1995 Ford Taurus Reviews - Page 6 of 17

1995 Ford Taurus GL 3.0 V6 from North America

Model year1995
Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 3.0 V6 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 3 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.3 / 10
Distance when acquired165000 miles
Most recent distance198000 miles

Summary:

I will never buy another Taurus,

Faults:

Since the day that I bought the car, it has shifted hard when going from first to second gear. About a year after I had the car, it started not shifting at all out of first gear. I stored it for 2 months, and when I got it out and drove, it shifted the same as when I first got it. As of right now, it shifts on and off every week.

The power train module relay went out 3 months ago and caused a lot of problems.

I have only changed one headlight the whole time that I have had the car.

I had to put in new brake switch because my brake lights went out, and because of that my car would get stuck in gear.

I have had to replace the brakes in the front twice, and have had a lot of problems with the brake cylinders and lines going out on me.

I had the same kind of car, just a 1992, and the transmission totally went out on me while I was driving down an expressway. That one only had 130,000 miles on it.

General Comments:

As far as having to put a lot of money into this vehicle, that wasn't a problem. Unless I decide to fix the transmission, I have only put about $250 into this car since the day I got it. That's with a brand new radiator. The transmission is the only thing that I would say has caused a major problem.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 23rd February, 2005

1995 Ford Taurus GL 3.8 liter V6 from North America

Model year1995
Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 3.8 liter V6 Automatic
Performance marks 2 / 10
Reliability marks 2 / 10
Comfort marks 3 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.0 / 10
Distance when acquired48000 miles
Most recent distance152000 miles
Previous carFord Escort

Summary:

The car is overall OK.

Faults:

The problems I have had with this Taurus were that with about 98,000 miles the dashboard started to shake it would shake very lightly at about 55 at 70 or more it would shake so bad I thought it might fall apart. Sometimes it doesn't shake at all.

Also the rear taillights and turn signals need replacement every 5 or 6 thousand miles they burn out fast.

The transmission Fluid started leaking when it hit 148,000 miles it leaks about a quart a month.

General Comments:

I own a 96 Bonneville and it has a hundred more horsepower that's why I bought it, but I had test driven a 205 horse Bonny and I could tell it had a lot more acceleration power and it takes off a lot faster.

I did notice that this car has a seriouos towing ability and is strong. That is what the 3.8 liter engine was built for towing.

This car does have a good amount of horses under the hood and I do like the 4 disk brakes.

At stop lights if a little sporty car pulls up I know with the 140 horse engine it can beat that car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 7th February, 2005

1995 Ford Taurus GL 3.0L V6 from North America

Model year1995
Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 3.0L V6 Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.6 / 10
Distance when acquired84000 miles
Most recent distance87500 miles
Previous carDodge Daytona

Summary:

Despite all of the major problems, this car performs outstanding as a 2nd vehicle for our family

Faults:

Purchased the vehicle from a family member, at that time it had 84,000 miles.

Front coil springs cracked and broke. Very costly fix, including towing.

Radiator had a hole in it.

Steering linkages had to be replaced when front coil springs were done.

Water pump failed 500 miles later.

Rear Coil springs failed at 85,000 miles.

Tire wear pattern caused terrible vibrations at 65 mph, replaced tires at 87,500 miles.

General Comments:

Most of the problems listed above were either present when the car was purchased or as a direct result of some of the problems (i.e. front coil springs broke, not long after the rears broke).

Very comfortable seating, even with a child seat for our 2 year old daughter in the rear, plenty of room!!

Lacks some GIDDY up when tooling around town.

Has never had a tune-up or trans service that I know of.

Gets killer gas mileage, highway around 30 miles per gallon, 25 in the city. OUTSTANDING!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 18th November, 2004

19th Nov 2004, 17:43

Your car should last a lot longer with basic maintenance.. Our '92 with the 3.0L went till 170,000 with no major problems, then it was wrekced... and even then it still drove straight and ran perfect despite the major rear body damage. The car held up really well during the accident and despite the abuse it took it continued running. The people we sold it to never fixed it and still drive it to this day. I would recommend this car to anyone (but avoid the 3.8L engine).

Average review marks: 6.5 / 10, based on 61 reviews