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 250 of 340

#2486 of 3389 Neglected by fdthird

Oct 20, 2003 (6:19 am)

Perhaps this is just another way that Ford has neglected the once proud Taurus. My wife's '97 Ford E-150 Custom Hi-Top Van had lighted cruise buttons. Now, in 2001 we trade that in for a top of the line, with all the bells and whistles Taurus SEL and find that this small thing is not a part of this top of the line Taurus.
 
Its really a shame that Ford decided to basically let this wonderful car languish while they spent un-told dollars on trucks and SUVs! I guess that the decision to go for fleet sales (rentals) meant that the consumer got the left overs as Ford decided to become a truck company. A shame that they now have to play catch up with the 500 and other new vehicle lines when they had the classic vehicle line that was at one time, synonymous with the mid sized family car.
 
What a shame that when Ford comes out with a vehicle to once again challenge the Camry and the Accord as the best selling car in America it will not be called a Taurus.
 
As a two time Taurus owner (also an '89 Wagon)I think this was a real screw up by the Ford folks!

#2487 of 3389 fdthird by badgerfan

Oct 20, 2003 (6:42 am)

Honda's new generation 03 Accord doesn't have lighted cruise buttons either. And, I believe it does not have available dual sun visors available on any versions. (I don't know if they have implemented either of these for 04 Accords)
 
So if you want to nitpick about minor features, you can find things to nitpick on any car. Besides, it appears Ford did add the lighted buttons as a running change. Certainly not a deal breaker anyways, as it takes only a few times to learn the feel of the buttons and operate them at night without lights.
 
Yes, Ford did concentrate most of its efforts in recent years on trucks and SUV's, but wouldn't you do it also if your profit margins were bigger on those vehicles? New car models will be introduced in the next few years. My main concern is that they drop the well known Taurus name in favor of Futura and 500. That and the Futura may be a bit small for a "mainstream" family car and the 500 may end up too big and likely more expensive. We will see when they are introduced.
Barring my car getting totalled somehow, I won't be in the market for many years anyways.

#2488 of 3389 cruise buttons by chicagosky

Oct 20, 2003 (10:56 am)

Thanks all for your responses to my cruise button inquiry. I'm returning from out-of-town, checking the message board, and am amazed by the number of posts! Ehenness, it's an '02 SES. Fdthird, interestingly enough I have lighted sideview mirrors. Yes, I think that my vehicle just didn't get the running change, which is fine, as they're coded by touch anyway.
 
While my car was getting repainted, we rented an '03 SES with a bazillion options from the dealership. For those who ever have to have warrantee work done, though I did have to pay for the rental, when I played a polite hardball, they negotiated with me on the price, until I was down to $18/day with unlimited mileage (started at $26). Just an fyi, that though you may have to pay, it may be worth it to request that you get a fairly inexpensive price, if it is within the 3/36.
 
Anyway, the rental was gorgeous, though I'm partial to my car because I'm more at home in it. The rental had the center gearshift, the leather package, a sunroof, MACH speakers, traction control, power-adjust pedals, etc. It was that pretty metallic gray color. I've read that Taurus leather packages wear prematurely, so I was wondering if anybody with experience had comment on that. Also, if anybody had the center console, I was wondering if they could speak to their preference of that. I found it more sporty looking and aesthetically pleasing, but after having adjusted to all that extra space in the center for my purse and whatnot, a bit cumbersome. However, that center console is very large, and the storage spaces are all very nice.
 
Just a curiosity thing. I also enjoyed the sunroof immensely, though I'm cheap and a graduate student so I'd have a hard time justifying paying for that as an option.
 
Aside from the options, I had a hard time noticing much difference between the '02 I own and the '02 I rented (both SESes). I didn't notice any "new dashboard treatments," but maybe I just didn't catch any. I could've sworn the car had five-spoke alloys but I may be wrong. I guess the cabin was quieter-- if anything the engine felt more powerful but it wasn't a Duratec-- but maybe I just thought it was quieter because I had read your post, S852.
 
Yes, Taurii have perhaps been a bit neglected by Ford, but my last experience with a Ford was the '89 GL I grew up with (it was the family car), and I'm astounded by how far it's come. One of my friends who is very into car appearances even commented on how far Tauruses have come. They look better, outside and inside, and the second generation Tauruses seem better mechanically (this coming from a girl who doesn't know much about cars) as well.

#2489 of 3389 clarification by fdthird

Oct 20, 2003 (11:29 am)

Please, don't get me wrong...I think the Taurus is a great car and when we were looking for a new car for my wife in 2001 there were few others that could come close to it for the price. I was only expressing my opinion that Ford put the Taurus way on the back burner. The Taurus was and still is very competitive with the Accord and Camry but Ford seemed to be more interested in selling it as a rental than keeping it "cutting edge" as it had been from its introduction. It seems to be that when the "oval themed" Taurus didn't take off they lost interest. I think de-ovaling of the car worked very well and my wife loves driving her Taurus. The interior is laid out very well, the seats comfortable, everything falls very well to your finger tips and the car drives great with lots of power from the 24V engine. Please, understand that I think it is a great car and as someone who has a 14 year history with the Taurus I am just a bit disappointed that Ford didn't go the extra mile to still make the Taurus name synonymous with the top of the field. Perhaps they needed to do more with the vehicle or perhaps they just needed to do some better PR work but I for one do not think the Taurus deserves the "bad press" it gets from many.
 
chicagosky, my wife's 2001 SEL has the leather, sunroof Mach audio with 6 Cd changer, traction control and center console....We like a lot the console and floor shifter and feel it gives the car a sporty and upmarket feel. One great thing about the console is that with it the 6 CD changer is mounted right inside rather than the trunk. I love the Mach audio system and the sunroof! The car will be 3 years old this coming March so I really can't speak well re the long term life of the leather but her dove gray interior still looks and feels great. I mean, the leather isn't glove soft Rolls Royce quality but then I paid less for the car then RR probably pays for its seats!

#2490 of 3389 by upsetter1

Oct 20, 2003 (6:44 pm)

Guys how do you like new instrument cluster and steering wheel on 2004 Taurus/Sable?
 
Chicagosky I like bucket seats more. First it is more easy to switch gears, esp when driving. Then there is central armrest that is mostly occupied by CD changer, but still there is some place to put stuff. Also it looks handsome and sporty. Mach audio system may be okay but CD players sound quality sucks. I would install something else. Adjustable pedals were proven to be useless, moonroof and leather are great but it is free option anyway on premium cars. I prefer leather because you don't get ussie with static. And it looks and feels nicer than velure.

#2491 of 3389 2004 illuminated stuff by samnoe

Oct 21, 2003 (9:04 am)

You're writing about the illuminated cruise control on the Taurus and some changes on the 2004 model, I have a question for anybody with a 2004 Taurus:
 
In the new 2004 Freestar, Ford eliminated the illuminated glove box - a feature they used to offer for years, even in the old Aerostars. But they added illuminated controls on the steering wheel for cruise control and audio controls.
 
Now my question is, the new 2004 interior of the Taurus is very similar to the new Freestar. The same instrument panel and steering wheel, etc. So somebody should check out if the glove box is still illuminated when you open it? And how are the 2003 and earlier models, are the illuminated?
 
I personally liked the Windstars instrument panel more than the new Freestars modern design; but the Taurus is a different story. A digital odometer for the first time! and the numbers on the gauges are more bright and clear than ever on Taurus.

#2492 of 3389 No light in the Glove Box by fdthird

Oct 21, 2003 (10:41 am)

Can you believe that as a way to save a buck! I ran into this with my 2000 Mustang and could not believe that this was where they decided to save a few pennies! They blamed that on Jacque but now that he's gone I still they're saving money there!
 
I also miss the under hood light!

#2493 of 3389 fdthird and upsetter1 by chicagosky

Oct 21, 2003 (1:17 pm)

Thanks for your responses to my curiosity questions. I have one more: are the bucket seats really different? Because I have a "bench" seat 2002 SES, and it's not a bench seat. It's just two seats, bucket-style, with an insert of upholstery in the center. I was just wondering, because everywhere I look, the column gearshift and the floor gearshift are distinguished by, among other things, bench and non-bench seating, and I can't tell the difference.

#2494 of 3389 chicagosky by badgerfan

Oct 21, 2003 (1:29 pm)

I believe that you are correct, the flip fold console version Taurus with the column shifter I am 99% sure has the same seats as the floor mounted shifter version. I have a 2000 SES with column shift and the flip fold console, and the seats are definitely more bucket-like than bench-like. My seats have a significant amount of side bolstering. The flip fold console theoretically provides the possibility of 6 passenger seating, but I wouldn't want to be the middle passenger in the front row! I would only consider it an option for short distances, as it would not be very comfortable.

#2495 of 3389 by upsetter1

Oct 21, 2003 (2:46 pm)

I agree with badgerfan about front seat.
 
New steering wheel on 2004 seems too busy to me. I find older one more elegant. But that style started from European Mondeo, where it looks more handsome.
 
Gauge cluster is made in VW style. The placement of gauges makes uncomfortable to watch speedometer and tachometer at the same time. You don't need unimportant gauges in the center. Don't know why they'd choosen to mimic VW.

Messages Page 250 of 340

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