Taurus question
- Thread starter Lubener
- Start date
- Status
I have a 95 Taurus and never heard of spline problems. Most autotransmission has its issues. Also have a 2001 PSA Citroen C5 2.0 16v, with an AL4 autotran, considered a weak transmission, too. My citroen car is with 160k on the original powerplant, never oppened and running great. Just do basic maintenance and they run for long.
You should provide a year range, price range or something to help parameterize your position.
FYI: My dear mother bought a 1991 Taurus GL with 16K. It as a "Ford Program Car" (a returned fleet car).
In her case it was a Budget Rent-a-Car.
The trans began shifting weirdly around 54K. I changed the fluid and realized no improvement.
Within 2 days Ford contacted her by mail admitting to bad transmissions. Their offer was to fix/replace the unit if the car was under 60K. That would've been in 1997.
The "Ford Rebuilt" transmission (it bore a sticker attesting to its in-house rebuild) did its job for 4 years.
The replaced unit failed in exactly the same way. We sold it for $800 in 2001 and she bought a CPO Saab 9-5 SE.
The question for you is "when did Ford finally stop building deficient transmissions for that car?"
I'm a firm believer in Ford's planned tinkering with transmissions in order to make cars die earlier than necessary.
Remember, only Ford had Aisin-Warner make bad AW-55-50 transmissions. They did this to their Volvo line. The 55-50 is a solid transmission in Saabs, Vauxhalls, Toyotas, Lexus and other lines.
If nothing else, look into the Taurus Ford built after the FIVE HUNDRED was discontinued. IIRC the Taurus was absent for 2 years. The FIVE HUNDRED's CVT was trash. I read that Ford couldn't deliver replacement units fast enough for those things.
Good luck.
FYI: My dear mother bought a 1991 Taurus GL with 16K. It as a "Ford Program Car" (a returned fleet car).
In her case it was a Budget Rent-a-Car.
The trans began shifting weirdly around 54K. I changed the fluid and realized no improvement.
Within 2 days Ford contacted her by mail admitting to bad transmissions. Their offer was to fix/replace the unit if the car was under 60K. That would've been in 1997.
The "Ford Rebuilt" transmission (it bore a sticker attesting to its in-house rebuild) did its job for 4 years.
The replaced unit failed in exactly the same way. We sold it for $800 in 2001 and she bought a CPO Saab 9-5 SE.
The question for you is "when did Ford finally stop building deficient transmissions for that car?"
I'm a firm believer in Ford's planned tinkering with transmissions in order to make cars die earlier than necessary.
Remember, only Ford had Aisin-Warner make bad AW-55-50 transmissions. They did this to their Volvo line. The 55-50 is a solid transmission in Saabs, Vauxhalls, Toyotas, Lexus and other lines.
If nothing else, look into the Taurus Ford built after the FIVE HUNDRED was discontinued. IIRC the Taurus was absent for 2 years. The FIVE HUNDRED's CVT was trash. I read that Ford couldn't deliver replacement units fast enough for those things.
Good luck.
The 4th generation didn't have the transmission issues that the earlier generations did. There were always some sort of revisions happening to the transmission. The 3.0L Duratec was always mated to the better AX4N transmission - which was certainly better than the Accord V6 transmissions.
The Vulcan had the AX4S transmission, which wasn't terrible either towards the end.
The did suffer from overheating. Definitely would install a cooler
The Vulcan had the AX4S transmission, which wasn't terrible either towards the end.
The did suffer from overheating. Definitely would install a cooler
Originally Posted By: Kira
You should provide a year range, price range or something to help parameterize your position.
FYI: My dear mother bought a 1991 Taurus GL with 16K. It as a "Ford Program Car" (a returned fleet car).
In her case it was a Budget Rent-a-Car.
The trans began shifting weirdly around 54K. I changed the fluid and realized no improvement.
Within 2 days Ford contacted her by mail admitting to bad transmissions. Their offer was to fix/replace the unit if the car was under 60K. That would've been in 1997.
The "Ford Rebuilt" transmission (it bore a sticker attesting to its in-house rebuild) did its job for 4 years.
The replaced unit failed in exactly the same way. We sold it for $800 in 2001 and she bought a CPO Saab 9-5 SE.
The question for you is "when did Ford finally stop building deficient transmissions for that car?"
I'm a firm believer in Ford's planned tinkering with transmissions in order to make cars die earlier than necessary.
Remember, only Ford had Aisin-Warner make bad AW-55-50 transmissions. They did this to their Volvo line. The 55-50 is a solid transmission in Saabs, Vauxhalls, Toyotas, Lexus and other lines.
If nothing else, look into the Taurus Ford built after the FIVE HUNDRED was discontinued. IIRC the Taurus was absent for 2 years. The FIVE HUNDRED's CVT was trash. I read that Ford couldn't deliver replacement units fast enough for those things.
Good luck.
Yes, but between your mothers 91 and mine 95, there had 28 upgrades and updates, until the N model. Maybe the 86 to 93 models that were the most sold car in america had a good fair of issues and did make such the bad reputation on axe transmissions.
You should provide a year range, price range or something to help parameterize your position.
FYI: My dear mother bought a 1991 Taurus GL with 16K. It as a "Ford Program Car" (a returned fleet car).
In her case it was a Budget Rent-a-Car.
The trans began shifting weirdly around 54K. I changed the fluid and realized no improvement.
Within 2 days Ford contacted her by mail admitting to bad transmissions. Their offer was to fix/replace the unit if the car was under 60K. That would've been in 1997.
The "Ford Rebuilt" transmission (it bore a sticker attesting to its in-house rebuild) did its job for 4 years.
The replaced unit failed in exactly the same way. We sold it for $800 in 2001 and she bought a CPO Saab 9-5 SE.
The question for you is "when did Ford finally stop building deficient transmissions for that car?"
I'm a firm believer in Ford's planned tinkering with transmissions in order to make cars die earlier than necessary.
Remember, only Ford had Aisin-Warner make bad AW-55-50 transmissions. They did this to their Volvo line. The 55-50 is a solid transmission in Saabs, Vauxhalls, Toyotas, Lexus and other lines.
If nothing else, look into the Taurus Ford built after the FIVE HUNDRED was discontinued. IIRC the Taurus was absent for 2 years. The FIVE HUNDRED's CVT was trash. I read that Ford couldn't deliver replacement units fast enough for those things.
Good luck.
Yes, but between your mothers 91 and mine 95, there had 28 upgrades and updates, until the N model. Maybe the 86 to 93 models that were the most sold car in america had a good fair of issues and did make such the bad reputation on axe transmissions.
JTK
$100 Site Donor 2025
Anything ~2001+ with the AX4N IMO. The AT is only part of the puzzle with this vintage Taurii. Cooling system issues can get costly with them due to labor involved.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Kira
You should provide a year range, price range or something to help parameterize your position.
FYI: My dear mother bought a 1991 Taurus GL with 16K. It as a "Ford Program Car" (a returned fleet car).
In her case it was a Budget Rent-a-Car.
The trans began shifting weirdly around 54K. I changed the fluid and realized no improvement.
Within 2 days Ford contacted her by mail admitting to bad transmissions. Their offer was to fix/replace the unit if the car was under 60K. That would've been in 1997.
The "Ford Rebuilt" transmission (it bore a sticker attesting to its in-house rebuild) did its job for 4 years.
The replaced unit failed in exactly the same way. We sold it for $800 in 2001 and she bought a CPO Saab 9-5 SE.
The question for you is "when did Ford finally stop building deficient transmissions for that car?"
I'm a firm believer in Ford's planned tinkering with transmissions in order to make cars die earlier than necessary.
Remember, only Ford had Aisin-Warner make bad AW-55-50 transmissions. They did this to their Volvo line. The 55-50 is a solid transmission in Saabs, Vauxhalls, Toyotas, Lexus and other lines.
If nothing else, look into the Taurus Ford built after the FIVE HUNDRED was discontinued. IIRC the Taurus was absent for 2 years. The FIVE HUNDRED's CVT was trash. I read that Ford couldn't deliver replacement units fast enough for those things.
Good luck.
We just bought a 2006 Ford Five Hundred with the Aisin Warner AWF21 six speed automatic FWD. They seem to be solid but the CVT used 2005-2007 AWD got a bad name but I have no personal CVT experience. The 2008+ Taurus's got the new Ford/GM six speed I have read.
While Ford did build the 2004 Taurus for fleet sales through 2007 the 2005-2007 Five Hundred and the 2008-2009 Ford Taurus line was built to the first gen Volvo S80 chassis since Ford had purchased Volvo and wanted a new chassis for the Taurus line.
Last month we got our 2006 Ford Five Hundred SEL with 110K miles in great condition for $5K even cash at the Ford dealership. They gave the owner of the past 10 years $3K on trade for a new car.
$5K-$10K will buy a nice 2005-2009 Ford 500/Taurus on the Volvo S80 (1998-2006 generation). The 2008-2008 got the 3.5L engine vs the 3.0L. Our 3.0 had a lot of power/speed if you give it enough gas to unlock the torque converter.
Take off light on the gas and it will be in 6th gear with TC locked at 40 MPH. Yes it seems under powered in that point. This is how it can get 30 MPG. If you want to move just go to 50% throttle and it will shift to 3rd and MOVE.
The 6 speed vs the old 4 speed is awesome BUT a different driving experience.
While we only have 2500 miles put on our 1600 miles was put on it in two days and all went well with single digit temps on the MN end of of our round trip.
Without a question the 2005-2009 generation of these cars can be a good value. Personally I would stay away from the CVT transmissions. They were only in the 2005-2007 versions labeled Five Hundred on the trunk lid. The SE has cloth seats whereas the SEL and Limited came with leather the best I can tell.
Keep in mind 2005-2007 Ford Taurus fleet cars were basically the same as the 2004 old style Taurus the best I can tell but may a good option if the price is right.
You should provide a year range, price range or something to help parameterize your position.
FYI: My dear mother bought a 1991 Taurus GL with 16K. It as a "Ford Program Car" (a returned fleet car).
In her case it was a Budget Rent-a-Car.
The trans began shifting weirdly around 54K. I changed the fluid and realized no improvement.
Within 2 days Ford contacted her by mail admitting to bad transmissions. Their offer was to fix/replace the unit if the car was under 60K. That would've been in 1997.
The "Ford Rebuilt" transmission (it bore a sticker attesting to its in-house rebuild) did its job for 4 years.
The replaced unit failed in exactly the same way. We sold it for $800 in 2001 and she bought a CPO Saab 9-5 SE.
The question for you is "when did Ford finally stop building deficient transmissions for that car?"
I'm a firm believer in Ford's planned tinkering with transmissions in order to make cars die earlier than necessary.
Remember, only Ford had Aisin-Warner make bad AW-55-50 transmissions. They did this to their Volvo line. The 55-50 is a solid transmission in Saabs, Vauxhalls, Toyotas, Lexus and other lines.
If nothing else, look into the Taurus Ford built after the FIVE HUNDRED was discontinued. IIRC the Taurus was absent for 2 years. The FIVE HUNDRED's CVT was trash. I read that Ford couldn't deliver replacement units fast enough for those things.
Good luck.
We just bought a 2006 Ford Five Hundred with the Aisin Warner AWF21 six speed automatic FWD. They seem to be solid but the CVT used 2005-2007 AWD got a bad name but I have no personal CVT experience. The 2008+ Taurus's got the new Ford/GM six speed I have read.
While Ford did build the 2004 Taurus for fleet sales through 2007 the 2005-2007 Five Hundred and the 2008-2009 Ford Taurus line was built to the first gen Volvo S80 chassis since Ford had purchased Volvo and wanted a new chassis for the Taurus line.
Last month we got our 2006 Ford Five Hundred SEL with 110K miles in great condition for $5K even cash at the Ford dealership. They gave the owner of the past 10 years $3K on trade for a new car.
$5K-$10K will buy a nice 2005-2009 Ford 500/Taurus on the Volvo S80 (1998-2006 generation). The 2008-2008 got the 3.5L engine vs the 3.0L. Our 3.0 had a lot of power/speed if you give it enough gas to unlock the torque converter.
Take off light on the gas and it will be in 6th gear with TC locked at 40 MPH. Yes it seems under powered in that point. This is how it can get 30 MPG. If you want to move just go to 50% throttle and it will shift to 3rd and MOVE.
While we only have 2500 miles put on our 1600 miles was put on it in two days and all went well with single digit temps on the MN end of of our round trip.
Without a question the 2005-2009 generation of these cars can be a good value. Personally I would stay away from the CVT transmissions. They were only in the 2005-2007 versions labeled Five Hundred on the trunk lid. The SE has cloth seats whereas the SEL and Limited came with leather the best I can tell.
Keep in mind 2005-2007 Ford Taurus fleet cars were basically the same as the 2004 old style Taurus the best I can tell but may a good option if the price is right.
2000 Ford Taurus (DOHC) wagon...nothing but grins.
I bought it in 2008 with 90k miles on it and it now has 145k miles. We stopped using it as our family car this year, but I still drive it to work once a week and take it on business trips in the state.
Comfortable cruiser...love this car.
I have zero issues with it (other than just recently replacing the HVAC). It has good power and gets decent MPG on the highway.
My wife had a 1993 Mercury Sable that she bought in 1998. It had the transmission replaced in 2002. Transmission died again in 2007 and we sold it. Nice car...always wished we'd taken more trips it in (comfortable cruiser and great in the snow).
Comfortable cruiser...love this car.
My wife had a 1993 Mercury Sable that she bought in 1998. It had the transmission replaced in 2002. Transmission died again in 2007 and we sold it. Nice car...always wished we'd taken more trips it in (comfortable cruiser and great in the snow).
The 2005-2007 Taurus was "the choice" for company cars and I had three of them. While I didn't put in excess of 100,000 miles on any of them-the miles I did put on before giving back were about 75,000. The cars ran great-although the front seats did get uncomfortable after awhile. I had a Ford "500" after that and who ever said above the CVTs left a lot to be desired was spot on. That thing would clunk on the freeway like crazy. Some of the Mercury versions had regular transmissions in them, and those would be a sound buy.
Last edited:
Splines sheared in the piece of [censored] in my sig.
The transmission will be the least of your issues. There's also the terrible cat converters in this car, the wonky cam synchro, the weak coil pack, the clogging heater core, etc, etc.
Seriously, unless you're prepared to dump several grand into keeping the car on the road, you should probably just avoid the 4th gen taurus altogether.
The transmission will be the least of your issues. There's also the terrible cat converters in this car, the wonky cam synchro, the weak coil pack, the clogging heater core, etc, etc.
Seriously, unless you're prepared to dump several grand into keeping the car on the road, you should probably just avoid the 4th gen taurus altogether.
Last edited:
I owned a 92 taurus for a very short time. I forget the mileage but it was fairly low. The body and interior were mint. I bought it very cheap because of a dead battery. I put a new battery in it and off we went. Problems became obvious once it was driven for a while and fully warmed up. It would slip from second gear. Even worse when you shut it off it would not start until it cooled off. I found out that the head gasket was going. I had it with that POS and off to the wreckers it went.
Originally Posted By: CKN
The 2005-2007 Taurus was "the choice" for company cars and I had three of them. While I didn't put in excess of 100,000 miles on any of them-the miles I did put on before giving back were about 75,000. The cars ran great-although the front seats did get uncomfortable after awhile. I had a Ford "500" after that and who ever said above the CVTs left a lot to be desired was spot on. That thing would clunk on the freeway like crazy. Some of the Mercury versions had regular transmissions in them, and those would be a sound buy.
CKN Ford 500 did have CVT's in the AWD's and in a few FWD versions. The Aisin Warner six speed AWF21 is what we have in our 500. The Aisin transmissions are now the most used in the world per the article below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Aisin_transmissions
While 'offically' there were no 2005-2007 Ford Taurus's they were sold as fleet cars however. Much like the Chevy S-10 Blazer sales ending in 2002 officially but were still sold 2003-2005 in fleet sales as I understand it.
The 2005-2007 Taurus was "the choice" for company cars and I had three of them. While I didn't put in excess of 100,000 miles on any of them-the miles I did put on before giving back were about 75,000. The cars ran great-although the front seats did get uncomfortable after awhile. I had a Ford "500" after that and who ever said above the CVTs left a lot to be desired was spot on. That thing would clunk on the freeway like crazy. Some of the Mercury versions had regular transmissions in them, and those would be a sound buy.
CKN Ford 500 did have CVT's in the AWD's and in a few FWD versions. The Aisin Warner six speed AWF21 is what we have in our 500. The Aisin transmissions are now the most used in the world per the article below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Aisin_transmissions
While 'offically' there were no 2005-2007 Ford Taurus's they were sold as fleet cars however. Much like the Chevy S-10 Blazer sales ending in 2002 officially but were still sold 2003-2005 in fleet sales as I understand it.
Originally Posted By: Subdued
Splines sheared in the piece of [censored] in my sig.
The transmission will be the least of your issues. There's also the terrible cat converters in this car, the wonky cam synchro, the weak coil pack, the clogging heater core, etc, etc.
Seriously, unless you're prepared to dump several grand into keeping the car on the road, you should probably just avoid the 4th gen taurus altogether.
I have heard the same. I did confirm that from around 2001-2005, the torque converter hu/spline area was about half the thickness as it should have been. The Freestars were affected as well, there was a recall on those but not the Taurus.
I did take a look at a 53k mile "creampuff" but walked away as I seen a lot of copper particles in the overflow bottle from someone dumping stop leak in there.
Splines sheared in the piece of [censored] in my sig.
The transmission will be the least of your issues. There's also the terrible cat converters in this car, the wonky cam synchro, the weak coil pack, the clogging heater core, etc, etc.
Seriously, unless you're prepared to dump several grand into keeping the car on the road, you should probably just avoid the 4th gen taurus altogether.
I have heard the same. I did confirm that from around 2001-2005, the torque converter hu/spline area was about half the thickness as it should have been. The Freestars were affected as well, there was a recall on those but not the Taurus.
I did take a look at a 53k mile "creampuff" but walked away as I seen a lot of copper particles in the overflow bottle from someone dumping stop leak in there.
In Florida the old Taurii are famous for their faulty o-rings in the AC line connections. We used to make a ton of money replacing them...
FWIW a friend has a 2005 Freestyle AWD with the CVT transmission and it has over 150,000 miles and still going. The car as been well maintained, though at the dealer with fluid changes, etc.
- Status
