You are here: Forums Sedans Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable What Are Your Thoughts on the Return of the Taurus/Sable?

What Are Your Thoughts on the Return of the Taurus/Sable?

530 messages,  Last post on Aug 22, 2008 at 10:00 PM

You are in the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Ford Five Hundred, Ford Taurus, Mercury Sable, Future Vehicle, Sedan, Wagon

Messages Page 53 of 54 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#517 of 530 Taurus Vs. Accord by redvw Feb 29, 2008 (12:27 pm)
I am looking for a new car and I am considering an Accord, or Taurus. One of my concerns is the long term reliability, and repair costs. How do you think the Taurus will compare to the Accord in the above criteria? Replies to this message: ronsmith38 (Feb 29, 2008 1:10 pm)
#518 of 530 Re: Taurus Vs. Accord [redvw] by ronsmith38 Feb 29, 2008 (1:10 pm)
Replying to: redvw (Feb 29, 2008 12:27 pm) The April issue of Consumers Report rates the reliability of the Accord as "very good" and that of the 2008 Taurus as "good". You should be able to get the Taurus now at a very good price, at least $4k off MSRP after rebates. I recently bought a Mercury Sable, a clone of the Taurus and got a very good deal. http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.f166af7/23
#519 of 530 Ford is getting what they deserve by g_allen Mar 02, 2008 (9:00 pm)
You know, it's sad. I have lived in Michigan all my life so I have first hand experience watching our once great auto industry slowly lose its competitive edge to the foreign companies. For years, Ford GM, and Chrylser have rested on their laurels assuming they would always be the kings of the automotive castle. While Chrysler Corp. has had some recent success with its 300/Charger/Magnum, SRT products, and likely with the upcoming Challenger, they continue to struggle to outshine their competitors. GM has been hard at work revamping all of their product lines and their hard work continues and is beginning to pay off....big time. Though GM struggles for overall profitability, their future looks bright as a result of fresh, innovative, and attractive product that is reaching new buyers and retaining current owners.   Now Ford. The name change thing. This is just an indication that Ford really has no idea what they are doing anymore. Ford thinks they still create markets and set standards for others to follow. They are lying to themselves and worse...believing it! Case in point, a few years ago I was talking with a Ford company official and we were talking about the 500. She was proud as a peacock about Ford's new sedan and its "revolutionary" CVT transmission. I politely said to her "I'm glad to hear Ford is exploring new ideas and designs, but the 500 is already outclassed before it even goes on sale." She replied "What do you mean?" I said "Well, since 2002 for example, Nissan has had a 250 hp sedan with some flashy styling that drives really well and gets good mileage and is available with an automatic or a manual transmission which allows them to cover the market more broadly. I'm not convinced a 200 hp sedan with a CVT transmission will be seen as a serious competitor" She said "What car is that?" At this point I was thinking to myself "Oh my God, what rock have you been hiding under?" The Nissan Altima, you know, the one that has been getting Car of the Year awards, etc. Apparently, Ford is not aware of their competitors because they believe they have none. At times I think they feel as though if they do have competitors, they are only Chrysler and GM. Therefore, as long as their garbage is at least as good as the other's garbage then all is well in Detroit. The really crazy part is Ford has dropped their horrible CVT and the competitors they didn't think they had are building CVT's that are everything Ford wished it's could have been. Nice job Ford. Henry would be proud.   Ford, you're getting what you deserve unfortunately. I hope you are reading this. Replies to this message: gregg_vw (Mar 03, 2008 5:39 am) bruneau1 (Mar 23, 2008 11:04 am)
#520 of 530 Re: Ford is getting what they deserve [g_allen] by gregg_vw Mar 03, 2008 (5:39 am)
Replying to: g_allen (Mar 02, 2008 9:00 pm) They aren't.   Ironic that the Altima offers a really good CVT across the board now.
#521 of 530 Re: Ford is getting what they deserve [g_allen] by bruneau1 Mar 23, 2008 (11:04 am)
Replying to: g_allen (Mar 02, 2008 9:00 pm) You don't know what you are talking about in connection to the CVT. I have a Freestyle with it, and it is the most intelligent (knows what it is doing at all times) transmission I have ever owned. Like all CVTs, it is a bit slow at launch, but after that great. yes, the engine should have been more powerful. It was too expensive to build and has torque limitations, but it is nothing like "horrible". The new Ford 6 spd. is always searching for the right ratio and is less refined.
#522 of 530 2008 Taurus Sel power drain? by pahana Mar 23, 2008 (1:27 pm)
Has anyone had a problem with the 2008 Taurus Sel concerning power being drained from the battery. Vehicle has less than 100 miles on it. Dealer says the computer is bad. I have to wait two weeks for a new one. Why?
#523 of 530 Re: Taurus vs Sable [thegraduate] by jsylvester Mar 24, 2008 (8:56 pm)
Replying to: thegraduate (Jan 12, 2008 5:58 pm) Anybody who has owned a Grand Marquis knows they are by far the most reliable Ford product produced. By reliable, I don't mean what a 90 days of ownership survey indicates, I'm referring to a 5-10 year ownership experience. I don't need to be a guinea pig on Ford's "experiments" with building North American products off of ill-fitting foreign platforms with suspect drivetrains.   Also, I've always done better than the EPA ratings on both of my Grand Marquis.   I'll buy one more before Ford drops the old gal, and then I guess I'll join the masses who have abandoned Ford for other manufacturers. Ford has completely screwed up Mercury, to the point I don't think it is fixable. Replies to this message: gregg_vw (Mar 25, 2008 5:07 am) brucelinc (Mar 25, 2008 5:34 am) thegraduate (Mar 25, 2008 9:17 am) gregg_vw (Mar 25, 2008 10:48 am) jmn1 (Aug 22, 2008 2:33 pm) savetheland (Aug 22, 2008 3:36 pm) thegraduate (Aug 22, 2008 10:00 pm)
#524 of 530 Re: Taurus vs Sable [jsylvester] by gregg_vw Mar 25, 2008 (5:07 am)
Replying to: jsylvester (Mar 24, 2008 8:56 pm) The problem with the Grand Marquis and its sister ships is its ancient platform, not its reliability. When I drive or ride in one, the contrast with a modern luxury or near luxury sedan is greatest with the body stiffness. It's the same looseness that was common with all large cars until the mid-90's or so. Even when the GM is new and fairly rattle-free, it clunks and bangs and shudders over potholes and uneven pavement, heaving expansion joints and so on. Then as it ages, it develops squeaks and rattles that show up on sharp bumps that only add to the sense that it is not a quality chassis. In its time, it was competitive. That time has passed.   The other glaring difference is in the interior: uneven gaps, too many cut lines, old style finishing that looks amateurish now compared to the competition. But like any proven product, you know what you are getting and if you can live without the improvements that are standard on just about any other car, its cheap and troublefree motoring.   Most cars these days are reliable, compared to a few years ago. VW for example has mediocre reliability ratings, yet mine have been completely trouble free. Ford's current "experiments" are screwed together rather well. Replies to this message: brucelinc (Mar 25, 2008 5:34 am)
#525 of 530 Re: Taurus vs Sable [gregg_vw] by brucelinc Mar 25, 2008 (5:34 am)
Replying to: gregg_vw (Mar 25, 2008 5:07 am) Gregg, I couldn't agree with you more. I have had numerous GMs, CVs, and TCs as rentals. Driving one is like going back in time - and not to a good time - for American cars. The seats are not comfortable, the ride is loose, there is too much engine noise, power is lacking, interior fit/finish is poor, and the rear seat room is horrible for cars that take up so much space.   A Taurus or Sable is vastly superior in all of the areas noted above. You and I agree that the styling of the Taurus/Sable is a turn off to prospective buyers but otherwise they are excellent mainstream sedans.   I have ridden in CV and TC cabs that have over 400,000 miles on them. I know they will last. If longevity is the primary purchasing decision, I suppose they have merit. I just couldn't tolerate one of the beasts long enough to put many miles on one.
#526 of 530 Re: Taurus vs Sable [jsylvester] by thegraduate Mar 25, 2008 (9:17 am)
Replying to: jsylvester (Mar 24, 2008 8:56 pm) It's easy to get the bugs worked out of a car when you have over ten years to do it. That old thing better be reliable - it has no excuse to be otherwise. Replies to this message: gregg_vw (Mar 25, 2008 10:48 am) jmn1 (Aug 22, 2008 2:33 pm) savetheland (Aug 22, 2008 3:36 pm) thegraduate (Aug 22, 2008 10:00 pm)

Messages Page 53 of 54 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable What Are Your Thoughts on the Return of the Taurus/Sable?