Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Sedans Pre-2008

1…3334363839…66

Comments

  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    If you are buying new and changing vehicles every three years, you are taking a big hit on depreciation no matter what car you buy.

    In my opinion, anyone changing cars that often probably should be looking into leasing it. My approach is to buy new then keep the car ten years or more. At that age most cars have depreciated nearly completely so depreciation is not much of an issue. The value of the car at that age is more related to it's condition.

    In my opinion, Taurus/Sable is a good bargain new, and even a better bargain slightly used.

    Furthermore, I believe the quality issue is nearly becoming a dead heat between all the major players in the midsize car market.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    the flip side to keeping a car for longer than 3 years is all the money you start to put into it.

    transmissions often go (at least on Fords) and other nickel and dime 3 and 400 dollars here and there starts to add up.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    Yes there were some transmission problems, I believe from model year 91-95??? and head gaskets on the optional larger engine pushrod V-6 now discontinued. I fortunately had a '90 Taurus with the Vulcan for ten years and 98,000 miles-never had an engine or transmission problem. Current 2000 SES with Duratec is at 20,000 and zero problems.

    I believe current generation Tauri are relatively trouble free. Apparently, from what I've seen in a few recent posts, CR is giving current generation Toyota Camry only "average" reliability ratings (same as Taurus) ,so they don't walk on water anymore either. Plus you have that larger up front price to pay new or used.
  • eng6ineeng6ine Member Posts: 29
    The 3.8 pushrod is still around, just not in the Taurus. I was going to buy the base mustang with the 3.8 but found that it had so many problems I decided to go with the Taurus, cheaper insurance, and I really like a four door car. I may get a Mustang as a second car in a few years though, they are supposed to have the duratec in the base model for 2004 (235hp). I would love a GT but the insurance would take all the fun away.

    I have a 2001 SEL and have 12,500 miles on it, so far so good. I use it every day in city traffic and I drive it hard. I use 89 octane, just a psychological thing, I think it runs better. My gas mileage could be better, but I have a heavy foot. I probably only get 15mpg in the city, with the stop and go and sitting in bumper to bumper traffic. So after sitting in traffic if I get an open piece of road look out I am getting on it full throttle=bad gas mileage.

    I also got the 6 year 75,000 extended warranty with my car at the time of purchase. Good thing, with my driving habits I may need it.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    I have to correct myself-the reliability news is even better for Taurus than I thought. The Detroit News Web site reports that Consumer Reports newest reliability data reports the 2002 Taurus rates above average, while Camry has slipped to below average. Of course, the Camry apologists will say that 2002 Camry is a new model design-it takes a while to get the bugs out, etc, etc...... however, they would never think of allowing the same excuse for the big three in the past. This further supports my position-Taurus good car with good value.
  • danielj6danielj6 Member Posts: 285
    I'm not concerned so much about depreciation being fully aware that if I were to trade every 3 years I'd wind up paying for it. But I believe that my s.w. not 3 years old yet, has taken a big hit in the value department. I paid $22000 for it. If Edmunds.com TMV is right, my car is worth $10000 less than when new. So okay it's 2 1/2 years old but still.

    In any case, I really like Taurus/Sable regardless of lost value. I'd still get another one. You get more bang for the buck and that is at purchase time. Lincoln-Mercury division has sold fewer vehicles during the current year, according to Car and Driver. This could translate into better deals for those of us who'd rather walk into a Ford/Lincoln Mercury dealership than a Toyota or Honda counterpart.
  • babaausbabaaus Member Posts: 10
    I'm in my second Merc Sable wagon (odometer @157K). My first was a '90 wagon that I bought at 60K and drove until 178K when I gave it to my nephew. The one I'm in, now, I bought for $4000.00 (yeah!) with 80K and it seems to have a lot more miles in it. Unfortunately, it failed a recent emissions test and I don't feel like parting with $1000.00 for a replacement catalytic convertor. Besides, I want a newer car. I drive a minimum of 130 miles each day and have decided I deserve a newer car. And having done my research, both online and visiting dealers/private sellers (looking for a new used car is SUCH a hassle!), I've decided that the only vehicle that really makes sense for me is another Sable wagon. And reading y'alls' comments and advice is reassuring.

    For my money, that is, I don't want a monthly car payment and intend to pay cash...plus for a vehicle that, given my experience with two prior models, is reliable and'll get you to at least 150K ...and, is comfortable for a 6'3" 260 pounder (gotta love that steering column-mounted shifter and bench seat eg. NO console!), a Sable is the way to go.

    Glad I found this discussion group. I'll look forward to contributing.

    So. The Duratec engine, if the oil is changed religiously, is NOT an Achille's heel?
  • 427435427435 Member Posts: 86
    kd carmen, thanks for a the feedback on the alarm. Would like to hear from someone who had the problem and how it was solved.

    Higher octane doesn't cause higher temperatures. Just the opposite---octane that is too low for an engine will result in pre-ignition (pinging) which WILL must definately cause higher temperatures and can even put holes in pistons. Octane that is too high for an engine does nothing---including more power, better gas mileage etc. As long as the octane being used is high enough to avoid pre-ignition, you're good. More is not better.
  • ezaircon4jcezaircon4jc Member Posts: 793
    My '96 Sable has the Duratec. With 113K on the clock the only repairs I have done are a crank pully bearing (~45K), a water pump (~100K), A/C clutch (~100K) and I just had to have the oil gallery plugs replaced. The total for these 4 repairs was about $800. I change the Mobil1 roughly every 5K miles, the coolant and brake fluid ~24K miles, and tranny flush ~40K. I was so impressed with the Duratec, I bought my Lincoln LS with that engine. The LS has considerably more power, as I have opened it up a little.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    The Camry has NOT slipped to below average. It has however decreased to merely average.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    Oops, I stand corrected. Camry has slipped to average reliability while Taurus has risen to above average. Still, it appears Toyota has slipped a bit and the justification for paying a premium for a Toyota is getting pretty weak.
  • sculldog33sculldog33 Member Posts: 19
    Wow! Hadn't heard that the Camry slipped to average. I think the Avalon was in this boat too, but that might have been based on the new model. Also remember hearing about "oil sludge" problems in Toyota minivans. Have also heard complaints about the Accord, including some potential tranmission problems -- my neighbors transmission went at 30K at just over a year old which is almost unheard of in a Honda. Have the Japanese makers lost their edge or have the American makers finally caught up a bit or some combination of both?

    Makes me feel even better about my '00 Sable! Potential reliability was all the Camry really had going for it since it definitely loses on price and standard content, and to my eyes at least, styling.
  • riswamiriswami Member Posts: 192
    the information about the Camry's reliability come from? CR doesn't publish its Auto Issue until April, so how are people getting this info at this point in time?

    I'm not a Toyota fan and agree with a lot that has been said about the Taurus being a good value. But don't expect CR to recommend a Taurus/Sable.
  • danielj6danielj6 Member Posts: 285
    As a matter of fact, CR does recommend Taurus/Sable but has consistently qualified these models as average and sometimes below average reliability (for the Taurus). I decided to buy American and get a Sable while CR was saying that it had average reliability.

    For me Toyota and Honda are so rich that have lost touch with the customer. I've been speaking to people I know who own and swear by both Japanese makers and told me this.

    I think, I digressed a bit. My point here is not to compare or knock Honda/Toyota. But appreciate the value of Taurus and Sable.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    "But don't expect CR to recommend a Taurus/Sable."

    Yeah right, Import freaks gotta wake up amd smell the coffee, it ain't 1980 anymore.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    you're right, it ain't 1980 any more and the domestics have really closed the reliability gap. If they keep their designs around long enough they eventually are able to work out the bugs. Only problem with that, the engineering gap has widen to the domestics decrement.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    From the press information in the Detroit newspaper's Web site, CR published a 2003 new car preview-apparently a separate issue from their normal magazine-and it is available on newstands now.

    They may have also issued a press release on their latest survey data that the news media picked up on.

    Taurus has been a CR recommended model in recent years, having average reliability, which is CR's minimum requirement.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    Engineering gap is if one compars BMW's to Fords. Also, most imports use carried over parts, too. But, I will say the Taurus is old and will go soon, so the "Eng. gap" will close too.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    i was thinking accord/altima/camry/passat, but BMW works too.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    All BMW's except 5 series, all Mercedes, and VW Jetta and Passat from their recommended list due to less than average reliability.

    Additionally, Altima, Camry and Subaru Impreza were rated only average.

    Is Japanese and European engineering innovation getting ahead of their ability to design in and build reliable cars (at a reasonable price as well)? Part of a "superior" vehicle is not only who has the most bells and whistles, but does everything work year in and year out-and for most of us is affordable as well.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    you make a good point. in the past the japanese were able to avoid the bugs common to a new design.
  • rogertc1rogertc1 Member Posts: 66
    Resale value of station wagons are crap as is Lincoln Town Cars, Suzuki X-90's and even Mercury Capri convertables. But by gosh are they a bargain when you buy a used one. Keep tour car untill it dies.... JMO
    Roger
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    No, keep it until one day before it dies, then sell it to some sucker!

    The problem is knowing which day it is going to die on..... :-)
  • upsetter1upsetter1 Member Posts: 205
    Camry is still very reliable car. The point with average reliability was body integrity, thats what I read. So that means below average built quality proobably, thats not about reliability. Honda extended transmission waranty so admitting faulty transmission.

    Taurus long time was in all kinds of recomended list starting in CR in numerous magazines. It is just getting older technically lagging a little compared to newer designs, but it also means that you can buy it for less. Remember 1996 Taurus was priced higher than previous year.
  • novoqnovoq Member Posts: 26
    Yes, you're right, Consumer Reports actually rates the Taurus and Sable HIGHER than the Camry in the latest quality survey.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    "The point with average reliability was body integrity"

    What's interesting is that Camry fans have been bragging about this for years, like this was the deciding factor in buying it. There are countless posts in Town Hall saying, "the Camry body fits better, so if they can make it fit well, they MUST be a great car all over".

    Face it, they can't walk with a big head on thier shoulders anymore, they are making the same excuses about "First year bugs" as domestics used to. But, are they not the ones who are supposed to "get it right the first time'??
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    this is a little misleading. if you mean problems encountered per car at this time, you're corect. otherwise the taurus doesn't compare very well.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    Well it certainly beats Camry in price-especially if you consider the more well equipped V-6 versions of Camry vs the Duratec DOHC V-6 versions of Taurus. You will notice that Consumer report never factors in price as a rating factor when comparing similar vehicles. If you are lucky, they may mention it in the text, but they do not use it as a rating criteria.

    It completely beats Camry in the styling department in my opinion-yes this is a subjective issue.

    While I do not have experience with Camry handling and ride, I understand most reviews rate it as more of a "Buick Boulevard" type ride and handling experience, while Taurus gives you better road feel and tighter handling-which is one of my criteria.

    Camry has usually rated somewhat better in the areas of "more refinement", but refinement must be slipping if they have had squeaks and rattles in their initial model year.

    Take a look at Edmunds ranking of family sedans done for the 2000 model year. Camry was not included in that bunch, but Taurus ranked third out of ten makes, just edged out by the last generation Accord by one point for second place, with VW Passat in first. But Passat was very pricey, and it's quality has slipped.

    I am not saying Camrys are bad cars overall-just that people should open their eyes to the possibility that there are better values out there-and quality has risen across the board and is becoming a non issue.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    you make good points. in terms of problems per car encountered, yes this is probably becoming a non issue for most cars.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    Toyota Camry is like HBO's "Sopranos" and "Sex & the City", overrated.

    People knee-jerkingly say they are 'the best' since that is what they expect others to hear. Like they want to appear "smart" and "in the know", so they say "I drive a Camry" just like "I only watch S/S&C"
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    I drive a Taurus and I don't have cable!!!

    On the other hand, I've never had a car with a timing belt, or a low-riding tailpipe, or an unwieldy looking sedan either.
  • sculldog33sculldog33 Member Posts: 19
    I agree with Tomcat630 about perceptions vs reality and so called knee jerk reactions. Consider the marketing campaign of Volvo, which has convinced people it is the safest car out there, bar none. However, crash tests results for the Sable/Taurus are very similar to the Volvo, yet many people wouldn't believe you on this. So families go and buy 35K Volvo wagons when a 20K sable wagon could probably do equally well, and the incremental 15K could go to a nice little college fund.

    People also think SUVs are safer, but forget that they are often viewed as trucks by regulators, and trunks have different standards. High center of gravity, less stability, could actually make you less safe. (Although the sheer mass of these things does help!) Again, a car or wagon might make more sense and the cost savings are even bigger. But the marketing folks have convinced people that they need 4 wheel drive, seating for 7 or 9, huge V8, etc., etc.

    By the same token, people swear that Accords and Camry's are bulletproof, and clearly they are very solid, but even in my limited little world, I know of people who have had problems with both -- from bad transmissions to someone who had a timing belt break that trashed the engine. (Also know people who have had problems with Sables as well, including transmissions!)

    Bottomline is that about 1.2 million Camry's, Accords and Sable/Taurus are sold each year. If any of them were horrifically bad, sales would likely plummet. Problem for Ford and the domestics is that for a while they were really, really bad, and for people who bought them in the 70's and 80's, perceptions die hard. Yet someone who loves Camry's might like a Sable -- if they could be convinced to ever actually drive one! (reverse holds true for the FoMoCo and bowtie diehards who would never drive an Accord!) The foreign makers hit the mark back then, and can point to a longer track record of reliability, yet I think we are entering a new period of reliability for some of the domestic players, at least Ford.
  • upsetter1upsetter1 Member Posts: 205
    BTW asked my friend to drive my new Sable Premium before considering similar Camry XLE. He did and told me that Camry accelerates faster and smoother and bought Camry for $8,000 more. So people ready to pay price whatever. Though if I had so much spare money I would rather spend it on entry luxury, like Mercedes or Acura for 30 grands. Whatever luxury Camry XLE is it doesn't worth 30 grands, you expect something more unique and stylish at this price.

    <<so they say "I drive a Camry" just like "I only watch S/S&C" >>

    What is "Sex & the City" about, is it kind of import film from Fellini ?
  • danielj6danielj6 Member Posts: 285
    I've been having this ongoing debate with a co-worker who bought an 02 Camry with an extended warranty and paid $30000 financed. He, like scores of others, have the perception that Toyota can build no wrong. Interestingly enough, he got it with an extended warranty. But paid a premium for a mid size sedan neglecting the bang for the buck notion.

    When one buys Toyota or Honda one buys cars that are highly desired by thiefs, and insurance companies know this and will charge you accordingly for it. Also the dealers will not give you breaks and if you walk out there is another sucker that will take what you reject. I like to negotiate and enjoy rebates. Honda and Toyota do not give anything, and do not offer as much standard equipment as Ford offers.

    For my money, I still go with Ford. I'm an ex Camry owner. I won't knock the car, especially because I didn't drive a new one. I don't speak loyalty here, I speak financial convenience. And this thread wasn't made to compare but to discuss Ford/Mercury issues. I may be violating Edmund's terms of use. But the discussion is interesting though.
  • upsetter1upsetter1 Member Posts: 205
    Currently there are $3,000 -$4,000 discounts from MSRP on new 2002 Camry XLEs here in SF area. Discounts are given by dealers. Not many people want to pay 30,000 for Camry, whatever it is good. And my friend bought it with 4,000 discount and paid 28,000 with taxes.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    Edmunds will soon do a midsize car comparison test now that the Mazda6 has finally come out. the Taurus will finish below the Passat, Accord, Camry, Altima and Mazda6 and maybe the Sonata. is this because of perception?

    i recently read an article from auto.com about GMs new midsize sedans coming out next fall and how they're going to give the imports a run for their money. the implication is that their current cars are not. is Bob Lutz caught up in this perception too?

    it looks like GM is not willing to give up the high ground to the imports for midsize cars. yet Ford shoulders on with the same old Taurus (till at least the 2005 model year). When's that Ford 500 coming out?
  • TMURFTMURF Member Posts: 10
    I liked post #1781. It seems forever that the Camry has had a low-riding exhaust system. It is sooo noticable. Actually looks like a design flaw.
  • danielj6danielj6 Member Posts: 285
    The discounts you're referring to are because dealers want to get rid of the 2002's to make room for the 03's. 28,000 after taxes for a mid size sedan is still pretty steep in my book, Camry or not.

    "The same old Taurus" can help you keep some cash in your pocket which could be invested in a more profitable pursuit. In any case,Taurus is on the way out.
  • upsetter1upsetter1 Member Posts: 205
    Actually 4 cylinder plain 2002 Camry you were able to buy for $19,000 with all CA fees and taxes. It actually was also discounted. And it was fresh new model.
  • danielj6danielj6 Member Posts: 285
    By plain you mean stripped? What kind of acceleration can a 4 cylinder mid sized sedan give you with so few cylinders?? If you carry several passengers and a/c on. $19,000 is nevertheless enticing.

    I actually tried it with my Sable and was somewhat dissapointed. Perhaps if instead of having a 3.0 litter engine was a 3.3 o higher.

    My 1991 Camry with 4 cylinders couldn't handle a hot day, a/c and 5 passengers. Of course that it didn't have a 3.0 L motor either.
  • upsetter1upsetter1 Member Posts: 205
    4 cyl Camry, esp newer one, is better than Taurus with Vulcan. It is quiet, smooth and accelerates nice and is more thrifty in city driving. That Camry was negotiated down to $17,000 and with all CA taxes it made about 19,000. It wasn't stripped, it had AC, all electric windows, but no moonroof, no leather, no climate control and etc. I mean for commuting it is very nice car. But adding just $1,700 I was able to buy new Mercury Sable with all optios including leather, moonroof, climate control etc. etc. plus 200 hp V6 engine. That makes the difference. For the same increment with Camry you have to add about 7,000 bucks at least. I mean if you want to buy a basic car Camry may be a better choice. But if you want car with all goodies then Japanese and Europeans just cannot beat Americans. And Mercury is a nice car - well built and using high quality materials.
  • danielj6danielj6 Member Posts: 285
    That translates into more bang for the buck. I'm all for keeping as much money as I can in my pocket. I like V6 engines and all the goodies but for less than It'd cost me to get a Camry.

    Toyota's Camry is indeed nice and no doubt good car. But those $7,000 are better used for other things. Let's not forget that purchasing a new car is the worst investment anyone can make.

    Somebody will come and tell me that Camry doesn't loose as much value as quickly as Sable/Taurus does. Well, let me take my chances.

    As for the engine, I love to hear the Duratec purr under the hood.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    this has been discussed before, but it still sounds like a little bit of funny math to me. i do think more desirable cars come into play when you're talking about a loaded Camry though.
  • rogertc1rogertc1 Member Posts: 66
    I just got a 1999 Taurus Wagon in perfect condition w/ 67K miles, Duratec engine for only $7000 inc tax and licence. I got what I wanted.
    They are bargains. Why get a Camry if you are looking for a station wagon. The Taurus is mid sized. There are too many small 4 dr hatch backs they label as a SW.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    "But if you want car with all goodies then Japanese and Europeans just cannot beat Americans"

    kind of like saying: you can't beat Wal-mart, why go to those expensive stores for...
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Member Posts: 1,565
    So, what is your point? We should pay more money for less features and apparently similar reliability just because we can then say "I drive a Camry or I drive a Passat"?

    I guess my values are just in a different place than a lot of others. Guess that's the same reason I have a Timex on my wrist instead of a Rolex. Both tell you the time very accurately, one much more economically.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    the other with more style.
  • upsetter1upsetter1 Member Posts: 205
    <<"But if you want car with all goodies then Japanese and Europeans just cannot beat Americans"

    kind of like saying: you can't beat Wal-mart, why go to those expensive stores for... >>

    You know if you want to save money you can go to Target, why not, and quality is still high. You can also buy for sale prices higher quality pruducts in Macy's and even in Nordstrom.

    Taurus/Sable are in production since 1996. 2000 restyling wasn't so radical. I mean it is still biodesign inspired. New edge (Focus) was the new direction for Ford and Europe got Mondeo and Fiesta in new modern style. But what we got here in America were bio-redesigned Taurus and Sable, Focus was successful here too despite all the problems with quality.

    Note when Toyota redesigned Camry in 1997 it was looking like a new car, you could hardly notice it was just remake of older Camry. Well Ford saved a lot of money keeping many ovals unchanged and venerable Vulcan under the hood in 2000. It translated into the lower price. Along with cheap cars Ford and GM have to offer modern more expensive cars too. Mercury may be a very good starting point for Ford. Ford didn't have to cheapen Mercury brand with old tech and outdated style.
  • ezaircon4jcezaircon4jc Member Posts: 793
    The Taurus/Sable began life in 1986.
  • edmund2460edmund2460 Member Posts: 293
    I think this is a pointless discussion because it doesn't take into account why people buy cars. If you want to buy cars like salami (by the pound) then there are many choices. You could do even better than a Taurus, buy a Kia or Hyundai. I drove an Aspire (a Kia) for over 100K with far less maintenance costs than my other Fords. People have recognized the quality levels of Japanese cars, established over many years and they are willing to pay for it. We must respect that. People are not all dumb. If they are paying more there is a perceived difference whatever it is. And as long as that perceived difference is there, the rest of the world will be playing catch up.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles