Options
Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Sedans Pre-2008
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
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.
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.
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?
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.
But I just drove my dad's Impala ~500 miles, and I will say it didn't suck...
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!
:-)
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.
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!
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?
The way to buy a Taurus is used. Then run it into the ground. Now tell me if it isn't a good deal?
You don't explain what you mean by "the engine became a pile of junk". That could mean anuthing. Was the oil changed ever 3K-5K? Was the coolant flushed? Was normal maintanence done? Specifics would help.
if this is the case (i don't know either), then their picks would be skewed. for depreciation, you should start from the purchase price.
Car had minor oil leak in oil pan. They needed to take off exhaust system to repair. I kept the oil topped off on regular basis. It never got below a quart low.
Thanks again.
My only point in emphasizing the Duratec is the major value it also has compared with V-6 equipped Camries, Accords, Altimas and Passats which can easily push into the mid to upper $20k range.
As far as durability, for any brand you will always find a few owners with disaster stories, and any owners that have major problems will be more likely post their problems if they find Edmunds, producing perceptions of major problems which are in reality fairly isolated, and this applies to all makes and models
Much as I disagree with some of Consumer Reports survey procedures, it is about all the general public has for making general reliability comparisons, and in recent years, Taurus and Sable have been greatly improved-and you have to remember that all cars have improved greatly in the last 10-15 years, such that an average reliability rating now is a much better rating than an average rating just a few years ago.
Is this something that happened in 2002 or has there always been a problem with my wife's 2001??
The price difference I can explain as Accord and Camry having more superior engine (even being 4 cylinder) and transmission compared with that damned Vulcan and AX4S on all rental Tauruse/Sables and having higher quality/ more reliable perseption blah-blah-blah. But that Accord is overestimated - there is no question about it. Now the point is that it is a myth that Taurus is a fleet car and Accord and Camry are not. They are and were (at least Accord according to Mary Walton was since 80s, 40% is a big number). She also writes about Accord owners. According to Walton they were 40 years old in average compared with 50 years for Taurus in 1991, kind a brainwashed yuppies who kept silent about problems with their cars, bought it because everyone else did and praise it because well you had to do it not to look stupid.
In Europe btw Accord never was popular and there was a reason why. It is kind of another stipud American cult. Everyone who drove Audi and then Accord will understand what I mean.
Are they superior in engineering? Maybe, but I don't care; same as I don't care if their 4 bangers are superior to the Vulcan. I was interested in the bottom line. When I checked an Accord out in 98 it was going to cost me 300 more a year to insure, so I'm over 1,500 ahead at this point. And are you going to tell me that their fours are that inspiring to drive on a dailey basis? I could care less. I wanted something afforable, reliable and durable. So far I haven't been disappointed.
I wouldn't say that only yuppies buy Accords and Camries; but I will say that some people who buy those cars are clueless. They are surprised when they need repairs. They are good and have earned their reps; don't know if you get that premium purchase cash back.
How do you know for sure to make this kind of statement? Did you work for Honda in 80s or was industry insider or made a market research ?
I'm sure Mary Walton did some reseach before writing a book, that's her job man. BTW you can go to Hertz website and check for youself that 30 previous rental Accords, the same number as Tauruses are currently on sale in East bay area, it is a big number btw. Here is the link:
http://www.hertzcarsales.com/findcar/findcar_premodel.asp?cost=99- 9999&state=CA&city=%25&cartype=Car
Statement about yuppies is from book too. I tend to believe that yuppies drive Audi or other German cars, or at least Acura rather than boring Accord. I don't know any yuppie driving Camcord/Taurus. But who knows.
For $11K I could buy a 2002 Taurus SES former rental with about 28K miles, the standard engine, CD, ABS and power seat.
For $12500 after rebate I could get pretty loaded Elantra with even more equipment (except power seat).
The Taurus will be bigger, quieter, more comfortable and safer, but will only gave 8K miles left on warranty and will be showing the wear of being a former rental. It will also be $1500 cheaper. I'm not sure that savings is worth the future repair costs.
For $2K I could buy the Ford ESP plan with 100K mile Bumper to Bumper coverage and zero deductable. This now makes the Taurus $500 more and it is still a used rental compared to a brand new Elantra. I don't know if the ESP plan will provide coverage on the former rental because I won't have proof the scheduled maintenance was done by the rental company,
Which is the better choice? It looks like a new Elantra makes more sense.
Elantra will have better fuel economy. But it is not a family car, it is not as safe as Taurus. Taurus is a family car in contrast and pretty safe and reliable. Okay because it is Taurus forum lets talk anout Taurus. I was in a situation to buy almost new used Sable and the best solution I found was the certified used Ford/Mercury. Ford gives extended warranty and that adds about $800 to the price. The idea is that only best used cars are supposed to be sold under this program. I was looking for Duratec engine and couldn't find Sable with this engine that match color and milage I wanted. Anyway Sable is more unique car than Taurus and more difficult to find, so I bought new Sable in the end.
I was shopping in Hertz too and Sables I tested had one or another type of defect, despite they asserted that they picked the best cars, fixed all defects and blah-blah-blah. It simply wasn't true. But anyway they don't have Dutatec. Well I believe that Ford sells worst cars to fleets. But I know also people who bought previous rental Taurus and are happy. Also go to Carfax (sometimes it is free on dealers website). Car's history contains a lot of hints, e.g. why someone buys the car and sells it only after 3 month.
I have Ford ESP on my Sable, driving a lot so 36,000 is not enough for me. It cost me ~ $1000 for 5/100,000.
It was a 2002 SES with the standard engine (would have liked the Duratec for an extra kick for passing, but the standard engine was adequate). The car has 24K miles, power seat, CD player, ABS and alloy wheels. The price was listed as $10,995, but there is a special this weekend for AAA members for an extra $300 off. So I left a deposit and will come back over the weekend and pick up the car for $10695. TTL and the $0 deductible warranty that adds 5 years and 70K miles coverage starting from the day I buy the car (meaning it is covered till it is 6 years old or has 94K miles) made the out the door price $13K. Looks like a good deal.
I'm selling my "old" 2002 Accord EXV6 coupe to CarMax right before I go to pick up the Taurus in a few days. Then the Hertz salesperson will come and pick me up so I can collect the Taurus. CarMax already gave me a written offer, so I'm going back to take them up on it before the 7 days it is valid expires.
I tried going to another dealer that had several similar Taurus SES sedans that were also prior rentals to see if they could match the CarMax trade quote and the Hertz price so I could save the hassle of dealing with two different dealerships, but they wanted $11999 for their car and we didn't even get to the point of talking about the extended warranty.
$13K out the door with 5 years left of B2B warranty (minus maintenance items and a small list of exclusions) and no deductible feels like a really good deal for a good looking, comfortable and safe 1 year old car.
Even though it is a 2002 Accord, I purchased it in Oct 2001 and the real world trade in value is only a few hundred less than the loan payoff at this point. If I had the time to sell it myself, I would get more than the payoff, so the depreciaton is not that bad compared to most other cars. I like this Taurus, but I am really glad I did not buy it new. I checked the prices for a new 2003 SES and even if I could buy one at invoice cost minus the current $3000 rebate, that is still $17,404 plus taxes based on the before-rebate price of $20404 (not even including an extended warranty) for a car that would only be worth about $9K trade in after a year. If I had bought a Taurus new with no money down, it would probably take nearly four years of payments on a 5 year loan before I would no longer be upside down in the loan.
I also want to replace the coupe for a 4 door since I'm planning to be carrying passengers and carpooling more often soon.
While I bought my Taurus new, I also keep them a long time, so depreciation is mostly gone by the time I buy again no matter what I would buy. Because I keep cars a long time, I like to buy new so I control all the maintenance. But, I must admit from a cost of ownership standpoint, buying a 1-3 year old model and getting an extended warranty with the deal is a very good approach.
Enjoy your Taurus. I happen to think it is a very good car for the price, new or used and does not deserve the "rental car" stigma so many people use to deride it.
The market is set by the price people are willing to pay. Camry and Accord are deemed superior by a segment of the population, thus they fetch a higher price in the used car market.
Don't get your point about the Germans. Besides the Passat, what cars do the Germans offer in the Accord, Taurus and Camry price point?
I am satisified with the way the Taurus drives. It is smoother and slightly quieter than the Accord, but doesn't handle as well. The V6 engine is not even remotely as smooth and silky as the Honda V6, but it is not a problem since I would still prefer it to a 4 cylinder Honda.
I also noticed the body panel gaps are bigger and not as straight as on the Honda. Most of it is fine, but one is so bad around the trunk lid that I will take it to the dealer to see if the trunk lid can be realigned to make sure no water gets inside. I can almost get a finger through one side of the trunk near the top of the tail lights. Since this is exactly the type of thing that would not be covered under the extended warranty, I need to get it taken care of before the factory warranty expires or return the car for refund or exchange before Hertz Sales' 5 day / 300 mile return period lapses if it cannot be fixed.
riswami, you have to add more than 100,000 Sables. Two factories in Atlanta and Chicago are churning out Tauruses and Sables and it is too much, thats why Ford sells so many Tauruses to fleets, just keep plants running.
I was actually talking about Japanese entering succesfully luxury car market with good (and more reliable) cars. I would buy new Acura (European Accord) rather than Audi A4, because I heard horrible stories about Audi, e.g. A4 prematurely but postwarranty broken time belt and following very expensive overhaul of engine and Audi kept silent about widespread defect for many years.