Ask the Car People.SM


Taurus/Sable Maintenance & Repair

2996 messages,  Last post on Dec 01, 2012 at 9:47 AM

You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Forum.

What is this discussion about? Ford Taurus, Mercury Sable, Sedan, Wagon

Messages Page 33 of 300

#321 of 2996 Buying New Car by rttaz54

Apr 21, 2001 (9:28 pm)

Folks,
 
I am looking at buying a new car for my wife and one of them is a Taurus with the larger 24 valve engine.
Should I stay away from Ford and the problems some are having? I have read the posts concerning the Mercury Sable and its problem with tranmissions and this engine.
Looking for pro and cons as we have to replace our 1991 Buick Skylark ( Blew a cylinder last year and other things have gone lately). Appreciate any responses.

#322 of 2996 rttaz54 by ezaircon4jc

Apr 22, 2001 (9:18 pm)

My 4th Sable is a '96 with the Duratec. This was the first year for the motor. We now have just over 100k on it and the only major repairs are a water pump and a/c compressor clutch, both within the last couple of weeks. I consider this normal wear and tear. I have done the struts as they wear out around 75k, even on Japanese cars! I have been very anal about maintainence, just ask my wife! I changed the synthetic oil every 3-5k. The car runs just as well as it did the day we drove it home. We just bought a Lincoln LS with the same Duratec engine, tweeked a little to 210hp and 205flbtq. If the RWD LS wasn't so much more fun to drive, I'd be driving the Sable. Also the wife is afraid to drive the Lincoln. She says she doesn't like all my rules. You know, park next to a 4-door car, at least 2 miles from the mall!
I believe all cars can easily go 150k (our '91 had 175k when we bought the Lincoln) with regular service. Machines need to be treated like machines. Too many people just drive cars until something breaks, then complain that the car is defective. Regular service is the key. Anyway, I've loved every one of our Sables. Our '88 and '91 even had the "dreaded" 3.8L engine. We had no head gasket or cooling issues. The '88 had 125k and, like I said, the '91 175k. Hope this helps.

#323 of 2996 by sable93

Apr 23, 2001 (4:26 pm)

2wheeler,
 
Welcome to the club! Our membership is rapidly expanding! What was the mileage on your car when your transmission died? I have a '97 GL, and the transmission was replaced at approx 79,000 miles. I have a friend who's neighbor owns a '97 Taurus, and his transmission just died at 62,000 miles.
 
I think we all need to start considering a class action lawsuit against Ford. As time passes, I'm finding more and more people who own newer Tauruses that are having horrible transmission problems. It is pretty sad when you call a Ford dealership asking them how much a new transmission for a '97 Taurus costs, and they tell you they just priced one the day before. As far as I know, a transmission should last the life of the car, not the life of the car's windshield wipers :o)
 
Anyone else in here with a '96 or newer Taurus/Sable with new transmission?

#324 of 2996 It's not just the newer ones! by 210delray

Apr 23, 2001 (8:10 pm)

I had a '90 Sable, purchased new. Its transmission lost 4th gear (overdrive) at 93K miles. It had to be replaced -- ouch!
 
And my car was carefully maintained.

#325 of 2996 by sable93

Apr 24, 2001 (8:45 am)

210delray,
 
I hear you.. For some reason, Ford doesn't know how to build transmissions (or engines, or ac, or etc.)
 
They did change the transmission in '96 though, so the older Tauruses have different transmission problems than the new ones, although both sets of problems are unacceptable. I think there is (or was) a lawsuit going with the older transmissions, but I'm trying to get one started with the newer ones, because they are just as unreliable (and expensive) as the old ones.

#326 of 2996 Yet More Transmission Woes by merckx

Apr 24, 2001 (8:59 am)

I just sold a 93 Taurus I'd had since new.In 93,000 miles it needed absolutely nothing!-I was amazed.The orgional brakes even passed inspection every year.I thought it the best car I'd ever owned.The transmission started slipping,though,and I sold it while I thought it still had some at least minimal value.I still reccommend the Taurus to friends,now though with a caveat about the transmission.I have always been amazed at how much value the car offers-perhaps though the trans is just built too much to a price.

#327 of 2996 FUEL INFO NEEDED/ DON'T HAVE MANUEL by 99tse1

Apr 25, 2001 (7:37 pm)

I Just got a '99 Taurus SE. Great car but it seems to be a bit of a gas HOG!!!! The Taurus has a Duratec V6 24 valve DOHC engine. Does anyone have any recommendations as to what grade of gas I should use & what brand? Had a '93 SHO that recently got totalled, I miss that car. The SHO got great mileage. PLEASE don't tell me 92 octane, I live in CALI and my pocketbook just can't take that this summer..... smile

#328 of 2996 99tse1 & fuel by ezaircon4jc

Apr 25, 2001 (10:32 pm)

My So. Cal. '96 runs just fine on regular. You can thank the environMENTALists and their MTBE in the fuel for our poor economy. I read that MTBE fuel has 10% less energy that regular fuel. I figure that equals a 10% reduction in MPG.

#329 of 2996 Info sought on perspective purchase by brightness

Apr 26, 2001 (11:18 am)

I'm considering buying a 94/95/96 Taurus wagon as a second car in the family; not intended as a daily driver. From what I've read so far, tranny seems to the major problem area. Would the choice of the old 3.0 (Vulcan SOHC?) over the 3.8 (OHV?) with less torque reduce the failure rate of the tranny? Any other problem areas that I should be looking out for? BTW, Edmund is saying 140-150 hp for the engines, is there some kind of mistake? the numbers are very low for the big displacements; the torque number on the 3.0 is also very low (160lb-ft?). I'm considering Taurus wagon primarily for safety and versatility.
 
Jim

#330 of 2996 brightness by 210delray

Apr 26, 2001 (8:56 pm)

Well, from my experience I'd say find another car.
 
I had the 3.0 V6 in my '90 Sable, and the transmission still failed (at 93K miles).
 
Yes, those horsepower and torque figures are correct. Still the car has adequate power.
 
Other problems: repeated a/c failures (expensive!), engine mounts, brake pulsation (warped rotors), water pump, alternator, front struts, starter, power door lock actuators (both rear doors), and turn signal/wiper switch (twice).
 
I had no serious engine problems and never touched the exhaust system.
 
Car was bought new and sold last summer at 135K miles.

Messages Page 33 of 300

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement