking effect, something missing from the Taurus and non-existant in the Intrepid/LH cars.
    * 5 Star government crash testing scores (A tie since the taurus has the same rating)
    * Fuel economy on the 3800 Impala engine is a steady 20 city/ 30 highway accomplished with regular 87 octane gas.
    * Content level on the Impala LS: Traction Control, ABS, Tire pressure monitor, 16" alloys, police grade 4-wheel disk brakes, quick ratio steering, trip computer, steering wheel mounted radio controls, RDS stereo system, dual zone temp climate control, dual power front seats, side airbags, dual exterior heated mirrors, etc for under $22,000.
    *Comfort and plenty of room for cargo and passengers.
    * Love or hate it looks....whether you like or not an Impala stands in the crowd.
    *Have received complimients from VW, Mercedes, BWM, Honda and FORD TAURUS OWNERS!

    So since the Taurus is not my "Cup of Tea" and the Intrepid's oversized Space Ship design doesn't appeal to me either, the Impala just fits perfectly in between the two.

    Again the Taurus is a very nice car, but there are other alternatives just as good or better in terms of value, safety, performance and quality.

    I would like to encourage the participants in this topic to stop the nonsense rants against the Impala. Hey if you don't like the car, fine, this is a free country! But let's find things in common and share experiences and knowledge about both cars....it would be very intertesting to see how the Taurus and Impala perform on a day to day basis and what advantages and disavantages one has over the other and so forth

    The purpose of these forums is to inform potential buyers about experiences with a particular model line, not to trash, humilliate and insult the choices of other car buyers than happen to think differently from you and I. let's grow up and show some maturity and respect for each other!

    Enjoy your rides! They look very nice!

    TEO
  • bthompbthomp Posts: 69
    My opinion: I'm laughing at the whole article. Especially the write up on the Intrepid "We would have liked some rear-end action, but the Intrepid's understeering nature probably makes it the "SAFEST" of these automobiles" You front drivers are so brainwashed.
    In compro to the Dodge my car accelerates faster, hauls down from 60-0 in less distance, has a skidpad of .82g, has a large rear seat, huge trunk, and will last when driven hard. It's design is over 10 years old. Really folks, what great advances have been created that beat this? For such a "new design" the Impalla doesn't really beat any of these parameters, nor does the Tauri family. Forget about the Intrepid....it'll break. Bulls, antelopes, adjectives...ahhh give me a crown anyday.
  • bthompbthomp Posts: 69
    Just stirrin up conversation.
  • teoteo Posts: 2,508
    The basic design of your car dates back from 1977. The Crown Vic's are good sturdy cars, but they frankly don't impress me much. But I would pick any of them over a SUV or minivan.
  • fclspatfclspat Posts: 61
    A friend of mine just bought a Y2K Taurus and had the following problem: Using the key fob or the key itself to enter the car. But the car wouldn't start (it's as if the factory alarm is still engaged). Car had to be towed to dealer. Dealer says part (transceiver) is on back order!

    Any one heard of this problem? She's only had the car a month!
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    you can't compare taurus+sable to "each and all GM somewhat close to midsize sedans" because

    a) chevy and ford are direct competitors as mainstream basic autos. Chevy wants to beat ford. Can't beat ford when your model that directly competes with the taurus sells 1/3 of the taurus

    b) even you did group all of gm's mid size offerings into one group and compared its sales to the taurus, the question would need to be asked "Why the hell does GM need to design and build 10 different models under six different brands to sell 500,000 midsize sedans when Ford can sell near that of just Taurus alone?" Is GM that friggin lame that they can't make one competing model that will outsell the Taurus? Do they really need to have ten different designs under so many different labels in that much more dealers to sell the same amount of cars? Certainly not very economical.

    As for reliability, you are saying Taurus are unreliable basing it primarily on the older generation Taurus model before 96. They may have below average but the 96 on up Taurus' are actually quite good, and certainly equal or better than many GM models. I know of three people personally who have had 96-99 Taurus, and have a combined 250k miles on them that have been entirely trouble free. As for Fords in general, I just traded a Thunderbird with 73k miles on it that I spent a total of 300 dollars in repairs for fixes over a five year span. In contrast my fatherin laws 1998 Olds 88 blows a tranny with 40 k miles on it to the tune of a thousand bucks. Or my dad's Seville with 30k miles on it and blown struts in front the dealer says will cost hundreds to replace.

    Fords are no Toyotas but you can't label them as all crap because they are actually pretty solid. Ford at least builds durable motors built with the latest in technology. And the cars themselves hold up better than Chevy's, Pontiacs, etc.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    mostly a response to yurakm
  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    Do they really need to have ten different designs under so many different labels in that much more dealers to sell the same amount of cars? Certainly not very economical.

    Well, it depends on consumer demand.

    If consumer is ready to pay (a bit) more for what he likes (somewhat) more - or simply for being different - than the more diversity, the better. In the opposite case, everybody would buy the same cars painted in the same black color.

    And, to take it to the limit, everybody would wear the same clothes of the same practical colors. Or in three colors. As in China 35 years ago.

    In reality we have something in-between. GM is producing six or seven models of basically the same car, with five variants of three different engines, and is selling them under four brands. Ford is producing three of four models (including wagons) with three variants of two engines, and is selling them under two brands.

    Now, consumer can select between all of this makes and models - or buy Crysler, Honda, Mazda - even Kia, if he dare. And everybody around is happy enough.
  • riswamiriswami Posts: 192
    Don't know where you are coming up with poor reliability for Fords and poor dealer service. I live in RI and we have two Ford dealers in this area that are outstanding. I bought a 97 Taurus GL in Jan 98. Put 30,000 on the car and the only thing I've had to do is fix an interior light switch. I understand this is a fairly common problem. Personally think the car is a great value and they seem to age well.

    I also own a 1993 Ford Escort Wagon, 5 speed. Have a 118k on it and it still runs strong. Replaced water pump and radiator. Everything else is original, battery, exhaust etc. Of course it has been tuned up regularly.

    I know of many other people who own Escorts and Tauruses and all have had good luck. One person had a 91 Accord, now drives a 97 Taurus with the Vulcan and finds the Taurus to be a much better car.
  • fordman33fordman33 Posts: 32
    I have read through all the posts here and thought I would jump in. I bought my 2000 Taurus SE on Memorial Day and already have about 3500 miles on it. I am really enjoying the car and have no major complaints. In my search, I looked at the Impala, Malibu, Focus, and Protege in addition to the Taurus. I test drove all but the Impala - I am wary of first year cars and figured it would be impossible to get a good deal on a new model. I did have an "emotional attraction" to the car as I learned to drive on a '59 Impala. The Focus and Protege were too small for a family of five. I liked the malibu pretty well. Why did I buy the Taurus? I was able to get a good trade in for my 1998 F-150 Supercab from the Ford dealer and a great price on the Taurus as well. While the price on the Malibu was reasonable, the Chevy dealer was insulting in their offer for my F-150 and refused to budge. In retrospect, I am glad I got the Taurus - a slightly larger, better equipped and more stylish car than the base Malibu I was looking at. I believe performance is better as well. As far as the styling of these cars, the Taurus, much like the F-150, grows on you and looks better and better with time. The Impala is a good looking car, but the attraction seems to fade with time. Let me adress a few things mentioned on the forum:
    1) price: I felt my skin crawl when someone said the paid MSRP for a Taurus! You should never pay anywhere near MSRP for a car - you should strive to pay something really close to dealer cost, not retail. My personal rule is I never pay more than MSRP - $3000. As with most cars, the best deals are found in middle of the line option packages. I originally looked at a Taurus LX for $15,900; I decided I couldn't live without a cassette player and I didn't really like the console or hubcaps on the LX, so I offered $450 more for an SE that included a six passenger set up with a power drivers seat in addition to the standard SE options. So I bought the SE for $16350, roughly $1000 less than dealer cost, thanks to a rebate. I'm sure the dealer had holdbacks as well because I know he didn't lose any money. I also got a very good price for my trade in.
    2) Engine: I'm sure the Duratec is a pleasure to drive(but not worth the extra dough considering you have to buy a higher priced model) , but I don't have any complaints about the Vulcan - it's no muscle car, but the mid level acceleration is great and I have caught myself passing cars on the interstate at 95 mph. I have the FFV version of the Vulcan because it was a no cost option. I initially had reservations about performance but research showed no difference in performance between the two. Someone in another post said performance would be better running ethanol, but I believe it is the opposite - degraded performance w/ ethanol. I don't really have any intentions of runing ethanol in it. The automatic transmission is great - I've never been a fan of automatics, but the 98 F-150 and this car changed my mind. Automatics have improved by leaps and bounds over the past ten years.
    3) CD Changer: someone asked about after-market cd changers compatible with the cd-ready am/fm/cassette - try crutchfield www.crutchfield.com . I am almost certain they have one for around $250. The dealer will charge you about $600 to install one.
  • tractiontraction Posts: 141
    I have to admit its been a lot of fun watching the Impala drivers go thru such gymnatics to try to justify their purchases on a Taurus Board no less. Meanwhile, the 2000 Taurus sales have been going thru the roof, even surpassing the Accord and closing in on the Camry.
  • teoteo Posts: 2,508
    Well, the exact opposite could also be true, don't you think?
  • fordman33fordman33 Posts: 32
    I have a couple of questions for those who own a 2000 Taurus:
    1) When filling up with gas, I have a hard time getting the tank full - if I follow the owners manual advice and quit after the pump "clicks off" 3 times, I'm about an 1/8 of a tank shy of full. Is anyone else having this problem?
    2) I normally do my own oil changes. Has anyone done their own oil change on a 2000 Taurus yet? I'm curious as to how easy it was to get the filter out of the tight spot that it is in (and if you were able to do it w/o third degree burns)!
  • As an owner of Ford and Chevy products, all I can say is both cars are wonderful in their own way.
    The Impala has alot more room and a very smooth ride. It handles better than any car that I have owned or driven. The Impala is very sleek and impressive looking. As for speed, try to beat it.
    My new Taurus is 24v with all the extras. I love the new look. It handles well and is also very roomy.
    As for repairs, thew Impala parts are alot more expensive and to find a service department that knows what they are doing, for get it.
    On the other hand, my ford service department is wonderful. They are pleasant, kind, and never question my judgement when I tell them something is wrong with my car. As for the cost of parts, I don't have any idea of this car yet.
  • This may not be the right board for this question, but was hoping someone could give me advice. I purchased a Taurus from the dealer a couple of months back, and just happened to be looking at the sticker again. The sticker shows that 5-spk aluminum wheels should have been standard equipment on the SE that I got. Well, in the optional equipment part, it shows that locking wheelcovers were optional (at No Charge). These are plastic covers over steel rims. My question is, is it a legitimate gripe to get the dealer to swap me back my aluminum wheels, which I happen to prefer? Or since I drove it off the lot, keep what I got? Replies appreciated.
  • davehodaveho Posts: 1
    I'm so tired of hearing all those complaints about Ford quality vs. praises for Japanese cars. I personally own many Ford models over the years as well as Honda Accords, Toyota Camry, & Nissan Altima. First of all, none of these Japanes cars are more reliable, and they cost more to repair and maintain. Worse still, the Japanese dealers are all blatant cheaters who, inspite of recent improvement in attitudes. always feel that customers are suckers. I once had a Nissan dealer misrepresenting a problem covered by the warranty as a $600 repair that I had to pay. After getting nowhere with the service manager, I went to see the sales manager and asked him to tell me what the warranty was and then asked the service manager to talk to him. What a hassle!!!

    My 1996 Taurus has 80K miles on it, and the total repair cost is a big round zero. I even skimmed on maintenance and so far I only have one 30K maintence done. Japanese cars all cost well over a thousand or two at comparable mileage. Even comparing with the most troublesome Ford vehicle I own in the past, it is still much much cheaper to repair and maintain than a Japanese car.

    So, why do I keep on buying Japanese cars still? The reason is simple - unfounded bias of my wife and my kids (as well as many people I know personally), who keep on insisting that Japanese cars are better, more reliable, and all those craps inspite of clear evidence to the contrary.

    Don't get me wrong. Japanese cars are well made and are just as reliable as a Taurus. You simply have to pay more (abeit for a smaller, less powerful car vs, Taurus), more to maintain, and more money to repair. That's all. Somehow, everybody that I know almost always try to hide problems with their Japanese cars or try to rationalize them.

    Yes, there are well publicized Taurus engine problems on earlier model, but the offer (extended warranty, thousands of dollars of rebates, buy-back of vehicles) from Ford is so generous that I wish I own one of those "problem" cars. Whatever problems I have or will have on Japanese cars, you bet that I will have to pay for them myself - sometimes even when they are still under warranty and I'm not knowledgeable enough to know the truth.
  • tractiontraction Posts: 141
    Edmunds review on family sedans is available online under '2000 Family Car Comparison'.

    The winners were Passat, Accord and Taurus, each separated by a faction of 1%. They tested a total of 9 cars. There was a wide range of scores with the worst rated car in the group having a score of 54 compared to 72 for the Taurus/Accord/Passat.
  • fordman33fordman33 Posts: 32
    Did you get the six way power drivers seat by any chance? If so, that was in place of the five spoke aluminum wheels (there is some fine print in the brochure that states this). The SE comes with one or the other; for both, you have to pay extra. For example, my SE had the five spokes and the power drivers seat was an added option.
Sign In or Register to comment.