1996-99
Ford
Taurus/Mercury Sable
Form Over Function
The first restyle of Ford's bold and
innovative 1986 Taurus had come and gone with a yawn. Introduced in
1992, it was promptly criticized. Too mild, the critics said. Too
boring, the enthusiast rags chimed in. Ford is losing it's edge, they
all chorused. Never mind the fact that the boring restyle sold better
than ever, even capturing the sales crown throughout it's four year
run.
The criticism must have stung, for when
Ford trotted out the newly redesigned Taurus for '96, there was no way
anyone could claim that Ford had gotten timid again.
The new Taurus was everything the last
version wasn't: fresh, bold, distinctive, and -- criticized for being
a little bit too bold, distinctive and unorthodox. Sometimes you just
can't beat those Monday morning quarterbacks. Regardless about how you
feel about the styling, which after all is a subjective matter anyway,
you've got to hand it to Ford for having the chutzpah to engineer such
a radical change on the nation's best selling car.
That first year, 1996, was a
continuation of the last, and the Taurus took the sales crown again.
The public, however, never fully warmed to the redesign, and it was
handicapped initially by Ford's attempt to increase standard equipment
-- and price -- and move the model upmarket a bit. The sales crown was
captured through the introduction of a slightly decontented and
cheaper base model and some very healthy dealer and customer
incentives. The huge number of sales to rental fleets, including
Ford's captive Hertz Rental Car, didn't hurt either. In 1997 Ford
decided to stop the heavy subsidies, and the Taurus lost the sales
race to the Toyota Camry. It hasn't reclaimed it since.
|
Strengths |
Weaknesses |
- Ride/handling
- Price/value
- Styling
-
Service/maintenance costs
|
- Base
powertrain
- Interior noise
w/base engine
- Styling
|
What's Available
Both the Taurus and Sable are available
in two body styles -- a four door sedan and four door station wagon.
Initially, both were available in two trim levels. The base Taurus
carried the GL moniker, while the base Sable was called the GS. The
upmarket versions carried LX and LS badges, respectively. Shortly into
the production run, a G model became the base model, forgoing things
like cruise control, power locks, and a folding rear seat. For the '98
model year the Taurus GL was dropped, the LX became the entry model,
and an SE occupied the top slot.
In most cases, the top trim levels came
with more standard equipment, fancier trim, and a new 3.0L 200hp DOHC
V6 (called Duratec by the marketing guys). Beginning in 1998, this
engine was technically moved to the option list for the SE and LS, but
most came with some sort of premium package that included this engine.
The base models made do with the old, 3.0L OHV V6 generating 145hp. A
4-speed automatic was the only transmission choice.
Along the way, various regional and
Touring Editions where marketed with special equipment packages, so
don't be surprised to see a Sable or Taurus labeled as something other
than the above designations.
|
Running Changes |
|
1996 New model; SHO added late in year
1997 No major
changes
1998 Duratec (DOHC)
equipped models get new final drive ratio for better
acceleration
1999 Sable gets
interior faux wood treatment |
Exterior Design
Automotive journalists are forever
complaining about the generic styling in the automotive world.
Japanese and GM cars seem to get the most complaints, but all
manufacturers have been fair game. As a rule, that seems to be
changing now, but "soulless" styling was running rampart when this
version of the Taurus/Sable debuted so the design was impossible to
confuse with any other family sedan available.
That may have not been a wise strategy.
From most angles we like the design very much. The front, front 3/4,
and side views present a crisp, taut profile. Despite being larger
than the model it replaced, it actually looks smaller. But then you
look at the rear and rear 3/4 views. It looks like the stylists ran
out of time and just grafted on a rear end. Both the Taurus and the
Sable just don't pull those views off. Sometimes the little flares
along the door sill (for aerodynamic purposes) appear ungainly, other
times they don't.
The big differences between the two are
the roofline and trunklid. On the Taurus, there is a six-window
treatment on the C-pillar, while the Sable gets a more traditional
four window treatment with thicker C-pillars. The Taurus' decklid
slopes down, while the Sables extends a couple more inches to the rear
and retreats into the rear bumper more abruptly. The Taurus gets a
unique, and rather odd, oval rear window that carries over the oval
design theme throughout the car.
Due to these design differences, the
Sable gets a slightly larger trunk; the Taurus boasts a lower drag
coefficient (.30 vs. .33) and slightly more rear seat headroom.
The wagon avoids most of these
problems. The rear hatch is still oval, but it manages to look pretty
good on the wagon. Of the two body styles, the wagon is the easy
winner when it comes to design harmony.
Interior Design
Here again, Ford chose to break from
traditional interior design cues to forge its new oval look. There
isn't a rectangle to be found. And identical dash with a full set of
gauges adorns the Taurus and Sable, with a choice of bucket seats with
full console and transmission on the floor or bench seat with a unique
and very useful fold down center seat cushion that can hold all kinds
of drinks, change and stuff. When so equipped the transmission
selector resides on the steering column.
When entering the cabin, the first
object your eye is likely to fall on is the large oval in the center
of the dash. It contains an unusual arrangement of radio and HVAC
controls. Many reviewers gave it poor marks for ergonomics, but we
think is works very well once you know your way around. It's hard to
fault the rest of the controls, too.
Fabrics and colors are well
coordinated, although the door panels have a very utilitarian look to
them. The dash is covered with an anti-glare texture that does reduce
glare but it hard to clean.
Room and Comfort
With a caveat, four people will be as
comfortable in a Taurus as in another other mainstream sedan. The only
objection we have is the driving position. It's too low. Get the power
seat, and your problems are solved.
As we mentioned earlier, the
Taurus/Sable twins are available as 5- and 6-passenger sedans. The
wagons can be configured to hold anywhere from 5 to 8, with the
optional rear seat that folds into the cargo floor.
The seats are well designed with just
the right amount of firmness. While the two outboard passengers will
be quite comfortable, we wouldn't recommend sitting in the middle
front for very long. It's not comfortable at all. The middle rear seat
passenger will deal with the usual hard cushion, but they'll be ok for
a while. The rear seatback folds down to create a pass through into
the trunk. The 3rd seat in the wagon is thinly padded and suitable
only for kids.
Legroom is sufficient front and rear,
but headroom gets a bit tight for tall rear seat passengers. The
sharply raked C-pillar on the Sable and wagons force you to scrunch
over when entering or exiting the rear. Both are a result of function
following form.
Two of the examples we drove exhibited
excessive wind noise at highway speeds. With triple sealed doors, this
shouldn't happen. To be fair, we should also mention that we took a
wagon for a weekend getaway, and there was no wind noise at all --
even at 80mph.
|
It's SHO time! |
|
Since 1989, there has always been a very different, very special
Taurus. It's called SHO. It's mission is decidedly more sporting
than a standard Taurus. A firmer suspension, more aggressive
wheels and tires, tighter steering and unique design cues adorn
every SHO. And let's not forget the engine. As with previous
SHO's, it was a joint project between Ford and Yamaha. Eight
cylinders, 3.4 liters and 235hp motivate the SHO with authority.
Handling is much
improved over other Taurus', with some loss of ride comfort. Top
speed is electronically limited to 138mph. Interestingly,
although quick, in most situations it's not all that much
quicker than the Taurus' DOHC V6, and measurably slower than the
previous SHO, which had only six cylinders and 15 less
horsepower.
This is also the
first SHO that cannot be had with a manual transmission, a blow
for SHO fans. It's also smoother, quieter and more refined than
past editions, an effort on Ford's part to position the car more
as an executive express than a four door sports car. |
Ride/Handling/Performance
When comparing the new Taurus to the
old, a few things are immediately apparent. The body is noticeably
stiffer, it's quieter inside, and the steering is more responsive. And
when pushed hard, the new Taurus behaves much better than the old one
and though you won't confuse it for a BMW, it handles very well for a
mainstream sedan. You'll get the usual front-drive understeer (the
front end wants to keep going straight under high-speed cornering),
but it's very predictable, not as pronounced as most, and body roll is
within acceptable bounds.
In almost all circumstances, the Taurus
rides very smoothly. Body motions always feel well controlled. The
suspension feels a little harsh over sudden, large disturbances in the
road, but it is never upset by them.
The Taurus/Sable duo are available with
two different engines. The base engine, a 3.0 liter pushrod V6
generating 145hp, is adequate. It's reasonably responsive and
unobtrusive most of the time. But it is not as quiet as most other
cars in this category and gets downright noisy when pushed. With a
fully loaded vehicle, it begins to feel overtaxed. The other engine,
the DOHC 3.0 liter V6, is a jewel. It's very quiet and smooth, and
moves the Taurus/Sable briskly. And unlike the base motor, it makes
some wonderful noises when pushed hard.
The transmission works smoothly and
seamlessly, particularly when mated to the more powerful engine. We
would still have to rate it a notch below the best from Japan and GM
however.
Braking chores are handled by a front
disc/rear drum setup on the Taurus and Sable sedans. All wagons were
equipped with four-wheel disc brakes. An anti-lock brake system (ABS)
was optional which included four wheel discs. Both systems work well,
with ABS giving an extra measure of control in slippery conditions.
Safety
On a car that was introduced only four
years ago, you would expect that a full complement of safety items
accompanies every Taurus/Sable. Dual front air bags and adjustable
seatbelts are standard fare, along with child safety locks.
ABS braking was originally intended to
be standard equipment, but for cost reasons was made optional.
Government crash testing of the Taurus
resulted in an very good (4-stars) score for the '96-'98 models, and
an excellent (5-stars) for the 1999 model. The Institute for Highway
Safety awarded the Taurus the highest rating of any midsize sedan.
Reliability
The latest generation Taurus/Sable has
amassed a good, but not exceptional, reliability record when compared
to the best in this class, the Toyota Camry. Major components rarely
fail, but we have had occasional reports of electrical gremlins and
transmission troubles through our customer helpline.
All were backed by a 3yr - 36,000 mile
bumper to bumper warranty, so there will be plenty of models out there
with the original warranty still in effect.
Service
If your Taurus does need a trip to the
shop, chances are that it won't lighten your wallet too much, at least
when compared to it's import competition.
Maintenance intervals are somewhat
below average, too . First coolant change isn't specified until 50,000
miles (every 30,000 miles after that), and the spark plugs are good
for 100,000 miles. Even the DOHC motor doesn't require timing belt
service, since it uses a chain. That usually ranges anywhere from $250
to $700 on it's Japanese rivals.
Recommendations
We've always felt that the Taurus
represents a terrific value as a used car. It does not have the resale
value of an Accord or Camry, so you can pick up good examples for
remarkably little money. And over the long haul, your pocket book will
appreciate the relatively low service and maintenance costs.
Our choice would be a loaded LX or LS
version with the sweet twin-cam engine. You'll be getting a
sophisticated, quick and comfortable sedan for the price of a new
economy car.
Current Ford Taurus Values
|
What They Said When New |
|
"The new Ford Taurus feels better than last year's model in many
ways, but its scores in our tests haven't improved
significantly" ...... Consumer Reports, 1996
"There's much to
like--the structure is notably solid, handling is without bad
habits, fin of interior parts is very good"..... Car & Driver,
1995
"Maybe the best
family car ever made."...........Automobile
1996
..."Ford
indulges rear passengers with limo-like legroom: 3.4 inches more
than the Camry and over 4.5 more that the Accord.".......Motor
Trend 1997
"In it's upper
range, this Duratec engine is exhilarating".....
Road & Track 1996
"Styling excesses
taint an otherwise excellent design."......
Consumer Reports,
1997 |
| |
General Specifications |
|
|
General
Trim Levels:
G, GL, LX, SE
(Taurus), G, GS, LS (Sable)
Body Styles:
4dr
Sedan, 4dr Wagon
Dimensions &
Capacities
Weight: 3400lbs
Length: Sdn
197.5"; Cpe 199.6"
Wheelbase: Sdn
108.5"
Width: 73"
Height: Sdn
55.1"; Wgn 57.6"
EPA Class:
Mid-size
Interior Vol: Sdn
101, Wgn 104.1 cu ft
Trunk Vol : Sdn
15.8; Wgn 38 cu. ft.
Fuel: 16 gallons |
Mechanical
Layout:
Front-engine, Front-wheel drive
Engines: 3.0L
(6cyl-145hp) 3.0L (6cyl-200hp)
Transmission:
4-speed automatic w/overdrive
Brakes: Front
disc/rear disc Front disc/rear disc w/ABS optional
Performance
(145/200hp)
0-60mph: 10.8/8.5
seconds 1/4 mile: 18.2/16.4 seconds Top Speed: 110/112mph
Electronically limited
EPA Mileage:
(city/hwy) 20/28 (sedan) 19/27 (wagon)
|
Safety
ABS Brakes:
Standard
Air Bags: Dual
standard
NHTSA Safety
Rating:
Driver *****
Passenger *****
Key:
Best: ***** No or
minor injuries probable
Worst: * Serious
injury probable
IIHS 40 mph Crash
Rating:
Good
Original
Warranty:
3yr/36,000 mile
bumper-to-bumper 5yr/unlimited miles corrosion
|
|
Safety Recalls |
|
NHTSA Number: 96V166000
Model Year:
1996-97; Year of Recall: '96
Summary:
The park pawl
abutment bracket has a sharp edge which can cause the
parking pawl
to hand up and no engage the park gear. This would allow the
vehicle to move even though the gear shift indicator shows that
the vehicle is in park. Dealers
will inspect and, if necessary, replace the park pawl abutment
bracket.
NHTSA Number:
96V176000
Model Year: 1996;
Year of Recall: '96
Summary:
The automatic
transmission park pawl shaft may not be free to rotate as
intended. If the park pawl shaft does not rotate, it would
prevent the park pawl from engaging the park gear when the shift
lever is in the park position. This condition could result in
the vehicle rolling as if in neutral with the shift lever in the
park position.
Dealers will inspect
the park pawl shaft rotation and those shafts with restricted
rotation will be replaced with a shorter shaft that will not
restrict rotation.
NHTSA Number:
97V097000
Model Year: 1997;
Year of Recall: '97
Summary:
Vehicle Description: Passenger vehicles equipped with AX4S
automatic transaxles. The low/intermediate servo cover can
separate from the transaxle while the
vehicle is being driven. If this occurs,
transmission fluid will leak contacting the catalytic converter.
The catalytic converter temperature may be hot enough to ignite
the transmission fluid and cause a vehicle fire.
Dealers will inspect the transmission
and replace these servo covers.
NHTSA Number:
98V028002
Year: 1997-98;
Year of Recall: '98
Summary:
Vehicle
Description: Passenger vehicles. The text and/or graphics for
the vehicle headlamp aiming instructions provided in the owner
guides are not sufficiently clear. This does not meet the
requirements of FMVSS No. 108, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and
Associated Equipment." If the headlamp assemblies are replaced,
customers may be confused by the aiming instructions provided in
the owner guides causing the headlamps to be improperly aimed.
Owner
guides containing revised aiming instructions will be mailed to
owners of these vehicles. Owner notification is expected to
begin April 6, 1998.
NHTSA Number:
98V067000
Model Year: 1998;
Year of Recall: '98
Summary:
Vehicle
Description: Passenger vehicles previously serviced under Ford
Service Bulletin 97-17-9. These vehicles were inadvertenly
equipped with an 18-gallon fuel tank rather than the 16-gallon
as specified. The 18-gallon tank has a second valve location
where a shipping plug should be installed. If this shipping plug
is displaced, fuel leakage can result. Fuel leakage in the
presence of an ignition source could potentially result in a
fire.
Dealers will install
the correct fuel tank.
NHTSA Number:
98V198000
Model Year:
1998-99; Year of Recall: '98
Summary:
Vehicle
Description: Passenger vehicles equipped with manual seat
tracks. The front seat belt buckle attaching stud may have been
improperly heat treated. This heat treatment may have resulted
in cracks developing in the stud. If the stud is cracked, in the
event of a vehicle crash, the occupant may not be properly
restrained, increasing the risk of personal injury.
Dealers will replace
the seat belt buckle mounting bracket and stud assembly.
NHTSA Number:
98V204000
Model Year: 1999;
Year of Recall: '98
Summary:
Vehicle Description: Passenger vehicles. A dash insulator
retainer clip was not fully assembled to the accelerator cable
dash fitting. The clip can disengage from the accelerator cable
and fall into the accelerator pedal arm pivot area. If this
condition occurs, the engine may not fully return to idle. Also,
the insulator may not stay in the intended location and could
interfere with the accelerator cable.
Dealers will inspect these vehicles to
ensure proper installation of the accelerator cable clip, and
re-install if needed.
NHTSA Number:
98V288000
Model Year: 1999;
Year of Recall: '98
Summary:
Vehicle
Description: Passenger vehicles equpped with the "California"
emissions package. An incorrect transmission oil cooler line was
installed. The line contacts the
anti-lock braking system module support bracket and over time,
can wear and develop a leak. Transmission fluid leakage onto the
exhaust manifold or catalytic converter can result in a fire.
Dealers will install the appropriate transmission oil cooler
line.
NHTSA Number:
96V016000
Model year: 1996;
Year of Recall: '96
Summary:
The brake system
fluid level indicator lamp switch can malfunction. This does not
comply with FMVSS NO. 105, "Hyrdraulic brake systems."
Consequence of non-compliance: If the switch malfunctions, the
brake system warning lamp will either remain illuminated
continuously or fail to light as intended when the fluid level
falls to a certain level. In either case, the operator wouldn'
be warned of a low brake fluid level condition.
Dealers will replace
the brake system fluid level indicator lamp switches.
NHTSA Number:
96V086000
Model year: 1996;
Year of Recall: '96
Summary:
The park pawl
shaft was improperly positioned when the roll pin that retains
it was installed during transmission assembly. If the shaft was
not properly positioned, the roll pin may not have lined up with
the groove int the shaft and have been crushed at assembly.
Also, a burr could have been raised on the shaft. This could
result in the park pawl occasionally not engaging when the
transmission selector lever is placed in the park position. This
could result in the vehicle rolling if the operator does not
apply the parking brake.
Dealers will inspect
the park pawl shaft roll pin. If the roll pin is damaged, both
the roll pin and the park pawl shaft will be replaced. In
addition, owners will be reminded to fully apply the parking
brake in addition to placing the transmission in park.
NHTSA Number:
96V151000
Model Year: 1996;
Year of Recall: '96
Summary:
The fuel pressure regulator located on the fuel rail in the
engine manifold plenum through the vacuum line resulting in
either release of fuel from the compartment has a vacuum
diaphragm that was damaged during manufacture of the regulator.
If the diaphragm tears or ruptures, liquid fuel could enter the
intake
air cleaner assembly or the exhaust
system. Fuel release in the presence of an ignition source could
potentially result in a fire.
Dealers will inspect the fuel pressure regulator. Those
regulators produced during the suspect time period will be
replaced. |
|