update on my P.O.S
My92TaurusP.O.S
02-17-2005, 04:55 AM
hey guys, im not gonna start bashin on ford like everyone else just wanna let everyone know what my experiences are and see what everyone else thinks and there bad to good experiences. when i bought my car i payed $600 hundred for it. it was f*cked and practly still is but i got what i payed for. after putting in about $800 its a lot better than it was. naturaly there is always room for inprovments. some stuff i got over charged for other stuff i did my self. since i got it it had body damage and bad suspension. i replaced the broked head/tail light casings, installed rear stabilizers, tie rods on the front and replaced the driver side quarter window. as far as the engine i replaced the radiator thermostat, thermostat housing elbo, trans cooling lines and got brand new plugs and wires. it still has its draw back but for the most part its pretty reliable. i still have a muffler to replace, a strange squeaky noise to identify, bent hood to replace, and the brakes to replace. when i do the brakes i havent decided yet if im gonna replace pads and rotors or just pads. i heard its reccemended to both that and im sure it couldnt hurt. my taurus actually isnt as bad as i tell my friends, its actully pretty decent for being a late model. again, im not trying to bash anything. i know i havnt had as much trouble as other people out there. more less i wanted to tell people about taurus situation thats gone from bad to good. you get out of your car only what you put into it. mine has never died on me yet im constently doin some kind of work to. like evertones else once you fix one thing something else pops up that you never thought of. if there are any others out there... what bad to good or even to better situations have you guys had rather than the more common bad to worse?
sfontain
02-17-2005, 07:30 AM
Hey there. Thanks for the info. Sorry about posting the following book, but I wanted to answer you thoroughly. :)
As you said, when you buy a $600 car, you probably shouldn't expect a whole lot. Personally, if I were going to buy a $600 car (and I wouldn't anymore), I probably would be tempted to put just enough money into it to make it legal and to make it drive well. But what's good is that you seem to be pretty handy with moderately difficult repairs, and it's probably cheaper to you than buying a $3000 car in better shape that's had tons of dealer service.
On the other hand. When you hear people come out and say "Ford sucks" or "Taurus sucks," there is this disturbing trend that most of these people drive with a lead foot and do virtually no maintenance, namely, transmission services, coolant changes, and oil changess. When you talk to people who are very happy with their cars, and you ask them, "What kind of work have you done on your car?" they'll often say, "Oh, nothing. But I changed the oil every 3k-5k and had the transmission fluid and coolant changed every 30k." And these people who care enough to have maintenance done tend to care more about the quality and longevity of their vehicles, and therefore often don't drive them super-hard, are less accident-prone, and keep their cars cleaner.
For $600, even if it's only a '92, I bet your Taurus has a TON of miles on it. I would suspect that if you continue on your current track doing all this great maintenance, so long as the engine and transmission don't (unpreventably due to age) blow up on you, you will probably still get quite a few more miles out of this car. And you'll have spent a lot less money than most people with newer cars. Good luck!
Since you asked... I have driven 4 cars in my short driving lifetime:
1. Ford Escort 5 spd. (1985): $500
2. Ford Thunderbird (1987) auto.: $3400
3. Ford Escort LX (1998) 5 spd.: $3600
4. Ford Taurus SES (2002) auto.: $8000
You might notice that each of these vehicles is a Ford. I will add, to be fair, that I sold each of these cars before they hit 100,000 miles.
Still, not once has one of these cars ever left me stranded on the side of the road or failed to start, even at -20 degrees in the winter. The only shop work I've ever had to pay someone else to do was thanks to rust damage from the abundance of salt they dump on the icy roads of Vermont, and, this weekend, the Taurus will be going into a dealer to have its first transmission service. I'll be doing my own oil and coolant changes.
YES, Ford vehicles have all had their little quirks. Some have had real, legitimate, recurring problems. The thing to recognize is that this has been the case for virtually *every* manufacturer. Bit, usually, the newer the car, the fewer recurring problems it will have. That's why I would shy away from a '92 in favor of, say, a '98-'00, even for the extra money--it's well-known that the '91 Taurus/Sable had major transmission issues, and many people just aren't going to prevent those kinds of problems, even by doing all the recommended maintenance.
The general truth is, though--and most of us already know this--if you take good care of your car, you stand a very good chance that it will take good care of you.
Good luck!
As you said, when you buy a $600 car, you probably shouldn't expect a whole lot. Personally, if I were going to buy a $600 car (and I wouldn't anymore), I probably would be tempted to put just enough money into it to make it legal and to make it drive well. But what's good is that you seem to be pretty handy with moderately difficult repairs, and it's probably cheaper to you than buying a $3000 car in better shape that's had tons of dealer service.
On the other hand. When you hear people come out and say "Ford sucks" or "Taurus sucks," there is this disturbing trend that most of these people drive with a lead foot and do virtually no maintenance, namely, transmission services, coolant changes, and oil changess. When you talk to people who are very happy with their cars, and you ask them, "What kind of work have you done on your car?" they'll often say, "Oh, nothing. But I changed the oil every 3k-5k and had the transmission fluid and coolant changed every 30k." And these people who care enough to have maintenance done tend to care more about the quality and longevity of their vehicles, and therefore often don't drive them super-hard, are less accident-prone, and keep their cars cleaner.
For $600, even if it's only a '92, I bet your Taurus has a TON of miles on it. I would suspect that if you continue on your current track doing all this great maintenance, so long as the engine and transmission don't (unpreventably due to age) blow up on you, you will probably still get quite a few more miles out of this car. And you'll have spent a lot less money than most people with newer cars. Good luck!
Since you asked... I have driven 4 cars in my short driving lifetime:
1. Ford Escort 5 spd. (1985): $500
2. Ford Thunderbird (1987) auto.: $3400
3. Ford Escort LX (1998) 5 spd.: $3600
4. Ford Taurus SES (2002) auto.: $8000
You might notice that each of these vehicles is a Ford. I will add, to be fair, that I sold each of these cars before they hit 100,000 miles.
Still, not once has one of these cars ever left me stranded on the side of the road or failed to start, even at -20 degrees in the winter. The only shop work I've ever had to pay someone else to do was thanks to rust damage from the abundance of salt they dump on the icy roads of Vermont, and, this weekend, the Taurus will be going into a dealer to have its first transmission service. I'll be doing my own oil and coolant changes.
YES, Ford vehicles have all had their little quirks. Some have had real, legitimate, recurring problems. The thing to recognize is that this has been the case for virtually *every* manufacturer. Bit, usually, the newer the car, the fewer recurring problems it will have. That's why I would shy away from a '92 in favor of, say, a '98-'00, even for the extra money--it's well-known that the '91 Taurus/Sable had major transmission issues, and many people just aren't going to prevent those kinds of problems, even by doing all the recommended maintenance.
The general truth is, though--and most of us already know this--if you take good care of your car, you stand a very good chance that it will take good care of you.
Good luck!
Psychopete
02-17-2005, 09:17 AM
Some of us don't have any other choice but to buy the $600 car :). I've had some bad problems with my Taurus, but like you said, most of it is not preventable, and some of it is. Like the transmission in my 93'. It had maintence done to it, but probably not exactly every 30k. It lasted 202,000 miles before it became undriveable. The transmission is certainly shot, can only go about 35mph before the tranny starts doing unusual things, but it drove on a bad tranny for at least 4 months. I would say that's pretty good, usually cars with bad transmission tend to die in a hurry. The suspension is toast, but that's normal. Engine runs great, except for the 3.8L blown head gasket problem. That's always a fun fix. The sad part is Ford didn't do much for the people that bought cars with the 3.8L. All blow head gaskets 50-75k no matter what. Really, it wouldn't be a bad car if they had built the tranny better and spent a little more time on designing a reliable engine. It can be done, and it has been. Like the inline 6 200, I could swear they quit making them, just because nothing EVER goes wrong with them. The insurance on these cars is freggin cheap. Ford definately has there better lines. I really like my modded out 1988 Ranger with the 2.9L V6. It's the best vehical I've ever owned, but I did put a lot of money into the motor.
sfontain
02-17-2005, 10:14 AM
Well, my point wasn't that most isn't preventable and some is. What I was saying is most *is* preventable and *some* isn't. The point you make is a good one, though: You got probably at least 170K out of one transmission in a '93 Taurus. And you admit you didn't even do all the recommended maintenance. You probably didn't beat the crap out of it all the time either. All I'm saying is you will see a majority of cases where well maintained cars last longer, and poorly maintained cars suffer an early demise. There is a solid chance that if you had never changed your transmission fluid, your Taurus would have crapped out by 100k. But that's what a lot of people do--they buy a car, don't do any work on it, and then complain when it breaks.
There is certainly a bit of conspiracy theory about manufacturers making slightly unreliable components simply to force consumers to bring the brooken cars to the dealer and pay their unrealistic labor/parts charges. For example, my '02 Taurus has the Vulcan and probably the AX4S. Given the choice, I would have paid extra to have the Vulcan with the AX4N. Unfortunately, Ford doesn't offer that option as a concrete choice (even though there are a lucky few with that setup), but I would expect that car generally to last a hell of a long time. Instead, if the tranny dies a premature death because Ford intentionally put in a worse transmission, Ford will make a whole bunch more money on my car, and there's not much I can do about it.
Another thing that stems from this is that I hear a lot of people talk about how Hondas and Toyotas are far superior to any domestic car. Well, there are plenty of people here with 200k+ miles on their Taurus with original engine and transmission, and the car is still running strong. Perhaps there are more Hondas running over 200k than there are Fords; I don't have the numbers, so I can't say for sure. But anyone who says all American cars are destined for the junkyard by 150k is just wrong. And, at least for the moment and in my current financial situation (everyone's is different), I will take a proven-reliable newer Taurus over any Accord or Camry for the huge dropoff in purchase price, repair costs, and insurance premiums.
There is certainly a bit of conspiracy theory about manufacturers making slightly unreliable components simply to force consumers to bring the brooken cars to the dealer and pay their unrealistic labor/parts charges. For example, my '02 Taurus has the Vulcan and probably the AX4S. Given the choice, I would have paid extra to have the Vulcan with the AX4N. Unfortunately, Ford doesn't offer that option as a concrete choice (even though there are a lucky few with that setup), but I would expect that car generally to last a hell of a long time. Instead, if the tranny dies a premature death because Ford intentionally put in a worse transmission, Ford will make a whole bunch more money on my car, and there's not much I can do about it.
Another thing that stems from this is that I hear a lot of people talk about how Hondas and Toyotas are far superior to any domestic car. Well, there are plenty of people here with 200k+ miles on their Taurus with original engine and transmission, and the car is still running strong. Perhaps there are more Hondas running over 200k than there are Fords; I don't have the numbers, so I can't say for sure. But anyone who says all American cars are destined for the junkyard by 150k is just wrong. And, at least for the moment and in my current financial situation (everyone's is different), I will take a proven-reliable newer Taurus over any Accord or Camry for the huge dropoff in purchase price, repair costs, and insurance premiums.
dita0401
02-17-2005, 01:07 PM
tauruses are crap but you cant really beat the price. my last one was a 91 l wagon w/ 215k and its still running now. my 92 lx w/160k runs great. ford engineers are geniuses. how can anybody figure out how to make the shittiest power steering in the world and make it somehow functionable. both tauruses squeak and grind like crazy but they drive. am i the only one who loves the stock rear time delayed lowering system. seems like everybody has it.
sfontain
02-17-2005, 02:08 PM
tauruses are crap but you cant really beat the price. my last one was a 91 l wagon w/ 215k and its still running now. my 92 lx w/160k runs great. ford engineers are geniuses. how can anybody figure out how to make the shittiest power steering in the world and make it somehow functionable. both tauruses squeak and grind like crazy but they drive. am i the only one who loves the stock rear time delayed lowering system. seems like everybody has it.
You had a 91 Taurus with 215,000 miles on it. And now you are driving a 13-year-old car with 160,000 miles and it "runs great." And you are complaining that Taurus is crap. Amazing.
If you can make a 14-year-old car that old go 215,000 miles--*especially* as inexpensive as it was--and it still "runs great," it's not crap. It sounds to me like you would be happier with a busted engine so long as the car doesn't have any rattles or squeaks.
Good for you. Best of luck.
You had a 91 Taurus with 215,000 miles on it. And now you are driving a 13-year-old car with 160,000 miles and it "runs great." And you are complaining that Taurus is crap. Amazing.
If you can make a 14-year-old car that old go 215,000 miles--*especially* as inexpensive as it was--and it still "runs great," it's not crap. It sounds to me like you would be happier with a busted engine so long as the car doesn't have any rattles or squeaks.
Good for you. Best of luck.
dita0401
02-17-2005, 02:29 PM
You had a 91 Taurus with 215,000 miles on it. And now you are driving a 13-year-old car with 160,000 miles and it "runs great." And you are complaining that Taurus is crap. Amazing.
If you can make a 14-year-old car that old go 215,000 miles--*especially* as inexpensive as it was--and it still "runs great," it's not crap. It sounds to me like you would be happier with a busted engine so long as the car doesn't have any rattles or squeaks.
Good for you. Best of luck.
i got lucky with the 91. i bought it cheap with a lot of recent work in it including a brand new tranny. it has so many things that are barely working so i sold it before it went. ford can make a motor run forever but thats all they can do. the 92 breaks down monthly from a wariety of quality ford failures. i dont drive it anymore. i switched over to my 89 deville. taurus is crap ... until the repairs are done and then they're ok for a month or 2 then taurus is crap again. just crap. i got the second onebecause it was a loaded lx, cheap, bigger than a rice burner and close by not and i repeat not because tauruses are worth it. amazing my ass
If you can make a 14-year-old car that old go 215,000 miles--*especially* as inexpensive as it was--and it still "runs great," it's not crap. It sounds to me like you would be happier with a busted engine so long as the car doesn't have any rattles or squeaks.
Good for you. Best of luck.
i got lucky with the 91. i bought it cheap with a lot of recent work in it including a brand new tranny. it has so many things that are barely working so i sold it before it went. ford can make a motor run forever but thats all they can do. the 92 breaks down monthly from a wariety of quality ford failures. i dont drive it anymore. i switched over to my 89 deville. taurus is crap ... until the repairs are done and then they're ok for a month or 2 then taurus is crap again. just crap. i got the second onebecause it was a loaded lx, cheap, bigger than a rice burner and close by not and i repeat not because tauruses are worth it. amazing my ass
Psychopete
02-17-2005, 03:19 PM
i got lucky with the 91. i bought it cheap with a lot of recent work in it including a brand new tranny. it has so many things that are barely working so i sold it before it went. ford can make a motor run forever but thats all they can do. the 92 breaks down monthly from a wariety of quality ford failures. i dont drive it anymore. i switched over to my 89 deville. taurus is crap ... until the repairs are done and then they're ok for a month or 2 then taurus is crap again. just crap. i got the second onebecause it was a loaded lx, cheap, bigger than a rice burner and close by not and i repeat not because tauruses are worth it. amazing my ass
I am sort of agreeing with this statement. Even those who do get the transmission fixed, it just goes right back out, even if properly maintained. Ok ok, so lets get off the subject of the Taurus. Lets consider an A4LD from a Ranger much like mine. Junk. Althought it's not a Ford product, but it still comes in the older Rangers. The newer electronic A4LDs are just as bad from what I hear. And it's true *most* of the motors Ford produces are good (I would like to exclude the 3.8L and most of the first SOHC motors :) ). I'd say on a scale from 1 to 10, the earlier 90's Tauruses might have the worst transmission EVER put into a Ford. Honestly, any vehical on the market during that era. Peroid. It gets a 10 (being worst). I like Ford a lot, especially the internal cam motors, just because they put out way more torque and are more reliable. I really like the inline 6 200, just because they last forever, as well as the C4 that's attached to it. You can make them fast too. Ford has it's good, Ford has it's bad, and it has it's really bad. Really I think the bottom here line is 'You get what you pay for.' If I were any one considering a Taurus, I would direct them to at least a 94 and older T-Bird with a 5.0L and AOD transmission. Cheap and very reliable. They cost a little more, but I imagine the repairs for the Taurus will far exceed the cost of a different, a little more expensive car.
Oh, and I drive cars pretty hard. I am always usually going at least 30 over the speed limit. I take care of them though. I am hypnotized by the sound of the performance exhaust, it just makes me hit the gas. Maybe if a cop can catch me someday, the ticket will knock me out of hypnosis.... :)
Pete
I am sort of agreeing with this statement. Even those who do get the transmission fixed, it just goes right back out, even if properly maintained. Ok ok, so lets get off the subject of the Taurus. Lets consider an A4LD from a Ranger much like mine. Junk. Althought it's not a Ford product, but it still comes in the older Rangers. The newer electronic A4LDs are just as bad from what I hear. And it's true *most* of the motors Ford produces are good (I would like to exclude the 3.8L and most of the first SOHC motors :) ). I'd say on a scale from 1 to 10, the earlier 90's Tauruses might have the worst transmission EVER put into a Ford. Honestly, any vehical on the market during that era. Peroid. It gets a 10 (being worst). I like Ford a lot, especially the internal cam motors, just because they put out way more torque and are more reliable. I really like the inline 6 200, just because they last forever, as well as the C4 that's attached to it. You can make them fast too. Ford has it's good, Ford has it's bad, and it has it's really bad. Really I think the bottom here line is 'You get what you pay for.' If I were any one considering a Taurus, I would direct them to at least a 94 and older T-Bird with a 5.0L and AOD transmission. Cheap and very reliable. They cost a little more, but I imagine the repairs for the Taurus will far exceed the cost of a different, a little more expensive car.
Oh, and I drive cars pretty hard. I am always usually going at least 30 over the speed limit. I take care of them though. I am hypnotized by the sound of the performance exhaust, it just makes me hit the gas. Maybe if a cop can catch me someday, the ticket will knock me out of hypnosis.... :)
Pete
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026