IllustrationCAR SELF ACCELERATES FOR NO REASON. IT HAPPENED FOUR TIMES TODAY DURING A 10 MINUTE DRIVE. IT HAPPENS WHILE CAR IS MOVING AND AT LOW SPEED, APPROXIMATELY 25 MILES PER HOUR.11\4. *TR
2006 Ford Taurus
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2006 Ford Taurus do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 318.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Taurus years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
80–25K
2225–50K
6650–75K
7075–100K
86100–150K
20150K+
272 reports with mileage · 46 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 176 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 25 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
19 crash reports4 fire reports8 injury reports
Fuel System, Gasoline complaints
6 reportsTHE VEHICLE AT AROUND 40 MPH WILL ACCELERATE ON ITS OWN REACHING SPEED OF 60-70 MPH NEEDING CONSTANT BRAKING TO MAINTAIN THE SPEED LIMIT OF 45 MPH. UPON START UP IT HAS A HIGH IDLE TAKING 3-4 MINUTES TO COME DOWN BELOW 2 RPMS. *TR
VEHICLE HAS FAILING CAMSHAFT SYNCHRONIZER CHIRPING FROM ENGINE FAILURE BEGAN AT 30,000-32,000 MILES FORD REFUSES TO HONOR EMISSIONS/EXTENDED DEFECT WARRANTY ON PART IF PART FAILS, IT DRIVES THE OIL PUMP, WHICH WILL RESULT IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF ENGINE POWER, AND WILL REQUIRE COMPLETE ENGINE REPLACEMENT. VEHICLE HAS LOWER EN…
Read full complaint
VEHICLE HAS FAILING CAMSHAFT SYNCHRONIZER CHIRPING FROM ENGINE FAILURE BEGAN AT 30,000-32,000 MILES FORD REFUSES TO HONOR EMISSIONS/EXTENDED DEFECT WARRANTY ON PART IF PART FAILS, IT DRIVES THE OIL PUMP, WHICH WILL RESULT IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF ENGINE POWER, AND WILL REQUIRE COMPLETE ENGINE REPLACEMENT. VEHICLE HAS LOWER END OF MILEAGE FOR ITS AGE, LONG AND THOROUGH MAINTENANCE HISTORY CONTACTED FORD, THEY HAD NO INTEREST IN PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TOTAL VEHICLE MILEAGE AS OF 3/13/2014 IS ~49,000 MILES WILL BE TAKING LEGAL ACTION. *TR
I WAS DRIVING TO WORK AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED OUT OF CONTROL. I TRIED STOPPING THE CAR, I PUT IT INTO PARK, AND EVEN WHILE IN PARK IT WAS STILL REVVING UP TO 4 OR 5 THOUSAND RPMS. I RE-STARTED THE CAR HOPING THIS WOULD "RE-SET" THE VEHICLE. NO SUCH LUCK. AS FOR NOW, THE VEHICLE'S GAS PEDAL IS EITHER STUCK, OR SOMETHING IS WR…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING TO WORK AND THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED OUT OF CONTROL. I TRIED STOPPING THE CAR, I PUT IT INTO PARK, AND EVEN WHILE IN PARK IT WAS STILL REVVING UP TO 4 OR 5 THOUSAND RPMS. I RE-STARTED THE CAR HOPING THIS WOULD "RE-SET" THE VEHICLE. NO SUCH LUCK. AS FOR NOW, THE VEHICLE'S GAS PEDAL IS EITHER STUCK, OR SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH THE CRUISE CONTROL CABLE. EITHER WAY, THE SITUATION, IN MY OPINION, IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. MY BRAKES BEGAN TO SMOKE BEFORE I COULD GET THE VEHICLE HOME AND WAIT FOR MY HUSBAND TO HELP ME FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO NEXT. *TR
I PURCHASED A 2006 FORD TAURUS ON JUNE 24TH, 2012. THE TAURUS WAS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION AND IT RAN WONDERFULLY, FOR THE FIRST SEVEN MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. HOWEVER, IN NOVEMBER OF 2012, THE CAR BEGAN RANDOMLY SHUTTING OFF, SOMETIMES WHILE I WAS DRIVING. IT WOULD HAPPEN SPORADICALLY AND I THOUGHT IT WAS A PROBLEM THAT COULD BE FIX…
Read full complaint
I PURCHASED A 2006 FORD TAURUS ON JUNE 24TH, 2012. THE TAURUS WAS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION AND IT RAN WONDERFULLY, FOR THE FIRST SEVEN MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. HOWEVER, IN NOVEMBER OF 2012, THE CAR BEGAN RANDOMLY SHUTTING OFF, SOMETIMES WHILE I WAS DRIVING. IT WOULD HAPPEN SPORADICALLY AND I THOUGHT IT WAS A PROBLEM THAT COULD BE FIXED. HOWEVER, AFTER TAKING IT TO A FORD DEALERSHIP ON TWO DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, NO MECHANIC IS ABLE TO FIGURE OUT THE PROBLEM. THE REASON BEING THAT SINCE IT HAPPENS SPORADICALLY, NO ONE CAN DUPLICATE IT NOR IS THERE ANY SAVED CENSOR ABNORMALITIES. I HAVE REPLACED THE FUEL PUMP, HOPING THAT WOULD FIX THE PROBLEM. HOWEVER, IT HAS NOT. SOMETIMES IT WILL HAPPEN UP TO SIX TIMES IN ONE DAY WHILE I'M GOING AS FAST AS 50 M.P.H. I REFUSE TO DRIVE ON THE HIGHWAY BECAUSE I FEAR FOR MY LIFE SINCE THE CAR SHUTS OFF WITHOUT WARNING. SOMETIMES THE CAR WILL TURN BACK ON AND OTHER TIMES, I WILL HAVE TO TURN THE ENGINE OFF AND RE-TURN ON THE CAR. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM AND A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE. I AM NOW STUCK WITH A CAR THAT DOES NOT WORK PROPERLY AND IS A DANGER TO MY WELL-BEING EACH TIME I GET BEHIND THE WHEEL. I DO NOT BLAME THE DEALERSHIP FOR SELLING ME THE CAR; HOWEVER, I DO BLAME THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY FOR THIS VERY SERIOUS AND VERY FAULTY PROBLEM. PLEASE CONSIDER THIS AS A FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND I URGE YOU TO TAKE THIS ISSUE SERIOUSLY, FOR MY SAFETY AS WELL AS OTHER FORD TAURUS OWNERS. *TR
THIS IS A MUSTANG. THERE WAS NO CHOICE FOR MUSTANG ON YOUR VEHICLES SO I HAD TO PICK TAURUS. THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH MY FUEL TANK. I WILL NOT ACCEPT GAS. IT MAY ONLY TAKE 1/2 A TANK AND STOP AND I AM UNABLE TO FILL IT ANY FURTHER. SOMETIMES IT WON'T TAKE ANY IF I HAVE MORE THAN 1/4 WHEN I TRY TO PUT GAS IN. SOMETIMES IT WIL…
Read full complaint
THIS IS A MUSTANG. THERE WAS NO CHOICE FOR MUSTANG ON YOUR VEHICLES SO I HAD TO PICK TAURUS. THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH MY FUEL TANK. I WILL NOT ACCEPT GAS. IT MAY ONLY TAKE 1/2 A TANK AND STOP AND I AM UNABLE TO FILL IT ANY FURTHER. SOMETIMES IT WON'T TAKE ANY IF I HAVE MORE THAN 1/4 WHEN I TRY TO PUT GAS IN. SOMETIMES IT WILL FILL UP. THIS IS A BRAND NEW 2006 MUSTANG AND JUST PURCHASED IN SEPTEMBER 2005. THERE WAS A FORD TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN TSB-05-15-12 ON THIS SAME EXACT PROBLEM ON THE 2005 MUSTANG BUILT AFTER 4/26/05 BUT APPARENTLY NOTHING WAS DONE ABOUT IT SINCE MY CAR WAS BUILT IN AUGUST OF 2005. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD FORD ISN'T MAKING ANY CORRECTIONS AT THIS TIME. *NM
Official recalls
206V119000 · Electrical System: Instrument Cluster/panel
Apr 10, 2006
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES BUILT FOR ONE SPECIFIC FLEET CUSTOMER WERE MODIFIED FOR OPTIONAL HANDS-FREE CELLULAR PHONE OPERATING CAPABILITY. TO PROVIDE THIS FUNCTIONALITY, A SPECIAL OVERLAY WIRE HARNESS WAS INSTALLED THAT INADVERTENTLY DID NOT INCLUDE THE CIRCUITS FOR PASSENGER AIR BAG DEACTIVATION INDICATOR (PADI) LAMP FUNCTION. AS A RESULT, THESE VEHICLES DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 208, 'OCCUPANT CRASH PROTECTION.'
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE PADI LAMP WILL FAIL TO ILLUMINATE AND THE AIR BAG WARNING LAMP IN THE CLUSTER WILL STAY ILLUMINATED.
Remedy: THE FLEET CUSTOMER WAS NOTIFIED AND ALL VEHICLES HAVE BEEN REPAIRED. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 28, 2006.
05V520000 · Visibility:windshield Wiper/washer:motor
Nov 9, 2005
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS, PASSENGER CARS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE WINDSHIELD WIPER MOTOR MAY HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WITHOUT GREASE BEING APPLIED TO THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AFTER A PERIOD OF CONTINUOUS USE ON THE HIGH SPEED SETTING, LACK OF GREASE ON THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR MAY CAUSE THE GEAR TO DISTORT OR FRACTURE DURING OPERATION RESULTING IN A LOSS OF WIPER FUNCTION. INOPERATIVE WIPERS UNDER INCLEMENT WEATHER CONDITIONS COULD CAUSE A CRASH DUE TO IMPAIRED VISIBILITY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE WIPER MOTOR FOR THE PRESENCE OF GREASE AND GREASE THE WIPER MOTOR GEARS IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673 OR LINCOLN/MERCURY AT 1-800-521-4140.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
1PE12005 · Stuck Throttle
Opened Mar 7, 2012 · Closed Oct 22, 2012
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cables
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation do
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:cables
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation do
Vehicle Speed Control
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation do