1993 Ford Taurus Reviews - Page 12 of 23

1993 Ford Taurus LX 3.8 V6 from North America

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership1993
Most recent year of ownership1998
Engine and transmission 3.8 V6 Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.0 / 10
Distance when acquired17000 miles
Most recent distance126000 miles
Previous carHonda Civic

Summary:

The '93 Taurus was a good concept, poorly executed in design and manufacturing details

Faults:

The car ran fine and was a pleasure to own for the first two years or so. It was good-looking and comfortable.

Then, 2000 km past the 60,000 warranty limit the air conditioning failed, and I split the repair with the dealer, (who told me I was silly not to have bought the extended warranty).

The following summer, at approximately 90,000 km the A/C failed again, and I opted not to get it repaired again at about $1000 CDN.

To go with the failed air conditioning, the power windows all quit. Quite a hot ride.

The transmission failed at 120,000km, a $3000 CDN repair.

On a positive note, I did not experience the head gasket failures many others did, and the engine was quite good.

I did get soaked for having to replace motor mounts much too early.

General Comments:

The car was built for people who lease and walk away at 60,000 km. It began to self-destruct just after. I have NEVER had a transmission fail on me before. I maintain my cars right by the book.

The air conditioning system and the transmission were obviously design and/or manufacturing disasters and Ford should have owned up to this issue.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 31st May, 2004

1993 Ford Taurus LX 3.0 from North America

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 3.0 Automatic
Performance marks 0 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
1.0 / 10
Distance when acquired121000 miles
Most recent distance129000 miles

Summary:

Another proof of why Ford's quality has always been third rate

Faults:

Head gasket blew at 122,000 miles.

Electrical system caught on fire at 126,000 miles.

Transmission blew at 122,000 miles.

Rebuilt transmission blew at 129,000 miles.

General Comments:

This car looks great and somewhat comfortable to ride in.

However the cabin wind noise is unbearable, the rear-hatch-window leaks and the drivers seat is not positioned directly behind the steering wheel.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 23rd May, 2004

1993 Ford Taurus from North America

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 1 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.8 / 10
Distance when acquired90000 miles
Most recent distance97000 miles
Previous carOldsmobile Cutlass

Summary:

An absolute nightmare

Faults:

The second day I had the Taurus, it threw a piston rod and the entire engine had to be replaced. After the new engine was put in the air conditioning motor stopped working. A few hundred miles later the starter had to be replaced, and then just another few hundred miles later the transmission blew. The day after getting the transmission fixed the head gasket blew in the "new" engine.

General Comments:

I pride myself in the way I treat my cars, I've owned a '90 Olds Cutlass and a '98 Toyota Tacoma, both of which never gave me one single problem. The Taurus on the other hand was the bane of all automobiles I have ever owned.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 5th January, 2004

1993 Ford Taurus GX 3.0 from North America

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership1997
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 3.0 Automatic
Performance marks 4 / 10
Reliability marks 3 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.6 / 10
Distance when acquired64000 miles
Most recent distance120000 miles
Previous carFord Aerostar

Summary:

A transmission loser

Faults:

The transmission went out at 100,000 miles.

General Comments:

This Taurus as well as my daughters Taurus, and Crown Victoria, keep losing transmissions. We currently own our last Fords, as our whole family is switching brands of car manufacturers!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 28th July, 2003

11th Nov 2003, 23:32

At 100,000 and that's it! What are you complaining about, that is awesome for these cars!

1993 Ford Taurus GL 3.0 V6 from North America

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 3.0 V6 Automatic
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 1 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
1.2 / 10
Distance when acquired74000 miles
Most recent distance111000 miles
Previous carHonda Accord

Summary:

A piece of junk that isn't worth it

Faults:

Brakes: I have had to replace the rotors twice as they have been ruined with ease. I have replaced the front brake pads 3 times, and the rear drum brakes once (a very expensive repair).

Lights: The guage cluster died on me at 94,000 miles.

Engine: The engine doesn't run well between 30-35 miles per hour. It stutters as the transmission tries to shift. I also have to by supreme gasoline for the car (92 octane) otherwise the engine pings like it is about to die.

Transmission: This transmission is so weak it is unbelievable. It only works well on flat roads; if you go uphill it is a good idea not to stop because you might not be able to start again.

General Comments:

Positives: I have been in 3 accidents with this car (none my fault), and it has survived well (only minor dings). She also has good low end acceleration.

The car has gotten me where I want to go, but I would never buy another Taurus again unless it was a SHO. This car is not worth it. I have probably spent $7,000 on repairing this car, and I continue to regret it.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 8th July, 2003

11th Jul 2003, 23:04

1998 Taurus: I wouldn't buy another Taurus. AS SIMPLE AS THAT!! Walter.

Average review marks: 6.3 / 10, based on 79 reviews