1994ish Mercury Tracer or 1990 Ford Taurus?
The thing is, the tracer has 150,000 miles and the Taurus has 130,000 miles. Which one would be a better buy, both are around 00. Any suggestions?
Tagged with: taurus
Filed under: Ford Taurus 1986-1991
Categories
Taurus Questions
- Beside the dealership,where can I get a spare key for my 2005 Ford Taurus?
- What Is a 2002 Ford Taurus with major front end damage worth?
- How much will the price of the 2010 Ford Taurus go down in 2 years?
- 2004 Ford Taurus Transmission problems?
- I am looking for discount parts for 2 ford vehicles?
Taurus Answers
- bubby on What would cause my 1999 Ford Taurus to sputter?
- DickJr on I am looking for a neutral safety switch for a 1996 ford taurus gl and a price on how much it cost please?
- Jessica on 1988 Ford Taurus engine wont turn over?
- Ashley on 1999 Ford Taurus stalled; mechanic says it’s transmission but is slow to get back to me?
- Mickey on My Ford Taurus 1999 heater doesn’t work — what can I do?
Go and see who has maintenance records for each car and see if they were both serviced regularly. If this is not the deciding factor, go with the car that is 4 years newer.
tracer seems a little high priced
i got my 99 escort ( same thing as a tracer) with 101k for only 1200
Go find you a chevy.
I love Ford Escorts and have found them to be one of the most reliable cars ever produced by Ford but my experiences are completely different for the Taurus… I just sent a 1996 Taurus to the junkyard because of all the problems it had. $1000 is not a bad price for the Tracer if it is in great condition but make sure to check if the timing belt has been changed…
what i would do is get both vin numbers and look them up threw carfax you never know what u might find but out of the two cars the 94 mercury is a better buy even if it has more miles on it, its still newer and im sure it looks better as well
come on a chevy
Taurus, the V-6 is going to last longer than a 4-cylinder. Also, the more expensive cars tend to be better maintained. (If someone doesn’t have the money to buy a more expensive car, they usually don’t have the money to maintain the car.)
What engine does the Taurus have? 2.5 HSC, 3.0 Vulcan, or 3.8 Essex? I used to have an ‘89 Taurus with the 3.0 Vulcan, and it ran great up to 166K miles, and I got rid of it because it was wrecked in a car accident, but it was very reliable. The most frequent problems I had were coolant leaks which were solved by replacing hoses. It had great reliability and got over 30 mpg on the freeway with the 4-speed/ OD transmission, and that’s important: some of the early Taurus’ had 3-speeds, so watch out for that: they weren’t unreliable, but they’re not as good for performance, and the engines may not last as long because they don’t have an overdrive gear. I loved the first Taurus so much that I replaced it with another one, same year, but it had the 3.8, and that’s a high maintenance engine. Again, my most common problem has been fluid leaks, but it has needed a lot of mechanical stuff replaced. The 3.8 makes a lot of torque, doesn’t rev high, and gets about 22 mpg average. The 3.0 loves to rev-up, feels lively, and returns 25 mpg. Few people bought Taurus’s with the standard 2.5 HSC engine, so I can’t comment on how it compares, but I imagine it got better fuel economy. I think 1991 was the only year the 2.5 was fuel injected too. The Mercury Tracer was primarily engineered by Mazda, and I’ve heard good things and bad things about that. It’ll get better fuel economy than the Taurus, but it won’t be as roomy, and probably won’t feel as nice. "Better buy" depends on the condition of the vehicles, options, and what’s important to you.