Is this a deal ?? 2003 Ford Taurus ??

[Pacfanweb]

Vehicle Value



2003 Ford Taurus
Base Original MSRP: $21,020
Series: SES
Body Style: 4D Sedan
Mileage: 8,063
Equipment Adjustment: $0
Back

Condition Trade-In Value Retail Value
Extra Clean N/A $15,250
Clean $12,010 $14,575
Average $11,395 $13,475
Rough $9,020 $11,725

This is Black Book value, which, along with auction prices, is what dealers use to price trades. Dealers nearly always used rough trade in value, maybe average trade in if the car is practically new. These cars are bringing around 9-10k at the sales right now, but you're not a wholesaler....so I'd start by offering a bit over 10k and go from there.

 

[StageLeft]

I only know of one personally. It's a friend's late 90's taurus and he's owned it since it was born. It's now at about 100k miles, and he's already gone through a transmission (at either 40k miles or 40k kilometers), and he's on his second engine (he was driving and the radiator cracked, I believe, and before he could notice that fact the engine had overheated and left him stranded on the way to the airport <- honest!). He kept insisting the thing was reliable to me, but he sings a different tune now after those two major repairs and whatever other ones he's had. He babies the car as well.

I guess others in this thread have had better reliability.

Personally I wouldn't even so much as honor the engine of that car with a sledge hammer, because if you need a v6 to produce 155 horsepower you've got issues. That's just pathetic any way you look at it, and gas mileage will suffer because of it. Give me an accord/camry's 4 cylinder over this engine any day.

Obviously a camry/accord is a better bet, if you're buying new, because they hold value so well. But, for the same reason they are not a very good buy if they have only a couple years on them because you'll end up paying a lot for a fairly used car.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Personally I wouldn't even so much as honor the engine of that car with a sledge hammer, because if you need a v6 to produce 155 horsepower you've got issues. That's just pathetic any way you look at it, and gas mileage will suffer because of it. Give me an accord/camry's 4 cylinder over this engine any day.

Pathetic? I'll take a bigger engine that's hardly breaking a sweat to produce xxx horsepower over a little one that's straining it's ass off to do the same thing any day.
It's irrelevant, totally, to look at what engine size a manufacturer uses to get a certain power level. So an Accord or Camry uses a 4 cylinder.....and?? The Accord 4 cylinder isn't much smaller than the 3.0 V-6, and it uses dohc 16 valve design. Big deal, so Ford chose not to use a 4 valve design for their standard engine. They have over 200 hp with their 24 valve 3.0, which isn't bad, but if they wanted to could be higher.

You can have a Camry...I'll put a standard Ford V-6's reliability up against that raggedy Toyota V-6 any day. Your friend lost the engine in his Taurus because he is STUPID, not through any fault of the engine. Continuing to drive after you lose coolant will lead to bad things, and don't tell me it ruined the engine before he could stop, because that's impossible.
It ruined the engine before he bothered to notice that something was wrong.
Now I'll give you the edge on a Honda's reliability over a Ford, but not as much of an edge as everyone thinks there is.
They have plenty of problems, too.
All cars do.

 

[NFS4]

Taurus??? Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeet...I'd take even a crappy Mitsubishi over a Taurus.

You'd be better off getting a USED 2000-2001 Accord or Camry 4-banger and you'll thank us later. Better quality, better fuel economy, better ride, better build quality, etc.

The Taurus is a JOKE and is nothing more than rental car fodder these days. That's why you can get them for dirt cheap.

As for the comment about Camrys/Accords being more expensive. They don't break down so I don't see where you're getting that from. **NFS4 pats his '95 Camry LE with 130,000 miles on it**

I'd take my car over a Taurus any day. I should know, I drove a '96 Taurus wagon almost every day for 5 years at work. Damn thing was a POS. Trim piece falling off. The doors felt like crap. Windshield wiper motor, power windows, tranny and A/C failed all before 60,000 miles.

It's irrelevant, totally, to look at what engine size a manufacturer uses to get a certain power level. So an Accord or Camry uses a 4 cylinder.....and?? The Accord 4 cylinder isn't much smaller than the 3.0 V-6, and it uses dohc 16 valve design. Big deal, so Ford chose not to use a 4 valve design for their standard engine. They have over 200 hp with their 24 valve 3.0, which isn't bad, but if they wanted to could be higher.

'03 Accord base 4-cylinder (160HP) MPG: 26/34
'03 Taurus base 6-cylinder (155HP) MPG: 20/28

THAT's why it is a big deal. NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Taurus??? Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeet...I'd take even a crappy Mitsubishi over a Taurus.

You'd be better off getting a USED 2000-2001 Accord or Camry 4-banger and you'll thank us later. Better quality, better fuel economy, better ride, better build quality, etc.

The Taurus is a JOKE and is nothing more than rental car fodder these days. That's why you can get them for dirt cheap.

As for the comment about Camrys/Accords being more expensive. They don't break down so I don't see where you're getting that from. **NFS4 pats his '95 Camry LE with 130,000 miles on it**

I'd take my car over a Taurus any day. I should know, I drove a '96 Taurus wagon almost every day for 5 years at work. Damn thing was a POS. Trim piece falling off. The doors felt like crap. Windshield wiper motor, power windows, tranny and A/C failed all before 60,000 miles.

It's irrelevant, totally, to look at what engine size a manufacturer uses to get a certain power level. So an Accord or Camry uses a 4 cylinder.....and?? The Accord 4 cylinder isn't much smaller than the 3.0 V-6, and it uses dohc 16 valve design. Big deal, so Ford chose not to use a 4 valve design for their standard engine. They have over 200 hp with their 24 valve 3.0, which isn't bad, but if they wanted to could be higher.

'03 Accord base 4-cylinder (160HP) MPG: 26/34
'03 Taurus base 6-cylinder (155HP) MPG: 20/28

THAT's why it is a big deal. NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You aren't comparing apples to apples.
Accord
MSRP
$15,800-27,900

Taurus
MSRP
$19,660-23,455 But you have HUGE rebates and incentives on the Taurus, not much of anything on the Accord. So essentially, the Accord is a more expensive vehicle, and costs more to maintain also.....it SHOULD be a better car.
Again, I'm not arguing that the Taurus is better than an Accord, but I'll even put a 3.0's reliability up against a 4 cyl Accord's. The 3.0 is a great engine.
Plus, you totally ignored the comparison to the Camry, which was one of the ones originally mentioned......that is also a far
worse car than the Accord.
No doubt the rice cars overall are better, but the difference isn't as great as it once was.

 

[RU482]

I've got a 99 Camry on it's second transmission, so I'd have to agree that no car is indestructible.
The fvcking oil leak from hell is back on my Camry too.

 

[NFS4]

Plus, you totally ignored the comparison to the Camry, which was one of the ones originally mentioned......that is also a far
worse car than the Accord.

How do you figure that:

Camry
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2004/toyota/camry/100330043/ratings_jdpower.html?tid=edmunds.n.prices.vdpheaderratingslinks..0.Toyota*

Accord
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2003/honda/accord/100144779/ratings_jdpower.html?tid=edmunds.n.ratings.vdpheaderratingslinks..0.Honda*

The Camry and Accord are virtual equals and are pretty much interchangeable. Just depends on if you like Honda or Toyota. They even sell at about the same rate:

Sales through September '03

Camry -- 320,687
Accord -- 314,598

 

[RMSistight]

Don't buy Ford. I repeat, DO NOT BUY FORD. You should pay the extra money for a Honda or Toyota. I've heard so many problems with Fords and how they break down. Sure, American car companies after rebate incentives, but I would rather pay extra money to obtain a reliable Japanese import. Actually, they aren't even imports anymore. Most of the cars in Honda and Toyota are manufacturered here in the states. Only high end cars are manufacturered in Japan. (I.E. Acura NSX, Lexus SC430, etc)

Don't be lured by Ford's rebate incentives. I also would like to mention as previously stated above, the resale value on these things are crap. Whatever you do, DO NOT BUY A FORD. Get a Camry or Accord. You might want to get a test drive for all three cars and then come back and tell us what you think. I have to give it up for Ford F-150 trucks though. But we'll see how it stands up with Nissan's Titan. I also heard that Honda may create a truck.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Lol a 155hp V6! Same as my 2.4L 4. The 200hp version of the V6 gets the same gas mileage as the 155 .

the vulcan has a lot of torque. after years of driving a '91 with the vulcan in it i got into a 2002 with the duratec and it didn't feel any quicker. and my vulcan was 140/160. the extra 200 lbs of car couldn't have made that much difference.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: SladeZero

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Lol a 155hp V6! Same as my 2.4L 4. The 200hp version of the V6 gets the same gas mileage as the 155 .

Hey there,

Thanks for the input. Yea, if I had alot of money then I would get what I want. Unfortunately,
with the wife, and kids I don't have alot of money to go around. It doesn't have to be FAST, just have
a little get up and go to it. Something reliable for me. That's all I need.

Slade

That doesn't mean you have to get a crappy car. There are lots of decent cars... Like a Maxima.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

You can get a 99 Maxima loaded with everything for about $10k USD (or even less). However that thing drinks fuel (in the city). Its pretty good on hte highway though.

Have you looked at getting a Malibu? They are quite cheap to own and quite comfortable. And I think it gets the best mileage as well.

 

[lowfatbaconboy]

Originally posted by: LordMorpheus
I have a 1991 Sable (taurus with some chrome) and it is still running like a clock. Some of the mid-late 90's models are crap because of the big oval dash that makes it impossible to replace the tapedeck/cd player (When I went to get a CD player for my car, the guy almost had a heart attack when he learned that I had a Sable. Untill I told him it was a 1991) but, AFAIK, they stopped making the ugly interiors.

I'd say go for it.

damn my 90 mercury sable fell apart like none other about 2-3 years ago....and it was well taken care of
ignition had problems
right door had problems (ie wouldn't stay closednif i took a left turn to fast)
sun roof, atenna stopped working
amp didn't work unless it was above 85 degrees
the eletrical sys was shot to hell (windshield wipers on turn on right blinker they go off ......if turn on the left blinker they blink twice as fast)

basically IMO fords and american cars are complete crap and I would never drive one again (the only thing america does well at is trucks)

 

[PCMarine]

I bought a 2000 ford taurus se with 65,000 miles for $4,700 from my dad's company as it was a company car. It is a lot of car for the price. Power everything, roomy interior, cruise control, premium stereo w/ 6 disc changer (though I later put in a nice pioneer deck), alloy rims, etc. I've been driving it for 9 months or so and it runs great; my dad never had any problem with it when it was his car.

My taurus has the FFV engine which is slightly more powerful than the standard vulcan, it's rated at 157 hp / 190 ft/lbs of torque, and it's more than enough for every day driving. Sure I wish I had the 200 hp duratec, but for how cheap I bought it for, I can't really complain.

 

[Black88GTA]

Taurus = the definition of boring, bland, plastic garbage. Those cars are so "middle of the road" it hurts. You could get something a lot nicer that's a couple years older. Look at 99-02 Bonneville SSEis. 240HP in the supercharged models. I don't know where you're located, but here's one in MA for under 12K. Plus, leather seats so when the kids spill crap on them, it's lots easier to clean off. I'd test drive a comparable model of anything I was looking at though.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Black88GTA
Taurus = the definition of boring, bland, plastic garbage. Those cars are so "middle of the road" it hurts.

what's funny is that toyota went and copied the taurus for the 1992 camry

 

[LordMorpheus]

Why the Taurus hating, people?

I have a Sable, a Taurus with some chrome and added lights, and its 13 years old, and has never had a major problem! I mean, I had to have the fuel line replaced, but it still worked with the clogged line. I don't know exactly which V6 i have, but thats ok because I'm not a dumbass street racer.

The taurus/sables are SOLID! Personally, I really like the new Taurus/Sable's style, also. Its a great family vehicle, will get you too freeway speed with no problems, will give you a really smooth ride on the freeway (a buddy of mine has a 98 accord, and on the freeway that thing vibrates, and you really feel all the bumps. My Sable is smooooth.)

I would buy it. I love my Sable. And, when it finally comes time to retire it, will probably get a slightly newer Grand Marquis. Or maybe a Crwon Vic with the police package.

 

[SladeZero]

Hey there,

I agree that FORD has had it's troubles. The original prob with the
Taurus was the use of different transmissions namely the:

1) AOXD - older model, usually plaqued with probs.
2) AX4S - older one but not as old at AOXD.
3) AX4N - newer model and best from what I seen out of the 4.
4) 4F50N - usually used in later model wagons.

The Vulcan is a durable engine, that's why they have been using it since 1984.
I did not mean to start a pride was here, IMPORTS vs. DOMESTICS.
Yes, Hondas get more resale value and have been know overall to be reliable.
I guess my question is: Those people that had probs what did they do in advance to
check up on it. If they say,"I took it to my mechanic shop." Then that is a wrong answer.
They themselves should be doing the checking. It does not take a genius person to check the
engine oil for metal scrappings and tell if something is damaged.

Not to mention that but you can even have your oil tested for about $10-$20. The analysis
will even give you a chart that according to the particles in your oil, and will tell you what's
wrong with your engine.
BTW- Like I said before I will be keeping this car for 10 yrs or more so is the resell value that much
of an importance to me ??
Hondas won't be worth alot in 10 yrs. Even if the book says one thing. How many of us can actually
get that price ?

But, again all this information has been very helpful. Thanks

Slade

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Black88GTA
Taurus = the definition of boring, bland, plastic garbage. Those cars are so "middle of the road" it hurts.

what's funny is that toyota went and copied the taurus for the 1992 camry

You got it the other way around.

The Taurus development team benchmarked the 1992 Camry for the 96 Taurus program. They originally benhcmarked the Accord, but when Toyota released the 92 Camry, they [Taurus dev team] were in awe that Toyota could produce such a high quality car at such a low (relatively) price.

Read the book "CAR: The Drama of an American Workplace", its a book about the entire development of 1996 Taurus. Very good read.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Taurus is a good reliable car. My brother still has my Mom's 1988 Sable Wagon (she bought it new) and has well over 200k miles on the original engine and tranny (he and his wife can't really afford a new car right now-his wife has health issues and it is costing them a lot of money).

I'm amazed at the depreciation on those cars. I've seen Mercury Grand Marquis less than a year old with 14k miles and loaded for $13-14k. Amazing considering they retail for over $25k new.

 

[waggy]

hmm i have owned many fords. from a escort to a 2002 Taurus.

i have also owned 3 Honda's (2accors and a prelude) and one Toyota.

out of all the cars i have owned the Toyota was by far the worst.

the Taurus is a nice car. Its rather roomy and comfortable to drive. granted it has a wimpy engine in it. But i am very happy with it.

 

[tcsenter]

'03 Accord base 4-cylinder (160HP) MPG: 26/34
'03 Taurus base 6-cylinder (155HP) MPG: 20/28

Any reasonably informed person would understand that HP is only half the story. A difference of 5HP is virtually meaningless in these mid-sized cars, but a difference of 24 ft-lbs of torque is noticable without requiring a dynometer.

The Vulcan V6 is rated 155 HP @ 4900RPM and 185 ft-lbs peak TQ @ 3900 rpm.

The base Accord 2.4 liter 4-cylinder is rated 160 HP @ 5500RPM and 161 ft-lbs peak TQ @ 4500 rpm.

The Vulcan is pulling harder @ 3900RPM than the Honda is capable of at any RPM. At their respective peak TQ ratings, both cars are making virtually the same power (137HP v. 138HP). Meaning, as power deficient as the Taurus is, saddling the Accord with an automatic would render it gutless by comparison (and hurt its fuel economy). The only thing redeeming the Accord is a manual transmission.

The Taurus also makes its peak TQ in a more driveable RPM range (as American cars traditionally do). These aren't performance cars, they're daily drivers. Its nice to be able to carry an adult passenger or three without having to run the engine as though you're competing in an SCCA event.

The fuel economy estimates above are based on the Accord being configured with a manual transmission while the Taurus is configured with an automatic OD transmission. Another bit of information any reasonably informed individual would not have neglected to disclose in a comparison of fuel economy.

The curb weight of the 2003 Taurus is 3316 lbs, while the Accord is 263lb lighter at 3053lbs. While 263lbs would not normally be a difference worth mentioning provided both cars were configured identically, being 263lbs heavier contributes to Taurus' disadvantage in fuel economy estimates because it uses an automatic transmission.

 

[SladeZero]

Hey there,

WOW, not only do I get really good info, but I get a physics lesson too.....COOL..... ...J/K
This is very true. My dads 82' F100 Ford truck was an inline 6. Slow to accellerate, but a tough
work horse.

Slade

 

[SladeZero]

Hey there,

WOW, not only do I get really good info, but I get a physics lesson too.....COOL..... ...J/K
This is very true. My dads 82' F100 Ford truck was an inline 6. Slow to accellerate, but a tough
work horse.

Slade

 

[nan0bug]

Originally posted by: SladeZero
Hey there,

I have to ask some of you this Q for my peace of mind. For those of you that own or had experience
with Ford Taurus would this be a good deal ??
Consists of:

USED Ford Taurus SES
2003
8,063 miles
155 HP, not a big deal
OPTIONS:
1) cruise control
2) cd player
3) 40/60 fold down seats
4) Dual front air bags
5) ABS
6) Electric everything IE: keyless entry, powerlocks/windows
*cloth seats-I prefer this.

The guy is selling it for $12,750 but said he is negotiable and will go down since his boss just needs to make room
for new vehicles. I think I could get him down to 12,000 or even 11,500.

This is a link with further information. Just let me know if this is a yay or nay deal.
Thanks again as always for any information given.

2003 Ford Taurus

Slade

I drive a 96 Taurus, and I love it. Comfortable, reliable, and powerful enough for anything but street racing. They're plenty roomy and the 2003s look really sharp. I think its a good deal.

Edit: BTW My car is at 121k miles, I DELIVER PIZZAS IN IT (for the past 11k) and i've never had any problems with it at all. It's been in my family since about 40k miles with no issues whatsoever, and I drive like an a$$hole, so nyah to all the people saying it will fall apart on you.

 

[SladeZero]

Sorry everone....must have hit the button twice.....disregard.......

Slade