Are recent Ford Tauruses decent? Alternatives?

[AstroManLuca]

My wife's car is a 1990 Chevy Lumina that is on the way out. We're going to run it until it dies but that time may be coming soon (we think this coming winter). She's looking for a midsized or larger sedan.

So we want to get something new but we can't spend a lot. We're on a budget of $5-7k, and it would be advantageous to get a 2004 or newer model (interest rates are much lower for 2004 and newer used cars). Before someone chimes in and tells us not to get a loan for a used car, the reason we'd have to get a loan is because we just haven't had enough time to save up for one, not to mention her student loans prevent us from quickly building up savings anyway. We're doing the best we can but the best we can do is put up a bit of a down payment so we don't have to take out as much of a loan.

After looking through Consumer Reports' reliability rankings and looking at used car ads, we've narrowed it down to a few models. In our price range we can get a late 90s or early 00s Accord or Camry, but recent Ford Tauruses are affordable, even for 2005-06 models. Is the Taurus any good? We've basically counted out most GM and Chrysler models on account of their poor reliability ratings. Maybe CR is wrong, but I'd feel nervous about getting an Impala or Malibu that has a "Much Below Average" rating in the suspension or brakes.

Also, if there are any other cars that may fit our needs please let me know!

CLIFFS:
Wife needs a midsize sedan for $5-7k
Camrys and Accords in that range are old and have high miles
Taurus seems good for the price
Maybe other cars are good too

 

[Pacfanweb]

Yes, recent Tauruses are decent. They are very good cars, in fact.

 

[BassBomb]

2003 Maxima
2003 I35

 

[boomhower]

Just got rid of my wifes 03 Impala and it wasn't bad. Two things went bad:
1. The security system keeping it from starting at random times.
2. Transmission started going out at ~120k. That's when we got rid of it.

The Taurus isn't bad. They are bland and boring, which makes them cheap and are pretty reliable. For something not to old in that price range you could certainly do worse.

 

[postmortemIA]

I believe 2005-2006 Tauruses have old design (slightly modified from 1996 ), but they are decent enough, bit underpowered. There is army on them everywhere as they were fleet vehicles. That is why they are so cheap, and that ford abandoned their development after 2001 for 5 yrs.

 

[PCMarine]

I've owned a 2000 base model Taurus that was totaled at 122k, and I currently own a 2002 fully loaded SEL that now has 133k. Both were purchased for <$5k.

They really are solid cars, and the value can't be beat. It's not so much that they are bulletproof reliable, since I've had to fix small things, but parts are ubiquitous and cheap - especially at junk yards. They are also quite safe. My 2000 was T-boned by a suburban going 40 mph on the drivers side and I walked away without a scratch.

I'd highly recommend looking for the loaded models (SEL, maybe SES), since they are less likely to be fleet cars, and on the used market they are only marginally more expensive then base models. The loaded models also have some nice features that are great to have (200hp DOHC motor, leather, auto dimming mirrors, sunroof, etc).

 

[AstroManLuca]

Leather would be nice. If we could find one with that I think my wife would forgive the car's looks. She is a designer and she is ridiculously picky about how cars look. When we're around town she will occasionally point out cars she thinks are attractive (very occasionally). And they're pretty much all $50,000 luxury cars!

So wait, are fleet vehicles bad? My natural assumption was because they're owned by a large company they would have to be maintained on a regular basis rather than a single owner who may let things slide a bit more. But maybe they're bad for one reason or another. I suppose the people who drive them would be less careful since they don't own the car.

Anyway I'll do some more searching and we'll find one to test drive. The Maxima looks good too; we'd have to get a 2003 or older but they seem like good cars and they don't have the same resale value as Hondas and Toyotas.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

early 00 Maxima for the win.

 

[StageLeft]

I saw 2005 grand marquis I think we good miles in that price range locally. And if you get one and you're not 50 year old or older you'll be the youngest owner in history. Has a V8, though.

Or MAXIMAS!

 

[Pacfanweb]

I believe 2005-2006 Tauruses have old design (slightly modified from 1996 ), but they are decent enough, bit underpowered. There is army on them everywhere as they were fleet vehicles. That is why they are so cheap, and that ford abandoned their development after 2001 for 5 yrs.

The actually made them through at least 2007, as the current Taurus was initially called the 500. Supposedly only made for fleets, but they were at dealerships for sale at the time, too.

 

[Bignate603]

So wait, are fleet vehicles bad? My natural assumption was because they're owned by a large company they would have to be maintained on a regular basis rather than a single owner who may let things slide a bit more. But maybe they're bad for one reason or another. I suppose the people who drive them would be less careful since they don't own the car.

The majority of Tauruses out there that were "fleet vehicles" were used as rental cars. Out of the hundreds of people that rented that particular vehicle you had better believe that there were at least a few that drove that car within an inch of its life. You might get lucky with a fleet vehicle and have no problems but my personal opinion is that the risk of getting one that has been screwed up is not worth the lower price, especially when privately owned ones really aren't that much more expensive.

 

[StageLeft]

The majority of Tauruses out there that were "fleet vehicles" were used as rental cars. Out of the hundreds of people that rented that particular vehicle you had better believe that there were at least a few that drove that car within an inch of its life. You might get lucky with a fleet vehicle and have no problems but my personal opinion is that the risk of getting one that has been screwed up is not worth the lower price, especially when privately owned ones really aren't that much more expensive.

Most hold this opinion of rentals until they actually own one and find out that in reality the things are very cheap to buy and hold up fine. I would buy another. Have 93k on my minivan so far and no problems at all I can attribute to abuses during the 15k it was a fleet vehicle (though what kind I don't know but probably rental). It depends on the car. Don't buy an ex-rental corvette.

 

[AstroManLuca]

The actually made them through at least 2007, as the current Taurus was initially called the 500. Supposedly only made for fleets, but they were at dealerships for sale at the time, too.

Yeah I looked it up and it looks like the Taurus didn't actually miss a single model year. The old model stuck around until the 2007 model year (although they stopped making them in late 2006). The Five Hundred was sold alongside the Taurus from its introduction in 2004 until Ford merged the Taurus and Five Hundred into a new Taurus in 2007.

I imagine the Taurus didn't sell in great quantities those years except as a rental, but it's not the same as the "Malibu Classic" that Chevy sold for a couple years after its discontinuation solely as a fleet car.

EDIT: Oh and I found a 2008 Taurus (first year of the new model) for $8,000 but it already has 125k miles on it! Crazy that a car can get that many miles in such a short time but I guess some people drive really a lot. It's tempting but on the other hand it makes me think there's something wrong with it. The ad doesn't mention a salvage title or any problems though.

 

[Vette73]

Look for a Impala. Better then the Taurus that is 5+ years old, new one is nice but I don't think will fall into your price range.

Impala drops in value (good for you) and is a good reliabile car. Also Buicks are another line to look at.

Also ignore CR. Their "studies" are flawed and mostly based on their internal opinions and/or opinions of those that pay for CR.

 

[Pulsar]

Yeah I looked it up and it looks like the Taurus didn't actually miss a single model year. The old model stuck around until the 2007 model year (although they stopped making them in late 2006). The Five Hundred was sold alongside the Taurus from its introduction in 2004 until Ford merged the Taurus and Five Hundred into a new Taurus in 2007.

I imagine the Taurus didn't sell in great quantities those years except as a rental, but it's not the same as the "Malibu Classic" that Chevy sold for a couple years after its discontinuation solely as a fleet car.

EDIT: Oh and I found a 2008 Taurus (first year of the new model) for $8,000 but it already has 125k miles on it! Crazy that a car can get that many miles in such a short time but I guess some people drive really a lot. It's tempting but on the other hand it makes me think there's something wrong with it. The ad doesn't mention a salvage title or any problems though.

The new body style Taurus's are excellent cars. The new 'Taurus' wasn't even really that new - all of it's underpinnings were based on the Ford 500, but they killed the name and made the updates to bring back the Taurus name. That means the standard "don't buy the first model year" doesn't really apply here.

You'll get a double benefit too - you're going to get reliability because it's a Ford, but you're going to get more value than you would out of most Japanese cars because so many people are still buying into the 5 year old paradigm that they're better: the Japanese cars still have substantially higher purchase prices than a comparable domestic.

You can take a look at the Wards or Edmunds data - the new style Taurus scores very well in almost every category, and IS the safest sedan in that class on the road.

 

[Bignate603]

Most hold this opinion of rentals until they actually own one and find out that in reality the things are very cheap to buy and hold up fine. I would buy another. Have 93k on my minivan so far and no problems at all I can attribute to abuses during the 15k it was a fleet vehicle (though what kind I don't know but probably rental). It depends on the car. Don't buy an ex-rental corvette.

Even if the majority of them are fine I've still seen what people do to rentals. When the price difference is small I don't see any advantage to buying a formal rental.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Look for a Impala. Better then the Taurus that is 5+ years old, new one is nice but I don't think will fall into your price range.

Impala drops in value (good for you) and is a good reliabile car. Also Buicks are another line to look at.

Also ignore CR. Their "studies" are flawed and mostly based on their internal opinions and/or opinions of those that pay for CR.

The Impala was one we were considering despite the low ratings from CR since we figured we could get a much newer one for cheap vs. a much older other model with high miles for the same price. Unfortunately it seems they are a bit more expensive than I had hoped. They've all been driven a lot and their prices are generally higher than the Taurus.

I've heard the argument that CR is biased in that they sample from people who read their magazine, and I am not using it as the sole basis for deciding. If the Impala was the same price as the Taurus it would be more of a contender. Right now the only thing going for it is that it looks a bit nicer.

I did find a pretty new Impala with a salvage title that the seller claims was marked as such because it hit a deer and had some front end damage (bodywork only). I've heard conflicting things about salvage titles... not sure I'd want to get one but has anyone bought a salvage car and had a good experience? What exactly are the disadvantages other than the fact that you can't seem to sell them for anything? If you're planning on keeping it until it dies, does it make any difference?

 

[desy]

The old Taurus are good cars
I drive a fleet one at work, a 2000 with 120K miles on it, all its ever needed was a starter.
However they aren't best on fuel if that is a concern,

 

[Pulsar]

The old Taurus are good cars
I drive a fleet one at work, a 2000 with 120K miles on it, all its ever needed was a starter.
However they aren't best on fuel if that is a concern,

I had a 2001 and I got around 22 mpg. Not great for a car that size, but that was the old vulcan engine and was indestructible. The newer models have a much-upgraded all new engine that's far superior.

 

[Mermaidman]

For $5K-$7K, you can find a nice 2001+ Olds Aurora. Near-lux, V8, great ride. Not the most reliable, but certainly not unreliable either.

Dead brands offer such great bargains! Ask me how I know

 

[StageLeft]

Also ignore CR. Their "studies" are flawed and mostly based on their internal opinions and/or opinions of those that pay for CR.

Projected reliability perhaps but historical reliability of vehicles they base upon surveys of owners (I think 1.4M they claim on some book). I don't want to derail this thread, but I used CR a great deal recently and if it truly is of little relevance for cars maybe someone should make another thread about it as a debate

 

[boomhower]

The Impala was one we were considering despite the low ratings from CR since we figured we could get a much newer one for cheap vs. a much older other model with high miles for the same price. Unfortunately it seems they are a bit more expensive than I had hoped. They've all been driven a lot and their prices are generally higher than the Taurus.

I've heard the argument that CR is biased in that they sample from people who read their magazine, and I am not using it as the sole basis for deciding. If the Impala was the same price as the Taurus it would be more of a contender. Right now the only thing going for it is that it looks a bit nicer.

I did find a pretty new Impala with a salvage title that the seller claims was marked as such because it hit a deer and had some front end damage (bodywork only). I've heard conflicting things about salvage titles... not sure I'd want to get one but has anyone bought a salvage car and had a good experience? What exactly are the disadvantages other than the fact that you can't seem to sell them for anything? If you're planning on keeping it until it dies, does it make any difference?

I bought an Accord with a salvage title. Pretty much the same thing, had some front end damage that was just expensive to fix. Just make sure there is no frame damage. My insurance company wanted to look at it first but other than that no biggy. Just make sure you get a heck of a deal because it will be a bear to sell later on.

 

[vi edit]

Do you live in any place with steep hills/mountains? If so then avoid the Taurus. I swear it has two gears...high and low. That transmission couldn't find the right gear to save it's live trying to climb mountains between Phoenix and Flagstaff.

I'd go for something with the GM 38000....Impala LS or Pontiac Grand Prix GT. You can also find some 2006 or so Malibus in that range. Comfortable cars that deliver great milage with the 3.5L V6. Good people space too. Other than some quirks with the steering the Malibus are pretty reliable.

 

[AstroManLuca]

There aren't really any hills here in Minnesota, but we'll have to take one for a test drive. Automatics that hunt are one of the reasons I have a manual, but my wife can't drive one and most of the cars she likes are autos anyway.

I will make sure we test drive an Impala or Malibu at some point.

 

[cheesehead]

Having recently been in your shoes, I would look at the following:

1. Subaru Legacy/Outback/Forrester. Actual Subaru sedans are quite rare, but their various mid-size wagons are all fantastically reliable and very possibly the best cars for ice and snow money can buy. $7k will get you a fairly recent ('04-ish) wagon with no frills and reasonable miles, and considering the frequency with which these cars break 250,000 miles, that shouldn't be an issue.

A caveat: Prices on these vary by state a great deal - around here, they're prohibitively high.

2. Hyundai Sonata - though only the last generation model (approximately 2005-2009.) These cars are fantastically cheap, and if you don't mind the fact that it's not the highest quality car in the world, they're very good value. They're also reasonably reliable - the V6 version in particular scored quite well in Consumer Reports.

Projected reliability perhaps but historical reliability of vehicles they base upon surveys of owners (I think 1.4M they claim on some book). I don't want to derail this thread, but I used CR a great deal recently and if it truly is of little relevance for cars maybe someone should make another thread about it as a debate

Agreed. My family has been purchasing used vehicles based on CR owner data for years - it's generally pretty good stuff.