Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jbaker

Soon To Be Taurus Owner

Recommended Posts

Hello, new here and to taurus, I currently have owned my first ford for a year now, its a 07 CVPI.

 

I am considering a 2000 taurus with either 76 or 95 thousand miles. Both cars have been regulary maintained and look from the pictures really good.

 

If I continue to maintain it is 200,000 miles a crazy thought??  they do have the 3.0 vulcan engine.

 

One final thought does anyone have a small"  dirty laundry" check list directly for a 00 taurus that I should look for?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being that low of mileage, you should be able to get 200K out of one of them with no problem. Maintenance is key.

 

Ask if the trans was serviced, and ask HOW it was done. If they say "oh they hooked it up to a machine at jiffy lube", then run away, if they say "yes, every 30K miles, trans filter, pan gasket and fluid were replaced each time" than relax, you've found your car.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the trany fluid hasn't been changed is it too late to start? I am not going to know how it was serviced but it was in a fleet gov/railroad admin cars.

Edited by jbaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just pull the dipstick, if its clean and doesn't smell burnt your good.  Vulcans of that era suffer from very few problems when serviced properly.  Most likely things that will fail or need replacement are the cam synchro, and the timing cover gasket/water pump. Keep the fluids fresh it it will be good. 

 

Rust will most likely bring an end to the vehicle if it is maintained properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're out in Rockford, huh? Welcome to the Midwest Chapter. :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey!

 

Good to see you made from CVN to here. :thumbs:

 

Good luck with your purchase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can see if the trans pan was recently serviced professionally by examining it under the car. It should be noticeably cleaner than the rest of the under body, and of course, have no leaks.

 

If you experience a shudder upon hard acceleration (the car kinda wiggling from side to side very quickly), that's a sign that the trans needs to be serviced. Our '97 Sable (Vulcan) would do this if it had been a long time since the trans was serviced (pan gasket, filter, fluid). Having it properly serviced cured the shudder immediately.

 

*Edit, last I heard, that Sable was past the 200,000 mile mark with its original trans. The guy moved away (was in the Armed Forces) so I lost track of it after that. IF you experience a trans problem in  your Taurus, take it to a shop or dealer that will actually diagnose it, not say "oh, its a Taurus, must need a rebuild". Twice we were told that about the Sable but both times it ended up being a very inexpensive repair.

Edited by JohnTaurus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, new here and to taurus, I currently have owned my first ford for a year now, its a 07 CVPI.

 

I am considering a 2000 taurus with either 76 or 95 thousand miles. Both cars have been regulary maintained and look from the pictures really good.

 

If I continue to maintain it is 200,000 miles a crazy thought??  they do have the 3.0 vulcan engine.

 

One final thought does anyone have a small"  dirty laundry" check list directly for a 00 taurus that I should look for?

 

:WELCOME:  to  :tsoc:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not ready to post a link until now, but here is a link to the Taurus I am looking at for my daughter.

Good tip on the pan and the trans shudder. One of CVN members said you guys would help ,  Thanks any more comments are welcome

 

http://www.chicagomotors.info/2385/2000-Ford-Taurus-SE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh, FFV.  I would walk away. I'm sure someone else knows more about it but I believe there are some major differences in electronics, as well as the fuel system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FFV model's fuel mileage on regular gasoline will typically be diminished, due to the ECU's different programming and injectors that are designed to accomodate E85. So, keep that in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure it's going to be that big a difference though…marginal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told that the FFV would require another FFV if the engine ever needed replacement. In other words, according to this person, you cannot take a non-FFV engine out of another Taurus/Sable and put it in an FFV model easily. As Brian mentioned, the computer, fuel system, etc. are different.

 

That car appears to be rust free, but a good inspection would go a long ways to assure you you're not buying a rust bucket. If I were you, I'd be open to buying a Taurus in another part of the country (South East, South West, or North West areas have good used cars with no rust issues) and going to get it or having it shipped to you. It could be worth the expense to get one without any rust whatsoever. Then, you can protect it against rust and not be forced to scrap the car with a good drivetrain at, say, 150K because it's rusted out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Operability and fuel economy are hardly affected.

 

Yes PCM, fuel lines, tank, injectors, fuel pump, necessary electronics, are obviously difference.  Motor has some differences as well.

 

But they still get about the same MPG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ethanol may burn cleaner but it is not as efficient and burns a lot hotter. I believe Ford recommends spark plug replacement every 30k on those early flex fuel engines. Might be different if you just run regular gas or E10.

I'm really not a fan of ethanol, it has way too many negatives to make it beneficial in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^agreed 100%. I'm not a fan of any fuel that requires more energy to manufacture than it yields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ethanol may burn cleaner but it is not as efficient and burns a lot hotter. I believe Ford recommends spark plug replacement every 30k on those early flex fuel engines. Might be different if you just run regular gas or E10. I'm really not a fan of ethanol, it has way too many negatives to make it beneficial in my opinion.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't buy a 2000 model Taurus or Sable to begin with (they changed too many things for the better after then, especially between 2003-2005) and I would also stay away from FFV for the reasons above. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because things changed doesn't make it bad.

 

I have 197K miles on my 2000 DOHC.  It still runs and drives fine minus the AC comp leaking out and a rattle/knock from some suspension component.  Expected on both with 197k miles and being 14 years old!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Word.

 

I've seen several Y2K Taurus/Sables with well over 200K on them. There was one near me for cheap with like 250K on it and a blown head gasket (Vulcan), still ran and drove. I was half tempted to buy it and fix it and see just how many miles I could wring out of it, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not understanding the hate for FFV. Not my first choice in engines but I would choose it over the 3.8L. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because things changed doesn't make it bad.

 

I have 197K miles on my 2000 DOHC.  It still runs and drives fine minus the AC comp leaking out and a rattle/knock from some suspension component.  Expected on both with 197k miles and being 14 years old!

 

I never said it was a bad model year, I just would rather have a newer car with some of the additional things cars got afterwards. Plus, around here, older cars are bound to have more rust. I've seen 2004 and '05 bulls with lots of rust already :/

 

Not understanding the hate for FFV. Not my first choice in engines but I would choose it over the 3.8L. 

 

I don't hate the FFV, it's just that I wouldn't want it. Parts are going to be more expensive and the small dip in fuel economy has already been talked about. Plus I would much rather have a Duratec over any Vulcan (I can't go back! Haha)

 

I would take *anything* over an Essex....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not understanding the hate for FFV. Not my first choice in engines but I would choose it over the 3.8L. 

 

 

Ethanol is just a garbage fuel, drives up the prices of food just so the "biofuel" people are happy.  Ethanol will see a 10-20% drop in fuel economy over a similar gas motor. Look up the gas equivalency of ethanol, its 1.5 or so gallons.  So it takes 1.5 gallons of ethanol to equal the same energy in a gallon of regular gas. Ethanol sucks in cold weather too, anything below 40 degrees F and it has a hard time starting.  During winter, E85 becomes more like E70 or E75 to solve that problem.  Same thing with bio diesel, its terrible in newer motors with these high pressure common rail systems, ruins them.  Good stuff in old non direct injection diesels though, those engine will run on anything. 

If I ever buy a newer vehicle with a flex fuel badge, the first thing I would do is tear that stupid emblem off.

 

That's the end of my rant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ethanol is just a garbage fuel, drives up the prices of food just so the "biofuel" people are happy.  Ethanol will see a 10-20% drop in fuel economy over a similar gas motor. Look up the gas equivalency of ethanol, its 1.5 or so gallons.  So it takes 1.5 gallons of ethanol to equal the same energy in a gallon of regular gas. Ethanol sucks in cold weather too, anything below 40 degrees F and it has a hard time starting.  During winter, E85 becomes more like E70 or E75 to solve that problem.  Same thing with bio diesel, its terrible in newer motors with these high pressure common rail systems, ruins them.  Good stuff in old non direct injection diesels though, those engine will run on anything. 

If I ever buy a newer vehicle with a flex fuel badge, the first thing I would do is tear that stupid emblem off.

 

That's the end of my rant.

 

I guess I just don't see what's so bad about a flex fuel engine.   :dunno:  Just because it can run on E85 doesn't mean you have to use it.

 

[threadjack]

I'm not arguing that ethanol sucks. It does. Adding a substance with lower energy content to gasoline lowers the overall energy available in the fuel. This results in more fuel being used to accomplish the same amount of work which means you need to fill up at the pump more often. And yet we are told that ethanol is lowering our reliance on foreign oil.... yeah. I don't see how that works when I'm spending almost $200/month at the pump when it could be a little less if I had access to straight gas. Would make a difference on my shoestring budget. [/threadjack]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...