: How about a brand new old Taurus?



ga_etc
06-14-11, 11:02 PM
We all hear about the insanely low mileage Camaros and Corvettes and stuff that have been hidden away, only to be discovered 20 years later looking like they just rolled off the show room floor. Well here's your chance to own one of those mint relics, only aimed at the more practical. This brand new 1991 Taurus can be yours for the low low price of only $9,000. Who could refuse?

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?ct=u&car_id=299421310

Destroyer
06-14-11, 11:30 PM
Wow! A true time capsule. Too bad the original owner didn't buy something else. Anything else would have been more collectible but damn, 508 miles. I simply don't want this car unless it's $3k or less to be used as a daily driver. Definitely a prime example of an early(ier) Taurus.

thebigjimsho
06-14-11, 11:53 PM
We had a SHO guy who had a stock '89 SHO since it rolled off the plant rollers. He worked at Ford and kept it as an ultra low mileage toy. He sold it a couple years ago to another SHO fanatic for 5 figures. It had less miles than the purchase price...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-15-11, 12:03 AM
That actually MIGHT be kinda collectible around 2030...

Destroyer
06-15-11, 12:14 AM
That actually MIGHT be kinda collectible around 2030...If history is indicative, a 4 door base model car with a standard motor...........will NEVER be collectible. An SHO? Yes, by 2030 anyway but not a regular Taurus.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-15-11, 12:17 AM
Maybe not collectible in terms of being highly desirable and coveted, but someone would appreciate seeing a 500 mile 40 year old Taurus the same way you'd appreciate seeing a 500 mile 1971 Impala today.

Destroyer
06-15-11, 12:21 AM
Maybe not collectible in terms of being highly desirable and coveted, but someone would appreciate seeing a 500 mile 40 year old Taurus the same way you'd appreciate seeing a 500 mile 1971 Impala today.Yes. But i still wouldn't pay much for it. :bouncy:

Playdrv4me
06-15-11, 12:22 AM
You know, with my fetish for mint things, I might consider that car at 5-6k... and you better believe I would drive the shit out of it. Where else can you get a brand new roadtrip cruiser for that amount of money? The guy was wise at least to pick such a neutral (if blase) color combo with all the weird shit you could get back then color wise.

greencadillacmatt
06-15-11, 12:38 AM
I stumbled across a 16,000 original mile late 80's Chevy Cavalier station wagon on Craigslist last week. It was white and looked like brand new. Definately odd.

Aron9000
06-15-11, 01:07 AM
hehehehehe . . . .

My uncle had a Taurus, that 1st gen body style in the mid-late 90's, same color, interior, wheels, everything. All of us made fun of that car because it was such an unreliable piece of crap, he proudly called it his "turd". I can't believe he kept it for 3 or 4 years with all the grief that car gave him.

STS_Seville_Hunter
06-15-11, 03:40 AM
I've been seeing alot more ultra low to low milage cars for sale lately. Shit back in '04 I got my first car, '86 Park Avenue with 35k miles on it.

Playdrv4me
06-15-11, 03:43 AM
Now someone find me a 1k mile Toronado Trofeo with the Trinitron touchscreen display and we'll talk.

ben.gators
06-15-11, 04:03 AM
1991 Taurus, meh... The good news is at least it is not a 96 Taurus!

http://www.automobile.com/images/stock-photos/lifestyle_gallery/hash/2/8/0/0d8c88d1d8f6fc72c6da98c7317683aa9b951082.jpg

Submariner409
06-15-11, 09:08 AM
FWIW, Karen had the identical 1991 Taurus GL (but a 3.0), I had a 1992 LX in Seafoam Green, 3.8L. Both were economical, reliable cars. Karen drove hers to 131,000 (new transmission at 100K) and then gave it to her granddaughter at U Richmond in 2007. The car still runs, but like all college beaters, it is a rolling wreck - with 220,000 miles on it.

Stingroo
06-15-11, 09:15 AM
Hey! I like my college beater. :lol:

orconn
06-15-11, 01:00 PM
1991 Taurus, meh... The good news is at least it is not a 96 Taurus!

http://www.automobile.com/images/stock-photos/lifestyle_gallery/hash/2/8/0/0d8c88d1d8f6fc72c6da98c7317683aa9b951082.jpg

I remember the day my son and I first saw a 1996 Taurus. We were in traffic on Sunset Blvd. in L.A. heading out to the stables. At first we were in shock, and both of us started laughing. The "thing" looked like it was designed by a dyspeptic Japanese toymaker! We couldn't believe that Ford had spent all that money o bring something that ugly to the marketplace.

The previous model had been a design game changer, coinciding with the Audi 5000's of the mid-80's, and bringing a new level of drag co-efficient to the passenger car world.

I am convinced the second generation Taurus only survived because of the wholesale adoption by the fleet buyers of America. My wife subsequently had four of these "ugly ducklings" as company supplied business cars (Hewlett-Packard exchanged them every six moths for a new one). These cars drove OK for a company car, but I hated to muck up the driveway and landscape their ugly shape! The fully loaded ones the she was supplied stickered for around $22,000., after sitting in the driveway for six months and accumulating maybe 6000 miles (my wife flew for most of trips and rarely used the the Taurus) we could buy them from the company for $13,000. After my son's Honda lease ran out he bought one to use in law school (he drove it for two years and sold it for $9000.

I recommended to friends that they buy them as they came off lease if they needed cheap transportation cars. A few did, for around $13,000. for the low mileage (under 10,000) ones. They also bought an extended warranty, which was a good thing because he cars they bought all needed new transmissions at 80,000 miles.

I'll bet the vast majority of these Taurus's were purchased for fleets, and I doubt Ford ever really made money on this model. I am sure he "dyspeptic" Japanese toymaker, whose design inspired the second generation Taurus died with a mile on his face. He should have been given Japan's highest award for stimulating export sales!

thebigjimsho
06-15-11, 01:31 PM
My first National SHO Convention was in Dearborn in 1995. One of the activities was a tour at the Ford Design Center. The '96 Taurus was either just starting to hit the streets or was about to. But the SHO was a little ways away from production and Ford was giddy to show the enthusiasts the plastic bodied show car with no interior. Just a foam inset. Ford went on and on touting the styling, bragging about how many ovals they could cram in the exterior and interior design. That's why the lights, rear window, side profile windows, exhaust tips, dash board, radio, etc all looked like ovals. And how this new breakthrough in design would be the end all be all for Ford. Most of us gave a giant eyeroll.

Then, they had a Ford engineer come to one of our banquets bragging about the drivetrain of the Gen III SHO(Gen I was 89-91, II was 92-95). A Yamaha touched V8 with barely more hp and NO manual. He was so proud. We, mostly enthusiasts who almost exclusively owned manual versions of the SHO(they started making auto available in '93), went ballistic. He wasn't expecting that. Ford wasn't expecting that. We almost yelled and heckled him off the stage. It was quite funny. Not so much in that the guy deserved that, but for Ford thinking guys would love this car.

There is a SHO following of that period, but they are mostly viewed as wacked. The car is not really respected and, on top of that, had a grenading engine. If you didn't have your cams welded, it's only a matter of time until boom. And Ford NEVER acknowledged the problem and left every owner out to dry...

Jesda
06-15-11, 02:30 PM
The 96 Taurus was originally going to look like the 1997 BMW 5-series, but the AC failed at the design center one night and the clay model melted. Short on time to redo the model, they decided to roll with it.


I'm lying.

Stingroo
06-15-11, 03:50 PM
I lol'd.

johnny kannapo
06-16-11, 01:59 AM
Unusually low miles for a car with bad color choice & zero personality.

Get the one with great speed & handling, they are found very cheap.

http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/zz183/billytheshoe/cammer/my%20car/Picture_0101.jpg

brandondeleo
06-17-11, 03:32 AM
My god the 96 is an ugly car... lol. I am lucky. My college beater is a 99 DeVille! And as for the Toronado- as soon as you get that, let me know too. :D

Stingroo
06-17-11, 07:50 AM
I hope you remain lucky. Luxury cars generally don't make the best "beaters."

You know what they say - if you can't afford to maintain one when new, you can't afford it.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-17-11, 07:56 AM
The '96 Taurus looks like something Hunter S. Thompson would have done after a bad acid trip.

johnny kannapo
06-17-11, 06:09 PM
I did buy a 1996 Taurus SHO with the Yammaha V8, Very good performance engine but not with out engineering troubles that are catastrophic.
That car was only available with the undesirable failure prone automatic. A solid, very fast car if you could keep it running.

The numorous 1989 SHO's I owned were far better, lighter, quicker, bulletproof engine 30mpg. Weak clutch & diff though.

thebigjimsho
06-17-11, 11:02 PM
That's why you go with a Quaife like my '92 had...

Playdrv4me
06-17-11, 11:25 PM
Hell, my '95 was an auto and I still had loads of fun mashing the pedal in that thing.

brandondeleo
06-18-11, 08:16 AM
The '96 Taurus looks like something that belongs in either a Pink Floyd video or an Edvard Munch print.