Have you heard of AutoTempest? This nifty search aggregator combs through every regional craigslist and a couple of other websites to find whatever car you’re looking for. It’s an excellent resource for Curbivores for obvious reasons. Although I cannot justify the purchase of a first generation Taurus or Sable at this point in my life, I still bookmarked my search parameters to see if any decent examples are out there. There is generally at least one available at any given time, but so far none of them have matched the condition of this particular Taurus.
This isn’t the first time I’ve written about a first generation Taurus/Sable internet find. There was a nice wagon available back in 2013, and a Robocop replica was posted on eBay in early 2014. It’s also impossible to forget about the two door Sable convertible concept I talked about earlier this year. This 1988 LX stands above them all due to its low mileage and excellent condition.
I’ve looked at every available exterior and interior picture several times now and I can’t find a single flaw. I came across a similarly optioned 1990 Taurus LX back in 2014, but that particular example had scuffed bumpers and wheels. Not this brown beauty. If Indiana Jones walked by this car he’d find the owner and forcefully advocate for its donation to a museum.
This Taurus is also noteworthy because of its model year. 1988 was the last time buyers had the opportunity to purchase a Taurus in the exact form in which it debuted. For 1989, both the sedan and wagon received a light refresh that altered the front end and eliminated the amber in the sedan’s tail lamps. Some interior bits were also modified.
And that is what makes this survivor extra special. How many similar examples are left? I’d be surprised if the number is more than ten.
How many LX models were produced thirty years ago? I’m sure the production figures paled in comparison to the mid level GL trim, which makes this veteran even more special. The keyless entry system also sweetens the deal.
If you wanted more evidence that this car has been well maintained over the course of its thirty year existence, here it is. Steering wheel cover? Check. Dash mat? Yup, its got that too.
And a peek underneath the cover reveals what we already knew: a perfectly intact dash.
Electronics also appear to be in working order.
Ford’s digital dash may be the most desirable option for collectors who want a more fully optioned Taurus. I’d probably opt against it due to the possibility that it may fail, but in this specific case it would not be a deal breaker. I also like the 44k mile figure, because it means the car has probably hasn’t sat around, which can obviously lead to problems.
The biggest potential deal breaker lies under the hood. The 3.8 liter “Essex” V6 had headgasket issues for pretty much its entire run, and I believe the additional torque tended to fry the AXOD transmissions at a higher rate than models equipped with the 3.0 “Vulcan” V6. But any owner who encountered these problems would be justified in paying for the repairs, at least in the case of this car.
“Money can’t buy happiness” is a dumb aphorism because I’m positive I’d be smiling ear to ear if I had this extraordinarily well maintained Taurus in my garage. A collector would be wise to acquire it. I just hope that when the time comes I can find something similar.
There are currently no meaningful bids for the Taurus, but that is bound to change as we get closer to November 3rd, which is when the auction ends. You can buy the car now for $2,900, which seems like a reasonable number for a car this rare and in such good condition. And if one of you actually buys it, you’re legally required to host me for at least one night so I can bask in the glow of this precious historical artifact.
Related Reading:
CC Capsule: Ford Taurus – The Best Seller Has Become Scarce by Paul Niedermeyer
Love it! This reminds me of my mother’s which was a 1987 (I think) LX 3.0 Wagon with Leather and a Moon Roof. I loved it but the moon roof was a mistake, as the moon roof and the shade both rattled. The leather was very supple and nice, but super-slippery. After a few years, I soured on the Taurus a bit and a few years after that, I drove a friend’s mom’s Taurus wagon which I think was a 1989, which had cloth, no sunroof, and normal gauges, and possibly the 3.8, and I remember thinking wow, this is so much better! No rattles, fast, comfortable, etc.
Hmmmmm……South Lake Tahoe could mean a really nice fly-in, drive home before Midwestern flurries crept in. If I had an extra garage, I’d be sorely tempted. Our 1990 Taurus wagon had the 3.8, but engine/transmission were never troublesome—perhaps we were lucky?
REVERSE CC EFFECT: Just last night I searched out Craigslist for a city I’ll be visiting soon, and the 1989 Sable Convertible concept car you mentioned is again on the market there: https://austin.craigslist.org/cto/d/mercury-convertible-concept/6710946295.html
Great find! There can’t be too many of these left at all in existence. Now I’m all for color-coordinated interiors, but the color of this one is god awful. Care for some vomit brown velour?
“Care for some vomit brown velour?”
Brendan, as a veteran of dealing with car-barfing kids, all I can think of is how easy clean-up would be in this color. 🙂
Needs to be a bit lighter to hide goldfish crackers 🙂
That’s a lovely colour. Much better than funereal black or deep, dark, drab, grey.
I have seen a couple of First Gen Tauruses with manual transmission imported from UAE.i like the first and second gen third gen is Fugly.
My X had her parents’ MT-5 Taurus (I think it was an 86 though.) Her dad was a Ford salesman and apparently got a screamin’ deal on it, cause it sat on their lot for a year because nobody wanted a manual trans Taurus. The car had a little over 100k on it when I was around it, it was mostly in OK shape, everything other than the AC worked but it was starting to …not start and leave her stranded places. The car was very comfortable though, it rode and drove great. It was DOG slow, though-like “don’t pull out in front of people” or bother passing other cars, though. She wasn’t sad to see it go, I only wish I thought to take some pics of it because of how rare it was.
I got exposure to the full Taurus range from a couple of older guys I worked with. One leased a loaded black one not long after they came out, complete with leather and sunroof. About a year later the other one bought a white MT-5 that was a total strippo right down to the crank windows. It was amazing to me that the same car could play so convincingly in both leagues.
It occurred to me while reading this that the Taurus styling was considered radical when it came out, yet today, it seems bland an boring. We have become accustomed to the shape. I recall speaking with a co-worker when these first came out, and he referred to the wagon as looking like a moon buggy, and not being negative in saying so. It was so different that it did look like something to drive on another planet. Compare this to a 1986 Cutlass and see which one looks futuristic. But fast forward to 2018, and this design seems to hold the basic shape of any generic sedan on the market today. It brings to mind the song “Video Killed the Radio Star”. This Taurus set the tone for all current sedans, yet Ford is killing it due to diminished demand. RIP Taurus, you will be missed.
Killed by a monster of its own creation is what comes to my mind.
Prior to the Taurus, American manufacturers prided themselves for decades on new styling to get people into showrooms, even if the underpinnings were unremarkable, and for many years it worked. The Taurus brought logic into an element of car design that was previously highly emotionally driven through marketing for the American market. AKA appliance styling. Once the Japanese put that same logical wrapper on their much better cars, the Taurus with its so-so dependability just became an unremarkable appliance, and because the cat was out of the bag with logical styling, they(nor any other manufacturer really) could no longer use new styling to pull in showroom traffic when sales would wane on current models
The only thing that really seems to date it is the ‘squareness’ of the corners compared to modern designs which are even more rounded. Thick pillars, check. Highish cowl line, check. Swoopy windshield, check. Fastbackish roofline, check…
Its styling is bland its a clone of the early Ford Sierra which was never a good looking car either, the flat front no grille styling eventually landed in Australia for the EA Falcon the awfull successor to the XF featured yesterday. Aussie didnt have Sierras so the locals thought it was a bold new style by Ford AU.
I had a ’88 (?) in Burgandy, but with the 3.0L V6. Only thing that failed was the very expen$ive, unique battery it had for the de-ice windshield. Other than that, for the time, it was about as good a U.S. sedan as one could get.
However, my wife’s stick, 4 banger Accord could easily out run it and got considerably better mpg. Despite those “details” I liked the Taurus and later bought another before finally switching to Honda!
I do believe I’ll continue with my ’88 IROC-Z 350 in lieu of even a very nice one of these Fords 🙂 DFO
And a peek underneath the cover reveals what we already knew: a perfectly intact dash.
Given that it’s all hard plastic, that shouldn’t be too surprising. 🙂
Have you looked at the hard plastic dashes on certain eras of Dodge pickups? They just disentegrate, though I’ve never seen such a thing happen on any Fords.
It’s soft touch vinyl. People put covers over them for a reason, to prevent cracks or to cover cracks like this…
Oops; my bad. Shoulda’ kept my mouth shut.
Wow, this car is the spitting image of one that an elderly lady used to drive to my church. Right down to the color. I never managed to get a picture.
She must have stopped driving because in the last couple of years I have seen a nice old brown Taurus with period-appropriate clearcoat rash. I suspect one of the grandchildren (or maybe great grandchildren) got it and started using it normally.
It is funny that the two nicest early Taurii I have seen in recent years have both been brown.
yes, I use
https://www.searchtempest.com/
All of craigslist, eBay & more in one search.
and not just cars
Nice find! My mother-in-law had an ’88 Taurus LX in light blue metallic w/ dark blue leather seat interior and about every option you could get on them. She loved that car, drove it daily for 12 or 13 years until she had to give up driving due to her post-polio syndrome-related mobility issues. The original Taurus and maybe the gen 2 from ’92-’95 were by far the best – and best looking – of the breed. I had a black ’89 SHO my wife and I bought new and it remains one of my top three favorite cars I’ve owned.
Even though I’m a Chevy guy thru and thru, I have nothing but respect for these. Especially in contrast to the Celebrity/Lumina equivalent of that day.
I’d driven several 1st/2nd Gen Tauruses over the years and thought each one was well-screwed together and offered a solid, confident driving experience.
Ten years ago we’d bought our youngest son a ’93 SHO project that he’d wanted for his 16th birthday. Yes it was a total “What were we thinking” moment, but even in its rode-hard-and-put-away-wet condition, with only new Walmart special tires, it still felt solid and confident. An AXOD failure sent it to the boneyard.
As a multiple-Taurus/Sable owner now down to one, but fondly remembering my first Gen 1 (a 1986 Taurus L wagon, red and nicknamed “The Tomato), I could really appreciate this well-preserved example. It’s not all that far away, either. Alas, there is no more garage or driveway space to accommodate it.
As I recall, in addition to the minor cosmetic changes to the Gen1.2, there was an improvement in airflow through the A/C condenser and radiator, and some interior decontenting.
I intentionally resisted the urge for the higher torque of the 3.8L V6 (the horsepower was the same 140 as in the 3.0L Vulcan) through Gen 1-2; skipped Gen 3 and with Gen 4, finally got a boost in power with the Duratec engine.
Saw this same car for sale on another site recently.
AutoTempest is pretty amazing. There is something to tempt everyone on that site.
Paul – Still pining for an nice 1979 Peugeot 504? – it’s in Idaho – just a hop and a skip over the mountains, and it’s going Cheap!!
(Edit: well, the car is actually in New Mexico, but close enough)
https://www.ebay.com/itm/163337154793?ul_ref=http%253A%252F%252Frover.ebay.com%252Frover%252F1%252F711-53200-19255-0%252F1%253Fff3%253D2%2526toolid%253D10044%2526campid%253D5336658105%2526customid%253D%2526lgeo%253D1%2526vectorid%253D229466%2526item%253D163337154793%2526srcrot%253D711-53200-19255-0%2526rvr_id%253D1724026269419%2526rvr_ts%253Dcbd3f9e31660a99be2b45388fffe3f36&ul_noapp=true
I remember brown on these very well, early on honing my car spotting talents I often told gen 1s apart from gen 2s by the colors I’d see them in, and brown was very common on earlier gen 1s. I also remember the chicago rust blended in well, at least until an entire chunk of rear fender lip fell off as was common.
Ed, this car is practically calling out your name! How can you say No? I’d be tempted myself, but right now I have two older Fords, and that’s plenty.
And somehow, I’ve never used AutoTempest before, I don’t know how I could have overlooked it. Lots of fun — found a Crown Vic LX Sport just like mine for sale in Texas, with only 28,000 miles.
Another CV Sport? Perhaps one driver and one parts car?
Yes — and I can still do it since I haven’t summoned up the courage yet to sell the CV!
Wow. Time Capsule status makes even mundane vehicles far more appealing. This is a great find, for 3 grand someone should snap it up and party like it’s 1990.
And here’s what it competed against in the market:
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/753572409/overview/?aff=stemp2&CMP=stemp2
Another time capsule, but they want 10 grand for that one. Which is nutters. The Taurus looks a full generation newer until you compare interiors–the Ranger steering wheel and big black plastic dashboard face plate don’t do it for me.
And another, in wagon form for three thousand less!
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/752263784/overview/?aff=atempest&CMP=atempest
Someone buy the Camry, I’ll go buy the Taurus, and we’ll have nice little comparison test writeup for CC!
John Davis has agreed to host the ‘comparo’.
John Davis is my hero. I can’t think of a job I’d want more, and he has stuck with it for almost 40 years. Also, he aged 10 years in the first 3 seasons, and then just stopped aging. Hmmm…
His windbreakers are legendary.
Your so right. John Davis looks younger now than he did 20 years ago.
My first new car was a 1988 Taurus LX sedan, dark blue with gray interior, analog gauges, floor shift, bucket seats and 3.8 V-6. Had most options except for sunroof and electronic digital dash.
Thought the Taurus was more modern looking, aerodynamic than Buick Century and Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera I was also looking at. IMO Taurus had a quasi-Germanic feel about it. (Later learned some parts were designed and made in Germany)
Car had firm smooth quiet ride. Steering was firm, acceleration was responsive.
Appreciated the yellow-coded underhood maintenance items for easy location, but that engine compartment with the 3.8 V-6 was packed tight. My local mechanic disliked routine service on that engine due to tight clearances.
Had the Taurus for nine years and about 112K miles, but had its shares of problems, i.e.,
-annoying creaking noise in front suspension whenever steering wheel was turned. Drove dealership crazy but they acknowledged noise and ended up replacing front struts, strut towers, steering rack under warranty.
-Battery had to replaced at 5 years….very expensive “special application” type requiring very high cranking amp IIRC.
-Fuel pump failed;
-Biggest problem: Exhaust manifold near firewall burned hole(s) in power steering hose. Happened twice before Tech Pub issued a heat shield kit to be installed between exhaust manifold and power steering hose. After shield kit installed, no problems…..but it was an expensive bill.
-Luckily got rid of it before headgasket and transmission issues reared their ugly and expensive heads. Recall didn’t get much when traded it in.
Enjoyed the car when things were running right.
A friend of mine got one of these in early 1986 as her company car. She was a top seller in her district and it was one of the perks of her job. It was absolutely loaded with every option available including a… cell phone! When she brought the car over to show us, she called the house to let us know she was there – from our driveway! Really, kids… It was neat stuff back in the day.
In the early 90’s I was selling Toyotas in rural Georgia. I encountered a number of people who had 200K mile Taurii, which surprised me at the time. Maybe the Essex motor maladies weren’t widely known or more of these cars had Vulcan than I remember, but it was nice to see folks getting good service out of them. They were giving the Accords and Camrys a run for their money.
Honestly, I wish that Ford had skipped the “oval” Taurus; it was put on the path to ruin from there, although the 10(?) year run of rental specials also didn’t do it any favors. The bright future that the 1986 Taurus promised was ruined so very quickly by the 1996 model and has never recovered. Even with the later re-boots, the magic was lost and the promise never returned.
I agree. The original gen Taurus and Sable were absolute magic, and just blew GM and Chrysler away. I had a 1987 Taurus wagon bought when it was 10 yrs old and a little bit rusty. It was very comfy and smooth-riding. It had the Vulcan engine and ran like a top despite having over 250k on it. Rather than spending the money to have the body fixed up, I traded it for an ’87 Jetta that was in great shape – big mistake! The Jetta was nothing but a repair nightmare, wish I’d kept that Taurus a lot longer!
I’ll always remember the first gen Tauruses fondly. We bought a ’90 GL new with the durable 3.0 Vulcan and put 336,000 on it! NO major repairs, just good preventive maintenance.
Best friend and his wife bought one of these brand new. I remember when I first got in it that it felt like the future.
And by golly it was.
This car still feels reasonably current. A few minor styling tweaks and it could be a 2014 Camry or Malibu. Whereas in 1988 a thirty year old car felt old and severely outdated.
My mom is rolling in a 2000 Taurus which she got new, it shows a smack over 27k in miles. People have been coming out of the woodwork lately wanting to buy it. She says no way, because her car HAS to be in a garage even after she sells it and none of the wanna be buyers have a garage. No car of hers has sat outside at nights since the mid sixties.
For me the sweet spot of Taurus is the 2000. They much improved the looks from the jellybean models and kept the mostly solid mechanicals. Too bad they kept the weak transmissions for pretty much the entire run from ’87 ’til ’07. My ’05 trans failed at 44,000 miles. Died under the mighty torque of the Vulcan. Luckily under warranty. Not to jinx it but it has 180,000 now and the rebuild still feels brand new. Actually most of the car does. Has original tie rods even driven in Chicagoland. The trans guy, who apparently builds a hell of a transmission, said there were a lot of problems with the mid 2000 models, with undersized lubrication fittings or something, but it was a kind of secret warranty thing. Ford gonna be Ford…
I would agree about the Y2K Taurus, it was a decent comeback from ovoid hell. But by that time, Ford had lost it’s contender status against the Camry/Accord/etc. Those companies were already on a serious product offensive during the early 90’s and only kept it up while Ford was blowing bubbles. By the time the Y2K came along, the nice restyling just couldn’t compete against the better engineered, better designed (not styled) cars from the competitors.
That said, I saw a Y2K era Mercury Sable in traffic the other day. It was in mint condition, which is not easy in this part of Michigan. I’d love to have one like that.
Even now, there are plenty of the post 2000 Taurii and Sables on the road around here. One of my former soccer players got married last year and needed a car; they found a minty 2005 Taurus at a very good price. It looks like grandma’s car; very clean and low miles. It was quite the find!
I would add that by 2000 Ford was deeply into the Nassar cost-cutting era. As someone with much wheeltime in Fords of the 80s through the mid 90s, those cost-cutter revisions of the later 90s (year varied by model) were just depressing cars that I could never muster much desire for.
In spite of my lengthy comments about me, because I’m apparently very interesting to me, I forgot to mention the featured car is extraordinary clean and in unbelievably good shape. My boss in the early 90s had a 1991, dark blue and nice looking Taurus. I remember something about her using a connection she had at Ford to special order it with with the 3.8L, which wasn’t normally available that year. Does anyone know if this true about the 3.8s availability in ’91? She managed a parts store near the Chicago plant where the first gens were made, and often could get special Ford parts easier than you’d think.
The 3.8 was a widely available option on sedans for 1991 and standard on wagons. Anyone could have one. No special factory connections required.
Okay, she was just dropping names. Thanks for replying!
It’s quite an example of an anything from 29 years ago. Very nice. Given the extreme vagaries of the U.S. climate, how many would there still be like this?
As to the car itself, I’ve learnt – largely from this site – just what a quantum leap this car represented for it’s manufacturer and perhaps Middle American Motordom in general when it came out. I agree too that it still looks contemporary enough.
But to a complete outsider, the styling has always been a bit wonky (meaning off-kilter here). The panelled grille looks either like someone was too tired to design an actual grille, or much worse, like Ford didn’t want to pay for a hood pressing that wrapped down and partly over (to at least some extent) to finish the aero effect. It looks, loudly, like a cost compromise.
Then there’s the back wheelarch area, where someone at Ford design was just not paying attention when the Audi 5000 was wheeled in. The strangely angled shutline of the rear door still leaves some body behind it till the arch is reached, the first awkwardness. The next, and distractingly worst, is that the wheelarch itself appears way smaller than the front one, and even has a less prominent eyebrow: a thoroughly odd compromise between the committee members who (rightly) insisted on no lip and a semi-covered straight line arch, and those who wanted the opposite, maybe? The result is a rear wheel that forever looks smaller than the front, which unhelpfully also makes it’s arse look big. And finally, the kink in the rear door shape gives the impression the doors don’t quite fit properly. It’s like a slipped Hoffmeister kink from an E36 BMW.
The total effect? To the outsider – again, I stress that point – it has always looked like a somewhat amateur knock-off of the Audi 5000. Not ugly by any means, but surely not quite right either.
The 1988 may have been the best Taurus ever. Still looks fresh – hard to believe this car is 30 years old. In 1989 the decontenting started, losing the amber turn signals, some map pockets, etc. Then the door courtesy lights went away and interiors cheapened. This happens all the time. A manufacturer gets a hit that sells well, then spends the rest of its life cycle cheapening it more and more every year to squeeze out a few more profit dollars. Manufacturers think we don’t notice.
Agreed! My ’05 has cheaper parts installed where they thought no one would notice. Most have held up anyway. The bad stuff was almost always corrosion related, which was probably due to the cost cutting. Like the alloy drums. Broke in half when the shop tried in vain to remove them. Steel replacements were still solid when the wheel cylinders started leaking at 120,000 miles. Not too bad for a cheap Ford overall. 180,000 miles and still drives like (almost) new.
It’s nice to see that these cars are starting to attract the ‘collector eye’. For years these got driven into the ground.
Ford cuts costs in cars, then loses customers. Now, they quit making cars for “more profits” and act like car buyers are “cheapskates”*. And some fans say “I’m glad they are out of that market”, as if “never should have bothered”.
Really? Should have just built trucks since 1903?
*With more supply of UV’s, more competition, there will be more cost cutting, and all. IMO. Law of supply and demand…
As if I don’t spend enough time looking at cars online… thanks, guys. First thing I did was look up Bronco IIs. Found some drool-worthy items.
I’m looking for a 1986 LX Wagon to restore. I really want to save one of these cars so badly.
The Taurus I want should have keyless entry, electronic climate control, and the digital gauge cluster. Oh and also front bench seats.
For the color I want the exterior to be in Medium Canyon Red Metallic. So basically this color:
http://smclassiccars.com/uploads/postfotos/1986-ford-taurus-l-used-3l-v6-12v-automatic-no-reserve-7.jpg
https://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2008/01/01/23/02/1986_ford_taurus-pic-34616.jpeg
The interior should be gray like this NOT red:
http://s3files.core77.com/blog/images/318631_33988_39532_tBddv34Sd.jpg
If anybody ever comes across something like this notify me IMMEDIATELY. When I restore the car I’ll post it on YouTube. I hope one will show up!
The car that wrecked automotive styling. I think they are hideous. Though the back and wagon are the best looking. Sable with light bar looked better. Unfortunately not good cars especially with the 3.8 that ate head gaskets. I used to work at a machine shop and when there was nothing to do we built 3.8 heads. The local Mercury dealer sent 3 to 6 heads a day to be rebuilt. The aod didn’t hold up well and the front ends wore quickly making them handle wierdly with much groaning. The interior was so so. Not great. The smart choice was spring for a more reliable cheaper to own crown Vic.
I disagree I love this car so much. While the 3.8 liter was a bad engine the 3.0 Vulcan was very reliable. Most of those other “problems” this car had was because people drove these cars into the ground and never took care of them. You are supposed to service the 4 speed AXOD very 30,000 to 50,000 miles according to many owners I’ve talked to and most nobody did. I’ve talked to a lot of people who said they’ve taken care of their Taurus and never ever had a problem with it.
I tried to place a bid, but unfortunately eBay refuses to accept it, because the seller has marked shipping within the U.S. only, and I am in Germany.
Of course I have to care about shipping to my place, not the seller, but he also seems to have the contact seller option disabled, so I cannot tell him my case….too bad.
Echoing Chas108 above, I’ve always preferred GM cars myself but these were desirable then and still are today. They represented truly forward thinking in American automotive design. The influences of the Euro Sierra and Granada / Scorpio and Audi 5000 (100/200) didn’t go far amiss. Incidentally, I’ve had a Scorpio and an Audi 200 but never a Taurus. Never occurred to me until now!
Sadly like many great American designs, it was left too long on the vine with no major redesigns. My father’s firm always had Taurii so I remember distinctly driving both a brand new 1993 and 1996 GL (ie facelift first gen and new catfish). The 1996 was clearly a better car but so damned ugly; the 1993 was clearly decontented from the original 1986-88 cars. He later had a 2000 which was much more attractive but I never drove that one – I would assume much the same as the 1996.
I always liked the color of this example. Still looks nice to my nearly 40 year old eyes. All the options don’t hurt either. Someone mentioned here that these cars scaled well from plain-Jane to near luxury – I’ve always thought Ford does that pretty well.
Now someone go buy this lovely old barge! 😉😉
I had a 1988 LX wagon in this color until 2015, with the optional sunroof and floor shift and just under 270,000 miles. Loved it, but someone in a bro-dozer crashed into it in a parking lot subsequently writing it off.
That’s too bad. I love these cars. Especially the wagons.
I have a 1989 Taurus LX with over 300k miles, and a 1988 Mercury Sable LS with over 100k miles, both cars have the same 3.8 and AXOD drivetrain, which has been very good. No problems with head gaskets. I had a statistics text book in college that explained the AXOD transmissions failure was found to be a specification problem. Ford and Mazda both built the same transmission, and none of the Mazda built transmissions had problems, and it was determined that parts in the Mazda trans were made to exact sizes, where as parts in Ford built trans had a high variance in sizes, even though they were within manufacturing tolerances. Also, the electronics are rock solid, and I’ve never had a problem with the digital dash.
Beautiful wagon!