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



  • danielj6danielj6 Posts: 285
    Happy Thanksgiving to all my fellow Taurus/Sable owners.

    Happy motoring and keep enjoying your cars!
  • Any problems with the 2001 24 valve 6 cyl. duratech engine....any idea what miles/gal. to expect form this engine-highwy & city??
  • The Duratec engine has been around in the Taurus since 96. It is and has been for me very reliable. It is used in several different vehicles from Ford, Mazda, to Jaguar.

    MPG: that depends on what your driving habits are. I kinda have a heavy foot so I get below what the sticker says you should get. I get about 15mpg in the city but I can get as much as 28mpg on the highway.

  • My Duratec is new and milage is up to specs, the same as Vulcan on my older Taurus. In everyday commuting (mostly on freeway) I get in average ~26 mpg. Vulcan has no advantage on gas milage, but will punish you considerably, pinging all the way up the hill or keeping you in slow lane on freeway. Duratec accelerates better on higher speeds (higher rpms), so it is pleasure to drive it on freeway. It has lower torque at low rmps but still accelerates faster from stop than Vulcan and many other cars.

    The other day I beat rice driver on the menacing low riding Civic at traffic lite. He tried hard with a lot of noice and expression on his face but couldn't make, I was relaxed as usual and even didn't try to kick it down. If I kicked it down his little car would suck into vacuum behind my car I guess and it wasn't yet SHO. Wow!
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    why don't you pick on someone your own size like the non menacing accord v6.
  • I don't pick no one.I was driving family car and didn't racing on the street or freeway. I just didn't like that clown trying to cut me to prove something. It was my turn to go so I got mad. It is more about guts to take risk than about engine size, so it will depend who will drive Accord and how mad I will be. Accord V6 isn't a sport car btw, it isn't SHO or something, just another boring family sedan.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    i didn't mean to upset you. it was intended to be a light hearted comment. and how can you go for the SHO with its you know what burning engine? by the way, the splendid accord is not a boring family sedan. for your reading...

  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    What a bunch of pap. A group of people with all kinds of preexisting biases review a group of cars. No statistical performance comparisons listed, no nothing except a bunch of opinions. I especially point out, under the Impala review, of one "reviewer" comment that is was better than they expected but they would never be caught dead driving one. Wow, and we are supposed to believe rankings based on these kind of comments?

    Give me Edmunds or even CR reviews any time over this crap.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    you're right, there's not much substance to the article. but do you feel the rankings will be that much different from edmunds and consumer reports with their upcoming tests? the camry will probably be rated higher with consumer reports.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    CR has already reviewed current gen Camry, and if my memory is right, ranked it 2nd behind VW Passat, however Passat, I believe has suffered in CR's reliability survey-they published an 2003 model year buying guide latel-so whether they still have it on their recommended list is questionable. Camry likewise has dropped to average reliability (now same as Taurus) and both are on CR's recommended list, though Taurus will be likely ranked probably about fourth or fifth. Current new gen Accord has not been reviewed yet, but I imagine it will come in second or third in any CR future reviews.

    Taurus held up well in Edmund's rankings, done on 2000 model sedans (please refer to that area in Edmunds and check it out). Edmunds did not view Camry at that time. Taurus finished third in Edmund's point ranking system basis just slightly behind Passat and nearly tied for second with last gen Accord. Edmunds point ranking you will note, includes price/value as a ranking factor, while CR does not.

    I am sure with any new reviews by CR, Taurus will end up behind three or four others, but that does not mean it is a bad choice, especially if you include cost as a factor.

    As with all published reviews and rankings, they all have to be taken with a grain of salt and the individual will have to decide.

    What really bothers me is when people dismiss a vehicle by blindly following one review, be it CR, Edmunds or heaven forbid, the NY Times. Or people who dismiss a car because it has a "rental car stigma". So what if Taurus is used in many fleet and rental car applications? The more Tauri sold, the lower the margin they can afford to sell them at and it benefits the individual buyer as well as the fleet buyer. Yes, this strategy also causes more depreciation, but anyone buying a car as an investment strategy is insane anyway. Buy new and keep it many years, or buy slightly used and keep it many years and do even better on a cost basis. This is the only way to minimize depreciation costs on any vehicle.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    i agree with everything you said almost.

    i believe the taurus (above average) is actually rated better than the camry (average) in terms of reliability. what i liked about the NY Times piece was where it placed the camry. CR is the only magazine that rates the camry as high as it does.
  • BTW the next Taurus will be based on the Mazda 6 platform. Mondeo platform seems to be too expensive for Taurus. The bad news is that it will take a lot of time and Mazda 6 platform will get aged. It is the problem of American manufacturers - Germans and Japanese always are ahead in using newer or better(means more expensive) platforms. Why not to use excelent Mondeo platform? Well because they think that we are not so demanding as Europeans.
  • Perceptions. bah!

    Toyota now has 0% ads called "saved by 0". They were always bragging how they "don't need incentives". Now what is the excuse? They act like they "invented" 0%.

    I like the one post about the guy's co-worker bragging about his new $30K Camry, with extended warranty. (If it's so bullet proof, why warranty?) "So am I supposed to kiss yer behind", I'd say.

    Also, go to any rental lot and count the Camries, then tell the "know it alls" how many there are when they say "You got a rental car?"
  • << like the one post about the guy's co-worker bragging about his new $30K Camry, with extended warranty.>>

    He has '97 Camry with 60,000 miles and had multiple problems with it, like - failed and changed under basic warranty power steering, warping rotors, $800 AMF sensor related failure repair under extended warranty and some others. Recently he noticed blue smoke coming out of exhaust and get done engine repair that was covered under Toyota sludge problem warranty and otherwise would cost him several grands. So he believes that extended warranty worth it, he saved thousands having extended warranty on previoud Camry. BTW he didn't have any problems with his old '92 Ford Tempo (with no warranty at all because bought used), currently at 200,000 miles and still running strong. But he bought a new luxury Camry XLE because he likes the quality and smoothness of powertrain.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    re: fuel filling your taurus

    I have a 99 taurus with the same deal...the manual says it has like a 16 gallon tank or something but I the most I have ever filled it is about 13.75 gallons.....usually by the time I have rode on E for about 40 miles I still can only fill it 13.5 gallons......makes for crappy long distance touring range between fills.
  • Simply not the most accurate fuel gauges on Tauri (someone else's grammar, i'm borrowing it) and Sables. Put a measured amount gasoline in an (approved) storage can, stick it in your trunk and drive 'til you run out of gas. Pour the "measured amount" into your tank and drive to a filling station. VOILA! ;-)
  • VERRRY COMFY!!! Handles nice. Super sound system. Warm seats. Luxurious "climate control". More than adequate acceleration from the Duratec engine.Handles quite nicely on snow-covered pavement, too. I'm disappointed with the mpg, so far. For the first 4K miles I've been averaging 21 mpg for mostly-highway driving (average 73 mph). Also having a little difficulty with visibility all around the car but I'm guessing that I'll adjust. I drive a minimum of 130 miles each day and am delighted with how comfortable the car is. YEOW! Being 6'3" with a long inseam, I just couldn't get comfortable in the vast majority of other sedans and wagons. And I couldn't justify the horrible mpg of a full-sized pickup.

    Had sworn NEVER to buy a new car but having not found what I wanted in a used Sable, I investigated buying a model-end car and wound up with an LS wagon with all the extras. Intend on driving it for five - six years, anyway, averaging 30K miles per year.

    Will look forward to reading others' maintenance ideas and experiences.
  • Thanks ezaircon! You SURE it's not "better" to change the oil every 3K miles? Or am I just an old dog who needs to learn new tricks?
  • I too, am old school. I remember when Mobil1 first came out saying you could go 2 years/24K miles on an oil change. I didn't feel real comfortable with that! I read that BMW and Mercedes go ~15K miles between changes! One important thing to remember is that synthetic oil doesn't break down like conventional oil. On my LS I change the oil every 10K miles and the filter every 5K. I drive mostly freeway for ~20 minutes each way to work, so the oil gets hot enough to burn off any moisture. I use 5K on the Sable as the wife-unit just puts around town and the oil doesn't get hot enough, long enough to burn off ant moisture. I still feel a little queasy going that long on an oil change, but who am I to argue with the experts? Mobil is actually reducing their profits by endorsing longer change intervals. I read about a guy who claims to have 250K miles on the same oil (Amsoil synthetic) in his Kenworth. He did say that he has the oil analyzed when he changes the filters. There is a topic in Edmunds that deals with this, but it is quite subjective. We have a guy in our car club who works for John Force. He plans on going 5K between changes, and he's quite conservitive on changes. That's good enough for me to go 10K.
  • I am going to change oil every 5K while it is new. It is recomemneded 5W20 syntetic blend. I think it is not actually real synthetic, cause real one goes much longer. In Europe btw synthetic goes about 25,000 km, semisyntethic about 15,000 km and mineral (for old cars) about 7,000 km between changes. 1 mile is 1.6 km. European engines also are running at higher rmps on premium gas.
Sign In or Register to comment.