1992 Ford Thunderbird Reviews - Page 5 of 6

1992 Ford Thunderbird LX 3.8 V-6 from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1995
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 3.8 V-6 Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.2 / 10
Distance when acquired68000 kilometres
Most recent distance225000 kilometres
Previous carDodge Shadow

Summary:

Fairly reliable, but wouldn't suggest buying one..

Faults:

Head gaskets have gone twice.

The exhaust was replaced.

Breaks have been changed 5 times within 5 years.

Front end needs alignment.

Front and rear wind shields have been replaced.

Beginning to rust under both doors and on the front of the hood.

Headlights and tail-lights have been replaced at least once each.

That's it... I think.

General Comments:

This car has cost me a lot of money, especially the head gaskets going.

But there are up-sides to this car, the interior is designed very well. Everything is comfortable and easy to reach. This car is also very responsive with acceleration, handling, and top speed. I've had this car well over 100mph before, and the acceleration is amazing for a Ford with an automatic transmission on it. It feels as if there's a shift kit on it!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 22nd July, 2001

10th Feb 2002, 21:31

The head gasket problem was probably not the car's fault, it was probably the dealership or whoever put them on the car. The Thunderbird's had a head gasket problem around 100000 miles, but if you put a good set back on them they are just fine for another 100000 miles. So don't run the cars down just because someone didn't do something right, run their name down not the cars, they are great, I have 3 of them and would love to have 4.

3rd Apr 2004, 01:15

Unless you drive like an idiot, all that shouldn't have happened. I think the operator was the problem. I don't have them problems with my t-bird.

1992 Ford Thunderbird LX 232 3.8L V-6 from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 232 3.8L V-6 Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired64000 miles
Most recent distance66342 miles

Summary:

Economy, performance, and style

Faults:

Absolutely NOTHING in the over 2,000 miles I have driven it.

General Comments:

Now THIS is a car. I'm getting about 20mpg along with great performance. I would recommend for anyone to buy this bad ass car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 27th March, 2001

6th Mar 2005, 14:09

Hey my fuel gauge on my 92 thunderbird went out so I have to go by mileage. How big is the tank and how many mpg can I get country driving email me type_o_negative69666@hotmail.com.

1992 Ford Thunderbird 2 door Coupe 3.8 liter, 232 cu. in. fi V6 from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 3.8 liter, 232 cu. in. fi V6 Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.4 / 10
Distance when acquired114000 miles
Most recent distance133000 miles
Previous carDodge Daytona

Summary:

The best car I've owned yet

Faults:

The only problem is that I have had is the head gasket, but that gave me a reason to give it a performance upgrade.

General Comments:

Excellent ride on the highway, but a little gas hungry around town. Try to keep your foot off of the pedal so you don't ruin your tires.

The handling is great and it has lots of mid-range torque. Runs OK in the snow with winter treads and has a nice wide stance.

Looks intimidating and a lot of people mistake it for high performance.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 16th March, 2001

1992 Ford Thunderbird LX 3.8 232 fuel injected V-6 from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 3.8 232 fuel injected V-6 Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 1 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.6 / 10
Distance when acquired95000 miles
Most recent distance116000 miles
Previous carFord Bronco

Summary:

A good car for performance but has no reliability

Faults:

Brake rotors.

Calipers.

Both CV-joint axle shafts completely fell apart.

Starter.

Headlight switch.

Fuel pump.

Water pump.

A/C condenser.

Thermostat.

Distributor cap & rotor.

Door lock actuator.

Electronic climate control.

Paint on the hood and bumper chips and peels.

General Comments:

Would not buy another one, this car has been a headache since the day I got it

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 30th December, 2000

1992 Ford Thunderbird Sport 5.0 HO from North America

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1995
Most recent year of ownership1999
Engine and transmission 5.0 HO Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.0 / 10
Distance when acquired32000 miles
Most recent distance70000 miles
Previous carAcura Integra

Summary:

Can't go wrong

General Comments:

I love the car. Nice for Sunday drives, and Sunday runs. The 5.0 HO realy gets this big car going.

A/C / heat and all the other little features still work like the car is brand new.

I get a lot of questions when people see the little "Sport" where a LX or other tag usually would be. Got to love it !

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 29th December, 2000

21st Jul 2001, 22:38

My '92 Thunderbird Sport has to be the best car I've ever owned. A real CLASSIC!

13th Oct 2001, 11:40

That makes three of us. It's my first car and I have had it for about 4 years. Love the thing on the freeway, plenty of get up and go for how big the car is. The only thing is, I wish it had bigger rotors on the front for stopping the beast. Oh well nothing is perfect, I still love my 92' sport bird!

7th May 2002, 07:32

I love my bird it's a great car except for the brakes and loose handling, but, then again its got 294,000 on the ticker.

18th Oct 2002, 16:31

Mine has 87000 as of 10-02-2002 and is a champ on the road. If you change the mass air flow sensor, go with a 70mm throttle body and a custom chip it really adds a lot more to the power the 5.0 H.O. already had. Great Car! But remember the chilton manual does not have the 5.0 HO in it for the T-Bird!

22nd Nov 2002, 12:40

I love my 92 T-Bird it is an excellent car. The 5.0 H.O. is an awesome engine. I store my car during the winter so even though it is ten years old it looks and drives like its new. The only thing I have ever had to replace on the car was the front brakes and the factory battery which lasted a whole ten years.

18th Feb 2003, 17:26

I have one and the transmissions' been out 8 times. engine's been replaced, and all of the brakes have been redone. I love this car though. It gets me where I'm going and then some.

29th Mar 2003, 07:48

I just bought the new love of my life a '92 Thunder-chicken Sport. it has 7300 on the ticker as the previous owner was the proverbial old man Sunday driver.

I had not heard about the brakes so thanks about that. any details on the pro chip?

Average review marks: 7.4 / 10, based on 29 reviews