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



  • robnisrobnis Posts: 78
    You had me cracking up when you said "worse yet you might get stuck with a GM". There is NO way I would ever buy a Saturn, Bonneville, or Grand Prix. Just look at all that cheap plastic they do with the knobs. And I won't get an Accord or Camry either! As I would like a FWD, I will probably go with a TL, I30, Max, or remotely a Passat although the 4 Motion had had a poor reliability factor. I will give the Aurora a passing glance but being a first year GM you have to be super cautious.

    I have totally missed any substantive rumors on another SHO. Can you tell me where to read them? So you think it will have 225-230 hp?

    I don't know what previous SHO's you have had but I think I liked the 24 valve 1995 about the best.
    That old '89 SHO was a tank. But the 0-60 was something like 6.7 or so. Which years have you had?

    And thanks for your comments warning me of the Saturn, Grand Prix, and Bonneville. Right on!
  • sable93sable93 Posts: 107
    I feel a strong urge to comment on the GM "cheapness" people here are talking about. When I was looking to replace my '93 Sable, I was thinking about a newer Lumina. They seem pretty reliable, and don't suffer from the early '90s GM ugliness. I ended up getting a great deal on a '97 Taurus GL. I think the interior looks like it should be in a much more expensive car. To put myself through college, and to keep gas in the Taurus, I work at a drive-thru window in a restaurant. I get to see the insides of tons of cars. I have to say that the interiors of most GM cars are either really plasticky looking, or just plain ugly. I'm really glad I didn't get a Lumina. I know a lot of people feel that the interior of the previous Taurus was weird, but at least it wasn't really ugly.
  • any comments on how tightly exterior panels, rubber, plastics should fit together? my new 24v taurus has almost a .25" gap on either side of the hood, rubber strip match between side windows at top not as straight as could be, and some other discontinuities. But I notice same thing on camry's and accords. what should we expect for over $20k cars that have been computer designed?

    btw, i hit 100mph along the rincon on 101 and the rpms settled at about 4000 with 3 coworkers on board. dont get the 24v if you have a family w/ kids...too easy to zip up in speed and not notice it. i am going to hate getting my first ticket in over twenty years playing w/ speed like this. i dont see how the porsche/corvette/camaro, etc drivers can avoid raising their insurance rates with high speeds so easily attained with these fast cars.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    right on.

    I was just making sure a fellow Ford man had not fallen off the wagon to try a plasti-mobile from GM.

    I owned an 89. I thought it was a fabulous car. Fast, fast fast. Always a neck snapper. Loved the steering, power and 5 speed. I thought the car looked fabulous in black. Now I own a green 99 like you. A different animal, but I like it just the same.

    My brother-in-law had a red 93 automatic that was nice and he now has a black 97. It has 74000 miles on it and he just got his first set of new tires for it so it looks like he is ready to go another 50k miles with it.

    The TL, Max and Passat are all good. Passat is a bit small, and the TL a bit plain looking. But none of these are bad cars. I will try to find where it was I read about the higher hp Taurus for you.

    taurus sel 2000-yes even the 3.0 v6 duratec is fast and is a good motor that you will obtain tickets with if you aren't careful!
  • danielj3danielj3 Posts: 19
    I just bought Taurus sibling Merc Sable and the
    engine is indeed peppy. I have to constantly
    check the odometer or I will end up getting cops
    on my tail ready to give me tickets.
  • tl565tl565 Posts: 78
    danielj3 - How would you rate the quality so far of your new car? Any problems or anything to report? Thanks
  • rbudn83510rbudn83510 Posts: 23
    has anyone gotten a PCM recall for the 24 valve engine. I did and had the computer reprogrammed and now i feel the engine has a flat spot when accelarating.....any comments?
  • danielj3danielj3 Posts: 19
    tl565 Ive had my Mercury Sable SW for a few weeks
    and I every day I like it more. The Duratec engine is very capable indeed. Suspension absorbs
    most imperfections on the road well, transmission is smooth, spacious inside. A lot of equipment and
    all automatic works so far flawlessly. If this
    car is reliable is a great value for the money.
    Did I answer your question? Ill be happy to tell you specifics.
  • yes i notice on the 24v 2000 sel that there is a touch of wait before downshifts for acceleration, but i think that the auto manufs are trying to keep the gas mileage figures up by making sure the testers do not get out of the higher gears easily. the transmission seems to do its job smoothly once allowed to shift by the computer(s), and the increased torque is noted by the front wheel drive (torque steer jump to right?).

    the flat that the rpms below about 3500, where the acceleration is not that quick and then the blast of power above that to say 5500?

    my taurus is winning me over with its overall performance (engine, suspension) and design features. wish that it had memory seats for when the wife starts to use it.
  • tboner1965tboner1965 Posts: 647
    If the 3L Duratec in the Taurus behaves the same as the 2.5L Duratec in my Contour, the hesitation you are experiencing may be the secondary intake runners opening up.

    There are two sets of intake runners. A short set that are used to improve low end torque. At about 3-3.5K RPMS the secondary runners begin to open to improve high RPM performance.

    Well, at least that is the way the 2.5L works, if the 3.0L works in a similar fashion, that may be the explaination.


  • tl565tl565 Posts: 78
    Thanks danielj3 for the feedback on your 2000. Anyone else out there with a 2000 Taurus or Sable that wants to offer any feedback on their vehicle so far? Thanks
  • watsontebowatsontebo Posts: 1
    My wife needed a new car in August 1998.
    We needed room for the 2 kids, Golden Retriever, bikes, groceries, etc, etc. But we wanted something more sporting (i.e.; better handling, acceleration) than a minivan.
    My wife now drives a car with an all-aluminum 3.0 liter DOHC 24-valve V-6 with 200 hp and 200 lb-ft torque, 6500 rpm redline, 4 wheel independent suspension, front & rear stabilizer bars, gas shocks, 4 wheel disk brakes w/ABS, dual exhaust, aluminum wheels.
    Acceleration and handling are great for this class of car.
    So you ask what high-dollar, imported sportscar does she drive?
    A 1998 Ford Taurus SE Wagon.
    It's a great car: not only does it carry everything we have to, but it's fast and handles
  • indytabindytab Posts: 32
    We got into the Taurus mainly because of the WS headgasket problem and the $4K incentive. We didn't want another minivan, so we thought a good sized family sedan would be appropriate.

    We've had our 2000 SE for about 3 weeks, and have put over 1100 miles on it. The more I drive it, the better I like it. I'm really kind of a boring car owner; go for funcionality, economy, reliability. But I'm enjoying the engine and handling performance tremendously. I like the way the controls and steering is laid out; pretty intuitive. We opted for the side air bags, traction control, 24 v engine. Could have gotten by alot cheaper without those options, but for the main family car, the safety features are important.

    I consider the bigger engine a safety feature. Several times yesterday I was impressed with the acceleration when I needed to pass trucks or re-position in bunced up cars on a busy four-lane road.

    I have noticed some flat spots during acceleration as others here have mentioned. But overall, it doesn't present any problems for me.
  • jpssjpss Posts: 1
    i am looking to buy a new mid size sedan in the low 20k range.i love the look of the new sable but everyone says buy a camry or accord not a ford or mercury.they say japaneese cars last for ever where fords and mercury dont.what is the general consenus ot those of you who have owned both?thanks for your help
  • tl565tl565 Posts: 78
    jpss- I'm in the same boat as you, shopping for a mid size sedan. I was leaning at first toward an Accord partly because of the reputation, but after reviewing the Edmunds "Accord Problems" board I was surprised to find the 2000 Accord seems to have a LOT of problems. These include transmission problems, a fuel "boilover" problem that causes the car not to start, engine hesitation, and rattles. These don't seem to be isolated incidents but quite a few owners experiencing the same problems.

    Anyway, if you like the style and price of a certain car, I would recommend you go with your instincts and not be swayed by other peoples resommendations.

    I have also checked out the safety issue and the Taurus/Sable seem to be at the tops of their class and now have the new dual stage air bags, self tensioning belts and adjustable pedals to reduce the chance of an airbag hurting the occupants.

    Good luck and happy shopping!
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    Search the net!!! The Accord and Camary are not as bullet proof and reliable as you may think or people wish to think. There are other chats and car rooms around the net. Plenty of horror stories on Accord/Camary too. The Taurus/Sable actually rate rather well for reliability contrary to popular belief. Go to and compare for yourself. Check under used cars. The 3.8 was Fords worst nightmare. The 3.0 Vulcan and 3.0 Duratec are very good motors. The 2000 Taurus has over 900 improvments and it shows. Good luck.
  • vi5ionvi5ion Posts: 1
    I have an 89 Taurus that needs some engine work (92k miles). Possibly need the head gaskets replaced. How much is such a job? Is it worth it?. Would it be more cost efficient to just replace the engine? The car looks good and was running good until now.
  • honda33honda33 Posts: 2
    I own a 97 accord and a 98 taurus. The accord is twice the car that the taurus is. I have not had one problem with the accord but several minor problems with the taurus. The accord handles much better and is engineered a lot better than the taurus. The honda will have twice the resale value as the taurus.
  • barjonbarjon Posts: 27
    Even though I was very happy with my '97 Taurus GL, I was blown away with the improvements made to the 2000. All it took was one test drive, and I signed on the dotted line.

    I had to order my new SEL back on April 1, because every SEL in stock has the optional power moonroof, which I don't want. At 6'4" tall, I don't want to sacrifice any precious headroom. Why are they all equipped that way?

    Anyway, the car was supposedly built on May 1, and I can't wait to get it. The car was targeted to be delivered to the local distribution center on 5/15, but it's not there yet according to the dealer. All I'm told is "we're still waiting for it." How long does it take to get a new car from Chicago to New Jersey?
  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    Two years ago I had a head gasket replaced in my Taurus (1988, 3.0 liter, wagon). The quote was about $1600, than mechanic called to say after opening the engine they see another things to do inside, and total (with taxes) was about $2000. It took about week or so, probably 10 days.

    Couple days and 32 miles after a strange sound in engine, like a sewing machine, and the oil light. It turned to be the main bearing. This time they replaced the block (take it from a junk yard), and it take a whole month |could not find a good block for long time). The second repair cost about $1600-1700. Given I bought the car itself for $1500...

    Also, while waiting for being repaired at summer hot, the air condition died. I think it would die anyway, but somewhat later: old gaskets etc. It is very expensive work, about $1000, so I am driving without air. Bad in summer, pretty tolerable other time (in Connecticut).

    On other hand, after this there were no problems with engine for two years. And, keeping repair to minimum, it does not eat much money.

    It is our second car and we do not use it much, about 3000-4000 miles a year only, all in city (5 days/week 6 miles to work and back, plus sometimes 4+4 miles driving our kid to school). And it is a great car for shopping: scratches from carts is nothing for the old clinker, and nobody would have fun to key it.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    Why is Honda not allowing Alldata access to their repair records or TSB's? Sounds awfully fishy here folks. Hmm.... go take a look.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    You will have to go back to 1998 Honda's and go through the motions to see the message about Honda denying access.
  • tl565tl565 Posts: 78
    Here is a more direct the link to what you were referring to on Honda's denial of info on TSB info:
  • indytabindytab Posts: 32
    What are the objective statistics on Taurus reliability? I'm a former Windstar owner and just purchased a 2000 Taurus about 3 weeks ago. We are enjoying the Taurus greatly, but there always lurks the concern over longterm durability.

    It's difficult to gauge a car's reliability from the Town Hall posts, because problems seem amplified by anecdotal evidence. Apart from the obvious 3.8 L headgasket issues on older Tauruses how do the actual statistics look and what is the prognosis for 2000 models. Anyone have any info at their fingertips?
  • My wife and I are looking at buying the 2000 Sable. We have a great relationship with a Lincoln/Mercury dealer here in NJ (this will be the third car purchased from them). I haven't seen anything on pricing on these boards from those of you that have recently purchased Sables or Tauruses (sp?).

    Any help would be appreciated. Also, any comments regarding how you like the car and if you have had any problems would be great as well.

  • danielj3danielj3 Posts: 19
    See my post in Mercury Sable thread.
  • slunarslunar Posts: 479
    barjon: There has been a lot of discussion on this on other Ford topics, but Ford has a big distribution problem in getting cars to the dealers in a timely manner. The northeast and south central (TX) are the worse places with up to 5 week ship times. Ford has hired UPS to help fix the logistical mess. Hope your car gets to you soon.
  • david144david144 Posts: 3
    Does anyone know much about the Taurus FFV? The local dealer has one in stock with a very large price reduction. What is/are the up or downside(s)?

    I also have a 1996 Taurus SW. It has been great except for one thing--a "clunk" I get from underneath. 3 dealers have looked at it and haven't a clue. Everything looks tight. It seems worse on warm days--very intermittent. Started at about 30K and has stayed about the same.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166

    I don't think Ford would go supercharged, but at least this may show that there is still some interest out there for jazzing up the Taurus.
  • tractiontraction Posts: 141
    Here is some info off Ford's web site

    Taurus Flexible Fuel Vehicle

    New look for 2000
    More headroom, legroom and trunk space
    Vulcan engine refinements include more responsive passing power
    5 star crash test rating for driver and front passenger

    The Taurus Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV) is a prime example of Ford’s leadership in the development of alternative fuel vehicles. Ford’s most popular AFV, the Taurus FFV continues to offer states and municipal fleets with an effective answer to EPAct.
    Flexible Fuel Vehicles can operate solely on ethanol (E-85), unleaded gasoline, or a mixture of the alcohol fuel and gasoline from the same tank. Ethanol (E-85) is an alcohol fuel made from corn. Ethanol has a higher octane than unleaded gasoline, and offers a reduction in certain types of emissions, and slightly increases performance. Inside the fuel system, a sensor determines the content of the fuel mixture and sends a signal to the engine controller. The engine controller then recalibrates to run on that specific fuel mixture. This means operators can travel outside of a refueling infrastructure on vacation or on a sales call. Special oil is no longer required on the ethanol Taurus. Taurus engineering - more than comfort and pleasure - it’s peace of mind
This discussion has been closed.