[777funk]

I just did a flip through eBay and searched Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable under the cars and trucks catagory and I didn't see one that was above or at 200k miles. Is it just that most aren't that far yet or that they're not built for that kind of mileage?

I've been driving Diesel Mercedes Benzes for the past 5 years (drove Tauruses before that) and they last and last and last (350k is usually still a good running good shifting car). They're great cars. I thought the Taurus was nice when I had them (2 of them).

But do these make it past 200k before rebuild time? Are these worth rebuilding? The reason I ask is I am looking for a Taurus wagon and don't have much to spend (on a major expensive business venture right now). So it's going to end up being a high mileage one unless I'm lucky.

I'm pretty mechanical but I also don't have a chery picker (yet) so I don't plan on tearing down an engine. Just curious if I should go with a Taurus with high miles or pass and stick with the Diesels.

thanks!
Nick

 

[Racer X]

The engines will.

The transmissions... probably not, unless it's a SHO 5-speed.

 

[austex04]

The older Mercedes diesels last 500k+ miles, they're safe and have pretty bullet proof engines and transmissions. The Taurus can last 300k+ as well, but they're not as strong as diesels. Both Vulcan and Duratec engines can last past 300k if well maintained and not abused during their life, I had a '93 Taurus that made it well past 200k, and the next owner kept it til around 300k-it was still running well when they sold it. There are members on here that have 300k+ on their Taurus, without needing rebuilds. The transmissions are not as strong, though, but some do last past 200k.

 

[egiroux]

I'm paraphrasing a post I read here: 'If you get an older Taurus, budget for a transmission rebuild and you won't be dissapointed.'

 

[2000sable]

With Regular maintenance and non-abusive driving and some luck, yes.

The transmissions are the problem. It's a shame too because, when I see a Toyota with 300k on it and it doesn't even use a filter for the transmission and max fill on the automatic transmission is six quarts... And the change interval is a voluntary 100k miles. Go to ebay and look at the tens (Hell, some times it is in the hundreds) of corolla's and Camry's with 200k+ on them for sale. Why? Toyota has had its share of problems. What's the difference? Service at the dealership.

My Sable takes 14 F-ing quarts of transmission fluid and a filter and if I change those 14 quarts and the filter every 30k miles and add a transmission cooler, the transmission might last 150k if well cared for( = hundreds of dollars in maintenance). Ford has the shittiest transmission design on the planet and their service departments at the dealerships all across the country actually don't care if your car lasts 200k miles or not.

 

[hhu168]

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Jun 5 2010, 06:09 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=809623

With Regular maintenance and non-abusive driving and some luck, yes.

The transmissions are the problem. It's a shame too because, when I see a Toyota with 300k on it and it doesn't even use a filter for the transmission and max fill on the automatic transmission is six quarts... And the change interval is a voluntary 100k miles. Go to ebay and look at the tens (Hell, some times it is in the hundreds) of corolla's and Camry's with 200k+ on them for sale. Why? Toyota has had its share of problems. What's the difference? Service at the dealership.

My Sable takes 14 F-ing quarts of transmission fluid and a filter and if I change those 14 quarts and the filter every 30k miles and add a transmission cooler, the transmission might last 150k if well cared for( = hundreds of dollars in maintenance). Ford has the shittiest transmission design on the planet and their service departments at the dealerships all across the country actually don't care if your car lasts 200k miles or not.[/b]

I think non-abusive driving is the key.

The first time I flushed my transmission, my 2000 'Tec had 152K. I am not sure if the transmission fluid was ever changed before -- I had the 30K service done at the dealer and that would be the only chance the transmission was ever serviced.

My bull has 157K now. Both the engine and the tranny run smoothly -- knock on wood. I sure hope they will last past 200K.

 

[major]

Seen a 2000 Taurus ex-taxi with almost 400,000. Vulcan and AX4N combo.


Edit - pic in post #20

 

[tdbo]

QUOTE (777funk @ Jun 5 2010, 03:15 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=809577

I just did a flip through eBay and searched Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable under the cars and trucks catagory and I didn't see one that was above or at 200k miles. Is it just that most aren't that far yet or that they're not built for that kind of mileage?

I've been driving Diesel Mercedes Benzes for the past 5 years (drove Tauruses before that) and they last and last and last (350k is usually still a good running good shifting car). They're great cars. I thought the Taurus was nice when I had them (2 of them).

But do these make it past 200k before rebuild time? Are these worth rebuilding? The reason I ask is I am looking for a Taurus wagon and don't have much to spend (on a major expensive business venture right now). So it's going to end up being a high mileage one unless I'm lucky.

I'm pretty mechanical but I also don't have a chery picker (yet) so I don't plan on tearing down an engine. Just curious if I should go with a Taurus with high miles or pass and stick with the Diesels.

thanks!
Nick[/b]

My daily driver is a 2000 Taurus w/ 203 K. It takes a 150 mile/Day commute five days a week. Engine/Tranny is original. Engine uses< 1qt. of oil between changes and tranny shifts smooth. However, I change oil every 3K and change transmission fluid every 50K. Another advantage is that virtually all of the miles are highway and the car has not been abused (I'm the original owner.) So yes, they are built to withstand that kind of mileage IF they are maintained well.

 

[Vee]

I have a 2000 Taurus with 167000 miles. I change the transmission fluid every 60,000 miles, and its still runnign strong.

I think the reason you dont see any on eBay is because my Taurus at 167,000 is worth more than what others will pay me for it.

I JUST bought a '96 Jaguar XJS with 56,000 miles, so the Taurus will no longer be driven daily. I am not selling it because a working car with 167k miles is worth more than what I can sell it for.

I don't know why anyone would pay anything for a car at 200,000 miles, unless it was something special. Jap cars have a reputation that, I guess, has people interested in it after the 200k mile mark. Personally I think the Gen IV Tauruses are every bit as good.

At least mine is.

 

[mwt]

I almost got banned for using the word Jap.

Mike
:noes:

 

[ntwrkguy1]

I think the maintenance on the transmission is the key.

I've currently got 158k on my '01 Duratec. I typically drive about 8,000 miles a year (the bulk of those miles -- 88k to be exact -- were put on by the original owner in the first year, if you can imagine!), so I have resigned myself to changing the trans fluid every 15k. $90 every two years isn't going to break my bank, and hopefully it will keep the transmission healthy well past 200k.

I agree with Vee - nobody sells their high mileage Taurus, because it's worth more to me than I would get for it. A good running car, especially one where you know the bulk of the maintenance history, is worth something to you. Low-mileage Tauruses don't fetch big money, so high-mileage ones certainly won't.

 

[fdogg96]

I've got 370,000 miles on one rebuilt tranny and motor.

 

[KhanTyranitar]

These guys are absolutely right about the transmission. It is the weak link. Even so, just budget a rebuild in somewhere along the way, the cost of ownership factoring that in is not any higher than anything else.

The engine can probably get to around 300,000 miles, though how long it actually lasts has a lot to do with how it was broken in. If it was broken in by a grandma or the owners manual was followed closely, it will be hard pressed to last that long. If was broken in by a more aggressive driver or was broken in on a dyno, it might be able to last 400,000 - 500,000 before it might need a rebuild. Of course this is assuming that the engines are actually cared for properly and that any oil leaks are fixed.

The reason that the hard break in is more effective is that it fully expands the piston rings during the break in period, which allows the hone pattern to wear down the rings until they perfectly fit the cylinder. If the rings do not fully expand, they will polish the hone pattern off on the high points before they fully engage, and this will prevent the rings from ever seating properly. Then the increased blowby from improperly seated rings causes chemical wear that reduces the engines life.

The hard break in method is the only one that almost guarantees a perfect seal. This perfect seal means less chemical wear over the life of the engine. The easy break in method outlined in the owners manual is obsolete, and the automakers do not use it themselves. They break some of their high performance engines in on the dyno before putting it into the car.

 

[egiroux]

QUOTE (Vee @ Jun 5 2010, 09:57 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=809693

I don't know why anyone would pay anything for a car at 200,000 miles[/b]

Probably because they can't afford something with 50K, 100K etc. It can be inexpensive if you can work on it yourself. If you pay for labor, forget about it being economical.

 

[mwt]

I had a 94GL, I put a cooler and a spin on filter on it as soon as it was out of factory warranty. The Dealer said it would void the warranty. :wtf:

It made it 246K before the tranny went.
I put a cooler and spin on filter on my 2000SES that I bought with almost 70K on it. The tranny went at 146K. I had it rebuilt with HD parts and a shift kit. It currently has 294K on it.

We bought a 2000SEL with around 80K if I remember right, Cooler and spin on added. It quit shifting into OD at around 135K.

The trannies are a crap shoot on these cars but Synthetic Fluid and a cooler definitely help them last longer.

Mike
B)

 

[mediarocker]

Its been my experience to see numerous G2 Tauruses around with 300k on the clock. Here in Alabama cars and trucks get driven to hell and back.

 

[chrisct]

my 99 has 174,000 original tranny .motor this car is serviced 30,000 tranny oil,3500-4000 miles car is strong as ox i though my tranny bad was speed sensor now drive like new ..my Duratec strong .and tranny as well ,we have five Taurus's all are well over 165,000 all orginal motors and trannys

 

[zorrex]

It seems as though most Ford cars, including the Taurus, are EXCELLENT, long-lasting cars, save for just a few flaws that drastically reduce the number of these cars getting to 200k miles (again, not just Taurus). Things like head gaskets, rod bearings, and very specific tranny failures come to mind.

 

[KhanTyranitar]

Well, and many of these things are maintenance related. Ford's tend to be picky about maintenance. You can take a Honda and neglect it, and it will run say 150K without any problems, then everything goes at once and the car is toast. If you neglect a Ford, it can go a long time, maybe about the same, but it will let you know that it has been neglected, and these issues will crop up over time.

If you take care of them, the Honda and Ford will last about as long, with the Honda going longer between major problems, but parts cost a lot more, and the Ford can be more economical to repair.

I know I'm overly generalizing here, but you guys get the idea.

 

[major]