Ask the Car People.SM


Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Sedans Pre-2008

3389 messages,  Last post on Jan 21, 2011 at 11:46 AM

You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Forum.

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

Messages Page 246 of 339

#2449 of 3389 2004 Taurus by samnoe

Sep 28, 2003 (7:23 pm)

Just seen at the dealer about 10-15 pieces sitting on the lot.
 
The new front- and rear-end, lights, not a big deal. The major upgrade is the new steering wheel and gauges (very similar to the new Ford Freestar) with a digital odometer - finally! It also has 3 button controls for the message board, also the same as Windstar/ Freestar. Then there supposed to be some changes under the hood (more hp, better mileage) which I can not verify by just looking.
 
Other than that, nothing special.

#2450 of 3389 '99 Taurus SE by vacman1

Sep 29, 2003 (12:50 pm)

Ok, so this is a bit dated, but I thought still relavent to coversations on safety if you own or are looking for a '99 Tauras.
 
About one week ago I was involved in a T-bone accident (ironically enough hit by another Ford - an older '88 or so F-150). The impact in my driver's door was horrendous. Glass exploded everywhere. I was to say the least, very impressed with the ability of my Taurus to withstand the heat. Despite being broadsided directly in the driver's door at between 20-30 mph, I sustained only a few minor cuts from glass and no significant injuries. The car, however, was not so lucky and was a total loss.
 
Thank you Ford, for making such a crashworthy vehicle!!!! I'll definitely be looking at you for my next vehicle.

#2451 of 3389 Taurus Safety by ehenness

Sep 30, 2003 (4:33 am)

The later '00 and up Taurus/Sables are supposed to be just as good on side impact (or better with the side airbags). The doors/sides of the car were the only part from the '96-'99 style that was not modified for the 2000 redesign, so this makes sense.
 
Glad to hear you came out of it with minor injuries. Too bad your Taurus didn't fare as well, but then again, it did the job it was designed for, especially given you got hit by a pickup.
 
I think a lot of people overlook this aspect of cars when buying, but it's kind of important!

#2452 of 3389 Taurus Safety contd. by vacman1

Oct 02, 2003 (1:07 pm)

I couldn't agree more. In fact, the primary reason I bought my Taurus originally was due to the five star crash rating it received.
 
My next delimma is whether to purchase another Taurus or a 300 M. I liked many features about the Taurus except the resale value was terrible and the driver's seat for me, at least, I found very uncomfortable after lengthy driving.
 
I would like to have the features of the 300 M but the Ford name. I was hoping to wait until the 500 came out to buy anything, but Mr. F-150 had other ideas ...
 
I guess now I'm more seriously considering the 300 M with side airbags. It'd be a serious step up pricewise for me, but I don't think my back can take 4 more years of stock Taurus seats.
 
All kidding aside, anyone that says Ford makes crap doesn't know what they're talking about. I only ever had two problems on that car (24V DOHC - sigh ... what a nice little engine that was ).
 
One was a lose cigarette lighter fixed under warranty, the second more annoying problem was the faulty wiper/turn switch that caused the wipers to cycle turning either left or right and the eventual loss of the wiper washer fluid.
 
But still $120 worth of repairs, one set of $225 tires, and a $100 brake job on a car with $95K miles and 4 years? The foreign quality crowd can stick it. As far as I'm concerned, I'll be buying more American cars in the future.

#2453 of 3389 vacman1 by badgerfan

Oct 02, 2003 (1:41 pm)

You might want to try current generation Taurus- seats may be different from your 99 as they redesigned all but the doors in 2000. Kept the optional Duratec however-has slightly more HP than your 99 also. Yes it is a very good engine.
 
Note the 300M is a nice car, but is becoming an orphan- I believe Chrysler is replacing it with a 300C rear wheel drive-the Mercedes influence. 300M may depreciate fast as well.
 
I had a rental low mileage 300M this summer for a weeks vacation and it was a nice car, but I don't think it is all that much better than my Taurus SES with the 24 valve DOHC Duratec, especially when I doubt if you would touch a new 300M for under say $25-$27K?????? That's just a guess on my part as I have never seriously priced one out.
 
If you really want to save some bucks, find a leftover new 2003 Taurus. With the rebates you can get them well loaded for several thousand south of $20K. Depreciation doesn't mean much to me, especially when I can bank the $5K-$6K I have saved over by not buying a V-6 Camcord. Use that money toward the next one. Money not spent up front does not depreciate!
On the other hand, I don't rack up the miles you do, so depreciation may be more important to you.
 
Want to move up and stay in the Ford Family? How about a Lincoln LS? Due to the "Domestic is Junk" fervor in the press, a leftover 2003 can be had pretty inexpensively with big rebates as well, especially if you stay with the base V-6 model, which also has an upscale version of that trusty 3 litre Duratec.

#2454 of 3389 Taurus / Lincoln LS by vacman1

Oct 02, 2003 (3:01 pm)

I have actually test driven the Lincoln. There are three reasons I would not buy it: 1) Appearance - I sell municipal equipment. Pull up in a Lincoln and a lot of mayors/cities will be asking themselves whether or not they are paying too much for your stuff. 2) I'd get a ticket in that Lincoln faster than you can say boo! 3) For the money, I can't see that it's better than a 300M. The 300M seems to have decent performance and let's face it, all leather seats and sunroof look about the same. I can get a 300M with satellite radio and in dash DVD/Nav system for $30,700 (not counting rebate original MSRP is almost $35K). I'm at least $10K higher with a Lincoln - and I don't think any of those features are built in for that price.
 
When you put 25-30K miles a year on a car you don't really give a crud about depreciation. The Taurus will go down much much quicker since a lot of these are available as rentals and corp. cars. I watched my old '99 Taurus go from an original purchase price of $18.3 K (7/01/2000) to $7.4K (9/18/2003) when I was hit four years and 95K miles later. Still not too bad though, came out $3.2K ahead.
 
I believe the secret to avoiding depreciation is negotiating a good car deal in the first place ...

#2455 of 3389 by nvbanker

Oct 02, 2003 (3:24 pm)

That's an excellent point, badger. Everybody jumps on the bandwagon about depreciation - money not spent up front does not depreciate. I may do a regression analysis on that someday to see what the true impact is between a Taurus and an Accord.

#2456 of 3389 Taurus depreciation is bad regardless by s852

Oct 02, 2003 (3:36 pm)

You can buy a new Taurus and get a big discount and big rebate and still lose a huge amount on depreciation compared to an Accord. You can also get a discounted Accord, just no rebates.
 
The only way to really minimize the worst of the Taurus depreciation is to buy a 1 or 2 year old model. You may be able to pick up a used 2002 Taurus SES for about $11K now. If the dealers are selling them for $11k, you would be lucky to get 9K trade-in value. The value is still spiralling down even after two years, but at a slower pace per year. (If it continued at that depreciation pace much longer, it would have a negative value!)
Even if you buy a brand new 2004 SES with the base Vulcan engine for invoice of $20412 minus the $1000 rebate, that's still $19412 plus the taxes. Expect to lose at least $6K in one year even if you got it for a "invoice minus rebate" deal.
Can you imagine if someone actually paid near the MSRP of $22040 for a bases SES with no options?!

#2457 of 3389 2002 SES for $11,500 by chicagosky

Oct 02, 2003 (6:15 pm)

As S852 stated, you can most definitely get a 2002 SES for $11K or so now. Two months ago, on 1 August, I bought a 2002 SES with 21K miles for $11,500 before my trade-in, with standard SES equipment, along with two new tires, new windshield wipers, oil change, etc. They listed in the $13Ks. This is not to say that I necessarily got the world's best price-- I'm new to the car-buying game and though I did my research, I doubt I got the best deal out there. I'm sure you can get a better price now. If geographical area can influence price, as I imagine it can, my area is the Southeast U.S., despite my username.
 
Another comment is this: when shopping, I narrowed it down to two cars, much like it seems vacman1 is doing. I was deciding between a Saturn L200 and a Taurus SES, of the same year and of comparable mileage. When it came down to it, I got the car of lesser quality/options (the Saturn L200) dealer to get down to their "lowest" price, and decided the evening that my boyfriend and I went to the Ford dealer, if we could get them to commit to that "low" price, then I would buy the car, as it's nicer. And that's what happened. Maybe not the most logical/informed approach, but I like having some range of vehicles to choose from, and I was very happy with the end result. Buying a car is really such a game anyway, though unfortunately it's really no fun for the buyer until they have the prize, and it's fun for the dealers, who are secretly laughing in everybody's face anyway, the entire time.

#2458 of 3389 by nvbanker

Oct 02, 2003 (8:19 pm)

I get the same feeling, Chicago, that I never really win, I just get a car......

Messages Page 246 of 339

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