23rd May 2008, 15:53
About the Cav being a competitor: I thought Escort GT was Cavalier's main focus. 1.8 liters, 127hp out of a 16v engine against the Cavalier Z24.
I thought Tempo would compete against a Beretta/Corsica twin with the 3.1L (3100) V6 moreso than a subcompact Cav/Escort.
14th Mar 2009, 20:17
I think he meant the V-6 Z-24 up to '94 which was the 3.1 V-6 rated at 140 hp and 185 lb. ft. of torque. Actually it was really down to the driver as both cars were very similar in specs. The Z had a 3.61 axle ratio and was pretty quick. I used to drive my girlfriends Probe LX with the 3.0 liter in it and it wasn't as fast as my Z was. They were both 5-speeds.
13th Jun 2009, 07:48
Yes. That is what I meant. The GLS is to the Tempo as the Z-24 is to the Cavalier.
*Sigh* I can't find the article anymore, but once upon a time there was one that listed a good bit of information on the Tempo GLS, as well as it's top competitors. The Cavalier is the only one that I can remember off-hand. I don't remember there were a few imports on there as well. I don't recall if there was anything for Dodge/Chrysler.
14th Jun 2009, 06:29
The 3.0 Vulcan V-6 found in most Tauruses and a few Tempos is a very reliable and durable motor. However the reason the Taurus has such a terribly bad name is mostly the transmission - the automatics go out frequently and expensively. So it is probably also advisable to avoid V-6 automatic Tempos.
However, the 2.3 four cylinder found in most Tempos, while very underpowered of course, and hardly smooth, is a very reliable and durable motor, and the 3-spd auto to which it is usually mated isn't all that bad for a Ford transmission.
Fords problem was never engines, but rather transmissions and to a lesser extent minor stuff like electrics, steering, accessories and the like.
21st Sep 2009, 12:15
I had a 92 Ford Tempo with the 3 liter V6. It wasn't much on looks, but it had incredible power for a car of its size and form factor.
There was no noticeable sacrifice in power when using the air conditioning, and I've never seen a car heat up the cabin so fast. The engine did seem to run a little on the hot side, but I never had a boil over.
The demise of mine came around 2001, more from neglect from my teenage boys and most of that was body related. I think the engine was still going strong.
As ugly as the Tempo was, it was a great car and I truly miss it. The only other car I've ever owned where I thought I got as good a value as the 92 Tempo was a 2003 Chevy Impala with a 3.8 liter engine.
I did get a Tempo the first year they made them, and it was surprisingly reliable for a first year car. I'm guessing it was an 83 or 84.
Ford positioned the Escorts (and Chevy had their Cavaliers) at the bottom of their lineup. I've owned both and had rotten luck with both.