 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Serviceability Report: TaurusPosted 9/9/2003By Craig Van Batenburg, AAM
We are focusing on the most popular (based on sales) cars and light trucks. This month, the Ford Taurus gets a careful examination. With the Taurus' revolutionary design, Ford had a winner its first year out. The jelly bean shape worked. The Ford Taurus came along in 1986 with either a 2.5 inline 4-cylinder engine or a 3.0 2v V-6 engine. Later on they offered a 3.8 V-6, known to many as an engine prone to head gasket failure. It was soon discontinued. The SHO didn't sell very many, so we will give Ford a break on this one. The 3.0 six cylinder was the big seller. The '86 Taurus stayed pretty much the same until the next generation came out in 1996. A twin cam 3.0 is now the most popular engine, with the old 3.0 2v still available, cast-iron heads and all. Did it get better with age or not? I interviewed many techs - from both dealerships and independents - talked to Ford in Detroit, looked under the hood, wrenched on a few, and here are the results. When the Taurus first came out in 1986, the first generation was not easy to repair for anyone unfamiliar with front-wheel drive. There are more than 400 technical service bulletins on early models. Most of the problems were small and some were fixed over the years at the factory. As time went by, the dealership techs (read this flat rate) loved the first-generation Taurus - from a paycheck viewpoint and also because some of what seemed time consuming to do became a little easier with experience. What tech didn't spend an afternoon changing power steering lines, but the second time around it became easier? The question I ask is this: Do you always get a second chance to use your experience? On a top seller you will, but does this make it a good design? In 1996, the Taurus saw its first complete redesign. I asked this question, "On Monday morning what would you rather see in your bay, a first- or second-generation 3.0 Taurus?" The answer was unanimous: "Give me an older one." As you know, the 3.0 is available now in the older, single cam version (less power) and the newer, twin cam engine. As the public wants "more power," it is the twin cam that you will see most often in your bays. This engine is better than the older 3.0, but when it needs rear spark plugs, watch out. You must remove the wiper assembly, cowl and ignition coils just to get to the plugs! What was Ford thinking? OK, the plugs are platinum, but what about trying to do a compression check? When spark plugs become a problem to access, I think technicians need to send a wake-up call. The coolant also seems to be an issue with the newer Fords. Flush them often or risk a rotted-out coolant tube under the intake. One more point that should be looked at carefully by Ford is the one-piece exhaust with four catalytic converters. Is this good for the consumer or should the tech have the ability to test each converter and replace only the degraded one? Pre-catalytic test ports could also be added at the factory so we don't have to drill or guess at the "cat's" health. It is Ford's 100th birthday this year, but I just can't make excuses for a modern car that gets harder to work on when ease of service could be included in the design at the early stages of development. Let's hope Ford will work harder to make its products the easiest of all to repair. 1986-1995:ProsFord's first attempt at a mainstream front-wheel drive car. Not bad; learning takes time.ConsUntil you learned all the tricks, the book time was hard to make.
1996-2003:ProsQuality got better; fewer problems with the car.ConsTwin cam 3.0 has hard-to-access parts that were easier to reach before. Ford made the car harder to work on.
Overall ratingThe Taurus quality is better; the ease of service is not. This car will be a problem for techs later on in the car's life as more problems arise. Ford needs to design serviceability into their products. The cost to produce a "serviceable" Taurus would be similar to the cost of the current design, if it were designed in. Ford would save money on warranty repairs, customer's bills would be less, and the car would appear better. It makes one wonder why this car is getting harder to repair and service.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright (c) 1996-2009. Automotive Service Association®. All rights reserved.
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This is our third article in a series asking the question: Do the automotive designers consider serviceability when designing a new car and truck? Are vehicles getting easier to work on? When it comes to you, the person who has to work on these marvels every day, do the OEMs care?
