1990 Ford Taurus Sho problems

Filed Mar 31, 2008 · Body · 160,000 miles · MO

Tl*the contact owns a 1990 ford taurus sho. While making a right turn into a parking lot, the subframe bolt failed and the vehicle dropped. The engine shut off and the vehicle had to be towed to the contact's residence. The dealer and manufacturer stated that the vehicle was repaired under the federal safety agency campaign id number 98v323000 (structure:frame and members) in 1990. The contact researched his vehicle and stated that there was no evidence that the recall work was done. The speed was unknown. The current and failure mileages were 160,000.

Filed Oct 28, 2003 · Body · 180,000 miles · KS

Subframe mount failure. Engine dropped causing loss of steering and destruction of computer controll module with resultant loss of engine function. Subject of previous recall the federal safety agency campaign 98v323000. Recall precedure performed but did not fix the underlying cause of failure problem. There are hundred of thousand other tauruses which are likely to suffer the same fate because the corrosion problem was not solved, just delayed, by the recall procedure. Talked with ford motor and the dealer who performed the recall procedure and none show any concern other that they did what they had to do to satisfy the previous recall. Repeat -- the corrosion problem is not fixed, just delayed and will surely recur to cause safety related failures in affected vehicles due to underlying engineering design failures.

Filed Mar 5, 2002 · Suspension · NY

I purchased a control arm from united auto. The part was made by trw. The balljoint failed when driving the vehicle. I went back and bought another one, then while doing a routine inspection(I am a mechanic) noticed that the top of the balljoint was 1.2mm(I measured) from the ABS ring. The control arm on the opposite side is about 5mm from the ABS ring. I went to my local ford dealership and had them get me 2 new control arms l+r. Guess what they were different then the ones that united auto sold me. I went back to united auto, had an employee pull control arms for a taurus and taurus sho. The control arms were the same thing. Trw is packaging non-sho control arms as sho ones. This is extremely dangerous considering a sho is a high performance car (220hp) compared to (140hp) regular taurus. I spoke with a local rep for trw , explained what had happened. I have not heard anything for almost 6 months. I am going to leave feedback on this topic on the sho club website, I am sure that other sho owner would like to know there getting the wrong part , and it will fail if installed on a sho. I ended up putting 2 knew control arms on my car, the dealership was the only one with the correct part. Thank you, hope to here something about this soon. *ak

Filed Mar 19, 2001 · Electrical · CT

The vehicle has had continual problems with stalling, several repairs completed at the dealership to try to rectify the stalling, however all have failed, the dealership has identified the problem as being the ignition module, the vehicle has not been repaired yet due the parts being on national backorder.