Last post on Jan 21, 2011 at 10:46 AM
You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable
What is this discussion about?
Ford Taurus, Mercury Sable, Sedan
#2489 of 3389 clarification
Oct 20, 2003 (10:29 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!
Oct 20, 2003 (5:44 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
Oct 21, 2003 (8:04 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
Oct 21, 2003 (9:41 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
Oct 21, 2003 (12:17 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.
Oct 21, 2003 (12:29 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.
Oct 21, 2003 (1:46 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.
Oct 22, 2003 (3:53 am)
The 'bucket' seats are those in the floor shift cars, the 'bench' is the seat with the flip/fold console/armrest between the seats. Although they look the same, they're most definitely different seats, and I can feel the difference. My '98 has buckets, and similar '98/'99 cars are a LOT more confortable with the buckets than the bench. I've driven some 2000-03 cars with both types of seats, and they're still more comfortable with buckets.
The bench seats felt like hard slabs, with less thigh support, less lumbar support (this is in cars without power lumbar on either type seat), and it felt like you sat ON the seat, not IN it. And I'm comparing power seats, same upholstery type, etc.
I sought out a bucket car on purpose, and have not regretted my decision one bit. I've been on a couple of 500+ mile trips (one way) and have been very comfortable without fatigue. For me, the buckets are the best choice. I'd recommend that people try both types and decide what suits them best.
#2497 of 3389 bucket vrs bench
Oct 22, 2003 (9:56 am)
I think that the Hertz rented SES with "bench" seats did feel different than my wife's SEL with buckets, but think ehenness is much more versed in the subject.
I haven't seen the new dash/steering wheel (where has everyone seen it) but I do like the dash on my wife's but do wish the wheel has audio controls.
Oct 22, 2003 (10:09 am)
Okay...did some web surfing and found some 2004 pictures. A few comments:
1 - I have to agree with the steering wheel comment, I like the old one better. Also, the cruise control buttons look like add ons...more suited to my son's Focus.
2 - As to the gauge placement...looks to me like change for change sake. Think the old style has a more traditional look (it worked for Mercedes for a long time) and the new look doesn't bring anything to the table for me.
3 - Is the console new this year too or was that change made before? I like the adjustable cup holder and the general look of my wife's 2001 better.
4 - Finally...I noticed 3 vertical buttons just to the right of the gauge cluster. Are they trying to go back to that "remote" button audio control method they had back in the mid 90s?? If so, I think that is a lame alternative to wheel mounted controls.