1993 Mercury Topaz Reviews

1993 Mercury Topaz GS 2.3 from North America

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2009
Engine and transmission 2.3 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired111000 miles
Most recent distance160000 miles
Previous carDodge Power Ram

Summary:

Just as good as a Toyota or Honda

Faults:

Had to put 3 starters, brakes.

General Comments:

Great car.

Took us to Reno to get married.

Real beat up.

Never let us down.

Well built.

Very good motor

I hated Fords till we got this one. We have an 88 Aerostar as well.

Easy car to work on.

Parts are cheap.

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

Review Date: 21st November, 2009

21st Nov 2009, 11:45

I beg to differ with your title. It is BETTER than a Honda or a Toyota.

21st Nov 2009, 16:14

All cast iron and push-rods.. can't get any better than that, engine-wise.

22nd Nov 2009, 14:55

"I beg to differ with your title. It is BETTER than a Honda or a Toyota."

Not if it needed 3 starters in 180,000 miles. My Honda went 230,000 before needing anything.

22nd Mar 2010, 13:55

"My Honda went 230,000 before needing anything"

No CV joints? No timing belts? No struts? No brake pads?

23rd Mar 2010, 15:20

"No CV joints? No timing belts? No struts? No brake pads?"

I figured people would understand that I meant nothing out of the ordinary. Basic maintenance is completely different.

To answer your question:

Timing belt every 60,000 miles.

Tires varied depending on the brand.

Brake pads every 90,000 miles or so.

Oil change every 3,000 miles.

Transmission fluid change every 30,000 miles.

Coolant every 60,000 miles.

Heck, it even survived an accident that destroyed the Buick that collided with it.

Never needed CV joints or struts... Sorry.

13th Jul 2010, 10:38

In 180,000 miles I'd much rather replace 3 starters than 3 timing belts. I've changed several of both in my lifetime. Honda timing belt is a PITA. And if you're having a mechanic change that belt for you - ouch $. If you add the cost of the timing belt change to how much more you paid for the Honda than a Topaz, the Honda doesn't come out looking as good as you'd think in total cost of ownership. I'm not knocking Honda. I've owned 3 of them. They are good cars. They are just not as astronomically superior to domestic cars as we are led to believe. In fact I own a 93 Topaz and I fully agree with the OP. It is just as good as a Honda or Toyota.

I'll take a cheap old push-rod motor with a timing chain any day over a rubber band motor. No more for me.

1993 Mercury Topaz GS 2.3 from North America

Model year1993
Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2009
Most recent year of ownership2009
Engine and transmission 2.3 Automatic
Distance when acquired88000 miles
Most recent distance93000 miles

Summary:

Good if you are a mechanic

Faults:

Rear struts failed, A/C failed.

Passenger side window motor failed, exhaust needed parts replaced.

THE CAR DIES WHEN HOT. The initial problem is it would not start after running for a while 15 miles or so, until the next day... then it would run fine, till it dies again.

Now, it will only run until it gets warm and dies until enough time passes till cooled, and will start again. I have replaced the ignition control module on the distributor. I have also replaced the camshaft positioning sensor (as there is no camshaft sensor to replace). There is spark and fuel at all times. Please help... any thoughts???

Read more: http://www.justanswer.com/questions/1tqd1-86-mercury-topaz-start-dies#ixzz0RBlrSFGu

General Comments:

Runs good when running.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 15th September, 2009

1993 Mercury Topaz 2.3 Litre from North America

Model year1993
Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 2.3 Litre Automatic
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 3 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.5 / 10
Distance when acquired140000 kilometres
Most recent distance182000 kilometres

Summary:

If you find one in good shape, BUY IT, or call us

Faults:

Had to replace all spark plug wires, cheap to fix.

Brake lines rusted and sprung a leak. Cheap to fix.

Needs new rear ball joints, not going to fix.

Needs tie rod ends, not going to fix.

Needs wheel bearings in front, not going to fix.

Shock absorbers toast, not going to fix.

Floor rusting out, not going to fix.

Transmission often skipping out of drive into neutral, not going to fix.

Threatens to stall after turning corners or stopping. Has only actually stalled once, not going to fix.

General Comments:

We bought this car at 13 years old for a $1,000, The two first weeks we had it we drove it over 3,000 Km through Northern Ontario, over some of the roughest steepest terrain you can imagine. This old beat up car performed better on the hills than many newer, prettier cars we had owned. The old girl actually picked up speed on the longest steepest hill we drove up. After the first two weeks performance this little beast could have died on the road and would have owed us nothing. But she continued to go for over a year, being driven fairly long distances every day. Now at the end of our ownership we have put over 42,000 KM on her, and she's pretty tired. All the above problems are age related and if we had got this car new we would have had it for years. We kept up with the oil changes and tune ups, which probably helped a lot. Over all this is a little workhorse, not the sportiest, not the roomiest, but reliable, reliable, reliable.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 3rd June, 2007

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 16 reviews