Last post on Jan 21, 2011 at 11:46 AM
You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable
What is this discussion about?
Ford Taurus, Mercury Sable, Sedan
Oct 26, 2003 (12:37 pm)
I must agree with you...Ford spent so much time concentrating on the SUV that it totally forgot folks who wanted a real car for the family. The Taurus did not deserve to be relegated to the back burner for so long. I say again, its like they lost interest when the public did not like the oval Taurus.
We drove vans for better than 16 years (one Toyota and two full size Fords) but now that the kids are no longer hauling everything they own everywhere we wanted to return to a "real car".
My Mom's got a 2000 Camry LE and its a nice car but really think it is very "cheap looking" compared to my wife's 2001 Taurus SEL.
You know, why do we always have to please everyone. Toyotas are fine vehicles if that's what you want. Ford did a lousy job with the Focus unless your my son who's got 45,000 trouble free miles on his 2001 SE.
Different people see the world differently and I say thank God for that! If you want to drive an SUV or a Toyota or a Honda well that's great. But I think companies need to not put all their eggs in one basket like Ford did with SUVs. I hope that when they come out with the 500 they don't do the same thing again...
Oct 26, 2003 (3:54 pm)
Well, car companies put their eggs in the basket with the money in it, and SUV's & trucks have kept Ford alive while they've been scratching their heads desperately trying to build a Camry. The bean counters won't let them do it. They could do it, but would it sell enough to make a profit with what it costs to make it that good? That's the problem domestics have right now, because Toyota, and to a lesser degree, Honda, already have this process clocked. The 96 Taurus was built to exceed the 92 Camry, and in many ways it made it. But in the end, the bean counters thrifted out a lot of what the designers put in, and it was a very good car, but not quite up there in NVH, or longevity. Then, there was the styling, which was too ovid for many, me included.
Oct 26, 2003 (4:36 pm)
Throughout the 7 years that I had my 91 Toyota Camry I went twice to Ford dealers to trade to a Taurus wagon, preferably. I needed something roomy and safe for my growing children.
First time 1993 I didn't get the Taurus wagon basically because my wife right there and then,in front of the salesman and manager, mentioned that after seeing the wagon she really wanted a minivan. Taurus wagon would've been sufficient. In 1996 we went again to a Ford dealership but I didn't like the car's sloping hood. Did not buy it.
What's the point here? Even though I owned a Camry I still wanted the perceived virtues of a Ford Taurus, which my Camry didn't possess then. My car felt like an econobox. However for 7 + years never visit the shop for repairs.
Taurus was built strong, safe and roomy. Camry was made reliable, economical and good looking. If Ford would've put great effort into putting dependability in the Taurus people would've flocked to get it.
Oct 26, 2003 (7:19 pm)
if i'm not mistaken, the civic line is still the top seller in the small car market. and there is a civic hatchback (it doesn't sell very well though).
you're not going to be able determine a car's overall reliability by reading a forum board.
i see you still continue to insist that consumers are being "duped" into spending more money for their camcords. your entitled to your opinion and i won't take it personally. but i think ford would love to have the demographics that honda has with its accord.
thanks for your (along with danielj6, nvbanker and fdthird) input.
#2512 of 3389 Buying an '03 Taurus
Oct 29, 2003 (1:46 pm)
I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this question, but here I go:
I'm considering buying a brand-new '03 Taurus SES Deluxe sedan, but I'm wondering how much below invoice I should go for my initial offer.
I've always understood that Ford gives the dealer an additional 3% of MSRP (in addition to the normal holdback) on "leftover" models. In this case, that would be about $679. (MSRP is 22645 + 660 destination charge = $23310).
Any suggestions on where I should start (ballpark estimate)? The dealer in question has about 25 '03s on his lot and twice that number of '04s.
Oct 29, 2003 (2:01 pm)
Lets put it this way.......I would buy a Taurus with square wheels before I would even think about buying a Honda or Toyota.....however my wife does own a Honda civic that has bee very reliable.....but no more reliable than my Taurus
Oct 29, 2003 (6:06 pm)
For the first 100,000 miles, it's about personal preference in what you like and feel comfortable.
For the next 100,000 miles, I bet on the Civic to keep you going more cheaply, generally, and from experience.
However, my Explorer has 115,000 miles on it, just needed it's first major repair - a water pump and a front end bushing. That's not bad.
Oct 29, 2003 (7:26 pm)
sometimes dealers even have more discounts available..
start at invoice - 3% and work up from there. Find out ahead of time ALL incentives and subtract those from the adjusted invoice price.
if the deal is close, no need to haggle over a couple hundred bucks.
Oct 29, 2003 (7:27 pm)
One could argue that a water pump at 115k is maintenance. Honda recommends replacing the water pump when a timing belt is changed. Their interval for a timing belt used to be 90k. The reasoning was the mechanic was already there. Bet a bunch of them also failed sometime right after the belt was changed.Thus the recommendation to change when doing the belt.
So I would not consider a water pump a major repair.My opinion is it is a wear item like plugs, pcv,thermostat, antifreeze, tranny fluid etc.I'm not saying you replace the pump if nothing is wrong; but it shouldn't have been a expensive job.
Oct 29, 2003 (7:34 pm)
it wasn't a big deal. And I'm not complaining in the least. It's been a great truck