(first posted 11/24/2014) What you are looking at here is the object of my teenage lust. While some teenage boys had posters of Lamborghinis and Ferraris in their rooms, I really wanted to own the short-lived Australian market version of the controversial 1996 Ford Taurus. In a market that hadn’t seen much in the way of American metal in decades, let alone anything this daringly styled, the Taurus was almost exotic. Underneath that bold sheetmetal, though, lay a fairly modern, competent yet unexciting family sedan. Despite its competitiveness, the odds were always going to be stacked against this bull in the Aussie market.
1994-96 Ford EF Falcon
We all know the Australian Falcon is ascending to the great junkyard in the sky come 2016, but much like the manual transmission and the V8 engine, the Falcon’s impending death has been speculated upon for decades. During the mid-1990s, the Falcon came very close to being replaced by the third-generation Taurus. But it was the successful 1994 EF revamp of the 1989-vintage Falcon, boasting up-to-date styling and a refined version of the venerable 4.0 six, which secured a $AUD750 million commitment to the 1998 AU Falcon. It was this replacement that ended up being one of the Australian market’s most polarizing cars of the past few decades, but that is a story for another day.
1991-96 Ford Telstar TX5 Ghia
Despite the commitment to future Falcons, Ford decided to help amortize the cost of developing the fresh new Taurus by launching it in the Australian market, as well as New Zealand and Japan. This led to the somewhat confusing situation of Ford dealers selling two similarly-sized, priced and equipped sedans in the same space. Ford claimed the Taurus Ghia was a replacement for the Telstar Ghia, a rebadged Mazda 626 that, thanks to a rising Yen, was priced uncomfortably high.
The most prestigious Falcon on the normal-length wheelbase, the Fairmont Ghia, retailed in 1996 for around $AUD46,000. The top-end Telstar hatch, with a 2.5 V6 and four-wheel-steering, retailed for a whopping $50,000; the entire Telstar range would be axed in 1996 to make way for the European Mondeo. This proved to be a wise move, as the subsequent 626 would be an example of mid-1990s Japanese conservatism and cost-cutting.
The Taurus was pitched not as an in-house rival to the Fairmont, but rather its quarry was the dull Nissan Maxima (a rebadged Infiniti I30/Nissan Cefiro), the Toyota Vienta (luxed-up Camry) and Mitsubishi Verada (Diamante). In specification, it was quite similar, with front-wheel-drive and a MacPherson strut suspension.
The transverse, DOHC Duratec 24v V6 was the only engine choice, mated to a four-speed automatic. Unlike its Aussie showroom buddy, there was no V8 to be found here. Detail changes were made from the American market Taurus, including the use of Mercury Sable headlights and new front turn signals to meet strict Australian Design Rules.
The Taurus was slightly longer overall than the Falcon (198 in vs 189 in), but had a shorter wheelbase (108.4 vs 110) and weighed 99lbs less than a similarly equipped Fairmont Ghia. Unlike many front-wheel-drive pretenders to the Falcon/Commodore throne, the Taurus was comfortably wide; a negligible 0.11 inches split the two.
Ford EF Fairmont Ghia (top) and Ford Taurus Ghia (bottom)
Hopes of considerably better packaging owing to the front-wheel-drive layout, though, were dashed by the Taurus’ swoopy roofline. Inside, however, the Taurus showed more flair. The continuation of the oval theme wasn’t to everyone’s tastes, but the interior had more panache than the conservative Falcon and was solidly assembled with good quality materials. The Falcon had it soundly beat in trunk space, though.
1996-98 Ford EL Fairmont
Much like the Probe debacle in the US that lead to the continuation of the old Fox Mustang, there was a mighty brouhaha over Ford daring to shift to a front-wheel-drive Falcon. Once the RWD Falcon’s position was firmly ensconced in the Aussie lineup, though, the Taurus was assessed on its own merits. Critics were fair in their verdicts on this curious American entrant.
Motor magazine’s first impressions were of a sedan with ride, steering and handling “close to class-leading for a large front-drive sedan”. They were especially impressed with the communicative steering and a well-damped ride, but disappointed by a deficiency in torque. The venerable SOHC 4.0 inline six in the Falcon may have had only slightly more horsepower (207), but it boasted a stout 263 ft-lbs of torque at 3000rpm; the Taurus had 200 ft-lbs at a much higher 4500rpm. The result was much less low-end grunt than the Falcon.
Wheels magazine compared the Fairmont Ghia and Taurus Ghia in 1996 and was disappointed that the Taurus wasn’t easily the better car considering the investment and talent involved in its development. The much older Falcon, riding on an eight-year-old platform with an even older engine and a solid rear axle, proved to be the sedan better-suited to Australia, right down to its better radio reception and stronger headlights. The Taurus gulped less fuel, shifted smoother and cornered flatter, but nothing stood out as being remarkably better.
The Taurus came extremely well-equipped, with climate control, a six-speaker stereo, alloy wheels, anti-lock brakes, remote central locking and dual airbags. An optional luxury pack added leather trim and a six-disc CD changer. But the Taurus Ghia retailed between $AUD43-46,000, right in the same price range as the Fairmont/Fairmont Ghia six.
Dealers had to discount to shift the bulls, and by the third and final year on the market, Ford slashed prices by more than $5000. Suffice it to say, Ford’s – ahem – bullish targets of 5,000 units annually were not reached. Considering the in-showroom competition and the fact that 1995 saw only 3,400 Veradas and 2,400 Maximas sold, it was always going to be an unrealistic target.
1998-2000 Ford AU Falcon
Unlike other RHD markets, Ford Australia never received the striking Taurus wagon. Although much more attractive than the workmanlike, leaf-sprung Falcon wagon, it probably wouldn’t have made a huge impact on sales, nor would a RHD SHO or lesser models. The fun-to-drive Mondeo couldn’t even escape the sales doldrums during the 1990s.
These were the golden years for the Falcon in terms of sales, until Holden’s VT Commodore arrived in 1997. The 1998 AU Falcon was a misguided re-attempt at bold and curvaceous styling on a large sedan, and was a significant flop. Not even the launch of the handsome and thoroughly restyled 2002 BA Falcon could arrest an overall sales slide for the Falcon.
“Taurus” in Australia became synonymous with failure, like an assassin sent to commit regicide and ending up in the stocks. Rumours would persist for years after that the Taurus would come back to usurp King Falcon, but these would prove to be false. The King may be dying now, but the Taurus isn’t coming to ascend to the throne. Ford Australia’s future flagship sedan will be the new Mondeo/Fusion.
Meanwhile, if you want a used family sedan in Australia that is reliable, well-equipped and dirt-cheap, the bulls tend to hover around the $3k mark. You’ll be part of an exclusive group of people who took a chance and tried something a little different. As for myself? I really liked the Taurus, but I bought a Falcon.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1986 Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable
Something “new” for me: Right Hand Drive Taurus 🙂
The bummer with the Taurus is how sad it looks, anthropomorphically speaking. The AU was even more of a disgrace, trying to force-fit Ford’s prevailing ‘edge design’ aesthetic and failing disastrously.
Well told, William, even if it’s a story best forgotten. You’re just the person to write up the recent Opel disaster over here.
I’ll second that. The Sable headlight and Taurus fascia combo work even more poorly than their respective designs in the North American market.
I saw an Opel the other day, an Astra Turbo. IIRC didn’t they sell something like 1200 Opels in total, while they were on the market here?
Those two-door Astras look great. I think we’re going to get them rebadged as Holdens, but not sure.
Still ugly, after all these years. I saw my first Taurus wagon in this generation in Seattle in 1996. It makes the sedan look good and the sedan makes the sad, droopy assed AU Falcon look good.
Australias roads are a prettier place without them.
sure the EF wasnt longer than 189 ” ?
The wagon was 198.5″, (Taurus length) but on a 115.1″ wheelbase.
The sedan was 193.1″ (shorter), on a 109.9 ” wheelbase.
A bit too much like a Mondeo competitor for the UK,did the Mondeo make it to Australia?It’s got a rather sad face though it must have been a decent car to have sold so well
The first-gen Mondeo made it here, but it was a rare sight. IIRC there wasn’t much price difference between it and the Falcon. A friend of mine had a Mondeo wagon; it was the only one I ever saw.
Thanks Pete,I’d take the Falcon over a Taurus also.A pity the Falcon never showed up in the UK as the Chrysler 300 and Monaro/VXR8 have sold quite well despite the price of fuel
You got and get the Falcon in the UK Gem – if you like Coleman Milne’s hearse conversions 😉
My Goth niece has an unhealthy interest in deadmobiles,a Falcon sedan would suit me
You’re also in luck Gem, the current Coleman Milne Dorchester is a Falcon sedan – just chop out the middle metre or so that CM added and you’ll end up with exactly the same car we lucky Kiwis and Aussies get! 😉
The Falcon wouldnt meet EU crash standards, it had little export potential good cars when they finally got it right for the EF EL models my mate has a Fairmont rotting slowly in his driveway it still runs but will never see the road again, then Ford threw it all away with the AU model new front and rear sheet metal for the BA improved to looks but the mechanical weaknesses remained, the Taurus was just butt ugly and now Im reminded just how long it is since Ive seen one in running order or dead for that matter they all seem to have vanished.
The people who designed both of the Taurus and the AU Falcon must have taken substances. Both remind me of some of the never realised (or realised in very small numbers) Volgas which were supposed to replace the 24 (the one that looks like an early Falcon). When the time to replace his Peugeot 505, my father and I visited the Israeli Ford dealer; after not having had an American car for years, he was considering going back to his old habit. He took one look at the Taurus and bought a Toyota Avensis.
There you go, the GAZ-3111, another failure. In fact, I find it less ugly than the Fords. At least, as I have heard from more than one source, all of the above are reliable.
That’s a very Rover looking grille
I think there styling elements from 5 different cars here – typical for Russian cars of that era. But, as I’ve said, to me even that thing is better looking that the Ford blob cousins…
It reminds me of the Daewoo Leganza
GAZ inside, again, no worse than other late 90s early 00s western cars.
I’ve never been a fan of the ovoid Taurus. It has only become worse with age. William, you mention that the Taurus’s interior was assembled solidly with good quality materials. From my personal experience with these cars, their interiors were so-so. Not worst in class quality, but hardly a standout. I guess it depends on which car you compare it to. I will say that the Fairmont Ghia’s interior looks very appealing and posh for the era – very Mazda Milenia. I’ve never seen that 1998-2000 Falcon – just hideous!
Brendan, I agree with you on interiors. Having driven scads of these, the de-contenting at Ford was quite palpable between the ’97 and ’99 I was assigned. The material was durable, but the vinyl that found its way into the ’99 was a real turn-off.
The Taurus interior was definitely worst in class here in NZ at the time. I remember racing into the local Ford showroom when the Taurus came out, and although I appreciated the daring exterior design, the interior was a huge turn-off, especially when compared with the Falcons and Fairmonts alongside it.
The quality of the door trim mouldings inparticular was absolutely apalling – very very crude compared with the Falcon, and on a par with my late cousin’s Lada Samara. Of particular memory is the holes for the door lock buttons, which were just jaggedly cut into the trim like the Lada, with no finishing around the edges. The Falcon’s door touchpoints were padded and upholstered; the Taurus’ were cheap plastic that felt flimsy and awful.
So the Taurus looked like the car of tomorrow in our Kiwi showrooms, but was trimmed like the car of yesteryear from Russia.
Perhaps this is a minority voice speaking, but I rather find the front of this Taurus to work much better than the catfish faced Taurus found in the U.S. The aluminum wheels also help the appearance; those were optional here but few had them.
With the amount of comparable and well proven product in showrooms, it is easy to see how Ford did not see a higher degree of success.
Great reminder of how the Taurus once tried to be a premium car. When these were new in the U.S., we had a secretary with a family connection to a Ford dealer. She drove a 96 or 97 Taurus sedan, very well optioned. Painted cobalt blue, it was as attractive as any of these I have ever seen. The styling was a bit jarring to me, but it certainly came across as a nice car. My, but how that would change by the end of the 90s.
This article has refreshed my hate for these cars, I forgot how much I disliked these dead catfish Taurus/Sables.
Has this generation Taurus/Sable been given the “Deadly Sin” treatment? Because its deserving of it worse than almost any GM “deadly sin”, this moldy day old catfish KILLED KILLED KILLED KILLED what was the best selling car in America, looking at pictures of the one above, I can’t believe that it was allowed to be produced, it has to be one of the ugliest cars perhaps THE UGLIEST of the last 20 years, yes WORSE THAN AN AZTEK.
Knock the GM-10 cars all you want, I would take ANY GM-10 W-body car over these melted mutated monstrosities any day of the week.
they were too obsessed with oval. Ford Crown Vic in 1992 looks too rounded already, and Lincoln Mark VIII looks nice, but 1994 Ford Thunderbird has a too ridiculous bumper with rounded vents, also the Mustang. Then they have a way too rounded 95 Continental, and eventually we got a 96 Taurus.
I think I would still take a 96-99 Taurus over a first generation GM-10 car (even though I like the looks of the Grand Prix)
As ugly as the 96-99 Taurus was it was more reliable then the first generation GM-10 cars where the standard engine in most of them was the 2.8l, 3.1l or 3100 V6 which had cooling issues (even before the introduction of Dex-Cool) plus they were horrible on rear brakes due to a faulty slide pin design that seized (the dealership I worked for at the time make a real killing on brakes and engines for these cars.
My friend put 300,000 on his 88 Regal Custom with the 2.8 V6, I put 140,000 on a 1993 Twin Cam GTP, and 160,000 it’s supercharged replacement, my friend put 385,000 on a 3.1 MFI 1993 Lumina Coupe, and has 200,000 on the Monte Carlo that replaced it, if thats un-reliable, well then I don’t know what, tell you what, I would rather stare at a non running Lumina that have a fully functional Taurus of this vintage.
Also, why are we comparing this to first generation 1988 GM-10 cars, by the time these cat-turds came out in 1996 the W-body had undergone some significant upgrades and was just about to get another revamp for 1997.
Well said, Carmine. I was very proud of my ’87 Sable spaceship, and later liked my 2nd-gen Taurus very much too. The Catfish is just tragic.
I had a look around a 92 Sable theres one roaming locally it had a tranny recall before it left the states but has been reliable since according to the girl driving it but, a much nicer looking car compared to the horrid fish faced thing Ford tried to sell here.
I’ve no experience of a GM-10, but that aside I am in total agreement with you, Carmine.
And the AU Falcon is surely Ford Australia’s deadliest sin. They had a top-selling car before that steaming pile appeared. The AU killed Ford Australia, and handed the once-family-size market over to Holden by default. Whoever forced the AU styling on Ford Australia is the person responsible for the imminent death of Ford in this country. As all Aussies know, car companies never prosper once they quit production here. We have long memories when it comes to companies that put our neighbours out of a job.
That said, post-AU Falcons make cheap, reliable second-hand cars. Only the styling (and awkward rear seat access) held them back.
Ironically, the previous Taurus redesign, in ’92, had made the car look much stodgier. So yeah, they went pretty far in the other direction. But how much of the sales decline was due to the styling and how much was due to Ford giving up on going head to head with the Camcords for the Mr. and Mrs. Middle America market, and instead turning the Taurus into a fleet queen.
“The styling” as mentioned here and “giving up on going head to head with the Camcords” are two different generations. These “fish face” Tauruses were Ford’s last salvo against the Camry and Accord. They hit the market with alloy wheels, nice(ish) interiors, interesting colors, the V8 SHO, the DOHC V6, and lots of other things aimed squarely at wowing consumers. The styling ended up being something of a misfire as it wasn’t recieved well, but this generation Taurus was not designed for fleets.
The following generation, or “extensive mid-cycle refresh” if you’d rather, was where Ford threw up their hands and said “screw it, we’ll chase the fleet market”. Rear drums replaced discs, all the daring styling elements were replaced with safe ones, the SHO was discontinued, the interior decontented, and essentially the whole car rejiggered into a boring but safe mold. And it became a fleet stalwart that lived long past its expiration date, all the way into 2007.
Exactly, I remember these being launched as a direct salvo against that Camcords, with the SHO and Sable possibly even angling up at more middle priced imports like the Maxima. They would have had a chance if they didn’t look like toxic waste mutants.
Telstar? Was that like the satellite or the song? (Either reference would have been almost three decades late by 1991!)
True, but they’d used the name since 1984 or thereabouts, since the FWD Mazda 626 came out. By 1991 we all knew where the Telstar fitted in the Ford lineup – it was the Cortina replacement.
Fascinatingly, Ford also sold the Telstar in Japan — presumably identical except for whatever minor regulatory changes to what you got in OZ. I have difficulty imagining who in Japan would have wanted one; the GD Capella on which it was based was an also-ran in the Japanese market and the Telstar wasn’t any cheaper or more attractive.
In NZ the Telstar and Sierra were sold alongside each other – the Telstar sedan/hatch replaced the Cortina sedans, the Sierra wagon replaced the Cortina wagons. When Mazda offered a 626 wagon, a Ford-badged version rocked along and replaced the Sierra here. My parents went from an ’83 Cortina wagon to an ’85 Sierra wagon to a ’90 Telstar wagon which they owned from 1994-96 (being FWD it struggled towing the boat or caravan and was replaced with a 4wd Subaru Legacy). Telstars had an excellent reputation here and sold very well.
Did NZ get the Escort or Orion, or just the Laser?
Sorry AUWM, comment notifications aren’t working too well any more, I missed your question. We got the MkI and II Escort ranges, then Lasers thereafter. We did get the MkV Escort in Cosworth form only, to replace the Sierra Cossie; and the whole Mk VI Escort range was introduced as a short-lived replacement for the Laser range. The Focus range replaced the Mk VI Esky and is still with us today.
I commend Ford for trying to make the Taurus “different” like it was when first released in 1986. It took America by storm and was a great top seller for years. I think the problem was that everyone was familiar with what a Taurus looked like and liked that styling. So when this oval beast came out it was rejected. I had one as a rental car in 1996 for a trip from Rhode Island to Canada and found it to be comfortable and roomy, just weird. The dash and controls were very strange to me, with buttons everywhere and just a very odd look to it. I never found this model Taurus attractive. Ugly is more like it!
Are you serious? I find this generation Taurus/Mercury Sable to be the ugliest of the cars sold.
I’m as hard-core a Ford guy as you’ll ever find but there’s no way… NO WAY… I’d EVER be caught dead driving one of those bottom-feeder-fish-faced turkeys. I’d guess that it was Jacques The Knife that signed off on that hideous pair. I’d also take a GM10 over one of these… at least if it’s a GM10 Grand Prix or Cutlass.
This launched a year after these Ford disasters…..
Much better than the ovoid twins! I have a bit of a soft spot for that gen Grand Prix. One of the last Pontiacs that deserved to be a Pontiac (along with the G8)
I got to drive one of these a few months ago. I was amazed to see a foot operated parking brake on a car this new. It at least looked sporty, but build quality and dynamics were definitely not in the same league as a Commodore or Falcon of the same era.
What do you mean “a car this new”? Most mid and full-size sedans in the US have foot operated parking brakes. Camrys, Altimas, Impalas, Chargers, Lacrosses etc. No one uses them in automatic cars anyway and you can’t even get manuals in most of them.
The only mainstream sedans I can think of with console parking brakes are the Accord and Gen1 Fusion… both of which actually offer manual trans versions… but I think even the Fusion went back to the floor for the current model (and I don’t know if they even sell sticks anymore).
I had no idea it was still common. It must be a US market thing. I guess if nearly everything is automatic it doesn’t really matter. I had never seen a foot parking brake or even an umbrella handle parking brake in a post-1980’s passenger car before. It’s very quaint, especially in a car with sporting pretensions like a Pontiac Grand Prix GT.
Seems like more and more cars are reverting back to the foot operated parking brake actually, if not an electronic one. Hand operated levers in US cars(both from domestic and foreign manufactures) seemed to fade in and out between the 80s and the last decade. Giant consoles with cupholders and compartments are all the customer seems to want in the center now.
Another effect of the loss of manual transmissions. In drivers ed we were actually TAUGHT not to use the parking brake in automatic cars if you can believe it. The reasoning being nobody uses them anyway and in a used car the cable and/or mechanism could be corroded and cause the brakes to lock up(unlikely) or the cable to drag.
Foot-operated parking brakes are definitely not common in New Zealand. Console levers have been the norm since forever (okay, the 1970s). The local car magazines hated foot-operated parking brakes with a passion in the 1970s as the majority of cars sold here (and in Australia) had a manual transmission. I remember the LH Holden Torana being ridiculed as it was impossible to do a hill start on the foot parking brake+manual trans model. Foot parking brakes are viewed as antiquated here. Having said that, my 1997 Nissan Laurel auto has a foot parking brake (with a brake release on the dashboard) and I like it just fine. The manual Laurels all have console levers though, for those handbrake turns and drifting sessions.
I hadnt seen a foot operated parking brake in years but the Nissan Bassaro I drove last weekend has one built this century too column shift auto as well a real retro mobile.
I 1st heard of the Australian Falcon in the early 80s. There was an ad in the British magazine CAR that featured one of the Ghia sedans being sold by select Ford dealers.
Being a Ford fan from the age of 7 or 8, I was quite interested but it would take the introduction of the internet before I could learn more about Ford of Australia.
I think, given the choice, I would have bought a Falcon instead of a Taurus.
BTW, can someone enlighten me about the “relationship” of the Falcon and Fairmont? Is this the same basic car but one is “stretched” to create a premium model….like the Crown Vic and the Lincoln Town Car? Two entirely different cars but with a few shared engines?
The Fairmont is merely a luxury Falcon, on the same wheelbase. Some years there was another trim level (Futura) in between.
The Fairlane was the luxury long-wheelbase job. And the LTD was an even-fancier Fairlane.
Based on when the Fairmont name was introduced, I’ve long suspected Ford was at one point contemplating quietly dropping the Falcon name to escape the bad reputation of the XK, which may have been why it was just “Fairmont” rather than “Falcon Fairmont.”
Standard wheelbase line up was the following in order of base to top spec:
Falcon
Futura
Fairmont
Fairmont Ghia
Futura disappeared in the 70s and reappeared in the 90s before dying in 2008. Fairmont and Fairmont Ghia also disappeared in 2008, becoming “Falcon G6” and “Falcon G6E”.
The Falcon S, XR6 and XR8 were also SWB and generally a mix of Falcon and Fairmont trim. The Ghia usually had a different dashboard shared with the LWB Fairland and LTD sedans. The Falcon wagon always sat on the LWB platform and usually shared the different Fairlane/LTD rear side doors.
No one will ever accuse these Taurii of being beautiful, but I never found them to be that hideous. Odd? Sure. And it would have looked far better continuing the grille-less theme of the previous model than this ovoid slot. Too many ovals! But still. I don’t hate it. Especially with the alloy wheels, not that bad. And I certainly never knew they were sold overseas!
Now that AU Falcon? Egads. THAT thing is Ugly with a capital U. I see they were trying to follow the “early new edge” idiom that gave us things like the Cougar and the Ka, but it just REALLY doesn’t work here. Not at all.
The aussie Fairmont is a deluxe version of the Falcon. The long wheelbase version is the Fairlane.
To the eyes of this aussie, the Taurus looked like it had been sitting in the sun too long. The sales suggested others thought the same.
Re. the AU Falcon, I read somewhere that the local Ford people were forced to abandon their almost-ready new Falcon design and re-style it to conform to Ford’s corporate ‘edge’ styling.
Few liked the resultant AU, a sales disaster, but Ford was stuck with it. The hasty (“BA” model) restyle that replaced the AU was a success, despite it retaining the basic AU shape. You can still see the same basic AU shape in the current “FG” Falcon (see pic), all these years later, even though not a single panel is the same.
3K for a Taurus OMG they are hard pressed to make 3 figures in NZ my across the street student neighbours struggled for a year to off load a tidy silver Taurus dropping the price to under a grand finally saw it go, Class leading please go drive something properly built a 406 Peugeot is a better car to drive and ride in than anything from Ford or GMH of the 90s and will eat any of them in performance ride and definitely handling the 3L pug will eat any Falcon off the line Wheels as usual showed their JAP/AUS bias.
The NZ market must be very different. Nobody in Australia would have cross-shopped a 406 and a Falcon – the 406 would be too expensive. Plus, you can get a Falcon serviced anywhere. Not so a Peugeot, once you get outside the big cities. A mate in Terang has to get his Peugeot serviced in Geelong, 145 km away. Only a dedicated Peugeot-phile would put up with that.
With the Taurus, Ford did not seem to grasp what BMW, Audi and M-B did: never, never mess with a recognizable and successful identity. There was no need to reinvent the wheel, merely refine it.
One of the reasons for so many Fords on the market was Dearborns threat of closure of Ford Australia mostly due to warranty costs on the dismal Capri and the exerable EA Falcon gboth cars cost Ford money almost per unit the Capri was only a restyle of the Mazda 323 Cabriolet yet they made a mess of it and the Falcon got released before it finished baking two massive blunders by Ford AU. So they tried every other car in the stable The Mondeo sold ok in NZ as did the Telstar which also had the Radisich performance model since Falcons lacked anything of that ilk. But the revamped Falcon was the best of the bunch in Aussie by then, finally a AOD trans to drop the revs at cruising speed the engine didnt leak oil from new(an inspection fail in OZ) and the suspension had been sorted so it steered sort of.
Not quite.
The Capri project was a fiasco from the start. The original Ghia Barchetta show car the design was based on was far better looking, and by the time the Capri appeared, the styling was dated. And convertibles generally don’t sell in Australia – so it was built primarily for export to the US. That was a dubious proposition.
I agree the EA Falcon was rushed to market, to come out ahead of the VN Commodore. Although the VN was not an Australian design but only a widened Opel with a Buick engine, it was reliable, while the early EAs had engine problems and only a three speed auto. The Falcon was more Australian, true, but Aussies want reliability. The bad rep of the early EAs led to us buying a Mitsubishi Magna instead. it was a good choice, and we’ve driven big Mitsubishis ever since.
But back to the Falcon, it recovered from the teething problems of the early EA ohc engines. It never recovered from the AU styling.
Still better looking than the USDM Taurus.
My 92 Taurus handled like a dream and looked peppy. Best car ever in the snow, especially with Pirellis.
After the frowning catfish re-style the Taurus looked like it was lumbering along. Felt like it too.
Interesting article William and interesting comments. I dug out the magazine with this comparison, some other stats are the Fairmont being over a second quicker to 100 km/h, the Taurus was 100 lb lighter. The Fairmont was only a quarter inch wider outside but nearly 5inches wider inside.
Ahhh…hello old friend! Yes, we actually had one – a ’96 DN – graphite grey with aubergine leather and toning plastic mouldings. Came after a series of Falcons as a novated lease vehicle. We liked it, local Ford dealers and mechanics hated it. No parts were ever held in stock which led to delays. The final straw was a dead alternator, two types used both with sealed for life bearings and neither in Melbourne. Then there was the cost to fix down low on the back of the transverse V6…days were quoted and the job came to thousands. Value was practically nothing at the time (2006), less than the repair! Car left soon after and we got a Mazda 6 seeking safety. Strange things went expensively wrong, non DIN/ISO radio, climate control and the crank damper deciding to come unstuck way out in central NSW. That was interesting, fixed with a junkyard part! I was always worried that the transmission or power driver’s seat would bite us, but no – always the stuff you never expect. If these are available for $3K now all I can say is STAY AWAY! unless it’s to be a special interest car. Oh yeah, changing a brake light globe…remove cargo net, remove trunk liner, undo about 4 nuts behind lamp assembly, drop lamp out of rear panel THEN remove globe from back of housing. I suppose it beats the Mazda where changing something relatively minor* under the hood started with removing the front bumper and degassing the aircon system – that episode takes the cake. Augggh…it’s no wonder the daily driver is now a ’68 280S with a radio delete plate.
*plastic coolant expansion tank had split .
Stylin’ DD, Jim. What colour?
DB 050 (refrigerator white).
Ever try changing the headlight bulb on the Mazda6 jim? Step one is to remove the front wheel on the relevant side…
I like the AU’s styling – now. Not a conventional-looker at all, nor remotely ‘pretty’, but there’s some very nice detail design on it, and the model styling variations were very well done. The BA was fantastic-looking by comparison, but I still think the AU’s styling has aged better. Mercedes-Benz must have liked the styling too going by the gen1 CLS – which looks like a squashed AU, especially from the rear.
RHD Taurus fun fact: although the front guards appear to be from the US Taurus/Sable, they’re actually unique to the RHD Taurus. Regulations in either Japan or Australia (I forget which) required a more-pronounced lip around the wheel arch, which I gather was an unexpected requirement and was costly to effect.
RHD Taurus funner fact: Ford did in fact build the V8 Taurus in RHD, but only for sale in Japan. I suspect the Aussie motoring mags would have had a hernia if Ford introduced both V6 and V8 Taurii! We got a number of the V8 Taurii here as used imports – there was one up the road from me for years, with an aftermarket exhaust fitted it sounded amazing.
The front guards do look to have more flare to them. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was to meet tyre coverage requirements in Australia, there are quite a few cars that have extra pieces added to wheel arches. Typically this happens with sports models or similar that have wider wheels.
I actually read a reference in the ‘first drive’ article that Ford CEO Alex Trotman was expecting 10,000 sales per year and the locals revised that down to 5,000. I think the V8 SHO would have met with some skepticism as a large fwd sports sedan, I gather they are not bad but I wonder if that also means not good?
I can stomach the wagon version of the 3rd Gen but in no way can I ever accept the sedan version. Just looks so wrong on my levels on the outside. Would make me feel like I was driving a turtle from the looks of it.
I really like the AU Falcon’s styling. I always considered it to be one of the better examples of Ford’s ‘new edge’ styling theme. The round surfaces and angular styling details remind me of the Sydney Opera House, especially the Series 1 Forte like the one in the photo above. Am I the only one who sees this? Ford should have brought the two together for a publicity photo shoot. I’ll give Ford kudos for being bold enough to be different. Popular opinion may be that it’s arch rival the Opel Omega based VT Commodore was better looking, but I think it hasn’t aged nearly as well. I’ve even considered buying a good AU eventually just to make sure that at least one example of the breed gets preserved in original condition.
When I started driving about 10 years ago I considered an Aussie delivered Taurus. They were nicely equipped and could be had for cheap. And as a young, homesick American transplanted to Australia, I was bias towards American cars at the time. It’s not handsome, but like the AU I admire the fact Ford at least tried to be a little different. It’s unfortunate that we didn’t get the wagon or V8 engine. In the end I bought a 2003 BA Falcon. Not a sporty XR6, but the XT base model. It was what my budget could afford at that time. I was extremely impressed with the BA series when it was launched, and it was immediately on my car buying short-list. My XT was an excellent car, and a superb highway cruiser.
My father had a 1994 Honda Accord at the time these Ford’s had hit Australia in 1996.And as bland as that was and the fact it was a 2.2L 4 in a class dominated by sixes it did well for a wheels test and came third in it’s segment and that is what Taurus should have been measured against it’s an Accord/Camry rival in the USA and what is now known as an Altima but what was then known as a Maxima rival in both markets not it’s showroom stablemate.people from memory who would have maybe put the Ford on the list have the mid to top range models of all the others on there too.
this was my taurus ghia,missing a sunroof only.Could’ve put it in all ford day in geelong.so cumfy.i loved its wheels,2nd spoiler,tinted glass.i polished it coz no licence
last time i drove it commodore SS cop got me,i was honest and drove home
Six years since this article first ran. I keep meaning to get out that issue of Wheels that compared the two and scan it to the Cohort – maybe someone else already has by now.
Time has shown that the love-it-or-hate-it AU Falcon styling was in many ways ahead of its time; certainly ahead of public taste which in Australia tended to be a bit conservative at the time. I still wouldn’t have one though; like most Aussies I’d rather the squared-up BA or BF. Make mine an XR6 turbo in Acid Rush.
But time has also shown that the Taurus looks just as odd now as it did then. And I can’t think when was the last time I saw one on the road. Ten years ago maybe?
Ford misfired taking the oval shape of the Ford badge as the theme for a car’s styling. For all its miscues, at least GM never tried making a bowtie-shaped Chevy!
Perhaps I’m the most devoted admirer/defender of the Gen3 (1996-rev) Taurus, but to everyone their own, especially with impending Thanksgiving 2020. Aussie-Sable-ized front end on this one is interesting at first glance…
What these writeups from Australia make me want to do is to vacation there sometime just to drive a bunch of these Fords…
My late brother bought a used AU Falcon he was a dedicated Falcon nutter but his had one tonne grille and looked a lot better, he got ten years mostly trouble free out of that car mostly because he flushed the trans 3 times just after he bought it and saved himself a tranny rebuild the 100,000 km service intervals were in response to GMH beefing up their trans and introducing longer service intervals Ford did the same but did nothing to the internals, Repco at the the time where my brother worked were selling rebuild kits to out of warranty Falcon owners in huge numbers, he just kept servicing his one feeding it petrol and it kept going.