NickF1011 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 The Panthers are retro. It works for the Mustang... In order to be retro, wouldn't you have had to be modern at one point and then go BACK to being old school? The Panthers never left old school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Everyone knows that the best looking Taurus was the 2nd gen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Everyone knows that the best looking Taurus was the 2nd gen The 1991-94 models? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Everyone knows that the best looking Taurus was the 2nd gen Absolutely... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 The 1991-94 models? 1986-1991 - 1st Gen 1992-1995 - 2nd Gen 1996-1999 - Ugly Gen 2000-2007 - 4th gen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Everyone knows that the best looking Taurus was the 2nd gen I think your right about that, though I did like the look of the 04 to death one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I miss my '95 SHO. I don't miss the 13 points it gave me on my license, tho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I miss my '95 SHO. I don't miss the 13 points it gave me on my license, tho. That Yamaha was intoxicating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovaltine Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 (edited) Oh yeah. What a beauty. The one shown above surely was, when compared to these models from the same and previous year: 1985 Ford LTD (Fairmont) and this 1986 Chevrolet competitor: 1986 Chevrolet Celebrity And here's the car that served as a major inspiration for that first gen Taurus: Audi 5000 -Ovaltine Edited November 2, 2007 by Ovaltine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT_MAN Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Absolutely... I own a second generation Sable (95). I actually prefer the styling of the 1st generation of Taurus and Sable to be honest. They looked more chunky and substantial. They had a Germanic look to them. By the second generation, all of the brash, yet streamlined, character lines that gave the car some heft were removed and / or softened. The car, to me anyway, began to look a bit stale. I think the 1st generation car actually has aged better than the 2nd generation to be honest. The thing that was the most bothersome is actually the fact that the 1st generation of cars were better built though. They cost cut so much on the 2nd generation cars it isn't even funny. Whereas the interior in the 1st generation Taurus was nicely styled and the dashboard was pretty much one piece and didn't squeak or rattle, the 2nd generation cars are notorious for squeaks and rattles because of their 1000 piece dashboard. I like my 95 Sable okay - it has been with my family for about 10 years and it has almost 150,000 on it now. But, almost everything on the car has been replaced at least once. Including the engine (which Ford paid for thankfully .. thank you 3.8L headgasket recall). And, if you own a 2nd generation, expect to break rear sway bar links every 5,000-10,000 miles. That's how crappy they are. On the other hand, our 89 Sable had heavy duty sway bar links which never broke once. I know a lot of people are mad at how piggish Ford cars are getting to be these days in terms of weight. Honestly, I'd rather have them built well at the sufferage of gas mileage and speed than have them built like they were in the early 90s ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Absolutely... I agree.. 1991-94 was the best looking Taurus... I always liked the first and sencond generation Taurus wagon.... It still looks good today. While I was visiting the Henry Ford Museum two weeks ago, they had a perfect 1986 Taurus in red and gray and it really looks timesless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 1985 Ford LTD (Fairmont) I love those LTD's! That's what we need NOW. It was virtually a four door Mustang. Anything that can be done to a Fox Mustang can be done to the LTD. It's a shame the potential was not realized in production which could have carried a legacy to modern times. The Taurus was the right car for the times so I cannot criticize the LTD's replacement. I guess the LTD is more relavent now because it represents what many of us would like to see... A RWD performance sedan with muscle car looks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT_MAN Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I agree.. 1991-94 was the best looking Taurus... I always liked the first and sencond generation Taurus wagon.... It still looks good today. While I was visiting the Henry Ford Museum two weeks ago, they had a perfect 1986 Taurus in red and gray and it really looks timesless. This is the Taurus you're talking about. I remember seeing it there as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 The thing that was the most bothersome is actually the fact that the 1st generation of cars were better built though. They cost cut so much on the 2nd generation cars it isn't even funny. Whereas the interior in the 1st generation Taurus was nicely styled and the dashboard was pretty much one piece and didn't squeak or rattle, the 2nd generation cars are notorious for squeaks and rattles because of their 1000 piece dashboard. I agree 100%. That SHO I posted had a dash that would jump up and down with every expansion joint. It also had electrical issues, the seat motors didn't really work, etc. It had 85K or so when my grandparents got rid of it. By contrast, their 1996 Explorer that was replaced with a V8 Buick Rainier earlier this year, was tight, everything worked...very well I might add, and never gave them ONE day of trouble in the seven years of ownership (it was the OHV 4.0 V6). It is amazing how built quality can vary across models. For me, I like a brand that shows exceptional quality (which is how I would classify that Explorer) across the whole brand. That shows commitment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navlys32 Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 (edited) 2nd gen SHO's were nice, but the MN-12's were the best looking fords built in the first half of the 90s :happy feet: I miss my 95 SC. The SVT t-bird that almost was Edited November 2, 2007 by navlys32 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 2nd gen SHO's were nice, but the MN-12's were the best looking fords built in the first half of the 90s :happy feet: I miss my 95 SC. The SVT t-bird that almost was The only problem with the 2nd gen SHOs was the interior quality (surprise surprise) and the trans. Why Ford EVER thought that a tranny needed that much slip programmed into it is beyond me. They did the same thin with my Vic...it had unacceptable amounts of slip in it. Once I got my tuner however, all that changed. Nice T-Bird BTW! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I can remember just a few years ago when Bill Brown Ford had prepped new cars stacked up everywhere at end of every month in lots. The dealership has about 40 spaces in back for just prepped new vehicles waiting to be picked up by new owner. That's where I always got mine usually. The spaces were pretty much filled almost everyday with new vehicles and by last week of month overflowed to many other areas of lots adjacent. The day I picked up my new 2002 Taurus, 13 new ones had already gone out that day and probably at least 5 others after mine....all RETAIL. Remember, this is FORD country with Ford's big transmission plant just down the road with thousands of Ford employes. Now last year or so there are maybe 10-12 new vehicles on that lot on most days and by end of month maybe 20-25 vehicles awaiting new customers. Not anything like it used to be even a few years ago. And back in late 90's it was a zoo in there it was sooooo busy. How times have changed. Even the Victory Honda Dealer by me is not near as busy as it used to be just couple years ago. Ditto for houses...I live in desirable community where houses used to sell in days, and now it's YEARS. Houses by me have been sitting for up to two years with no sale. So people who tell me times are great must be Republicans. I'm not a Democrat either...just a realist. When home and car sales suck, the economy sucks. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Ford Cortina, nobody else got a look in when it come to sale 2 decades at No1 in the UK and with the Taunus No1 spot in Europe. So what did Ford do kill off the name. Beetle, F-150, Golf, Mini and Mustang live on and keep the continuity with the buyers. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.j...0/emfcort21.xml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.