Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
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
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.
transmissions often go (at least on Fords) and other nickel and dime 3 and 400 dollars here and there starts to add up.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yeah right, Import freaks gotta wake up amd smell the coffee, it ain't 1980 anymore.
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.
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.
Roger
The problem is knowing which day it is going to die on..... :-)
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.
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'??
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.
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"
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.
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.
<<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 ?
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.
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?
"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.
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.
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.
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.
kind of like saying: you can't beat Wal-mart, why go to those expensive stores for...
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.
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.