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

L8_ApexL8_Apex Member Posts: 187
edited August 2014 in Ford
Welcome to the continuation of the Ford Taurus
topic. Those of you joining us from that topic are
welcome to continue your discussion. If you're
new to this topic, you may want to follow the above
link for additional archived posts.

Thanks,

L8_Apex
Sedans Host
«13456766

Comments

  • joyr1dejoyr1de Member Posts: 2
    What is the exact 0-60 for the 2000 Taurus SEL? With the 200+ Duratec engine? And also.. on the back of the SEL Taurus is it labelled as SEL or just SE? Are there any ways I could see if it was a SE or SEL from just looking at it and not looking under the hood? Any special details that make it different?

    Thx
    -JR
  • reesejreesej Member Posts: 23
    The Duratec equipped version has been stated at 8.2 to 8.5 seconds for 0-60 depending on the source.

    The back of the SE, SES, and SEL just has "SE". The SEL has machined aluminum wheels while the SES and SE have painted aluminum wheels (wheel selections are not optional). I have an SES with the Duratec, so looking under the hood (or the 24V DOHC emblem on the side) won't tell you it's an SEL. Interior features and options are what really tell the three "SE" trim levels apart.
  • uqmooreuqmoore Member Posts: 4
    I like the idea of the cd changer in the center console but I'm bawking at the high $600 price tag. It seems like a lot of cash for a cd changer even with the speaker upgrade.

    Has anyone had luck with using Ford's cd pre-wiring with a third party cd player? Please post your experiences here, thanks.
  • matramatra Member Posts: 5
    I ordered my SEL Feb.12 I pick it up tomorrow (April 26). Can't wait....:)
  • robnisrobnis Member Posts: 78
    I have a SHO (and have had them for the past 10 years with Red Carpet leases). Since the SHO will no longer be made, I thought I would try the Duratec engine Taurus. Was I ever unimpressed! IMO it is a wimp compared to the SHO. It is a second slowed, the handling is not as crisp, etc I was hoping I could stay a loyal Ford customer; alas, Ford has shot themselves in the foot by not having a fwd performance sports sedan for the SHO enthusiasts. Looks like I go with a Maxima or TL.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    you must've driven a 2000.

    The 2000 has been toned down in every facet. Interior, ride, handling, sound, looks......Good for some people maybe.

    The 99 Duratec is fairly lively. But if you're gonna go for a 99 then might as well get another SHO. I took my own advice and got one. I know you've owned a few SHO;s and liked them; maybe you should get a low-mile 99 SHO while u still can.

    Otherwise, it's rumored that a SHO like v6 may reappear in 2001 or 2002. No substitute for a v8, though. Maybe it will be an SVT. We can hope. It would be interesting to see any extra styling tweaks they would do to the new body with an SVT or SHO.

    Two options, buy 99 SHO now, or wait for a potential new v6 SHO in the future.
  • robnisrobnis Member Posts: 78
    Thanks for your post and "listening" whil;e I vent my frustration with Ford for screwing up a good thing with our SHO. And I has a loyal consumer with a Red Carpet lease every two years since 1989 too!
  • scottmac1scottmac1 Member Posts: 6
    I was curious about your comments on the 2000 SEL. I've had mine for 4 months and have put on almost 7,000 miles already. The performance is more than adequate and the handling is very good. The standard 16" wheels make a difference over the 99s. Also how do you figure that the 99 is more "sporty"? The performance has been upgraded for 2000 to 200 hp. Granted its not as fast as a SHO but then again the SHO isn't as fast as the GTP I traded on my Taurus. My dad drives a new SHO and its a nice car but I think the performance is a little disappointing for $30k. I'm not looking to start an argument just point out that everyone's opinion is relative.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    I bought my 99 SHO last month with 6000 miles for 20,500. My brother in law two years ago bought a new loaded SHO for a bit over 24,000. No one with a right mind will pay 30k for this car.

    Anyone who would've paid anything close to sticker for any new car needed to do more shopping. And especially SHO's when there are used ones a plenty. For a new one you should not pay more than 25k. So let's not get in the trap of calling the Taurus a 30k car.

    My opinion of the Y2k Taurus is that its more toned down and numb. Trust me, I drove about 10 Taurus' in the last two months (99's and 2000's). The 98 Duratec Taurus as well as the 99 Sable had the 200 hp motor which to me seemed pretty peppy. Maybe it was the transmission or something but even if the 2000 has 200hp, it did not seem as agressive as the 99.

    Also my styling preference inside and out is for the 99. I prefer the less cluttered interior and the oval pod to the upright, plain dash on the 2000. I do like the exterior redo for 2000, but a 99 with SHO front and rear fascia and 16 inch wheels to me looks better.

    As far as the GTP, its fine that its a little faster. I don't try to do 0-60's all the time. I don't judge my status in society on the idea that I can do 60 in under 7 seconds. I think Ford's products are more refined than GM's. I don't like pushrod motors. And I certainly prefer an 8 cylinder DOHC motor to a I've also owned an 89 SHO which was had a bullutproof and lightning fast v6 and was a fabulous performer. The car I traded in for my SHO was a 95 Thunderbird with a rock solid v8. I have loved the absolutely bulletproof and performance oriented nature of these two Ford OHC motors. The exhaust sound in all three cars was invigorating. The handling on all three cars was very good also.

    For what my money would buy, the SHO was preferable to the Grand Prix.

    Plus the whole Pontiac thing just turns me off, Too NASCAR, too gigolo, too many buttons, too many lights, too spaceship, too Grand Am, too sorority, too 1992, way too much cheap dark plastic. To me, I just think Pontiac could back off on some of this wierdness and cheapness and just produce a car that isn't trying so hard to be some futuristic transport vessel.

    Bottom line. Ford purposely toned down the 2000 Taurus so it would be more acceptable to the average car buyer. The "average" car buyer values different virtues than the 96-99's had to offer. The result is a pleasant functional car; one that doesn't excite, but will please many. And at a helluva good value. Taurus is still a better overall buy than just about any other mid sized sedan.

    Robnis I can totally understand your frustration. My brother in law has owned these new since 85
    85 Mercury Cougar XR7, 87 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, 92 Taurus SHO, 97 SHO.

    His 97 now has 72000 miles on it, but he feels like you do, He has been giving Ford business for over a decade and now they have pulled the plug on the kind of cars he likes. He is afraid he may have to switch brands when he goes to buy next year. But he dislikes Pontiacs also. He may be leaning towards a 300M.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    I meant to say.
  • scottmac1scottmac1 Member Posts: 6
    I think we're coming at this from similiar view points (I traded a 94 V8 T-Bird for my GTP) but coming to different conclusions. I also have a 96 Taurus in the drive way and side by side I prefer the looks of the 00. Its cleaner and doesn't have the Quirky ovoid styling. To me Ford tried too hard to distance itself with the 96 and came up with a strange Infiniti look (downturned rump). I guess thats why theres choclate and vanilla. As far as GM, I'm a Ford fan at heart but I acknowledge that they build an excellent product for the money. What you might call gimmicks others might call excellent features (I still miss the Heads up display). The GTP is an excellent buy for 5K less than the SHO with all of the features of the Ford. I just wanted a change when I opted for the SEL and have not been disappointed in the least. We'll just agree to disagree.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    They are selling Taurus SES's with the 3.0 Duratec in my region for 16.9K! I just wonder how can they do this? This isn't just one either, this dealers is offering 6 to choose from. A comparably equipped V6 Accord or Camary would cost over 20K.
  • joyr1dejoyr1de Member Posts: 2
    I was wondering where I could find more specs on the Taurus models like 0-60's and other features that Edmunds has here. I like Edmunds but some of the information is missing for cars so I was wondering if there were any other pages that are similar?

    Thx
    -JR
  • reesejreesej Member Posts: 23
    Do an Internet/Web search for 2000 Ford Taurus or whatever else you are interested in (try various keywords). Some sites and reviews have specs and some don't.
  • andys22andys22 Member Posts: 13
    hi folks. I just noticed my 99 se duratec with about 8500 miles, starting to ping. just a little noise while going up hills in OD ( It shouldn't ping on Regular if its MADE to run on Regular) Any ideas ? I tried half a tank of premium and we will have to see.thanks for any input
  • tl565tl565 Member Posts: 78
    The SVT Contour is a kick if you like high-reving manual tranny performance sedans. Also, the new Lincoln LS in a way replaces the SHO (albeit at a higher price! but not much more than the front wheel drive 300M).

    The LS has awesome handling with a more refined ride than the SHO had. Plus, the LS has rear wheel drive which is a nice change from all of the front wheel drive jobs out there.
  • 2629926299 Member Posts: 3
    I am considering trading 98 Intrepid for 2000 Taurus SEL any comments?
  • tl565tl565 Member Posts: 78
    26299 - The Taurus does much better in crash tests than the Intrepid if that is at all important to you. The Taurus has the dual stage air bags that are not as dangerous as the normal airbags. They also have new special seat belts that help keep you better restrained in the event of an accident. The new Taurus also offers side air bags. As for styling, thats a personal choice, I like the new styling of the Y2K Taurus a LOT. The Intrepid has a bigger back seat probably.
  • reesejreesej Member Posts: 23
    New Taurus SEL -- Just got an SES mid-March and love it. Didn't buy the SEL as I didn't want the Daytime Running Lights (I HATE those things with a passion) and I have heard that moonroofs just turn into leaks later. I upgraded the SES with options of the Duratec 24V engine (highly recommended), floor shift console, side air bags, power adjustable pedals, heated mirrors, and front/rear floor mats. A power antenna would have been nice -- not even an option on the sedan, though it comes standard on the wagon.
  • reesejreesej Member Posts: 23
    Power moonroof is an option, not standard, on the SES and SEL. I commented on it since ALL the SEL's I have seen on the dealer's lots have it on and are indeed fully optioned models.
  • sable93sable93 Member Posts: 107
    Hey everybody, guess what. This weekend, I took a plunge (or I should say my bank account took a plunge), and I traded my '93 Sable GS in for a '97 Taurus GL. I LOVE THIS CAR!!!!! It is maroon with a tan interior, it has 6 speakers, premium wheels, pw, pl, and if I want, I can add a 6 cd changer later (the radio is set up for it.) I miss the power of the 3.8L in my Sable, but that is the only thing about the car I miss. Oh, I also really like the integrated radio/climate control pod. It seems like a great idea, and I am quickly getting used to it.

    On top of all this, I also got a pretty good deal. $9200 including tax and title, with $4,000 for my trade in (which is above average for a '93 Sable.) I'll keep everyone posted on my "new" car. :o)
  • sable93sable93 Member Posts: 107
    I just looked at the invoice, the actual car cost $8600, but then the tax (6% in Ohio) brought it up to the $9200.
  • agtabbyagtabby Member Posts: 28
    Hey, all I can say to your statement on Pontiac is: AMEN! Geeze, these things have more plastic crud than a . . . . well, than last years Pontiac.

    Sad, if they made a simply car with the 3.8 and a five speed and rear wheel drive that would be awesome.

    ****

    "Plus the whole Pontiac thing just turns me off,
    Too NASCAR, too gigolo, too many buttons, too many
    lights, too spaceship, too Grand Am, too sorority,
    too 1992, way too much cheap dark plastic. To me,
    I just think Pontiac could back off on some of this
    wierdness and cheapness and just produce a car
    that isn't trying so hard to be some futuristictransport vessel."
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    not only the fact that Pontiac hasn't changed their "look" since the 1982 Grand Am.

    In other words, it's getting old. And this new Aztek and Pihrana, yuck. Barf. The Aztek is the biggest styling lemon ever set forth on the American car buying public. Basically they must be acknowledging the vehicle is gonna suck (c'mon, a sport ute built off a minivan platform?) so they are trying to differentiate it with vomit inducing styling.

    I digress. Really, with the Grand Prix my big gripe is the interior. But the Grand Am and Bonneville, ouch.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    How can ANYONE rag on Ford for the 96 Taurus styling when we see atrocities like the Pontiac Aztek?
  • 2629926299 Member Posts: 3
    The Taurus I was looking at didn't have the moonroof but it had the upgrade sound system something they called Mach. I appears your ses has most of the options of the sel, I do like the auto temp control. They only had three sel in stock no white but the salesman said wouldn't be any problem to find one.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Pinging is a result of timing issues or fuel/air misture ratio's. Take it back to the dealer and make them adjust it correctly.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    Here is the latest sales figures for the 2000 Taurus:

    from www.prnewswire.com

    "Ford Taurus - Record April sales of 37,066, up 32 percent. Previous
    April record (35,070) was set 1989. New Product: Taurus redesigned for
    2000 model year."
  • honda33honda33 Member Posts: 2
    I have a 98 taurus SE that I just bought used a month ago. It has the duratec engine. The problem that I have with this engine is that it does not slow down very much when I take my foot off of the gas. If I am going 55 mph and take my foot off the gas on a flat surface, it keeps going 55 and will slow down very slowly. I was wondering if this was normal or not. It just drives me nuts that I have to hit the brakes all the time if I want to slow down at all. Thanks for any help on this.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    Taurus rules.

    Chevy and Pontiac can eat dirt.
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Member Posts: 854
    Olda and Buick are as good as dead. I. E. The hyped Intrigue is way down in this booming market. I am sure there were a lot of lemons made in the 1998 year, like Edmunds' long term car, that turned buyers off to GM forever.

    The Taurus and Sable are kicking the already
    outdated Intrigue's, Regal's and Century's butts.
    GM thinks it can come up with a new car and not
    do anything to it for 7-8 years, like the old
    Cutlasses, Acheivas, and Centurys (ick). Now, cars have to be constantly updated, or else die.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Buick is not dead. Buick rates very high in customer satisfaction along with reliability ratings. Buick just has a stigma of being an "old persons car".
    As for Olds, I believe they will be merged into another branch of GM soon.
    Good to hear about the Taurus/Sable sales. I see quite a few of them around now and like the look more and more. The 16" wheels that come standard give the car a sporty, yet rich look. Score one for Ford for putting a nice wheel and tire on these cars. I still believe the Taurus will make the #2 spot by next year. The Camry will be the one to fall from grace.
  • indytabindytab Member Posts: 32
    Before buying our Taurus, I asked a local car audio shop if they could put in a CD changer using the pre-wired Ford system. Their reply was no, that they couldn't get the adapter that would work between their systems and Ford's wiring. Don't know the details, but this car audio place has been doing booming business for quite a few years. We folded the CD cost into our financing and love the CD changer. It's a bit odd having it in the trunk, but since it has 6 CDs you get alot of playtime before you have to open the trunk and change CDs.

    I would like to get another magazine or two, though, so each person in our family could have their own 6 CD selection without having to constantly shift CDs around.
  • keithwandkeithwand Member Posts: 23
    What can anyone tell me about a 2000 Taurus SE SVG pkg. with FFV fuel option? Is the drivetrain ratio the same as the std. 3.0? What can I expect for performance (is there any?), etc.
    My co. car is on order and I have to sell a 99 Lexus GS400 w/ 300hp. Don't mind getting a free car but I'm not looking forward to 150hp either.
    Comments please.
  • pecospecos Member Posts: 8
    I did some research on the Flex Fuel version of the Taurus a couple of months ago when I was considering buying one. I too was concerned about any possible differences. Turns out the only difference between it and the regular Vulcan engine version of the Taurus is a sensor in the fuel tank that tells the engine what to expect fuel wise so that it can adjust accordingly. Since the FFV can accept fuel sold with up to an 85/15 ethanol/gasoline mix, there can be quite a range of what's actually in the tank at any given time. I don't think there's any difference in gear ratios whatsoever since the engine is I think still rated at 155hp. Ethanol is quite a bit more expensive than regular unleaded, hence there are no gas stations in my area that sell even a 15/85 mix which, by the way, all cars could use. I ended up buying a '00 Taurus about a month later with the Duratec engine instead. I just wanted the extra hp for extended highway driving. But I wouldn't shy away from the FFV for any other reason. The Vulcan is very fuel efficient 6. Had one in my '97 Taurus. Very reliable and smooth powerplant.
  • keithwandkeithwand Member Posts: 23
    Thanks for your very informative reply. I drove a rental car w/ FFV and found it to be very slow and this was without the air cond. on. I too would have opted for the bigger engine but being a co. car had no choice. I am surprised that the co. I work for had the std. ABS brakes deleted but opted and paid for the FFV engine. I would have gone for the safety.
  • pecospecos Member Posts: 8
    Your Co. may not have actually paid extra for the FFV engine. All the Taurus' at dealerships in my area with this option show both a charge for and then an equal dollar amount credit on the sticker for the Flex Fuel Vulcan. In other words, it was free. Enjoy your car. The price was certainly right!
  • jc58jc58 Member Posts: 48
    Does anyone know if you can get the 24v engine on the Taurus SE?

    I am looking for a sedan for my wife, and am looking at the Taurus, as well as they Camry, 626, and Accord. I really like the looks of the 2000 Taurus, but would like to know what people who have bought it think of it.

    How is the handling, ride, pick-up ( with 24v engine) and the quiteness. Also, have you had any problems with the 2000 model?
  • teoteo Member Posts: 2,508
    Regarding your comments on GM sedans...well the Taurus has been essentially the same car since its introduction in 1986, so most major changes have been related to the exterior presentation.
    The current car still uses the old door design from the 96-99 generation and it is beyond me as to why Ford revamped the entire body design but the doors? The Taurus has had a very dark reliability history (Look at reliability data from years past)and specially the vaunted 3.8L engine and its infamous "Blown Gasket" problems. Sorry to blow it back and you, but the Taurus has never been a star in the reliability dept. GM as Ford and other manufacturers have had their own share of mistakes, but the current GM sedans (Regal, Intrigue, Bonneville, Lumina, Impala)are showing much improved trends in quality control and reliability over the Taurus. In fact, the Intrigue reports less problems per car than the Taurus does. As far as the "Long Term" tests performed by Edmunds...I take them with a grain of salt due to their questionable testing methodology, (Going back to the same dealer that gave them bad service, wrecking the car and then trash it all the way,etc)and unquestionable bias towards domestic products, namely GM, make me wonder about the accuracy of these reports. But to each his own. In the end the best critic and tester is the owner of the vehicle. I was a Ford owner many moons ago and the cars exhibited the worst quality and durability of any domestic maker. The "Quality is Job#1" bull was just a "Hook" and "Hype" to make potential customers believe that their products offered the edge from all fronts. Ford had lost until recently the design leadership it acquired in the 1980's with the Taurus, but now it is regaining some of it back with the Focus. Ford lost me forever with their lousy products and service. Enjoy your vehicles...that's the beauty of having choices....everyone drives what they like!
  • sable93sable93 Member Posts: 107
    "well the Taurus has been essentially the same car since its introduction in 1986, so most major changes have been related to the exterior presentation"

    I hope you aren't being serious. The Taurus has changed a lot since 1986. Everything it is known for having problems with has been eliminated (and for a while.) No more 3.8L engine, no more AXOD-E transmission, and it seems like they improved the air conditioner's reliability. I had a '93 Sable (same as Taurus) GS, and now I have a '97 Taurus GL. The only thing similar about the two cars is the name. In '96 Ford improved everything about the Taurus/Sable. They are much more reliable, they handle better, they are more comfortable (in my opinion), and they are more cutting edge design than the '92-'95 models. I highly doubt you've driven both model cars if you think there are no differences. To each there own though. Just don't use facts about the 3.8L engine when talking about the new Taurus (since it hasn't been used in Tauruses for 5 years.)
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    The 2000 Taurus has over 900 improvements!! how can you call this the same car?? It is obvious you know nothing about this car!
    And another thing, Ford Taurus sales are up 32% over last year alone! This is Taurus only, not including Sable.
    Yes, you can get the Duratec 3.0 24V engine in the SE model. It is a $626 option, I forgot the option number. Head over to Edmunds on the new car site, I believe they list the option number. I currently own a Contour SE V6. I am seriously thinking of a 2000 Taurus SE myself with the 24V Duratec. A dealer in my area is listing the SE's with the 24V V6 for 17.2K, A while back he had some for 15.9K! One heck of a value when comparing other sedans with like options.
  • jd123jd123 Member Posts: 7
    Well, when it doubt consult the manual. Here's some input straight from the T2k owner's guide p. 181:
    "Ethanol is more chemically active than gasoline. It corrodes some metals and causes some plastic and rubber components to swell, break down or become brittle and crack, especially when mixed with gasoline. Special materials and procedures have been developed for flexible fuel vehicles and the dispensers used by ethanol fuel providers." This is followed by a warning that flexible fuel components are not interchangeable with standard unleaded gasoline components.
    The basic difference is the construction of fuel line materials. The FFV also differs from the standard Vulcan is regards to PCV valve, spark plugs, and compression ratio (Vulcan is 9.3:1, FFV is 9.14:1, Duratec is 10:1).
    Otherwise, all the standard parts and filters are the same.
  • keithwandkeithwand Member Posts: 23
    Will my FFV be any slower than the already slow std. engine? I was told it would burn hotter with better low end torque and performance if I could find a 85/15 blend. Looked on the web and those are almost none existent in MI/OH/IN which is my territory. The co. must have gotten a heck of a fleet deal because they also had the ABS deleted which was std. on the SE SVG trim.
  • evoluteevolute Member Posts: 1
    Just got a '00 Taurus SEL for graduation : black, spoiler, moonroof, Mach system, and charcoal cloth interior. I love this car. Much nicer to drive than my '95 Taurus SE, 3.8 liter (which is what enabled me to get this car, recieved a $4000 rebate on top of another $1000, at dealer's price, enabled by the X plan) engine and leather. This is only my second car, and I am hoping to drive it for quite some time, though sometimes I wonder if maybe I should have gone with foriegn for the reliability (causing me to go with less features for more money), but so far 1050 miles, and not a thing off tick. Keeping fingers crossed.

    One more thing, why does everyone give Ford so much crap? Everyone I hear at work and anywhere is "Why didn't you buy a chevy?" Because I got all the bells and whistles for less money, thats why. Or "Friends don't let friends drive Fords?" Okay guys, I thought the competition was between the businesses, not the drivers, as if what car you drive determines your character. News people, they are CARS, not a reason to argue which is better. If everyone drove the same car, that feeling you get when you drive off the lot in a new car, that few people yet have, will be gone. I would puke if I saw my same exact car being driven around by some old man, trying to stay young and hip, like those morons with spoilers on their mini-vans.
  • zslickzslick Member Posts: 11
    I, too, have a 98 Taurus SE which does not slow down when taking my foot off the gas. While my car has the Vulcan engine, the problem seems to be related to the engine management computer than the engine itself. I suspect the car was intentionally set up this way to prevent throttle off oversteer which I have encountered with other front wheel drive cars. Check out the NHTSA website (www.nhtsa.gov, I think). The last time I looked there, I thought I spotted a technical service bulletin that addressed this.
  • avfanavfan Member Posts: 17
    I have a 92 taurus sedan with the 3.8 engine. I have always had a gas smell in the passenger compartment in the summer time. I brought to the dealer before the warranty was up and he said he could not duplicate the smell. It happens after I have been driving the car for 1/2 hour (highway), less time in stop and go traffic. If the windows are closed and the AC is on, it comes in through the vents. When I get out of the car to check any loose connections I can't smell it anywhere. Every year it gets worse. Has anyone else experienced this? Please help!
  • slunarslunar Member Posts: 479
    evolute: Historically there were lots of reasons to bad mouth Fords. For 30 years Ford was years behind GM in technical innovation. Some examples are:

    1. GM cars had independent front suspension in the 1930's. Ford didn't until 1949.

    2. GM went to overhead valve engines in the 1930's, Ford didn't until 1954.

    3. GM's full size cars went to rear coil springs in 1959, Ford didn't until 1965.

    4. GM's mid size cars went to rear coil springs in 1964 or 1965, Ford didn't until 1972.

    5. GM's V8 engines of the 1950's were light years ahead of Ford's overweight under powered designs. It wasn't until 1962 that Ford had a lightweight V8.

    6. GM was king of the design studio in the 1950's and 1960's.

    Now what does that ancient history have to do with your '00 Taurus. Most of Ford's cars from 1974 to 1985 were hideous ill handling under powered cars. The 1986 Taurus was a great car in its day and most likely kept Ford in the passenger car business. Hey as good as things are for FoMoCo today, the early 80's were dark days for Ford. With that said the '00 Taurus is a far better car than the 86 Taurus but bad reputations die hard. GM has had some real turkeys in the last 20 years, but GM gets away with its bad cars due to its legendary days in the 1950's and 1960's when it owned 70% of the car market in the U.S. Ask your Chevy fan friends to explain why GM has lost almost half of it's market share in the last 25 years.
  • slunarslunar Member Posts: 479
    I drove a new Taurus every year from 1986-1999. One year my Taurus would coast forever. The next year's car felt like someone was jamming on the brakes when you took your foot off the gas. I just figured they kept jerking with the software. The Tauri I liked the best were the ones that seemed in the middle of coast verses braking characteristics. I understand these days you want the throttle body to close when you take your foot off the gas to reduce emissions during coasting.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Also ask your friends why Ford could possibly pass Chevy in car/truck production in the next 5 years? And why more Fords are in the top 10 in car/truck sales? And why more Ford plants have won more awards for quality/productivity? GM is a big fat giant that is wandering and has no direction. Ford Motor company is no joke. Taurus sales up 32% over last year alone!
  • taurus_sel2000taurus_sel2000 Member Posts: 9
    I purchased via carsdirect.com, and w/ the $1k rebate, their price was about $600 under invoice, but they have a $250 service fee. we rejected our first choice due to miles over 200, and accepted the silver frost w/ moonroof and side air (along w/ everything but traction control and a rear spoiler). did not want the moonroof for the $800 extra, but it is a nice treat. car seems small from the outside, but six foot folks can sit behind a six foot driver without complaint. 6 cd player in armrest is fine, but if i want a backup holder it must be purchased thru ford it seems. i have to crank the treble all the way up to get the sound i like with the Mach (mock?) system, but it seems fine. Carsdirect.com was ok to deal with, delivering the car to my home in santa barbara all the way from the dealer in san diego (bob baker). the car had 13 miles on it. they need to display a sample of the paperwork that the driver brings with the car (finance and reg papers, got $15k ford finance at 0.9% for 36 months) so as not to be surprised at what needs to be filled out (not really that bad, but we are paranoid around deals like this which we don't do every year). the driver of the flat bed allows demo ride of the car so that you can be sure and you can reject the car for any reason. he demostrates all the gizmos on the vehicle also, he was very nice. sorry if this seems like an advert for them, but it was a better deal (price was as shown on their web site) than i could do directly with a dealer. you know the dealers are trying to lock out the manufacturers from competing with them by buying the state politicians...this causes us to pay an extra $1000 or so...tell your local politician to fight back. all i need from the dealer is competent service and demo cars to try out; dump the sales person tricks. carsdirect.com is backed by dell computer guy and other big investors, but i understand other internet dealers are out there.

    I have gone up the steepest longest hills on 101 at only 65mph (about 2400rpm) and the 200hp engine did not shift down to cope! it holds the road very well for me, tight like a small car; a little torque steer to the right, i think, when accelerating, and if pushed, it takes off. 90mph on the free way is no problem, and it is hard to touch the pedal lightly enough to go below 65.

    the trunk is nice and roomy, but they did not put in a cargo net even though they have the hooks inside (bought one). Another peeve is not having a light under the hood of the engine compartment?! I guess they think that the duratec doesn't need any checking...what about fluids you bozo engineers at ford! I do not like the side inward curves on the taurus and wish for more side protection for the paint in parking lots. the front glass is so tall, i am having trouble putting up a sun screen (even "jumbo" size is only about 28", and i need about 36").

    Overall, I am very pleased with the car, the power is great compared with my 93 merc cougar 3.8 v-6 and 88 chevy 350 v-8 pickup. it takes rough bumps very well, but certain old wavy surface concrete on the freeway (southbound for 1/4 mile on 101 at buellton,ca) can set up a little feel that it is too stiff to handle i guess, but not too bad.

    the leather seats are firm without any stiff metal line hitting across the back. our ride up to morro bay and back was comfortable except for my varying the speed between 55 and 90 mph to break in the car (manual says first 1000 miles to vary the speed, i probably vary too quickly). the manual also says not to stay up at the top of the tachometer continuously, which would be 7000rpm, i may have hit 6000 with a couple of downshifts.

    Road noise: some wind noise that i wish was less, but i was not ready to spend the extra 10k for a lincoln ls for the same engine and thicker glass. side winds have some effect on the car, but not enough to move me out of my lane.

    Zero defects to take into the dealer yet...very nice surprise, no squeaks from dash movement, no problems...hmm, maybe the turn signal switch when i want to go right isn't quite latching at the right position for me...not sure yet; not enough to bug me so far. the engine power makes it all worthwhile for me, but could get a ticket for me unless i learn to quit competing and showing off on the highway.
This discussion has been closed.