Toyota Celica Supra Forum banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I'm getting to the point in my life where I have to start to consider retiring.

I've got a job that comes with a company car so I haven't had to purchase my own daily driver for 37 years.
I've got 2 Celica Supra's but they are in good enough shape that I don't want to use one of them as a daily driver.
I want something that I can throw wood, or concrete blocks, or dirt into without being concerned about ruining the car.
I absolutely detest new cars that have so many electronics the cars are unusable.

What to do?

1999 Ford Taurus Station Wagon.

No laughing or sneering or whatever.
I have been going through Craigslist ads and have found the perfect car. A lot of the Taurus' for sale are being sold by seniors who no longer drive. 2001 models with 78,000 km (48,500 miles) on them. They usually have front and back bumper dings because the vision goes before the will to drive does!

There were 2 motors available, both 3.0L V6s. The more common is the Vulcan pushrod V6. They only made about 145-155hp through the years. They are renowned for running 300,000 to 500,000 miles in these and Ford Ranger pickups.

The second is the Duratec DOHC V6 which in the Taurus put out about 200hp with the same fuel mileage as the Vulcan. This engine had the primary design done by Porsche who sold the rights to Ford. Ford then had Cosworth Engineering (who they owned at the time) do final design work on it. This engine has been around a long time and was in a lot of different models of Ford and Mazda. Variable Cam Timing was introduced on different versions, but the one in the Taurus did not have it.

The Duratec is quite reliable as long as the oil is changed religiously (cam bearing surfaces ride in aluminum rather than in replaceable bearing shells) and antifreeze is kept up to strength (aluminum block and heads can suffer electrolysis in reaction to steel accessories).

How can you tell if a Taurus has a Duratec?


If the Taurus has these on the front fender in front of the door, it's got a Duratec.


The looks are hit or miss. I used to detest the look of the wagon, but now I sort of like it!

The handling is "honest". It is not very lively, but does not have a lot of vices. The Duratec actually delivers quite a kick in the pants when called upon. It is not a torque monster, but when you look down at the tach and see 6,000rpm come up before you know it, you realize that you are actually traveling pretty quickly.

Parts are getting harder to source from Ford, but there are still a lot of the cars at junk yards.

There are a lot of seating formats available. With the front bench seat and the optional pop-up rear facing seats in the cargo area one can legally carry 8 people. The really nice thing about the rear facing seats is that the grand kids like to sit there facing people behind so they can make faces at them and you have a full row of seats between you and them so it's quiet!

Rear facing seats in the cargo area. There are seat belts with shoulder straps so it's legal.

It's been fun to play with so far.

Dale
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,357 Posts
LOL, you have turned into an old fart. People complained about the electronics on Supras when they were new.
 

· Founding Member
Joined
·
6,768 Posts
LOL, you have turned into an old fart.
Hey, watch it! I resemble that remark. We have to face it tho. Those of us who've been fans of CelicaSupras since their beginning are getting to be "old farts" now.

Its sad that the "station wagon" fell out of favor. They are sort of still around, more popular than ever tho. Modern equivalent is the "crossover" which is supposed to be somewhere in between a station wagon and a SUV, but looks more like a short, stubby station wagon on jacked suspension. (In the Supra's day, that was the AMC Eagle.) Today, they can't hardly sell a "station wagon" as the word conjures images of an "old fart" or a woman in a beehive hairdo driving round with a bunch of rugrats in the back. I understand Jaguar is gonna try it again in the US market with the XF wagon, tho they're going to call theirs a "sportbrake" so that prospective buyers don't have to admit to their age. You'll still have to be an "old fart" to be able to afford one tho.

Question tho? Did they ever put the SHO package in a wagon?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
Hells yeah 3rd row seat faces the back. What sort of mileage are you getting?
I haven't had it long enough to run a tank of gas through so I'm not really sure. The Duratec is supposed to get the same mileage as the Vulcan, but what that is I don't know.

I researched the daylights of the Taurus and then did just about everything wrong. The car I bought didn't have the 3rd row seat but I went to a fellow parting out a 2000 wagon which had one. I pulled out the 3rd row seat, a factory 6-disc CD Changer, and the 16" aluminum wheels.

The 3rd row seats required the rear seat belts, the 2nd row seat belt shoulder anchors, and the side plastic to clear the seat belts.
I thought the CD Changer would be bad, but I plugged it in and it worked great! It came with 2 magazines as well.

The 1999 came with 15" wheels so in addition to liking the look of the 2000 wheels better, it opens up a slightly better choice of tires.


16" x 6" with 215/60-16 size tires.

The air conditioning works REALLY well, unlike those in my Celica Supras.
The standard sound system is surprisingly good.

The 1999 has air bags but it does not have the weight and position sensors that came standard in the 2000 Taurus so that it looks like it will be possible to install the Recaro LS-C seat that I've had in the basement since I sold my 1978 Capri decades ago. This would cause real problems with the air bag operation if I tried this on a newer car.

There are a multitude of things to do. The paint needs a good cut polish, the oval headlight covers are really UV fogged so I need to either polish them or replace them, the fuel tank gauge shows half full when actually filled up, and a multitude of other smaller things.

I've got to change all the fluids, spark plugs and wires which is a real hassle because the rear bank is covered by the intake manifold. I'll probably change the accessory serpentine belt and tensioner.

Let the games begin!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
LOL, you have turned into an old fart. People complained about the electronics on Supras when they were new.
Last winter I was up in Edmonton Alberta during the first real snow of the year and I was driving a Ford Explorer rental car. It had the navigation screen on it which was incredibly complicated. I was driving in the dark and it was snowing heavily on the main ring road. The radio station lost reception on the channel I was listening to. I wanted to change the channel, but I had the heater controls displayed and it was too dangerous to look down in an unfamiliar car to figure out how to change the channel. I had to listen to static for half an hour.

Electronics................bah humbug!

Sadly, I am a field service technician for an instrumentation company so I generally keep up with electronics. However, when a car dash starts to look like a cellular phone, it is too complicated.

The heater controls should be 3 round dials. One for fan speed, one for temperature, and one for air direction. Hooo boy, I AM old and crotchety, aren't I.
Well, I've learned to accept it.

Curmudgeons of the world unite!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
Question tho? Did they ever put the SHO package in a wagon?
No, they never did. Car and Driver built one with assistance from Ford in 1993, but it was never seriously contemplated by Ford.

The SHO V6 only produced 220HP but it was/is amazingly beautiful. Yamaha designed the cylinder heads and there was a dual runner intake manifold. The block and heads are cast iron.



The Duratec 3.0 is actually very similar. The short block has the same architecture and there is a tuned length induction system called IMRC (Intake Manifold Runner Control) which has a valve switching between long and short runners for low/high speed operation. The early Duratec produced 200HP which is not too far from the SHO V6. The block and heads are aluminum with cast iron liners in the block.


The later 3.4L V8 SHO engines only produced 235HP and had a fatal flaw. The camshaft lobes were swaged onto a hollow tube with an expander run through the tube. After several years the cam lobes would come loose and piston/valve damage would result. People now have the lobes welded on, but this seems like a lot of work for only 35HP.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
This would be surprisingly affordable to build.
There are LOTS of Wagons out there and because of the SHO V8 motor problems, the donor SHO cars and engines are not that hard to find.
Put them together and you definitely have something a bit different.




1998 SHO powered Wagon - Not your grand dad's Taurus!

http://www.2040-cars.com/Ford/Taurus/showagon-1998-taurus-sho-station-wagon-v8-powered-976437/

This one has had the roof rack shaved and the tea tray spoiler from the SHO sedan added to the roof. The wheels are stock SHO too.

You would definitely want a motor with the camshaft lobes welded and I suppose it would be pretty reliable.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
495 Posts
I drove a V6 Duratec to Idaho and back to pick up some frineds from college in the late 90's, I was actually impressed with just how much umph that car really had. It had surprising power under the curve; while the numbers are not impressive by modern "standards" I would rate the V6 Duratec as just as good as any modern car, and in many cases actually more enjoyable to drive.


Now I am curious about the service weight on that SHO V8; is the block alloy? Are he heads alloy??

Something of note, power under the curve is something that people forget about; its something that cars of the 90's actually did very well. With the "numbers" wars where auto makers try ever harder to boast more impressive numbers than the next guy or the previous year, they push further and further from engines that are enjoyable to drive. Sure the new stuff makes a crapload of power, but the problem I have seen is these new cars don't really have any more in the RPM range where you actually drive.

This brings me back to the cars of the 90's, where they were producing decent power figures, but at the same time providing you with power where you really use it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
The following seems to be a pretty accurate figure. Obviously someone weighed everything before putting it back together!

Upper Intake : 17 pounds
Lower Intake : 5 pounds (it's in 2 pieces, not 1 piece like I thought)
Fuel Rail w/ Injectors : 2 pounds
A/C compressor : 11 pounds
P/S pump : 3 pounds
P/S pump bracket : < 1 pound
IMRC : 12 pounds
Water pump assembly complete : 13 pounds
Complete wiring : 15 pounds
Alternator Bracket : 7 pounds.
Exhaust manifolds : 11 pounds each.
Heat shields : 1 pound for both
Complete Aluminum Head : 48 pounds each
Valve Cover : 5 pounds each
Short Block : 175 pounds
TOTAL 374 pounds

I have seen other weights mentioned, but this seems quite specific

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40ay52N4SYE


60 Degree V8
Compression ratio is 10:1
Redline 7000 rpm
235hp @ 6100 rpm
230 lb*ft @ 4800 rpm
Weight 374 pounds
It's aluminum block and heads. The block has cast iron liners

The Duratec 3.0 as used in the 1999 Taurus
60 Degree V6
Compression ratio is 10:1
Redline 6500 rpm
200hp @ 6000 rpm
193 lb*ft @ 4850 rpm
89.0mm x 79.5 mm bore and stroke
Total weight with accessories 360 pounds
It's aluminum block and heads. The block has cast iron liners

The problem with both these engines is that there are not really any speed parts available for them. They are pretty radical right from Ford.
The Duratec doesn't have a lot of people rebuilding them. They are a relatively complicated engine compared to a Vulcan 3.0 OHV for instance!

Dale
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
10,234 Posts
Nope, I can't do it, don't trust Fords lol. For the reasons you've highlighted here yourself. Sorry Dale, these things have always been and always will be hideous :p

Though, you're reasons for getting a wagon I can relate with. Currently the family is driving around in a low miles 98 Corolla that I fixed up nicely. Threw some 17s on it, tinted it and lowered it slightly so I can stand being in it lol. Its not so bad, but I don't really want the wifey in something I'd find exciting or it would distract me. Otherwise we'd already own an is300, maybe even a Sport Cross wagon version!

But I'm always looking ahead. Realistically the corolla could last us 5+ years easily, but it could be written off anytime and I find it a touch on the old side already for a vehicle that we depend on this much. I've been kind of eyeballing future alternatives, and am also morning the death of the station wagon. But these things keep catching my eye, Toyota Venzas...




I ran into one at the wreckers the other day and had a good look at them. They are literally just a wagon Camry with a lift kit. You can get them fwd\awd, 2.7l inline 4 or 3.5l v6. They don't have a third bench or rear facing seats, but there is a decent amount of room behind the rear seats and the interior back there is all durable plastic panels like the Matrix has (win!). I detest SUV\crossovers, but it only gets that designation due to the ride height, which is a solvable problem...



That said, they start at 3700lbs and go north of 4000 with the AWD. Too much in my book (another huge issue I have with new cars). We'll probably just end up with one of these next...



The utility and economy of the Matrix is awesome, I just can't stand the looks of the first gen. Luckily the 2nd gen is much improved in that department, and can be had with the 2.5l from the Camry.

Sorry for the thread derail, been thinking about stuff like this a lot lately.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Nope, I can't do it, don't trust Fords lol. For the reasons you've highlighted here yourself. Sorry Dale, these things have always been and always will be hideous :p

Though, you're reasons for getting a wagon I can relate with. Currently the family is driving around in a low miles 98 Corolla that I fixed up nicely. Threw some 17s on it, tinted it and lowered it slightly so I can stand being in it lol. Its not so bad, but I don't really want the wifey in something I'd find exciting or it would distract me. Otherwise we'd already own an is300, maybe even a Sport Cross wagon version!

But I'm always looking ahead. Realistically the corolla could last us 5+ years easily, but it could be written off anytime and I find it a touch on the old side already for a vehicle that we depend on this much. I've been kind of eyeballing future alternatives, and am also morning the death of the station wagon. But these things keep catching my eye, Toyota Venzas...


Sorry for the thread derail, been thinking about stuff like this a lot lately.
No problem. It's not a derail. I needed something practical and I'm quite curious as to other solutions out there.
Like you, I have a real problem with SUVs/CUVs/whatever. I don't particularly enjoy riding high up in one of these. It may intimidate other drivers, but it doesn't feel good driving.

Engines and transmissions are getting more efficient all the time, but the cars are getting heavier and boxier.

I love station wagons. you can camp in them, haul stuff in them, and still be driving a car.

They're too old and too far up on the price curve, but a Volvo P1800ES


Has enough surface interest to be interesting

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/janbarnier/5045044172/

Or this! If you want something a bit different, nothing says different like an American Motors Pacer Wagon



https://gearheads.org/the-20-fastest-longest-weirdest-station-wagons-you-need-to-know-about/

I think that the current crop of automotive designers learned their trade on Tonka Toys. Most modern cars are boxy, block, and lacking in a theme. These vehicles were designed by committee.

The cars above definitely broke the mold. They are so odd they are cool.

The Taurus Wagon almost fits in here while being dirt cheap.

And the most important thing of all for a wagon; the Taurus just fits a 4 x 8 sheet of plywood in the back hatch.

Dale
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Don't forget the MGB GT too, those are sweet old wagons/shooting brakes/breadvans/whatever you wanna call em.
I'd forgotten about these. They are a nice combination of sporty and practical. However, the English reputation for quality scares me. I'm a ******* and a firm believer in American iron. Sure it may not be the best, but they design to the 90 percentile and parts are usually available and inexpensive (nothing is cheap these days!).
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
10,234 Posts
you know what else does all of that well? A mk2 Supra. I've had a beater 85 around for about a decade that I've used as my occasional DD and for tasks like that. I widened the space behind the rear seats so I can carry wider loads or sleep 2 people in the back when camping. I've modified the hatch struts with quick release pins so I can quickly disconnect them and open the hatch straight up so I can drop motors in with a hoist. I've put in an 82 rear hatch board and reinforced it so it can survive those kinds of loads, and tossed the hatch carpet. I also have a roof rack for it now and a couple more mods on the horizon to make it handle sheets of plywood and drywall easier (it can already do it hanging out the back). That said, the car is a bit of an eyesore and it was rusty when I got it 10 years ago. I've known for awhile that its time left was limited and the car is not worth restoring, so I've been restoring another car to replace it. But that one is going to be a lot nicer so there will be some things I will not want to use it for, and it would be handy if the family DD could handle some of them. Sounds like a truck is going to live on our property for a few years at least too.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Hey Seamus,

I just realized something.
When Toyota wanted to build the 2000GT they went to Yamaha for assistance in the design.
Fast forward to 1984 and Ford wanted to design something special to spice up their sedan product line. Who do they go to for engine design assistance? Yamaha.

This means that the Toyota 2000GT and the Ford Taurus SHO are practically brother and sister!

4








I never noticed it before but when you look at them side by side they are absolute clones!

I think that Toyota will demand that ford rename the Taurus the 2000GT-2 or they will rename the 2000GT the Toyota Taurus!.

Dale
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Seamus,

I'm just having fun with you!



But seriously, I think both Toyota and Ford have to thank Yamaha for some things!


Dale
 

· Founding Member
Joined
·
6,768 Posts
Most practical vehicle I've owned is my 2007 Honda Ridgeline that I bought brand new. 4-doors, huge interior. All wheel drive. Size of an medium SUV for navigating parking lots, but its a truck.

I did have a 97 Toyota Landcrusher and I got tired of every time I wanted to haul building materials or a greasy engine, I had to very carefully remove seats, line the interior with blankets and/or plastic sheeting and rig extensive tie-downs so I wouldn't damage any of the leather upholstery or trim. A truck just made so much more sense.

The Ridgeline has an actual "trunk" underneath the bed of the truck so I can lock up my luggage out of site just like a sedan. And the coolest feature is the tailgate swings down like a regular truck and thus hauls those 4x8 sheets, OR and I love this feature, it swings to the left like some of the old 60s and 70s station wagons. Whenever I have anything really heavy to load, its a whole lot easier to open the gate to the left rather than having to lift the load past a lowered tailgate or scratch it across. I probably open it sideways 90% of the time.

While its not a big 3/4 ton diesel, I pull a car trailer with it. Its rated at 5,000lbs which is light sports car like the Supra on an open 16' trailer. Doesn't accelerate very fast loaded, in fact it can hardly get out of its own way even when its empty, but it stops in a straight line and that's what's important. But that's my only gripe about it and why Honda can't ever sell very many. They don't have a V8 or any sort of real truck engine to put in it. I understand its just a different tune on the same v6 they put in everything.

But on the plus side, while my own Ridgeline barely has 70K miles on it, I know they have the legendary Honda reliability. My cousin bought one first a year before me in 2006, talked me into it, and he now has 270,000 miles on his. He drives his daily and pulls a trailer loaded with three of those paddle-wheeled trikes and camping gear to the dunes a couple times a year.

So Seamus, if you're thinking of a truck, take a look at the Ridgeline.
 

· Founding Member
Joined
·
6,768 Posts
The new ridgelines are supposed to be great too from what i hear.
Great reviews and functionally an improvement, but the styling now sort of gives it away that its just a puny V6. The first generation at least looked the part of a big, beefy, offroad capable pickup truck. Now it looks more like a minivan with the back end cut open. Functionally, they got a lot of complaints that one styling element of the oridgelinal, the flying buttresses and sloping bedrails, made access to the bed very difficult from the side, and admittedly, it does. But it was unique and it looked cool. Now the bedrails are parallel to the ground which is more functional, but just like all those functional design features that make modern sedans all look alike, the new Ridgeline is a bit boring in appearance.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top