By on July 27, 2021

We continue our 2007 and 1997 sedan series with its fourth installment. We’ve covered V6 Japanese sedans from two different decades, as well as American-branded entries from 2007. Today we step back to the midsize V6 sedan class of 1997. The Big Three beckon you with medium build quality, equipment, and value for money in a midsize sedan; a segment in which only GM deigns to participate in 2020. Let’s go.

Note: We’re counting these three as mid-size today, though the Intrepid leans into the full-size category. The Dodge Stratus is too small to play here.

Dodge Intrepid

1997 saw the first generation Dodge Intrepid wrap up its run, arguably as the most stylish car of this trio. It was replaced by a larger second generation the following year which seemed built even more poorly than the first-gen. Developed over its tenure, by 1996 Intrepid had standard ABS, and an Autostick shift-it-yourself feature for the four-speed automatic. Today’s car is well-equipped ES trim and features the larger 3.5-liter V6 good for 214 horsepower. You’ll pay around $22,910.

Ford Taurus

The third-gen Taurus was in its second model year in 1997, as its design went from aero three-box to ovoid, customers were less than thrilled, and Ford began to pay less and less attention to its mass-market family car. The model’s first two years saw a different trim lineup than the latter two, with G, GL, LX, and SHO as the initial group. Base models received a 3.0-liter Vulcan V6, but the LX stepped up to the 3.0 Duratec mill that made 200 horses (instead of 145). Today’s LX sends those horses through a four-speed AX4N automatic. Yours at $21,610.

Pontiac Grand Prix

The popular and cladded Grand Prix was newly in its sixth generation for the ’97 model year. Aggressive in styling and with Pontiac’s Wide-Trac stance, the Grand Prix was a go-to for many family sedan buyers at the time. Just two trims were available on Grand Prix, the base SE in sedan guise, or GT in coupe or sedan forms. The GT sedan (today’s pick) uses the Buick 3800 V6 good for 195 horsepower. Ask is about $20,319.

Three sedans around the $20,000 mark, which is worth the Buy in 1997?

[Images: Chrysler, Ford, GM]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter here.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

76 Comments on “Buy/Drive/Burn: V6 Midsize American Sedans of 1997...”

  • avatar

    Oh man this is a hard one.

    Buy Grand Prix. I’m not the biggest W-body fan out there but I am one of the biggest 3800 fans out there.

    Drive the Taurus. My grandmother had an oval Taurus that served her well for many years and the 3.0L Duratec is a solid performer.

    Burn the Intrepid. I’ve always *heard* good things about the LH cars but I’ve never been able to experience that goodness. The suspension and steering is always a little worn out and the engines never quite punch at what their power output states.

    • 0 avatar
      Land Ark

      I went the same as you, but it was very easy for me.
      I desperately wanted this generation of GP, although I would have, and almost did get, a GTP coupe. Preferably in the blue Daytona 500 livery. So any version would win most contests for me, even the plan GT version.

      The Taurus would be fine to drive. I wouldn’t have to look at it while driving nor would it be parked in front of my house.

      I actually have never heard anything good about the Intrepid. They certainly put Chrysler back on the map when they came out, but they looked off to my eye – maybe not as much as the Taurus. Still, I’d be worried about it blowing the transmission whether a valid concern or not.

    • 0 avatar

      Never owned any of these cars after I got burned by a 1974 Pontiac Ventura oh wait it was the valves that got burnt at 13 000 miles.
      I did ride shotgun in a late 90s mercury sable the length of the northeast extension of the Pennsylvania turnpike when the speedo never went below 90 MPH and that car tracked and rode better than my Toyota Camry LE.
      That said what would I buy anything with the 3800 GM engine supercharged if available.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Buy the Taurus – probably the most durable with the best value.

    Drive the Grand Prix – probably the most responsive on the road.

    Burn, burn, burn the Intrepid – especially if equipped with the 2.7 V6 (which today’s entry isn’t, thankfully). These cars betrayed many owners.

  • avatar

    Buy the Grand Prix as it drives reasonably well and there is certainly no shortage of parts to keep it going.

    Drive the Intrepid as it is by far the best looking one and has the largest interior however is let down by virtue of being a Chrysler product.

    Burn the Taurus, objectively better than intrepid but I hated that generation Taurus when it was new and I still dont like it.

  • avatar

    This is tough because I know that only one of these was any good long term.

    Buy: The Intrepid because in it’s first generation, Dodge had something different going for it. This thing was, pardon my french, the “cat’s a$$” in terms of size, power, and initial refinement. I still remember sitting in my grandmother’s ’96 ES in this exact color with those exact wheels. Those leather seats were so comfy, and I’d never seen so much rear seat room. I left this one in “Buy” because with it’s maintenance costs, I wouldn’t want to drive it too much. Maybe just to a Cars and Coffee.

    Drive: Taurus, especially with the 3.0 DOHC. That thing was a hoot to drive around when I was in high school. Way more power and ability to smoke tires than any 16 year old needed and it was glorious. Plus, they’re the American version of the ’93 Camry. They’re cockroaches that’s hard to kill.

    Burn: Grand Prix. Every single one I’ve ever been in aside from the best cared for GTP’s has just been terrible. Creaky, cracked plastics, sagging suspension, slipping transmissions, terribleness. A cream puff? Sure, I would probably take one, but most of these were destined for the scrap heap after the first 60k miles.

    • 0 avatar

      Funny but the creaky cracked plastics, sagging suspension, slipping transmissions could so easily be pointed at the Taurus and Intrepid of this generation too. We sold all three at my buddy’s used Southern dealership and intake gaskets aside the Grand Prix’s and other W-body cars seemed to hold up a bit better than the other two in our experience.

    • 0 avatar

      Just because you say it doesn’t mean it’s true. Of these three cars, the Grand Prix was easily the longest lasting. It probably drove like crap, sure, but I still see 90s Grand Prixs where I live.

  • avatar

    This is really hard – none of these stand out:

    BUY: Grand Prix – hear me out here. The Grand Prix is going to run badly long after the other choices stopped running. Ya, this was the utter basement of GM interiors, Playskol grade buttons and mouse fur cloth. I get it. But I’ll say it again – this will be running badly long after either of the other two have gone to the crusher.

    DRIVE: Intrepid – had a few as a rental and was a fun car to drive, but how many of these do you see left on the road today? So just drive it until the wheels fall off, which will be about a decade.

    BURN: Taurus – by 1997 this was just an awful, uncompetitive car. A shadow of its former self. The Duratec 3.0 was not a great engine and the tranny has even more problematic. If this had the Vulcan under the hood my choices would have been very different.

    • 0 avatar

      “The Duratec 3.0 was not a great engine”

      Oh man. The Ford people are going to get you for that one.
      FWIW, I haven’t encountered many serious issues related to the 3.0L. The 2.5L Duratec seems to be the more troublesome one.

      I also think the interior on this gen GP was actually better than the gen that came afterward.

      • 0 avatar

        My experience with the 3.0 Duratec with Mazda branding was a complete nightmare in the 6

        • 0 avatar

          What?! I had the same engine in a 6 and it was an incredibly good engine. Aside from the whole intake coming off to change plugs I took it to 230k trouble free miles before selling it. Power and fuel economy were pretty good as well.

        • 0 avatar
          C5 is Alive

          No engine issues with a 2006 6S I drove for five years and 70,000 miles. The Aisin 6-speed auto crapped out at 19K (in the middle of a 1,500-mile road trip) but was generally solid after a rebuild.

    • 0 avatar

      I owned a Ford Escape with the Duratec 3.0
      It was a great peppy engine for its time, with decent fuel economy and super reliable. I only did oil changes, spark plugs and filters to it. But I only owned that Escape from 80K to 130K miles.
      Several relatives owned either an Escape or a Taurus powered by the same Duratec. No one ever had problems with the engine, they all sold in running condition.

      • 0 avatar

        I put 227K on my Escape 3.0L before selling it to my neighbor. Besides regular maintenance I had 2 of the ignition coils go out and a very minor oil leak after 180K, but very reliable engine.

    • 0 avatar

      The Duratecs were bulletproof-especially the 2.5s. I’ve never heard ANYONE who would take a Vulcan over a Duratec…

    • 0 avatar

      The Duratec just might be the most durable consumer engine that Ford has ever built.

  • avatar

    Corey must have had an evil, sadistic grin when he selected these cars. This really wasn’t a good era for domestic full-sized sedans.

    Buy the Taurus. Of the three, I think these held up the best, had decent power, and given the zillions of them had as rental cars, were semi-comfortable. I swear some of them, however, as Mercury Sables had the worst positioned lumbar support that felt like a pile of logs in the lower back.

    Drive the Grand Prix. They might drive well and have a smooth transmission, but I just can’t get over the Pontiac-era interior. The plastics are so cheap looking, the strange “organic blob” style, harsh orange lighting at night, it hasn’t aged well at all. But at least it has less cladding than the previous generation.

    Burn the Intrepid. I have several friends who were just let down by this heap. Transmission and drivetrain problems as far as the eyes can see. Squeaks and rattles after a year or two. Dreary quality. They looked great at the time, especially compared to the inflated second gen. But they just weren’t built to last.

  • avatar

    Buy: GP. I’m with the Church of St. 3800 here!

    Drive: Taurus.

    Burn: Intrepid.

  • avatar

    What a depressing choice. The only way to win is not to play at all.

    I had a Taurus wagon once, which I bought to resell. It decided to crap its transmission, and that was my first and last Taurus. Other than a sticky steering wheel (what the hell did that make that out of?!), it was incredibly unremarkable.

    The only four-door sedan that I’ve had the pleasure to own from that era was a ’94 5-speed Accord. It was kind of fun to drive, and amazingly trouble-free. Any of the three slushbox sedans offered up here would require years of therapy to recover from.

  • avatar

    I had a ’99 Grand Prix GTP that I bought brand new just after I graduated college. It was the first car I bought and paid for on my own. I agree with the comments on the interior, but man, that supercharged 3800 had some muscle. I put 126K miles on it and made the mistake of having the transmission flushed instead of just replacing the oil. It shifted real hard after that in every gear. Dealer told me it was a common issue when debris from the flush gets caught inside a filter within the transmission and the hydraulic pressure cannot be properly regulated. Unfortunately getting to that part required a tear down of the tranny, which cost more than the car was worth at that point (it also had developed at least one leaking head gasket). I do miss that car.

    • 0 avatar

      And transmission flush places continue to ruin transmissions near and far today.

    • 0 avatar

      It’s funny there are still people that swear up and down a transmission flush can never hurt a transmission. That if something goes wrong, it was going to happen anyway.

      My Lexus dealer wouldn’t even change the transmission fluid on my Lexus.

      • 0 avatar

        Interesting. Was the mileage too low? Transmission fluid changes are a service interval item.

        • 0 avatar
          Arthur Dailey

          I’ve had two dealerships tell me that they will not drain the transmission oil, that it must be flushed.

          My independent mechanic will only flush it if it is below a certain age/mileage. Otherwise he will only drain it. For the same reason posted by @jrocco001.

          Buy: The Grand Prix for the 3800. And I like the orange instrument panel lighting.
          Drive: The Taurus. Like millions of salespeople.
          Burn: The Intrepid. A ‘good’ try by Chrysler.

          • 0 avatar

            every time i see or hear about the “cab forward” chryslers it reminds me of tom kreutzer. memmer him?

        • 0 avatar

          It was a Lexus with “lifetime” fluid, I still wanted it changed. Multiple dealerships pushed the job away.

          Car had like 150k miles on what I could glean was original fluid. So I guess it really is “lifetime”, shifted perfect when I sold it.

  • avatar

    Buy: Taurus. Never cared much for this gens styling but Taurus’ seem to run forever, and in this 3 way it seems like the best car. It’s interior wasn’t special but it also wasn’t repulsive, overall the type of car that failed to elicit any strong emotions positively or negatively
    Drive: Grand Prix. I remember them being somewhat desirable when new, but they aged very poorly that by the time I was driving age some friends were getting them already from family members in the early 2000s. GM interiors of the period were downright offensive, and I have yet to see a Pontiac with all its radio buttons legible after a year from this generation. It did however have the 3800 and could be supercharged
    Burn: intrepid. Seemingly better made than the GP and a much better interior, but the drivetrain fell apart quickly. I don’t recall seeing many of these past about 2004 moving under their own power

  • avatar

    “…which seemed built even more poorly than the first-gen.” My second generation Concorde and LHS were both built very well.

    • 0 avatar

      I haven’t looked it up, but I think that was the generation where Chrysler finally worked out the bugs of their new 4-speed automatic. That was the sore spot of the first gen as I recall and that’s what failed on two people’s LH cars that I know of. I remember the seats and the cars being more comfortable and quieter as well, but I was never a huge fan of the styling – it’s like they told the designers to keep the same shape, but use compressed air to puff it out a bit.

    • 0 avatar
      C5 is Alive

      That was always my impression as well, though even the first-gen LH cars still featured markedly better fit-and-finish than the K-Chryslers ever managed. The second-gen built on that with higher-quality components and materials and generally simplified designs that allowed tighter build tolerances.

      However, I also recall the service manager of the Chrysler store I worked at in 1998 talking of how the newly-formed DaimlerChrysler intended to use “Tier 1” suppliers exclusively going forward, a move that would have presumably reduced the amount of warranty work flowing through his service drive. Subsequent DC vehicles offer little reason to believe that ever actually happened.

      • 0 avatar

        Sounds like the service manager didn’t understand on how the automotive supply chain worked.

        What DCX did do was demanded cost cutting to a huge extreme.

  • avatar

    Buy: Grand Prix. I owned a 2006 for awhile which I liked well enough. I imagine it’s similar here, but I’d stick with the 3800.

    Drive: Taurus. I grew up in a vaguely Ford family and had a similar vintage Escort, so the overall ambiance seems that it would be similar ish.

    Burn: Intrepid. Never really cared.

  • avatar

    Zzzzzz, I’m sorry, what were the choices again. Had all three of these as company cars over the years. Unremarkable, uninteresting, but competent generic appliances

  • avatar

    Buy the Taurus because the name will sell it later. People don’t know if they are good or not, but they know the name.

    Drive the Intrepid. It is the best driver of this group and the 3.5 was a good unit. My parents had one and had no issues. The did go back to minivans though.

    Burn the GP. My nephew still has his, but it is a little newer. Still junk. He is too lazy to buy something else. I think he is on his 5th set of window regulators and the third headlight buckets, though any headlight from that era will be crap by now anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      C5 is Alive

      This is also my order, and the Taurus was also by far the best-assembled of the three in my experience. LHs were quite fun to drive with the 3.5L and AutoStick; W-body GMs unfortunately tended to fall to pieces rather quickly around the generally sound drivetrain.

  • avatar

    Interesting comparison of family sedans from the Big Three.
    FWIW, not to nitpick… but the Intrepid pictured can’t be a ’97 because of the pentastar emblem on the fenders. Must be an earlier model.
    The Taurus pictured can’t be a ’97 since it doesn’t have the amber colored rear turn signals (must be a ’98-’99 model)
    And the last Grand Prix pictured is a 2001+ SE model, the ’97 SEs still had the unique “bottom breather” grill.

    • 0 avatar

      I hearby nominate you as the trivia expert on this thread. Impressive.

    • 0 avatar

      Sharp eyes!

      It’s rough finding 90s pics sometimes. They have to be 600px wide, they have to be OEM, and they need to be reasonably clear and free of stupid watermarks. Sites love to mark up pictures they don’t own these days, and websites that uploaded pics years and years ago used files too small so they’re all blurry.

    • 0 avatar
      C5 is Alive

      Awesome eye for details! I noticed the Taurus’s tail lights, too, but failed to spot the clues for the other two.

  • avatar
    MRF 95 T-Bird

    Buy: Grand Prix-The 3800 is bulletproof and these W-bodies seem to run forever.

    Drive: Intrepid- These were roomy and comfortable and the auto stick was innovative but they seem to wear out before their time.

    Burn: Taurus- Even though the 3.0 Duratec is smooth I can’t get over its ugly ovoid redesign from the original groundbreaking aero Taurus.

    Honorable mention: Buick Regal GS

  • avatar

    Cars like that Taurus are the reason why people say ‘Ford is really good at trucks’ in 2021.

    Even the current CEO says it: “And I know the truth in life, which is if you want great products, stick to what you’re really good at. We’re really good at Mustangs, we’re really good at F-series.”

    First picture here (“Collapsed” vs. “Still Standing”):

    You -could- look at that picture and say ‘We are really good at the Still Standing portion.’

  • avatar

    Buy the GP for the drivetrain. Try not to look at the interior too much…eyes up!

    Kind of a toss up for the other two. I guess I’d drive the Intrepid, it looks OK and you don’t see a lot of them around.

    Burn the Taurus, it’s a cruel reminder of what it once was, and no one will miss it.

  • avatar

    Well, based on the fact that these are all beaters by now, it’s an easy call: buy the one with the 3800 and burn the rest.

    But if this were 1997, I’d buy the Intrepid (best-looking, and it was entertaining to drive), drive the Pontiac, and burn the Taurus (never liked the jellybean styling).

  • avatar

    Oh, well, here goes:

    Buy: The Grand Prix. This was an excellent design, Pontiac truly put a lot of thought into the interior, and–with some basic maintenance and/or reconditioning–the 3800 should last into perpetuity

    Drive: The Taurus. I think the ovoid design actually worked well (or, at least, it did until 2000, when they dumbed it down and the Taurus fell into fleet-queen status). I would prefer a 1996, because that’s when Ford pulled out all the stops, not realizing they’d have to cost-cut the crap out of it in 1997, in order to hit the newly downgraded Camry’s price point.

    Burn: The Intrepid. I am keenly fascinated with longitude-transaxle cars of all sorts, but for some reason, I don’t have any love for the LH cars, especially the early ones.

  • avatar

    BUY: Grand Prix. The most reliable of the bunch. I’d have loved if it was the GTP, though.

    DRIVE: Taurus. Duratec 30 is a super reliable, responsive engine. Driving dynamics may be on par with the other two, but the engine gives it an edge here.

    BURN: Intrepid. An ex gf used to have one, it would let her stranded on the side of the road more often than not and mind you it had the “reliable” 3.3. Ultradrive transmissions are even less reliable than the AX4N, oldest design out of this three, there’s really not much going for this one.

  • avatar

    Oh boy I am late to this one!

    BUY: GP – GM cars will run longer poorly than the others. My first ever rental car was a white 95 or so GP due to my passing 25. It drove great, the best memory I have is going to the store and buying a broom. I stuck it in the back seat and as I was closing the door, it slid down at an angle and the door panel popped completely off when it hit the broom!

    DRIVE: The LH, as least until the transmission or some other gremlin came home to roost. Worked for a supplier in the Detroit Metro, all the big guns had LHs as company cars, new. Hot summer and all their AC systems crapped out. Parts back-ordered. These were new cars too. Had to have company branded cars to service the company after all!

    BURN: Never liked this Taurus generation. Has aged very poorly. This car should not have made it out of focus groups. Actually the wagon looks better than the sedan, and gets a few points for even existing for another generation.

  • avatar

    Buy – Grand Prix – I did (a 99 and 02 GT). Most comfortable cars I’ve had… really ate up the miles on trips, and pretty efficient for their size.

    Drive – Intrepid – a family member had a 97, and it was great to drive when it was firing on all cylinders so to speak, and when it stops doing that, wouldn’t feel bad leaving it on the side of the road.

    Burn – Taurus – rented a couple of them. May have been more reliable than the Dodge, but that’s not saying much. Weren’t enjoyable to drive, either, and wasn’t a fan of the oval interior.

  • avatar

    I think I remember reading about this generation of Grand Prix when they first came out and the writer said it already felt like a 5 year old car.

    • 0 avatar

      Who was that? The ’97 was generally well regarded on its introduction and it was a pretty big change versus the ’88-’96.

      Are you sure it was this gen and not the one that came out in 2004?

    • 0 avatar

      That sounds more like the 2004 Grand Prix which didn’t bring much new to the table other than wider opening doors and that trick fold down passenger seat that allowed a small canoe to fit inside the car.

  • avatar

    Buy drive the Grand Prix, pretty much the closest to an American Camry, with the reliable 3800; and you could get some cool stuff like HUD.

  • avatar

    buy taurus, kinda ugly but a good car
    drive pontiac, not a bad looking car but omg that typical GM interior was horrendous, almost bought one until i sat in one, couldnt picture looking at the interior for the next few years
    burn the intrepid, what a piece of S%^t

  • avatar

    This is an easy one.

    Buy the Intrepid. One of the nicest looking cars to come out of Detroit in the past 25 years. Stellar good looks, with the unfortunate Chrysler quality.

    Drive the Taurus. Bulletproof and smooth Duratec and overall Ford quality (which was pretty sold for American cars).

    Burn the Pontic. Obviously. Superfluous WTF? cladding. Cheap interior. GM quality…

  • avatar

    Man, those are some beautiful cars.

    I know the Prius (and others) have a high, fat, flat butt for what may be good reasons, but man, do these cars look better for the lack of it.

  • avatar

    Has there been a Cavalier/Escort/”whatever Dodge fielded” comparo? That might be funny to read.

  • avatar

    This one is easy for me.

    Buy- the Grand Prix and that wonderful 3800 V6. I owned a 1998 SE 3800 and it served me quite well for the 124K miles I had it with the only repairs being a set of plug wires and spark plugs installed by me, one front wheel bearing and the normal brakes and tires. I replaced the plastic elbow myself with a metal one during the 00’s and luckily didn’t need the intake replaced just new gaskets as it had the modified heat pipe hole that was enlarged. The interior held up perfectly fine too with nothing cracked or broken as I take care of my cars and don’t abuse them!

    Drive goes to the Intrepid- the peppy 3.5 V6, the roomy well laid out interior, the big trunk and fine driving dynamics earn it this status.

    Burn- The Taurus for it’s odd ball styling, oval odd dash, indifferent interior with rough cut lines seen with the glove box door opened, vinyl door inserts falling off each door, creaky center console, indecisive transmission and the smallest trunk of the bunch. Even the ovoid rear window started the “can’t see out of the rear” trend we now have in full force.

  • avatar
    Offbeat Oddity

    This is really tough for me because 1997 was the year I first got into automobiles, and all of these cars left a good impression on me.

    Buy: Ford Taurus. I’m of a small minority that loved the 1996 redesign and preferred it to the original- it has my favorite styling inside and out of this group. Fords of this time that I experienced (Explorer, Contour, and Taurus) also had a tactile sense of quality that most GMs and some Dodges lacked, even if they mechanically were very spotty. This is peak Taurus to me, as I felt that the 2000 refresh made a unique car very generic, and they cheapened the heck out of it.

    Drive: Pontiac Grand Prix. I loved the styling of this generation, and I think it’s likely the best engine/transmission combo of the group. My aunt owned a 2000 Grand Prix for 20 years and it held up well for about 15 of those years before she deferred maintenance on it.

    Burn: Dodge Intrepid. Just because there has to be a loser. My grandparents owned a white 1995 Dodge Intrepid they kept for 13 years and it looked/smelled like new even toward the end, but that’s due in large part to the fact that they garaged it half the year for most of its ownership. As with the others, I like the styling, but it’s too big for my taste.

  • avatar

    Ooh! Great one!

    DRIVE the Intrepid! Class leading dynamics, ground-breaking styling inside and out that sets the course for the future. Huge cabin and trunk. AMC-team led design with proper LONGITUDINAL engine layout. (Did you know Chrysler considered making these available with AWD?!) Detroit traditional 3.3 OHV V6 with great durability and smoothness or the 3.5 SOHC 24V for snob appeal and more power. I love the first gen’s dynamics and handling. The second gen LH cars were too soft and watered down with worse front foot well space. Easily the best looking of all three here by an eternity. P*ss poor 4-Speed UltraDrive automatics and wimpy, failure prone air condition systems. Chrysler, under Eaton, is reputed to have shunned the original design of the a/c compressor which would have been large enough and stout enough to handle the cavernous LH interior and expansive greenhouses and the sun they collected.

    BUY the Grand Prix. Stout if dull, floppy, unjoyous and cramped architecture versus interior space. I’ve never enjoyed piloting any W-Body car. Legendary and unbeatable 3800 V6 (thank you Buick!) with power, durability, and efficiency. Great HVAC system, as usual from GM. Incredible supercharged option with GTP. Old platform though that was a failed and unprofitable launch in the late 1980’s, and milked along and never outstanding. Typical creaky, flimsy GM interior pieces.
    Outdated in that regard and feels just as old to boot. Cheesy styling and interiors. Dig the red backlighting of the gauges though.

    BURN BURN BURN the Taurus. Eats transmissions even worse than the big Dodge. Ugliest by a country mile inside and out. Chintzy, cheap, tacky interior styling and quality. Poor general reliability. Hated the ride quality of the one I’ve been in. Strays far from the revolutionary Taurus of 1986. Atrocious “Everything Oval” styling put into full effect by Ford. What the heck were they thinking? Who signed off on THAT?! Worst car here, period.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Inside Looking Out: IMHO no one is interested in this SUV. On the other hand Ford finally revealed the new generation...
  • ToolGuy: When some dude undercooks the pork loin to conserve range and gives his whole family trichinosis, THEN...
  • Art Vandelay: I won’t buy it unless I see a video of it for every story I read on this site.
  • ToolGuy: I heard that Toyota is getting out of the automotive business.
  • ToolGuy: Inline 12-cylinder is what you want.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber