1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT Super High Output
- ihartmacz
- Senior Standardshifter
- Posts: 983
- Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:45 am
- Cars: 1998 Ford Mustang Coupe
1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT Super High Output
Performance: 3
Handling: 4
Practicality: 10
Reliability: 9
Cost to own: 9
Feasibility of Sexual Encounters: 10
Performance:
There are two engines available for the Taurus/Sable. The engines available are:
3.8L V6: "Essex" 140HP / 210ft-lbs
3.0L "Vulcan" V6: 140HP / 160ft-lbs
The Sable I was driving was equipped with the 3.0L.
Performance was decent, but for a heavy car the 3.8L is a good choice for people wanting 50 more foot-pounds of torque. There's use able power all over the rev band.
The transmission used is synchronized - meaning that it cannot skip gears.
Example: 4-3-2-1 NOT 4-1
These transaxles have major problems and can fail often. This is because it has to shift more then other transmissions.
There's not a lot to say about performance. Not good, not great - just okay.
Handling: Hahaha. With turning comes a lot of body roll. Steering is about as numb as you can get. My Buick's power steering was more tight than the Sable's; you could literally just toss the wheel and it would turn.
This is great for relaxed driving. Easy to cruise and chill.
Practicality: You can't get much more practicle. Lot's of room and lots of places to store things. There's a standard airbag for the driver only. Speedometer only reads to 85mph.
Reliability: Car always started when it was needed. Had to replace the rear caliper because it was seized. Other than that, no problems.
Cost to own: Cheap. Parts are cheap and gas is cheap since it's pretty easy on it.
Feasibility of Sexual Encounters: Bench seats! Lots of places to put condoms and the seats fold pretty flat. You almost have all the room you need to get "your shit going" in this car.
Handling: 4
Practicality: 10
Reliability: 9
Cost to own: 9
Feasibility of Sexual Encounters: 10
Performance:
There are two engines available for the Taurus/Sable. The engines available are:
3.8L V6: "Essex" 140HP / 210ft-lbs
3.0L "Vulcan" V6: 140HP / 160ft-lbs
The Sable I was driving was equipped with the 3.0L.
Performance was decent, but for a heavy car the 3.8L is a good choice for people wanting 50 more foot-pounds of torque. There's use able power all over the rev band.
The transmission used is synchronized - meaning that it cannot skip gears.
Example: 4-3-2-1 NOT 4-1
These transaxles have major problems and can fail often. This is because it has to shift more then other transmissions.
There's not a lot to say about performance. Not good, not great - just okay.
Handling: Hahaha. With turning comes a lot of body roll. Steering is about as numb as you can get. My Buick's power steering was more tight than the Sable's; you could literally just toss the wheel and it would turn.
This is great for relaxed driving. Easy to cruise and chill.
Practicality: You can't get much more practicle. Lot's of room and lots of places to store things. There's a standard airbag for the driver only. Speedometer only reads to 85mph.
Reliability: Car always started when it was needed. Had to replace the rear caliper because it was seized. Other than that, no problems.
Cost to own: Cheap. Parts are cheap and gas is cheap since it's pretty easy on it.
Feasibility of Sexual Encounters: Bench seats! Lots of places to put condoms and the seats fold pretty flat. You almost have all the room you need to get "your shit going" in this car.
Last edited by ihartmacz on Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 11612
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:44 pm
- Cars: '08 Jeep Liberty
- Location: Greater Detroit Area
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
If yo not sho 'bout it, why did yo waste yo tom postin' bout it?
'08 Jeep Liberty 6-Speed MT - "Last of the Mohicans"
-
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 6927
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:51 pm
- Cars: 1994 Corolla, 1990 Miata
- Location: Chicago, IL
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
Give this guy a medal for most hilarious newbieRope-Pusher wrote:If yo not sho 'bout it, why did yo waste yo tom postin' bout it?
- potownrob
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 7833
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:35 pm
- Cars: '17 CX-5 GT
- Location: Dutchess County
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
It took me a while to figure out why soap on a rope thought ihartmacs wasn't sure about his car experience. I even re-read the post looking for where he says he's not sure about something. Then I saw the thread title and laughed. Poor kid must've missed the 90's (not to mention the 80's) .
ClutchFork wrote:...So I started carrying a stick of firewood with me and that became my parking brake.
- AHTOXA
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 14693
- Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 6:31 pm
- Cars: '19 4RUNNER TRD ORP
- Location: Irving, TX
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
Seems like you rated it pretty high. I had a '90 (or '91?) Taurus back like 6-7 years ago. That pile of dung was in the shop every Friday. Fuel pump, 3 transmissions, a number of alternators, batteries, subframe, you name it... Only had 80 some thousand miles on it, too.
'19 Toyota 4Runner TRD ORP
'12 Suzuki V-Strom 650
'12 Suzuki V-Strom 650
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
overall, this car sucks. lol
my girlfriend's mom has one and it's a pain in the ass. brakes go out often (probably due to being too small for a big hunk of metal), transmission has been replaced at 40k, and there's strange sounds and creaks.
i think she's finally ready to give it up
my girlfriend's mom has one and it's a pain in the ass. brakes go out often (probably due to being too small for a big hunk of metal), transmission has been replaced at 40k, and there's strange sounds and creaks.
i think she's finally ready to give it up
2012 VW GTI - 6MT
2001 Infiniti QX4 - 4AT
2001 Infiniti QX4 - 4AT
- theholycow
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 16021
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:36 pm
- Cars: '80 Buick LeSabre 4.1 5MT
- Location: Glocester, RI
- Contact:
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
I had to look it up. It sure is obese for a 1993 model. At 3600 pounds, it's only 200 pounds short of a 1993 Crown Victoria! The Taurus started in (1986?) as a futuristic car and indeed ushered in a new era, the end of corners and lines in favor of [relatively] sleek curves on even the most dowdy of vehicles. 1993 was the height of lightweight cars, before the safety race and horsepower race heated up. Saturns (they were all small and all plastic) and Ford Escorts were all over the place and SUVs were still known as "trucks" and driven only by people who actually needed to go off road; soccer moms were driving station wagons and minivans. WTF was a Taurus, a mid-size family sedan, doing weighing 3600 pounds in that world?vedran wrote:(probably due to being too small for a big hunk of metal)
1980 Buick LeSabre 4.1L 5MT
Put your car in your sig!
Learn to launch/FAQs/lugging/misused terms: meta-sig
Put your car in your sig!
Learn to launch/FAQs/lugging/misused terms: meta-sig
watkins wrote:Humans have rear-biased AWD. Cows have 4WD
- AHTOXA
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 14693
- Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 6:31 pm
- Cars: '19 4RUNNER TRD ORP
- Location: Irving, TX
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
vedran wrote:
i think she's finally ready to give it up
'19 Toyota 4Runner TRD ORP
'12 Suzuki V-Strom 650
'12 Suzuki V-Strom 650
- ihartmacz
- Senior Standardshifter
- Posts: 983
- Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:45 am
- Cars: 1998 Ford Mustang Coupe
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
/\
|
|
Fixed.
|
|
Fixed.
HHAHAHHAAHTOXA wrote:vedran wrote:
i think she's finally ready to give it up
- potownrob
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 7833
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:35 pm
- Cars: '17 CX-5 GT
- Location: Dutchess County
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT SHO
I think its first year was 85. My friend's mom had either an 85 or 86 Taurus wagon 5 speed - yes, they did offer a 5 speed manual on the first gen Taurus. I vaguely remember something about my friend's mom saying they only came on the wagon due to something with the extra room under the car; might be mixing that up with something else, or maybe she was misinformed. As far as I know that Taurus wasn't too troublesome. She bought a 95 Taurus on year-end special once the 96 models came out to replace the older Taurus. Not sure how that one fared but it didn't have too much of a chance since my friend had crashed it lo later than 98. My step mom had a 92 Taurus which was nothing but trouble but was pretty quick (3.8 litre). It was cool they offered the 3.8 on the GL and not just the LX models. You could tell the 92 Taurus from later ones by the grey bumpers. I thought it looked cool.theholycow wrote:I had to look it up. It sure is obese for a 1993 model. At 3600 pounds, it's only 200 pounds short of a 1993 Crown Victoria! The Taurus started in (1986?) as a futuristic car and indeed ushered in a new era, the end of corners and lines in favor of [relatively] sleek curves on even the most dowdy of vehicles. 1993 was the height of lightweight cars, before the safety race and horsepower race heated up. Saturns (they were all small and all plastic) and Ford Escorts were all over the place and SUVs were still known as "trucks" and driven only by people who actually needed to go off road; soccer moms were driving station wagons and minivans. WTF was a Taurus, a mid-size family sedan, doing weighing 3600 pounds in that world?vedran wrote:(probably due to being too small for a big hunk of metal)
ClutchFork wrote:...So I started carrying a stick of firewood with me and that became my parking brake.
- RITmusic2k
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 2078
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:32 pm
- Cars: 2004 BMW 330i ZHP
- Location: Anaheim, CA
- Contact:
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT Super High Output
Why did the thread title get changed from 'SHO' to 'Super High Output'? Did someone have an issue with the acronym?
-
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 11612
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:44 pm
- Cars: '08 Jeep Liberty
- Location: Greater Detroit Area
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT Super High Output
SHO 'nuff.
'08 Jeep Liberty 6-Speed MT - "Last of the Mohicans"
- potownrob
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 7833
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:35 pm
- Cars: '17 CX-5 GT
- Location: Dutchess County
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT Super High Output
RITmusic2k wrote:Why did the thread title get changed from 'SHO' to 'Super High Output'? Did someone have an issue with the acronym?
Rope-Pusher wrote:If yo not sho 'bout it, why did yo waste yo tom postin' bout it?
ClutchFork wrote:...So I started carrying a stick of firewood with me and that became my parking brake.
- RITmusic2k
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 2078
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:32 pm
- Cars: 2004 BMW 330i ZHP
- Location: Anaheim, CA
- Contact:
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT Super High Output
Aww...
Rope-Pusher doesn't count... that was wit, not misinterpretation!
Rope-Pusher doesn't count... that was wit, not misinterpretation!
-
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 11612
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:44 pm
- Cars: '08 Jeep Liberty
- Location: Greater Detroit Area
Re: 1993 Mercury Sable/Ford Taurus 3.0L - NOT Super High Output
I do too count, all the way up to three-digit numbers. I can add, subtract, multiply and do gosintas, too. I've had 21 years of schooling and next year they're gonna pass me on up to the middle school. Did you know the short bus has a stickshift?RITmusic2k wrote:Aww...
Rope-Pusher doesn't count... that was wit, not misinterpretation!
Last edited by Rope-Pusher on Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'08 Jeep Liberty 6-Speed MT - "Last of the Mohicans"