1996 Ford Taurus Reviews - Page 5 of 20

1996 Ford Taurus 3.0 from North America

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1996
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2008
Engine and transmission 3.0 Automatic
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.0 / 10
Distance when acquired60854 miles
Most recent distance105479 miles

Summary:

Do not recommend, if you want to drive it into the ground

Faults:

Gas tank replaced around 92K.

Front strut/spring coil replaced, 70k.

Transmission leak, replaced pan, 99k.

Transmission clutch solenoid replaced, 70k.

This is where I stop fixing the car.

Brake line, front to back, 105666.

Transmission oil leak from one of the line, 105666.

Over heats, need to replace the gasket.

General Comments:

Comfortable, engine is great, but too many other problems.

Typical American car, it will not less more than 10 years.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 18th August, 2008

1996 Ford Taurus GL 3.0 Liter from North America

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1996
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2008
Engine and transmission 3.0 Liter Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.5 / 10
Distance when acquired71000 miles
Most recent distance83000 miles

Summary:

The Good, The bad and the Tranny..

Faults:

Got the car with corroded Freeze-out plug. Tranny started to slip when I bought it, also. Recently, only other problems with the car is occasional stalling, exhaust is loud now and A/C needs to be recharged every summer.

General Comments:

I love the car, but the transmission from these models are horrible, so no suprise I need a rebuild. The disappointing performance of the engine and over all design however makes me just want to sell the car and get a cherokee. On a plus side, I've heard good things about these 3.0 V6's, they are supposed to last a very long time (I've heard of people with the same engine that got theirs up to 300,000 miles plus). I purchased this car from family and, I can't lie, I know the car was driven hard at times, but all maintenance was done accordingly. No reason for my car to be doing 20 and revving at 4,000+ RPM's in the first gear ratio.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 15th August, 2008

1996 Ford Taurus GL 3.0 from North America

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 3.0 Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.0 / 10
Distance when acquired63963 miles
Most recent distance75289 miles
Previous carFord Tempo

Summary:

Volcano waiting to erupt

Faults:

Got at it almost 64k, and not sure what had been replaced. However I do know there were a few problems when I bought it that were still there when I wrecked it.

The transmission had a good cutoff at the red line, but it shifted into 3rd gear like jerked pretty rough. Not the worse I have ever felt, but not good.

It had a bad vibration in the pedal at acceleration. I suspect the car may have been hit before I owned it. Something in the front end vibrated terribly between 25, and 50 mph. It was badly out of alignment, and the front tires were pretty worn after only 11k miles.

The ball joints sounded like popcorn in a microwave when I went over bumps. Also this car had rigged up plastic control arms or something in there. Don't know if that was stock or what.

Camshaft position sensor was bad at 73k. The service engine soon light was on, and I had it scanned at auto zone. Never fixed it, and it never gave me a problem. Still ran it for 2k miles before I wrecked the car.

One day I took a turn too fast on a winding road. Don't know what happened, but I lost control pretty good, and I went into a ditch, and couldn't get out. The wheel was hanging off the car, and I messed up the transmission. The end.

General Comments:

I didn't have to put any money into it in the 11k+ miles I had it. Just oil, and trans fluid, cause I think it leaked. It had an oil burning problem, but it may have been a leak somewhere. This car was a volcano waiting to erupt. I'm not saying the Taurus was a bad car, but mine sucked. The radio, and ac control in the same unit sucked too. And the tape player wouldn't stop skipping. I wouldn't buy another one, because this car has a weak front end that falls apart so early. Same could be said for most front wheel drive cars.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 1st April, 2008

2nd Apr 2008, 13:10

Not fixing the front suspension makes you at fault for the wreck. No wonder you didn't call it an accident.

1996 Ford Taurus LX Station Wagon 3.0 DOHC Duratec from North America

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1996
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 3.0 DOHC Duratec Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.5 / 10
Distance when acquired64000 miles
Most recent distance125000 miles
Previous carFord Taunus

Summary:

All in all, I'd buy another Taurus, but keep an eye on it around 100K

Faults:

Water pump needed to be replaced around 100,000.

Fuel pump died at 120000, about $200 to replace if you do it yourself.

Alternator died at 124000. A difficult DIY job because of the placement, but fairly straight-forward.

The power antenna stopped working after about 2 years, thankfully it stopped in the up position.

Engine developed a small oil leak at the back around 90,000. The car takes about 2 quarts between oil changes.

General Comments:

Overall, this has been a fairly dependable vehicle to own. We bought it with 64000 miles and it currently has about 125000.

Aside from normal family wear and tear, it has been a good purchase, and is still running well.

I'm a DIY-guy and have done most of the repairs and all maintenance. It is a difficult engine to service as far as the water pump, alternator, and air conditioning. But thankfully, so far I've not needed any dealer specific tools.

The car has had a "Check Engine" light on for the last few years. The related codes are: Cat below efficiency, and occasionally fuel trim codes such as: Bank # too lean. I've checked and re-checked the complete fuel delivery from tank to injectors and cannot find anything. As far as the catalytic code, I've determined it isn't blocked and both O2 sensors on that bank are operating correctly. What's more is the car runs great to this day... so I'm leaving well enough alone and have grown accustomed to the little yellow check engine light.

The car is above average in snow because of it's weight and FWD, but about or slightly below average for normal handling. The cargo area is ample and is a comfortable ride.

Fuel economy is average for a station wagon.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 16th November, 2007

Average review marks: 6.6 / 10, based on 63 reviews